In the primary analysis of the ERIVANCE BCC trial, vismodegib, the first US Food and Drug Administration-approved Hedgehog pathway inhibitor, showed objective response rates (ORRs) by independent review facility (IRF) of 30% and 43% in metastatic basal cell carcinoma (mBCC) and locally advanced BCC (laBCC), respectively.,ORRs by investigator review were 45% (mBCC) and 60% (laBCC).,Herein, we present long-term safety and final investigator-assessed efficacy results in patients with mBCC or laBCC.,One hundred four patients with measurable advanced BCC received oral vismodegib 150 mg once daily until disease progression or intolerable toxicity.,The primary end point was IRF-assessed ORR.,Secondary end points included ORR, duration of response (DOR), progression-free survival, overall survival (OS), and safety.,At data cutoff (39 months after completion of accrual), 8 patients were receiving the study drug (69 patients in survival follow-up).,Investigator-assessed ORR was 48.5% in the mBCC group (all partial responses) and 60.3% in the laBCC group (20 patients had complete response and 18 patients had partial response).,ORRs were comparable across patient subgroups, including aggressive histologic subtypes (eg, infiltrative BCC).,Median DOR was 14.8 months (mBCC) and 26.2 months (laBCC).,Median OS was 33.4 months in the mBCC cohort and not estimable in the laBCC cohort.,Adverse events remained consistent with clinical experience.,Thirty-three deaths (31.7%) were reported; none were related to vismodegib.,This long-term update of the ERIVANCE BCC trial demonstrated durability of response, efficacy across patient subgroups, and manageable long-term safety of vismodegib in patients with advanced BCC.,This study was registered prospectively with Clinicaltrials.gov, number NCT00833417 on January 30, 2009.,The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12885-017-3286-5) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
Carrying the cyclin-dependent kinase inhibitor 2A (CDKN2A) germline mutations is associated with a high risk for melanoma.,Penetrance of CDKN2A mutations is modified by pigmentation characteristics, nevus phenotypes, and some variants of the melanocortin-1 receptor gene (MC1R), which is known to have a role in the pigmentation process.,However, investigation of the associations of both MC1R variants and host phenotypes with melanoma risk has been limited.,We included 815 CDKN2A mutation carriers (473 affected, and 342 unaffected, with melanoma) from 186 families from 15 centers in Europe, North America, and Australia who participated in the Melanoma Genetics Consortium.,In this family-based study, we assessed the associations of the four most frequent MC1R variants (V60L, V92M, R151C, and R160W) and the number of variants (1, ≥2 variants), alone or jointly with the host phenotypes (hair color, propensity to sunburn, and number of nevi), with melanoma risk in CDKN2A mutation carriers.,These associations were estimated and tested using generalized estimating equations.,All statistical tests were two-sided.,Carrying any one of the four most frequent MC1R variants (V60L, V92M, R151C, R160W) in CDKN2A mutation carriers was associated with a statistically significantly increased risk for melanoma across all continents (1.24 × 10−6 ≤ P ≤ .0007).,A consistent pattern of increase in melanoma risk was also associated with increase in number of MC1R variants.,The risk of melanoma associated with at least two MC1R variants was 2.6-fold higher than the risk associated with only one variant (odds ratio = 5.83 [95% confidence interval = 3.60 to 9.46] vs 2.25 [95% confidence interval = 1.44 to 3.52]; Ptrend = 1.86 × 10−8).,The joint analysis of MC1R variants and host phenotypes showed statistically significant associations of melanoma risk, together with MC1R variants (.0001 ≤ P ≤ .04), hair color (.006 ≤ P ≤ .06), and number of nevi (6.9 × 10−6 ≤ P ≤ .02).,Results show that MC1R variants, hair color, and number of nevi were jointly associated with melanoma risk in CDKN2A mutation carriers.,This joint association may have important consequences for risk assessments in familial settings.