Despite the general focus on an invasive and de-differentiated phenotype as main driver of cancer metastasis, in melanoma patients many metastatic lesions display a high degree of pigmentation, indicative for a differentiated phenotype.,Indeed, studies in mice and fish show that melanoma cells switch to a differentiated phenotype at secondary sites, possibly because in melanoma differentiation is closely linked to proliferation through the lineage-specific transcriptional master regulator MITF.,Importantly, while a lot of effort has gone into identifying factors that induce the de-differentiated/invasive phenotype, it is not well understood how the switch to the differentiated/proliferative phenotype is controlled.,We identify collagen as a contributor to this switch.,We demonstrate that collagen stiffness induces melanoma differentiation through a YAP/PAX3/MITF axis and show that in melanoma patients increased collagen abundance correlates with nuclear YAP localization.,However, the interrogation of large patient datasets revealed that in the context of the tumour microenvironment, YAP function is more complex.,In the absence of fibroblasts, YAP/PAX3-mediated transcription prevails, but in the presence of fibroblasts tumour growth factor-β suppresses YAP/PAX3-mediated MITF expression and induces YAP/TEAD/SMAD-driven transcription and a de-differentiated phenotype.,Intriguingly, while high collagen expression is correlated with poorer patient survival, the worst prognosis is seen in patients with high collagen expression, who also express MITF target genes such as the differentiation markers TRPM1, TYR and TYRP1, as well as CDK4.,In summary, we reveal a distinct lineage-specific route of YAP signalling that contributes to the regulation of melanoma pigmentation and uncovers a set of potential biomarkers predictive for poor survival.
BRAF is a serine/threonine protein kinase activating the MAP kinase/ERK-signaling pathway.,About 50 % of melanomas harbors activating BRAF mutations (over 90 % V600E).,BRAFV600E has been implicated in different mechanisms underlying melanomagenesis, most of which due to the deregulated activation of the downstream MEK/ERK effectors.,The first selective inhibitor of mutant BRAF, vemurafenib, after highly encouraging results of the phase I and II trial, was compared to dacarbazine in a phase III trial in treatment-naïve patients (BRIM-3).,The study results showed a relative reduction of 63 % in risk of death and 74 % in risk of tumor progression.,Considering all trials so far completed, median overall survival reached approximately 16 months for vemurafenib compared to less than 10 months for dacarbazine treatment.,Vemurafenib has been extensively tested on melanoma patients expressing the BRAFV600E mutated form; it has been demonstrated to be also effective in inhibiting melanomas carrying the V600K mutation.,In 2011, both FDA and EMA therefore approved vemurafenib for metastatic melanoma carrying BRAFV600 mutations.,Some findings suggest that continuation of vemurafenib treatment is potentially beneficial after local therapy in a subset of patients with disease progression (PD).,Among who continued vemurafenib >30 days after local therapy of PD lesion(s), a median overall survival was not reached, with a median follow-up of 15.5 months from initiation of BRAF inhibitor therapy.,For patients who did not continue treatment, median overall survival from the time of disease progression was 1.4 months.,A clinical phase I/II trial is evaluating the safety, tolerability and efficacy of vemurafenib in combination with the CTLA-4 inhibitor mAb ipilimumab.,In the BRIM-7 trial vemurafenib is tested in association with GDC-0973, a potent and highly selective inhibitor of MEK1/2.,Preliminary data seem to indicate that an additional inhibitor of mutated BRAF, GSK2118436, might be also active on a wider range of BRAF mutations (V600E-K-D-R); actually, treatment with such a compound is under evaluation in a phase III study among stage III-IV melanoma patients positive for BRAF mutations.,Overall, BRAF inhibitors were well tolerated; common adverse events are arthralgia, rash, fatigue, alopecia, keratoacanthoma or cutaneous squamous-cell carcinoma, photosensitivity, nausea, and diarrhea, with some variants between different inhibitors.