Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26857260›Full record

ArticleTargeted oncology2016

Ongoing Response in BRAF V600E-Mutant Melanoma After Cessation of Intermittent Vemurafenib Therapy: A Case Report.

Andrew J Dooley, Avinash Gupta, Mark R Middleton

Erratum issuedOpen access · hybridAbstract readCase Reports
In one paragraph

Article in Targeted oncology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
1.4field-weighted citation impact, top 19% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Clinical Implications of Acquired BRAF Inhibitors Resistance in Melanoma.International journal of molecular sciences · 2020
    Review
  5. Successful BRAF/MEK inhibition in a patient withCold Spring Harbor molecular case studies · 2020
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Andrew J DooleyUniversity of Oxford, John Radcliffe Hospital, Oxford, OX3 9DU, UK.
Avinash GuptaDepartment of Oncology, NIHR Biomedical Research Centre, Oxford Cancer and Haematology Centre, Churchill Hospital, Old Road, Headington, Oxford, OX3 7LE, UK.
Mark R MiddletonDepartment of Oncology, NIHR Biomedical Research Centre, Oxford Cancer and Haematology Centre, Churchill Hospital, Old Road, Headington, Oxford, OX3 7LE, UK. mark.middleton@oncology.ox.ac.uk.
Churchill Hospital · GBJohn Radcliffe Hospital · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The selective BRAF inhibitors vemurafenib and dabrafenib yield high response rates and improved overall survival in patients with BRAF V600E-mutant metastatic melanoma. Treatment traditionally continues until disease progression or the development of unacceptable toxicity. Acquired drug resistance and toxicity are key challenges with the use of these drugs. Resistance to vemurafenib usually develops within 6-8 months. Management of drug toxicity typically involves stopping vemurafenib until resolution, before restarting at a lower dose, or permanently ceasing vemurafenib therapy. We have recently considered whether intermittent dosing could be used as an alternative to dose reduction/termination in the management of vemurafenib toxicity. One patient treated with intermittent vemurafenib was an 89-year-old woman with metastatic melanoma, who initially showed a good response to continuous dosing. Recurrent toxicity meant that the continuous vemurafenib dosage was repeatedly ceased before restarting at a lower dose. Ten months after vemurafenib was first begun, an intermittent dosing regimen was introduced in an attempt to control toxicity. This continued for 2 months, before cessation due to continued unacceptable toxicity. A further 24 months later, the patient remains fit and well in complete clinical remission, with no recurrence of her previous melanoma and no new primary malignancies. To the best of our knowledge, a continued response after the cessation of selective BRAF inhibitors has never before been described in melanoma. Induction of an immune response and/or epigenetic changes could explain continued disease response after cessation of vemurafenib therapy. Care should be taken when extrapolating the findings from the continued response after vemurafenib cessation to other tumour types. We recommend the collection and analysis of data to investigate the clinical responses seen after cessation of vemurafenib due to intolerable toxicities, which could help further explain vemurafenib's mechanism of action.

Indexed as

Aged, 80 and overAntineoplastic AgentsFemaleHumansIndolesMelanomaProto-Oncogene Proteins B-rafSkin NeoplasmsSulfonamidesVemurafenibAntineoplastic AgentsIndolesProto-Oncogene Proteins B-rafSulfonamidesVemurafenib

Identifiers

PMID26857260
PMCPMC5309307
OpenAlexW2287370367

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.