@article{LoddeForschnerHasseletal.2021, author = {Lodde, Georg and Forschner, Andrea and Hassel, Jessica and Wulfken, Lena M. and Meier, Friedegund and Mohr, Peter and K{\"a}hler, Katharina and Schilling, Bastian and Loquai, Carmen and Berking, Carola and H{\"u}ning, Svea and Schatton, Kerstin and Gebhardt, Christoffer and Eckardt, Julia and Gutzmer, Ralf and Reinhardt, Lydia and Glutsch, Valerie and Nikfarjam, Ulrike and Erdmann, Michael and Stang, Andreas and Kowall, Bernd and Roesch, Alexander and Ugurel, Selma and Zimmer, Lisa and Schadendorf, Dirk and Livingstone, Elisabeth}, title = {Factors influencing the adjuvant therapy decision: results of a real-world multicenter data analysis of 904 melanoma patients}, series = {Cancers}, volume = {13}, journal = {Cancers}, number = {10}, issn = {2072-6694}, doi = {10.3390/cancers13102319}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-239583}, year = {2021}, abstract = {Adjuvant treatment of melanoma patients with immune-checkpoint inhibition (ICI) and targeted therapy (TT) significantly improved recurrence-free survival. This study investigates the real-world situation of 904 patients from 13 German skin cancer centers with an indication for adjuvant treatment since the approval of adjuvant ICI and TT. From adjusted log-binomial regression models, we estimated relative risks for associations between various influence factors and treatment decisions (adjuvant therapy yes/no, TT vs. ICI in BRAF mutant patients). Of these patients, 76.9\% (95\% CI 74-80) opted for a systemic adjuvant treatment. The probability of starting an adjuvant treatment was 26\% lower in patients >65 years (RR 0.74, 95\% CI 68-80). The most common reasons against adjuvant treatment given by patients were age (29.4\%, 95\% CI 24-38), and fear of adverse events (21.1\%, 95\% CI 16-28) and impaired quality of life (11.9\%, 95\% CI 7-16). Of all BRAF-mutated patients who opted for adjuvant treatment, 52.9\% (95\% CI 47-59) decided for ICI. Treatment decision for TT or ICI was barely associated with age, gender and tumor stage, but with comorbidities and affiliated center. Shortly after their approval, adjuvant treatments have been well accepted by physicians and patients. Age plays a decisive role in the decision for adjuvant treatment, while pre-existing autoimmune disease and regional differences influence the choice between TT or ICI.}, language = {en} } @article{GlutschAmaralGarbeetal.2020, author = {Glutsch, Valerie and Amaral, Teresa and Garbe, Claus and Thoms, Kai-Martin and Mohr, Peter and Hauschild, Axel and Schilling, Bastian}, title = {Indirect Comparison of Combined BRAF and MEK Inhibition in Melanoma Patients with Elevated Baseline Lactate Dehydrogenase}, series = {Acta Dermato-Venereologica}, volume = {100}, journal = {Acta Dermato-Venereologica}, doi = {10.2340/00015555-3526}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-230190}, year = {2020}, abstract = {The approval of BRAF and MEK inhibitors has signifi-cantly improved treatment outcomes for patients with BRAF-mutated metastatic melanoma. The 3 first-line targeted therapy trials have provided similar results, and thus the identification of predictive biomarkers may generate a more precise basis for clinical deci-sion-making. Elevated baseline lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) has already been determined as a strong prog-nostic factor. Therefore, this indirect analysis compa-red subgroups with elevated baseline LDH across the pivotal targeted therapy trials co-BRIM, COMBI-v and COLUMBUS part 1. The Bucher method was used to compare progression-free survival, objective response rate and overall survival indirectly. The results show a non-significant risk reduction for progression in the subgroup with elevated baseline LDH receiving vemu-rafenib plus cobimetinib compared with dabrafenib plus trametinib and encorafenib plus binimetinib. Al-though an indirect comparison, these data might pro-vide some guidance for treatment recommendations in melanoma patients with elevated LDH.}, language = {en} } @article{EisenhardtSprengerRoeringetal.2016, author = {Eisenhardt, Anja E. and Sprenger, Adrian and R{\"o}ring, Michael and Herr, Ricarda and Weinberg, Florian and K{\"o}hler, Martin and Braun, Sandra and Orth, Joachim and Diedrich, Britta and Lanner, Ulrike and Tscherwinski, Natalja and Schuster, Simon and Dumaz, Nicolas and Schmidt, Enrico and Baumeister, Ralf and Schlosser, Andreas and Dengjel, J{\"o}rn and Brummer, Tilman}, title = {Phospho-proteomic analyses of B-Raf protein complexes reveal new regulatory principles}, series = {Oncotarget}, volume = {7}, journal = {Oncotarget}, number = {18}, doi = {10.18632/oncotarget.8427}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-166529}, pages = {26628-26652}, year = {2016}, abstract = {B-Raf represents a critical physiological regulator of the Ras/RAF/MEK/ERK-pathway and a pharmacological target of growing clinical relevance, in particular in oncology. To understand how B-Raf itself is regulated, we combined mass spectrometry with genetic approaches to map its interactome in MCF-10A cells as well as in B-Raf deficient murine embryonic fibroblasts (MEFs) and B-Raf/Raf-1 double deficient DT40 lymphoma cells complemented with wildtype or mutant B-Raf expression vectors. Using a multi-protease digestion approach, we identified a novel ubiquitination site and provide a detailed B-Raf phospho-map. Importantly, we identify two evolutionary conserved phosphorylation clusters around T401 and S419 in the B-Raf hinge region. SILAC labelling and genetic/biochemical follow-up revealed that these clusters are phosphorylated in the contexts of oncogenic Ras, sorafenib induced Raf dimerization and in the background of the V600E mutation. We further show that the vemurafenib sensitive phosphorylation of the T401 cluster occurs in trans within a Raf dimer. Substitution of the Ser/Thr-residues of this cluster by alanine residues enhances the transforming potential of B-Raf, indicating that these phosphorylation sites suppress its signaling output. Moreover, several B-Raf phosphorylation sites, including T401 and S419, are somatically mutated in tumors, further illustrating the importance of phosphorylation for the regulation of this kinase.}, language = {en} } @article{GrimmHufnagelWobseretal.2018, author = {Grimm, Johannes and Hufnagel, Anita and Wobser, Marion and Borst, Andreas and Haferkamp, Sebastian and Houben, Roland and Meierjohann, Svenja}, title = {BRAF inhibition causes resilience of melanoma cell lines by inducing the secretion of FGF1}, series = {Oncogenesis}, volume = {7}, journal = {Oncogenesis}, number = {71}, doi = {10.1038/s41389-018-0082-2}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-177261}, year = {2018}, abstract = {Approximately half of all melanoma patients harbour activating mutations in the serine/threonine kinase BRAF. This is the basis for one of the main treatment strategies for this tumor type, the targeted therapy with BRAF and MEK inhibitors. While the initial responsiveness to these drugs is high, resistance develops after several months, frequently at sites of the previously responding tumor. This indicates that tumor response is incomplete and that a certain tumor fraction survives even in drug-sensitive patients, e.g., in a therapy-induced senescence-like state. Here, we show in several melanoma cell lines that BRAF inhibition induces a secretome with stimulating effect on fibroblasts and naive melanoma cells. Several senescence-associated factors were found to be transcribed and secreted in response to BRAF or MEK inhibition, among them members of the fibroblast growth factor family. We identified the growth factor FGF1 as mediator of resilience towards BRAF inhibition, which limits the pro-apoptotic effects of the drug and activates fibroblasts to secrete HGF. FGF1 regulation was mediated by the PI3K pathway and by FRA1, a direct target gene of the MAPK pathway. When FGFR inhibitors were applied in parallel to BRAF inhibitors, resilience was broken, thus providing a rationale for combined therapeutical application.}, language = {en} }