@article{HesbacherPfitzerWiedorferetal.2016, author = {Hesbacher, Sonja and Pfitzer, Lisa and Wiedorfer, Katharina and Angermeyer, Sabrina and Borst, Andreas and Haferkamp, Sebastian and Scholz, Claus-J{\"u}rgen and Wobser, Marion and Schrama, David and Houben, Roland}, title = {RB1 is the crucial target of the Merkel cell polyomavirus Large T antigen in Merkel cell carcinoma cells}, series = {Oncotarget}, volume = {7}, journal = {Oncotarget}, number = {22}, doi = {10.18632/oncotarget.8793}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-177858}, pages = {32956-32968}, year = {2016}, abstract = {The pocket protein (PP) family consists of the three members RB1, p107 and p130 all possessing tumor suppressive properties. Indeed, the PPs jointly control the G1/S transition mainly by inhibiting E2F transcription factors. Notably, several viral oncoproteins are capable of binding and inhibiting PPs. Merkel cell polyomavirus (MCPyV) is considered as etiological factor for Merkel cell carcinoma (MCC) with expression of the viral Large T antigen (LT) harboring an intact PP binding domain being required for proliferation of most MCC cells. Therefore, we analyzed the interaction of MCPyV-LT with the PPs. Co-IP experiments indicate that MCPyV-LT binds potently only to RB1. Moreover, MCPyV-LT knockdown-induced growth arrest in MCC cells can be rescued by knockdown of RB1, but not by p107 or p130 knockdown. Accordingly, cell cycle arrest and E2F target gene repression mediated by the single PPs can only in the case of RB1 be significantly reverted by MCPyV-LT expression. Moreover, data from an MCC patient indicate that loss of RB1 rendered the MCPyV-positive MCC cells LT independent. Thus, our results suggest that RB1 is the dominant tumor suppressor PP in MCC, and that inactivation of RB1 by MCPyV-LT is largely sufficient for its growth supporting function in established MCPyV-positive MCC cells.}, language = {en} } @article{HoubenHesbacherSchmidetal.2011, author = {Houben, Roland and Hesbacher, Sonja and Schmid, Corinna P. and Kauczok, Claudia S. and Flohr, Ulrike and Haferkamp, Sebastian and M{\"u}ller, Cornelia S. L. and Schrama, David and Wischhusen, J{\"o}rg and Becker, J{\"u}rgen C.}, title = {High-Level Expression of Wild-Type p53 in Melanoma Cells is Frequently Associated with Inactivity in p53 Reporter Gene Assays}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-69012}, year = {2011}, abstract = {Background: Inactivation of the p53 pathway that controls cell cycle progression, apoptosis and senescence, has been proposed to occur in virtually all human tumors and p53 is the protein most frequently mutated in human cancer. However, the mutational status of p53 in melanoma is still controversial; to clarify this notion we analysed the largest series of melanoma samples reported to date. Methodology/Principal Findings: Immunohistochemical analysis of more than 180 melanoma specimens demonstrated that high levels of p53 are expressed in the vast majority of cases. Subsequent sequencing of the p53 exons 5-8, however, revealed only in one case the presence of a mutation. Nevertheless, by means of two different p53 reporter constructs we demonstrate transcriptional inactivity of wild type p53 in 6 out of 10 melanoma cell lines; the 4 other p53 wild type melanoma cell lines exhibit p53 reporter gene activity, which can be blocked by shRNA knock down of p53. Conclusions/Significance: In melanomas expressing high levels of wild type p53 this tumor suppressor is frequently inactivated at transcriptional level.}, subject = {Krebs }, language = {en} } @article{HaferkampHesbacherWeyandtetal.2014, author = {Haferkamp, Sebastian and Hesbacher, Sonja and Weyandt, Gerhard and Vetter-Kauczok, Claudia S. and Becker, J{\"u}rgen C. and Motschenbacher, Stephanie and Wobser, Marion and Maier, Melissa and Schmid, Corinna P. and Houben, Roland}, title = {p53 regulation by TRP2 is not pervasive in melanoma}, doi = {10.1371/journal.pone.0087440}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-111396}, year = {2014}, abstract = {p53 is a central tumor suppressor protein and its inhibition is believed to be a prerequisite for cancer development. In approximately 50\% of all malignancies this is achieved by inactivating mutations in the p53 gene. However, in several cancer entities, including melanoma, p53 mutations are rare. It has been recently proposed that tyrosinase related protein 2 (TRP2), a protein involved in melanin synthesis, may act as suppressor of the p53 pathway in melanoma. To scrutinize this notion we analyzed p53 and TRP2 expression by immunohistochemistry in 172 melanoma tissues and did not find any correlation. Furthermore, we applied three different TRP2 shRNAs to five melanoma cell lines and could not observe a target specific effect of the TRP2 knockdown on either p53 expression nor p53 reporter gene activity. Likewise, ectopic expression of TRP2 in a TRP2 negative melanoma cell line had no impact on p53 expression. In conclusion our data suggest that p53 repression critically controlled by TRP2 is not a general event in melanoma.}, language = {en} } @article{HohenauerBerkingSchmidtetal.2013, author = {Hohenauer, Tobias and Berking, Carola and Schmidt, Andreas and Haferkamp, Sebastian and Senft, Daniela and Kammerbauer, Claudia and Fraschka, Sabine and Graf, Saskia Anna and Irmler, Martin and Beckers, Johannes and Flaig, Michael and Aigner, Achim and H{\"o}bel, Sabrina and Hoffmann, Franziska and Hermeking, Heiko and Rothenfusser, Simon and Endres, Stefan and Ruzicka, Thomas and Besch, Robert}, title = {The neural crest transcription factor Brn3a is expressed in melanoma and required for cell cycle progression and survival}, series = {EMBO Molecular Medicine}, volume = {5}, journal = {EMBO Molecular Medicine}, issn = {1757-4676}, doi = {10.1002/emmm.201201862}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-122193}, pages = {919-934}, year = {2013}, abstract = {Pigment cells and neuronal cells both are derived from the neural crest. Here, we describe the Pit-Oct-Unc (POU) domain transcription factor Brn3a, normally involved in neuronal development, to be frequently expressed in melanoma, but not in melanocytes and nevi. RNAi-mediated silencing of Brn3a strongly reduced the viability of melanoma cell lines and decreased tumour growth in vivo. In melanoma cell lines, inhibition of Brn3a caused DNA double-strand breaks as evidenced by Mre11/Rad50-containing nuclear foci. Activated DNA damage signalling caused stabilization of the tumour suppressor p53, which resulted in cell cycle arrest and apoptosis. When Brn3a was ectopically expressed in primary melanocytes and fibroblasts, anchorage-independent growth was increased. In tumourigenic melanocytes and fibroblasts, Brn3a accelerated tumour growth in vivo. Furthermore, Brn3a cooperated with proliferation pathways such as oncogenic BRAF, by reducing oncogene-induced senescence in non-malignant melanocytes. Together, these results identify Brn3a as a new factor in melanoma that is essential for melanoma cell survival and that promotes melanocytic transformation and tumourigenesis.}, language = {en} } @article{KochPetzoldWesselyetal.2021, author = {Koch, Elias A. T. and Petzold, Anne and Wessely, Anja and Dippel, Edgar and Gesierich, Anja and Gutzmer, Ralf and Hassel, Jessica C. and Haferkamp, Sebastian and Hohberger, Bettina and K{\"a}hler, Katharina C. and Knorr, Harald and Kreuzberg, Nicole and Leiter, Ulrike and Loquai, Carmen and Meier, Friedegund and Meissner, Markus and Mohr, Peter and Pf{\"o}hler, Claudia and Rahimi, Farnaz and Schadendorf, Dirk and Schell, Beatrice and Schlaak, Max and Terheyden, Patrick and Thoms, Kai-Martin and Schuler-Thurner, Beatrice and Ugurel, Selma and Ulrich, Jens and Utikal, Jochen and Weichenthal, Michael and Ziller, Fabian and Berking, Carola and Heppt, Markus}, title = {Immune checkpoint blockade for metastatic uveal melanoma: patterns of response and survival according to the presence of hepatic and extrahepatic metastasis}, series = {Cancers}, volume = {13}, journal = {Cancers}, number = {13}, issn = {2072-6694}, doi = {10.3390/cancers13133359}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-242603}, year = {2021}, abstract = {Background: Since there is no standardized and effective treatment for advanced uveal melanoma (UM), the prognosis is dismal once metastases develop. Due to the availability of immune checkpoint blockade (ICB) in the real-world setting, the prognosis of metastatic UM has improved. However, it is unclear how the presence of hepatic and extrahepatic metastasis impacts the response and survival after ICB. Methods: A total of 178 patients with metastatic UM treated with ICB were included in this analysis. Patients were recruited from German skin cancer centers and the German national skin cancer registry (ADOReg). To investigate the impact of hepatic metastasis, two cohorts were compared: patients with liver metastasis only (cohort A, n = 55) versus those with both liver and extra-hepatic metastasis (cohort B, n = 123). Data were analyzed in both cohorts for response to treatment, progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS). The survival and progression probabilities were calculated with the Kaplan-Meier method. Log-rank tests, χ\(^2\) tests, and t-tests were performed to detect significant differences between both cohorts. Results: The median OS of the overall population was 16 months (95\% CI 13.4-23.7) and the median PFS, 2.8 months (95\% CI 2.5-3.0). The median OS was longer in cohort B than in cohort A (18.2 vs. 6.1 months; p = 0.071). The best objective response rate to dual ICB was 13.8\% and to anti-PD-1 monotherapy 8.9\% in the entire population. Patients with liver metastases only had a lower response to dual ICB, yet without significance (cohort A 8.7\% vs. cohort B 16.7\%; p = 0.45). Adverse events (AE) occurred in 41.6\%. Severe AE were observed in 26.3\% and evenly distributed between both cohorts. Conclusion: The survival of this large cohort of patients with advanced UM was more favorable than reported in previous benchmark studies. Patients with both hepatic and extrahepatic metastasis showed more favorable survival and higher response to dual ICB than those with hepatic metastasis only.}, 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} } @article{KochPetzoldWesselyetal.2022, author = {Koch, Elias A. T. and Petzold, Anne and Wessely, Anja and Dippel, Edgar and Gesierich, Anja and Gutzmer, Ralf and Hassel, Jessica C. and Haferkamp, Sebastian and K{\"a}hler, Katharina C. and Knorr, Harald and Kreuzberg, Nicole and Leiter, Ulrike and Loquai, Carmen and Meier, Friedegund and Meissner, Markus and Mohr, Peter and Pf{\"o}hler, Claudia and Rahimi, Farnaz and Schadendorf, Dirk and Schell, Beatrice and Schlaak, Max and Terheyden, Patrick and Thoms, Kai-Martin and Schuler-Thurner, Beatrice and Ugurel, Selma and Ulrich, Jens and Utikal, Jochen and Weichenthal, Michael and Ziller, Fabian and Berking, Carola and Heppt, Markus V.}, title = {Immune checkpoint blockade for metastatic uveal melanoma: re-induction following resistance or toxicity}, series = {Cancers}, volume = {14}, journal = {Cancers}, number = {3}, issn = {2072-6694}, doi = {10.3390/cancers14030518}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-254814}, year = {2022}, abstract = {Re-induction with immune checkpoint blockade (ICB) needs to be considered in many patients with uveal melanoma (UM) due to limited systemic treatment options. Here, we provide hitherto the first analysis of ICB re-induction in UM. A total of 177 patients with metastatic UM treated with ICB were included from German skin cancer centers and the German national skin cancer registry (ADOReg). To investigate the impact of ICB re-induction, two cohorts were compared: patients who received at least one ICB re-induction (cohort A, n = 52) versus those who received only one treatment line of ICB (cohort B, n = 125). In cohort A, a transient benefit of overall survival (OS) was observed at 6 and 12 months after the treatment start of ICB. There was no significant difference in OS between both groups (p = 0.1) with a median OS of 16.2 months (cohort A, 95\% CI: 11.1-23.8) versus 9.4 months (cohort B, 95\% CI: 6.1-14.9). Patients receiving re-induction of ICB (cohort A) had similar response rates compared to those receiving ICB once. Re-induction of ICB may yield a clinical benefit for a small subgroup of patients even after resistance or development of toxicities.}, language = {en} } @article{GlutschKneitzGesierichetal.2021, author = {Glutsch, Valerie and Kneitz, Hermann and Gesierich, Anja and Goebeler, Matthias and Haferkamp, Sebastian and Becker, J{\"u}rgen C. and Ugurel, Selma and Schilling, Bastian}, title = {Activity of ipilimumab plus nivolumab in avelumab-refractory Merkel cell carcinoma}, series = {Cancer Immunology, Immunotherapy}, volume = {70}, journal = {Cancer Immunology, Immunotherapy}, number = {7}, issn = {14320851}, doi = {10.1007/s00262-020-02832-0}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-265635}, pages = {2087-2093}, year = {2021}, abstract = {Background Merkel cell carcinoma (MCC) is a rare and aggressive neuroendocrine cutaneous malignancy with poor prognosis. In Europe, approved systemic therapies are limited to the PD-L1 inhibitor avelumab. For avelumab-refractory patients, efficient and safe treatment options are lacking. Methods At three different sites in Germany, clinical and molecular data of patients with metastatic MCC being refractory to the PD-L1 inhibitor avelumab and who were later on treated with combined IPI/NIVO were retrospectively collected and evaluated. Results Five patients treated at three different academic sites in Germany were enrolled. Three out of five patients investigated for this report responded to combined IPI/NIVO according to RECIST 1.1. Combined immunotherapy was well tolerated without any grade II or III immune-related adverse events. Two out of three responders to IPI/NIVO received platinum-based chemotherapy in between avelumab and combined immunotherapy. Conclusion In this small retrospective study, we observed a high response rate and durable responses to subsequent combined immunotherapy with IPI/NIVO in avelumab-refractory metastatic MCC patients. In conclusion, our data suggest a promising activity of second- or third-line PD-1- plus CTLA-4-blockade in patients with anti-PD-L1-refractory MCC.}, language = {en} } @article{GlutschSchummerKneitzetal.2022, author = {Glutsch, Valerie and Schummer, Patrick and Kneitz, Hermann and Gesierich, Anja and Goebeler, Matthias and Klein, Detlef and Posch, Christian and Gebhardt, Christoffer and Haferkamp, Sebastian and Zimmer, Lisa and Becker, J{\"u}rgen C and Leiter, Ulrike and Weichenthal, Michael and Schadendorf, Dirk and Ugurel, Selma and Schilling, Bastian}, title = {Ipilimumab plus nivolumab in avelumab-refractory Merkel cell carcinoma: a multicenter study of the prospective skin cancer registry ADOREG}, series = {Journal for ImmunoTherapy of Cancer}, volume = {10}, journal = {Journal for ImmunoTherapy of Cancer}, number = {11}, issn = {2051-1426}, doi = {10.1136/jitc-2022-005930}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-304613}, year = {2022}, abstract = {Merkel cell carcinoma is a rare, highly aggressive skin cancer with neuroendocrine differentiation. Immune checkpoint inhibition has significantly improved treatment outcomes in metastatic disease with response rates to programmed cell death protein 1/programmed cell death 1 ligand 1 (PD-1/PD-L1) inhibition of up to 62\%. However, primary and secondary resistance to PD-1/PD-L1 inhibition remains a so far unsolved clinical challenge since effective and safe treatment options for these patients are lacking.Fourteen patients with advanced (non-resectable stage III or stage IV, Union international contre le cancer 2017) Merkel cell carcinoma with primary resistance to the PD-L1 inhibitor avelumab receiving subsequent therapy (second or later line) with ipilimumab plus nivolumab (IPI/NIVO) were identified in the prospective multicenter skin cancer registry ADOREG. Five of these 14 patients were reported previously and were included in this analysis with additional follow-up. Overall response rate, progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS) and adverse events were analyzed.All 14 patients received avelumab as first-line treatment. Thereof, 12 patients had shown primary resistance with progressive disease in the first tumor assessment, while two patients had initially experienced a short-lived stabilization (stable disease). Six patients had at least one systemic treatment in between avelumab and IPI/NIVO. In total, 7 patients responded to IPI/NIVO (overall response rate 50\%), and response was ongoing in 4 responders at last follow-up. After a median follow-up of 18.85 months, median PFS was 5.07 months (95\% CI 2.43—not available (NA)), and median OS was not reached. PFS rates at 12 months and 24 months were 42.9\% and 26.8 \%, respectively. The OS rate at 36 months was 64.3\%. Only 3 (21\%) patients did not receive all 4 cycles of IPI/NIVO due to immune-related adverse events.In this multicenter evaluation, we observed high response rates, a durable benefit and promising OS rates after treatment with later-line combined IPI/NIVO. In conclusion, our patient cohort supports our prior findings with an encouraging activity of second-line or later-line IPI/NIVO in patients with anti-PD-L1-refractory Merkel cell carcinoma.}, language = {en} } @article{HaistStegeLangetal.2022, author = {Haist, Maximilian and Stege, Henner and Lang, Berenice Mareen and Tsochataridou, Aikaterini and Salzmann, Martin and Mohr, Peter and Schadendorf, Dirk and Ugurel, Selma and Placke, Jan-Malte and Weichenthal, Michael and Gutzmer, Ralf and Leiter, Ulrike and Kaatz, Martin and Haferkamp, Sebastian and Berking, Carola and Heppt, Markus and Tschechne, Barbara and Schummer, Patrick and Gebhardt, Christoffer and Grabbe, Stephan and Loquai, Carmen}, title = {Response to first-line treatment with immune-checkpoint inhibitors in patients with advanced cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma: a multicenter, retrospective analysis from the German ADOReg registry}, series = {Cancers}, volume = {14}, journal = {Cancers}, number = {22}, issn = {2072-6694}, doi = {10.3390/cancers14225543}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-297506}, year = {2022}, abstract = {Cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (cSCC) is a common malignancy of the skin and has an overall favorable outcome, except for patients with an advanced stage of the disease. The efficacy of checkpoint inhibitors (CPI) for advanced cSCC has been demonstrated in recent clinical studies, but data from real-world cohorts and trial-ineligible cSCC patients are limited. We retrospectively investigated patients with advanced cSCC who have been treated with CPI in a first-line setting at eight German skin cancer centers registered within the multicenter registry ADOReg. Clinical outcome parameters including response, progression-free (PFS) and overall survival (OS), time-to-next-treatment (TTNT), and toxicity were analyzed and have been stratified by the individual immune status. Among 39 evaluable patients, the tumor response rate (rwTRR) was 48.6\%, the median PFS was 29.0 months, and the median OS was not reached. In addition, 9 patients showed an impaired immune status due to immunosuppressive medication or hematological diseases. Our data demonstrated that CPI also evoked tumor responses among immunocompromised patients (rwTRR: 48.1 vs. 50.0\%), although these responses less often resulted in durable remissions. In line with this, the median PFS (11 vs. 40 months, p = 0.059), TTNT (12 months vs. NR, p = 0.016), and OS (29 months vs. NR, p < 0.001) were significantly shorter for this patient cohort. CPI therapy was well tolerated in both subcohorts with 15\% discontinuing therapy due to toxicity. Our real-world data show that first-line CPI therapy produced strong and durable responses among patients with advanced cSCC. Immunocompromised patients were less likely to achieve long-term benefit from anti-PD1 treatment, despite similar tumor response rates.}, language = {en} }