Efficacy and safety of BRAF/MEK inhibitor rechallenge in patients with advanced melanoma: Systematic review and meta-analysis.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
e21535 Background: Approximately 50% of patients with melanoma harbor a BRAF mutation and are eligible for targeted therapy (TT) with BRAFi/MEKi. In spite of a response rate of nearly 70%, roughly half of patients will progress within a year due to development of resistance. Rechallenging patients with BRAFi/MEKi may be an alternative to overcome resistance and improve outcomes. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy and safety of BRAFi/MEKi rechallenge in patients with advanced melanoma. Methods: PubMed, Scopus, the Cochrane Library, ASCO publications, ESMO, and AACR databases were searched for relevant studies. Rechallenge was defined as patients treated with BRAFi/MEKi that developed disease progression or had significant adverse effects and went on an interval treatment or drug holiday, before being reintroduced to BRAFi/MEKi. Efficacy was assessed by objective response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS). Heterogeneity was examined with the I(2) statistics and random-effect model was used to pool studies. Results: Seven studies met inclusion criteria, with a total of 400 patients. The medium follow-up ranged from 6.8 to 15.7 months. Elevated LDH was seen in 48.5% (194/400) of patients, and 53% (164/310) had brain metastases (BM). Prior to rechallenge, 83% (333/400) of patients received immunotherapy as interval treatment, mainly anti-PD-1 and/or anti-CTLA-4, and 10% (40/400) were on a drug holiday. During the rechallenge, 79% (317/400) of patients were treated with the combination of BRAFi/MEKi, whereas 21% (83/400) were treated with BRAFi alone. In a pooled analysis, the median PFS was 5 months (95% CI 4.0 – 5.9), and median OS was 9.8 months (95% CI 9.3 – 20.4). The 1-year OS rate was 42.63% (95% CI 30.25 - 55.02). ORR was 34.25% (95% CI 28.50 - 40), and DCR was 65.01% (95% CI 57.31 - 72.72). Prognostic markers such as BM and elevated LDH were not statistically significant. Treatment was well tolerated without unexpected adverse events. Conclusions: This meta-analysis indicates that advanced melanoma patients with refractory disease benefit from rechallenge with BRAFi/MEKi, particularly from high DCR, with a promising effect on 1-year OS rate. Further randomized controlled trials are warranted to investigate these findings. [Table: see text]
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.010 | 0.023 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.016 | 0.029 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".