Up to 50% of patients with uveal melanoma (UM) develop metastatic disease with limited treatment options.,The immunomodulating agent ipilimumab has shown an overall survival (OS) benefit in patients with cutaneous metastatic melanoma in two phase III trials.,As patients with UM were excluded in these studies, the Dermatologic Cooperative Oncology Group (DeCOG) conducted a phase II to assess the efficacy and safety of ipilimumab in patients with metastatic UM.,We undertook a multicenter phase II study in patients with different subtypes of metastatic melanoma.,Here we present data on patients with metastatic UM (pretreated and treatment-naïve) who received up to four cycles of ipilimumab administered at a dose of 3 mg/kg in 3 week intervals.,Tumor assessments were conducted at baseline, weeks 12, 24, 36 and 48 according to RECIST 1.1 criteria.,Adverse events (AEs), including immune-related AEs were graded according to National Cancer Institute Common Toxicity Criteria (CTC) v.4.0.,Primary endpoint was the OS rate at 12 months.,Forty five pretreated (85%) and eight treatment-naïve (15%) patients received at least one dose of ipilimumab. 1-year and 2-year OS rates were 22% and 7%, respectively.,Median OS was 6.8 months (95% CI 3.7-8.1), median progression-free survival 2.8 months (95% CI 2.5-2.9).,The disease control rate at weeks 12 and 24 was 47% and 21%, respectively.,Sixteen patients had stable disease (47%), none experienced partial or complete response.,Treatment-related AEs were observed in 35 patients (66%), including 19 grade 3-4 events (36%).,One drug-related death due to pancytopenia was observed.,Ipilimumab has very limited clinical activity in patients with metastatic UM.,Toxicity was manageable when treated as per protocol-specific guidelines.,ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01355120
Treatment of advanced melanoma has been improved with the advent of the BRAF inhibitors.,However, a limitation to such treatment is the occurrence of resistance.,Several mechanisms have been identified to be responsible for the development of resistance, either MEK-dependent or MEK-independent.,In order to overcome resistance due to reactivation of MEK signaling, MEK inhibitors are being clinically developed with promising results.,However, also in this case resistance inevitably occurs.,It has been recently reported that ErbB3, a member of the EGFR receptor family, may be involved in the establishment of drug resistance.,Three melanoma cell lines were tested: LOX IMVI (BRAF V600E), MST-L (BRAF V600R) and WM266 (BRAF V600D).,Phosphorylation of Receptor Tyrosine Kinases (RTKs) was assessed by an RTK array.,Western blot analysis was performed on total protein extracts using anti-ErbB3, anti-AKT and anti-ERK 1/2 antibodies.,The expression of neuregulin after vemurafenib treatment was assessed by Real Time PCR and Western blotting.,The growth inhibitory effects of vemurafenib, GSK1120212b and/or anti-ErbB3 mAbs were evaluated by in vitro colony formation assays.,In the present study we demonstrate that ErbB3 is the main RTK undergoing rapidly hyperphosphorylation upon either treatment with a BRAF inhibitor or with a MEK inhibitor in a panel of melanoma cell lines harboring a variety of V600BRAF mutations and that this results in a strong activation of phospho-AKT.,Importantly, ErbB3 activation is fully abrogated by the simultaneous use of anti-ErbB3 monoclonal antibodies, which are also shown to potently synergize with BRAF inhibitors in the inactivation of both AKT and ERK pathways and in the inhibition of melanoma cell growth.,We show that upregulation of phospho-ErbB3 is due to an autocrine loop involving increased transcription and production of neuregulin by melanoma cells.,On the basis of these results, we propose that initial co-treatment with BRAF and/or MEK inhibitors and anti-ErbB3 antibodies should be pursued as a strategy to reduce the ErbB3-dependent feedback survival mechanism and enhance duration of clinical response.