Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2014 Dec;11(4):237-46.
doi: 10.7497/j.issn.2095-3941.2014.04.002.

Combining targeted therapy and immune checkpoint inhibitors in the treatment of metastatic melanoma

Affiliations
Review

Combining targeted therapy and immune checkpoint inhibitors in the treatment of metastatic melanoma

Teresa Kim et al. Cancer Biol Med. 2014 Dec.

Abstract

Melanoma is the deadliest form of skin cancer and has an incidence that is rising faster than any other solid tumor. Metastatic melanoma treatment has considerably progressed in the past five years with the introduction of targeted therapy (BRAF and MEK inhibitors) and immune checkpoint blockade (anti-CTLA4, anti-PD-1, and anti-PD-L1). However, each treatment modality has limitations. Treatment with targeted therapy has been associated with a high response rate, but with short-term responses. Conversely, treatment with immune checkpoint blockade has a lower response rate, but with long-term responses. Targeted therapy affects antitumor immunity, and synergy may exist when targeted therapy is combined with immunotherapy. This article presents a brief review of the rationale and evidence for the potential synergy between targeted therapy and immune checkpoint blockade. Challenges and directions for future studies are also proposed.

Keywords: BRAF inhibition; Melanoma; checkpoint blockade; immunotherapy.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Jennifer A. Wargo has honoraria from the speakers’ bureau of DAVA Oncology and is an advisory board member for Glaxo Smith Kline, Roche/Genentech, and Amgen. No potential conflicts of interest were disclosed by the other authors.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Putative effects of adding BRAF targeted therapy to immune-based therapies. Without treatment, melanomas demonstrate an immunosuppressive environment with generally low levels of melanoma antigens, low levels of infiltrating cytotoxic T lymphocytes, and high levels of immunosuppressive cytokines and VEGF (A). Treatment with a BRAF inhibitor results in a favorable tumor microenvironment with increased antigens and CD8+ T cells and decreased immunosuppressive cytokines and VEGF, but with concurrent increase in immunomodulatory molecules, such as PD-1 on T cells and PD-L1, in the tumor microenvironment (B). BRAF-targeted therapy may synergize with different treatment modalities, and this phenomenon is being tested in murine models and in clinical trials. Evidence for synergy exists with immune checkpoint blockade (C), considering that the BRAF inhibitor addition has positive effects on the tumor microenvironment (with increased antigens, CD8+ T cells, and decreased immunosuppressive cytokines/VEGF) and that the simultaneous increase in immunomodulatory molecules is tempered by immune checkpoint blockade (D). The potential synergy includes combined treatment with IL2 (E), in which the addition of BRAF-targeted therapy may augment the antitumor immune response by its favorable effects on the tumor microenvironment (F). Nevertheless, regulatory T cells in this setting may be controversial. Adoptive cell therapy works through ex vivo activation of autologous antigen-reactive T cells (G), and this behavior may be enhanced by the favorable effects of BRAF-targeted therapy on the tumor microenvironment (H). Radiation therapy has clear effects on the tumor microenvironment with effects on both tumor cells and antitumor immunity (I), which may be augmented by the addition of BRAF-targeted therapy (J).

References

    1. Siegel R, Ma J, Zou Z, Jemal A.Cancer statistics, 2014. CA Cancer J Clin 2014;64:9-29. - PubMed
    1. Little EG, Eide MJ. Update on the current state of melanoma incidence. Dermatol Clin 2012;30:355-361. - PubMed
    1. Beddingfield FC, 3rd. The melanoma epidemic: res ipsa loquitur. Oncologist 2003;8:459-465. - PubMed
    1. Costanza ME, Nathanson L, Costello WG, Wolter J, Brunk SF, Colsky J, et al. Results of a randomized study comparing DTIC with TIC mustard in malignant melanoma. Cancer 1976;37:1654-1659. - PubMed
    1. Patel PM, Suciu S, Mortier L, Kruit WH, Robert C, Schadendorf D, et al. Extended schedule, escalated dose temozolomide versus dacarbazine in stage IV melanoma: final results of a randomised phase III study (EORTC 18032). Eur J Cancer 2011;47:1476-1483. - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources