The prognosis of patients with metastatic melanoma is poor and not influenced by systemic therapy with cytotoxic drugs. New targeted agents directed against the RAS-RAF-MEK-ERK pathway show promising activity in early clinical development and particular interest is focused on selective inhibitors of mutant BRAF, which is present in one half of the cases of metastatic melanoma. The majority of patients on early trials of these drugs develop secondary resistance and subsequent disease progression and it is, therefore, critical to understand the underlying escape mechanisms leading to resistance.

The last 12 months have seen the beginning of a new era in the treatment options available for patients with metastatic cutaneous melanoma, a disease previously characterised by its poor prognosis and limited treatment options. Two mechanistically diverse agents have now demonstrated an overall survival benefit in different patient subgroups and further clinical trials are ongoing with emerging single agents and novel combinations. The first agent to demonstrate an overall survival benefit was the CTLA-4 antibody, ipilimumab, illustrating the importance of the immune system and immunomodulation in melanoma tumorigenesis. The second group of agents to show a survival benefit were the selective BRAF inhibitors, vemurafenib and GSK2118436, in patients who are BRAF V600 mutation positive. In addition, in the same BRAF mutant patient population, MEK inhibitors also show promising results and are currently under investigation in later stage trials. Although ipilimumab, BRAF and MEK inhibitors are just passing through the clinical trials arena, their use will rapidly become more widespread. Along with their significant clinical benefits, there are also unique adverse events related to these agents. Although the majority are mild and can be managed with supportive treatment, some toxicities require special management strategies. We outline up-to-date clinical development and management guidelines for ipilimumab, as well as the BRAF and MEK inhibitors.

Urothelial cancers (UC) are the fourth most common tumours worldwide after prostate (or breast), lung and colorectal cancer. Despite recent improvements in their management, UC remain an aggressive disease associated with a poor outcome. Following disease progression on first-line platinum-based chemotherapy, very few effective treatment options are available and none of them have shown significant improvement in overall survival. Alterations of the fibroblast growth factor receptor (FGFR) pathway including amplification, mutations and overexpression are common in UC. Pre-clinical data suggest that the presence of such dysregulations may confer sensitivity to FGFR inhibitors. We present here the case of a patient with a metastatic UC of the renal pelvis with lymph node metastases treated with the selective FGFR inhibitor AZD4547. To date, the patient has been on a study drug for 32 months with acceptable tolerance and maintained radiological partial response as per RECIST 1.1 criteria. Exploratory biomarker analysis showed FGFR3, FGFR1, FGF-ligand and fibroblast growth factor receptor substrate 2 (FRS2) expression in the patient’s tumour, together with the presence of a germ-line mutation in the FGFR3 extracellular binding domain. This is not a known hotspot mutation, and the functional significance remains unclear. The FGFR inhibitor AZD4547 exhibits antitumour activity in a metastatic urothelial cancer displaying FGFR1, FGFR3, FGF-ligand and FRS2 expression. This lends support to the further exploration of FGFR inhibitors in urothelial cancer. Further studies are required to determinate the most effective way to select those patients most likely to respond.

Historically, patients with advanced cutaneous melanoma have a poor prognosis and limited treatment options. The discovery of selective v-raf murine sarcoma viral oncogene homolog B1 (BRAF) V600 mutation as an oncogenic mutation in cutaneous melanoma and the importance of the mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK) pathway in its tumourigenesis have changed the treatment paradigm for melanoma. Selective BRAF inhibitors and now MEK inhibitors have demonstrated response rates far higher than standard chemotherapeutic options and we review the phase I–III results for these agents in this article. The understanding of mechanisms of resistance that may occur upstream, downstream, at the BRAF level or bypassing the MAPK pathway provides a platform for rational drug development and combination therapies.

Objectives: To evaluate the 6-mo overall survival, safety and tolerability of lenalidomide in combination with standard gemcitabine as first-line treatment for patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer. Methods: Eligibility included: previously untreated metastatic adenocarcinoma of the pancreas with metastases incurable by surgery/radiation therapy; ECOG PS 0–2; adequate organ function; prophylactic anticoagulation for venous thromboembolic events (VTEs). Patients received lenalidomide 25 mg PO (days 1–21) and gemcitabine 1,000 mg/m2 IV (days 1, 8 and 15) each 28-day cycle, with response evaluations every eight weeks. Results: Between 5/2009–4/2010, 72 patients (median age 64 years; 68% male; 42% ECOG PS 0) were enrolled in this multicenter, community-based study. Six-month OS was 37% (95% CI 26–48%). Median PFS and OS were 2.3 (95% CI 1.9–3.5) and 4.7 (95% CI 3.4–5.7) months, respectively. Eight partial responses (11%) were documented. Thirty-nine patients (54%) experienced thrombocytopenia (2 patients, 3% grade 4). Hematologic toxicities resulted in dose modifications for the majority of patients. Twenty patients (28%) developed VTEs during treatment. Conclusions: The observed 6-month OS (37%) of lenalidomide with gemcitabine does not suggest improvement compared with historical results with gemcitabine alone. Toxicities and dose modifications likely limited dose intensity. Further development of this regimen in pancreas cancer is not recommended.