Video

Dr. Algazi on Benefit of Continuous Dabrafenib/Trametinib Dosing in BRAF+ Melanoma

Alain Algazi, MD, discusses the benefit of continuous dosing with dabrafenib (Tafinlar) and trametinib (Mekinist) in patients with BRAF mutation–positive advanced melanoma.

Alain Algazi, MD, associate professor in the Department of Medicine, leader of the UCSF Head and Neck Medical Oncology program and melanoma specialist at UCSF Helen Diller Family Comprehensive Cancer Center, discusses the benefit of continuous dosing with dabrafenib (Tafinlar) and trametinib (Mekinist) in patients with BRAF mutation—positive advanced melanoma.

V600-mutant

In the randomized, phase 2 SWOG S1320 trial, investigators sought to determine whether intermittent versus continuous dosing of dabrafenib and trametinib would improve progression-free survival (PFS) in patients with advanced BRAF melanoma. All patients received continuous dabrafenib and trametinib for 8 weeks. Non-progressing patients were then randomized to receive either continuous treatment or intermittent dosing of both drugs on a 3-week-off, 5-week-on schedule. A total of 242 patients were treated and 206 patients without disease progression after 8 weeks were randomized (n = 105 continuous; n = 101 intermittent). The median PFS was 9.0 months from randomization with continuous dosing versus 5.5 months from randomization with intermittent dosing (P =.064). The median overall survival in both groups was 29.2 months (P =.93) at a median follow up of 2 years.

Investigators found that the continuous dosing provided longer disease control than intermittent dosing, says Algazi. This was a sharp contrast to what had been observed in animals, which prompts the question of why these results differed between animals and humans. Investigators rely on animal models to determine what treatments should be evaluated in patients, says Algazi. As such, it is important to understand the reason behind these contrary findings.

One issue is that animals metabolize drugs differently than humans do and sometimes they will eliminate a drug from their system more quickly than a human would. Another thought is that in order to get the resistant cells to die off, the drug needs to be moved very quickly; it may be that the drug lingers longer in people and did not produce such a robust effect of drug withdrawal that had been seen in animals, postulates Algazi. Another possibility is that an animal model might not have as many resistant mechanisms as a human does, which could be an important factor. Trying to understand what is learned from an animal model and what to test in people is important. Once investigators can better understand the differences between people and animals, that will provide them with improtant insight to inform the development of better therapies, concludes Algazi.

Related Videos
Albert Grinshpun, MD, MSc, head, Breast Oncology Service, Shaare Zedek Medical Center
Erica L. Mayer, MD, MPH, director, clinical research, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute; associate professor, medicine, Harvard Medical School
Stephanie Graff, MD, and Chandler Park, FACP
Mariya Rozenblit, MD, assistant professor, medicine (medical oncology), Yale School of Medicine
Maxwell Lloyd, MD, clinical fellow, medicine, Department of Medicine, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center
Neil Iyengar, MD, and Chandler Park, MD, FACP
Azka Ali, MD, medical oncologist, Cleveland Clinic Taussig Cancer Institute
Rena Callahan, MD, and Chandler Park, MD, FACP
Hope S. Rugo, MD, FASCO, Winterhof Family Endowed Professor in Breast Cancer, professor, Department of Medicine (Hematology/Oncology), director, Breast Oncology and Clinical Trials Education; medical director, Cancer Infusion Services; the University of California San Francisco Helen Diller Family Comprehensive Cancer Center
Virginia Kaklamani, MD, DSc, professor, medicine, Division of Hematology-Medical Oncology, The University of Texas (UT) Health Science Center San Antonio; leader, breast cancer program, Mays Cancer Center, UT Health San Antonio MD Anderson Cancer Center