SummaryActivated RAS promotes dimerization of members of the RAF kinase family1-3. ATP-competitive RAF inhibitors activate ERK signaling4-7 by transactivating RAF dimers4. In melanomas with mutant BRAF(V600E), levels of RAS activation are low and these drugs bind to BRAF(V600E) monomers and inhibit their activity. This tumor-specific inhibition of ERK signaling results in a broad therapeutic index and RAF inhibitors have remarkable clinical activity in patients with melanomas that harbor mutant BRAF(V600E)8. However, resistance invariably develops. Here, we identify a novel resistance mechanism. We find that a subset of cells resistant to vemurafenib (PLX4032, RG7204) express a 61kd variant form of BRAF(V600E) that lacks exons 4-8, a region that encompasses the RAS-binding domain. p61BRAF(V600E) exhibits enhanced dimerization in cells with low levels of RAS activation, as compared to full length BRAF(V600E). In cells in which p61BRAF(V600E) is expressed endogenously or ectopically, ERK signaling is resistant to the RAF inhibitor. Moreover, a mutation that abolishes the dimerization of p61BRAF(V600E) restores its sensitivity to vemurafenib. Finally, we identified BRAF(V600E) splicing variants lacking the RAS-binding domain in the tumors of six of 19 patients with acquired resistance to vemurafenib. These data support the model that inhibition of ERK signaling by RAF inhibitors is dependent on levels of RAS-GTP too low to support RAF dimerization and identify a novel mechanism of acquired resistance in patients: expression of splicing isoforms of BRAF(V600E) that dimerize in a RAS-independent manner.

The development of acquired drug resistance hampers the long-term success of B-RAF inhibitor (B-RAFi) therapy for melanoma patients. Here we show V600EB-RAF copy number gain as a mechanism of acquired B-RAFi resistance in four out of twenty (20%) patients treated with B-RAFi. In cell lines, V600EB-RAF over-expression and knockdown conferred B-RAFi resistance and sensitivity, respectively. In V600EB-RAF amplification-driven (vs. mutant N-RAS-driven) B-RAFi resistance, ERK reactivation is saturable, with higher doses of vemurafenib down-regulating pERK and re-sensitizing melanoma cells to B-RAFi. These two mechanisms of ERK reactivation are sensitive to the MEK1/2 inhibitor AZD6244/selumetinib or its combination with the B-RAFi vemurafenib. In contrast to mutant N-RAS-mediated V600EB-RAF bypass, which is sensitive to C-RAF knockdown, V600EB-RAF amplification-mediated resistance functions largely independently of C-RAF. Thus, alternative clinical strategies may potentially overcome distinct modes of ERK reactivation underlying acquired B-RAFi resistance in melanoma.

BackgroundThe sustained clinical activity of the BRAF inhibitor vemurafenib (PLX4032/RG7204) in patients with BRAFV600 mutant melanoma is limited primarily by the development of acquired resistance leading to tumor progression. Clinical trials are in progress using MEK inhibitors following disease progression in patients receiving BRAF inhibitors. However, the PI3K/AKT pathway can also induce resistance to the inhibitors of MAPK pathway.Methodology/Principal FindingsThe sensitivity to vemurafenib or the MEK inhibitor AZD6244 was tested in sensitive and resistant human melanoma cell lines exploring differences in activation-associated phosphorylation levels of major signaling molecules, leading to the testing of co-inhibition of the AKT/mTOR pathway genetically and pharmacologically. There was a high degree of cross-resistance to vemurafenib and AZD6244, except in two vemurafenib-resistant cell lines that acquired a secondary mutation in NRAS. In other cell lines, acquired resistance to both drugs was associated with persistence or increase in activity of AKT pathway. siRNA-mediated gene silencing and combination therapy with an AKT inhibitor or rapamycin partially or completely reversed the resistance.Conclusions/SignificancePrimary and acquired resistance to vemurafenib in these in vitro models results in frequent cross resistance to MEK inhibitors, except when the resistance is the result of a secondary NRAS mutation. Resistance to BRAF or MEK inhibitors is associated with the induction or persistence of activity within the AKT pathway in the presence of these drugs. This resistance can be potentially reversed by the combination of a RAF or MEK inhibitor with an AKT or mTOR inhibitor. These combinations should be available for clinical testing in patients progressing on BRAF inhibitors.

Confined to one cell: A method to detect and isolate single circulating melanoma cells (CMCs; see figure) has been produced by integrating a polymer‐nanofiber‐embedded nanovelcro cell‐affinity assay with a laser microdissection (LMD) technique. This method is able to separate CMCs from normal white blood cells (WBCs) and sequence individual cells for a specific mutation related to cancer progression, allowing for more personalized cancer therapy.

Purpose It has been demonstrated that large numbers of tumor-specific T cells for adoptive cell transfer (ACT) can be manufactured by retroviral genetic engineering of autologous peripheral blood lymphocytes and expanding them over several weeks. In mouse models, this therapy is optimized when administered with dendritic cell (DC) vaccination. We developed a short one-week manufacture protocol to determine the feasibility, safety and antitumor efficacy of this double cell therapy. Experimnetal Design A clinical trial (NCT00910650) adoptively transferring MART-1 T cell receptor (TCR) transgenic lymphocytes together with MART-1 peptide pulsed DC vaccination in HLA-A2.1 patients with metastatic melanoma. Autologous TCR transgenic cells were manufactured in 6 to 7 days using retroviral vector gene transfer, and re-infused with (n = 10) or without (n = 3) prior cryopreservation. Results 14 patients with metastatic melanoma were enrolled and nine out of 13 treated patients (69%) showed evidence of tumor regression. Peripheral blood reconstitution with MART-1-specific T cells peaked within two weeks of ACT indicating rapid in vivo expansion. Administration of freshly manufactured TCR transgenic T cells resulted in a higher persistence of MART-1-specific T cells in the blood as compared to cryopreserved. Evidence that DC vaccination could cause further in vivo expansion was only observed with ACT using non-cryopreserved T cells. Conclusion Double cell therapy with ACT of TCR engineered T cells with a very short ex vivo manipulation and DC vaccines is feasible and results in antitumor activity, but improvements are needed to maintain tumor responses.