Beverly Hills Cancer Center
Beverly Hills Cancer Center
Robert C.,CNRS Gustave Roussy Institute |
Schadendorf D.,University of Duisburg - Essen |
Messina M.,Bristol Myers Squibb |
Hodi F.S.,Dana-Farber Cancer Institute |
O'Day S.,Beverly Hills Cancer Center
Clinical Cancer Research | Year: 2013
Purpose: Ipilimumab is a fully human monoclonal antibody against cytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated antigen-4 (CTLA-4) that has been shown to improve survival in patients with pretreated, advanced melanoma in a phase III trial. Some patients in this study who initially responded to ipilimumab treatment but later progressed were eligible for retreatment with their original randomized regimen. Here, outcomes for these patients concerning baseline characteristics, best overall response, and disease control rate are assessed and considered with respect to the overall study population. Experimental Design: In the phase III study, 676 pretreated patients were randomly allocated to treatment with ipilimumab 3 mg/kg plus gp100 vaccine, ipilimumab 3 mg/kg plus placebo, or gp100 vaccine alone. Of these patients, 32 had a partial or complete objective response or stable disease after treatment and met the eligibility criteria for retreatment, although a total of 40 patients were retreated. Results: Best overall response rates (complete responses plus partial responses) for 31 retreatmenteligible patients in the ipilimumab plus gp100 and ipilimumab plus placebo groups were 3 of 23 (13.0%) and 3 of 8 (37.5%), respectively, and disease control rates were 65.2% and 75.0%. No new types of toxicities occurred during retreatment and most events were mild-to-moderate. Conclusion: Ipilimumab provided durable objective responses and/or stable disease in qualifying patients who received retreatment upon disease progression with a similar toxicity profile to that seen during their original treatment regimen. ©2013 AACR.
Carvajal R.D.,Sloan Kettering Cancer Center |
Carvajal R.D.,Cornell University |
Lawrence D.P.,Massachusetts General Hospital |
Weber J.S.,H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center and Research Institute |
And 19 more authors.
Clinical Cancer Research | Year: 2015
Purpose: Although durable responses can be achieved with tyrosine kinase inhibitors such as imatinib in melanomas harboring KIT mutations, the efficacy of alternative inhibitors after progression to imatinib and the activity of these agents on brain metastases are unknown. Experimental Design: We conducted a phase II study of nilotinib 400 mg twice a day in two cohorts of patients with melanomas harboring KIT mutations or amplification: (A) those refractory or intolerant to a prior KIT inhibitor; and (B) those with brain metastases. The primary endpoint was 4-month disease control rate. Secondary endpoints included response rate, time-to-progression (TTP), and overall survival (OS). A Simon twostage and a single-stage design was planned to assess for the primary endpoint in cohorts A and B, respectively. Results: Twenty patients were enrolled and 19 treated (11 in cohort A; 8 in cohort B). Three patients on cohort A [27%; 95% confidence interval (CI), 8%-56%] and 1 on cohort B (12.5%; 90% CI, 0.6%-47%) achieved the primary endpoint. Two partial responses were observed in cohort A (18.2%; 90% CI, 3%-47%); none were observed in cohort B. The median TTP and OS was 3.3 (90% CI, 2.1-3.9 months) and 9.1 months (90% CI, 4.3-14.2 months), respectively, in all treated patients. Conclusions: Nilotinib may achieve disease control in patients with melanoma harboring KIT alterations and whose disease progressed after imatinib therapy. The efficacy of this agent in KIT-altered melanoma with brain metastasis is limited. © 2015 AACR.
Ribas A.,University of California at Los Angeles |
Puzanov I.,Vanderbilt Ingram Cancer Center |
Dummer R.,University of Zürich |
Schadendorf D.,University of Duisburg - Essen |
And 33 more authors.
The Lancet Oncology | Year: 2015
Background: Patients with melanoma that progresses on ipilimumab and, if BRAFV600 mutant-positive, a BRAF or MEK inhibitor or both, have few treatment options. We assessed the efficacy and safety of two pembrolizumab doses versus investigator-choice chemotherapy in patients with ipilimumab-refractory melanoma. Methods: We carried out a randomised phase 2 trial of patients aged 18 years or older from 73 hospitals, clinics, and academic medical centres in 12 countries who had confirmed progressive disease within 24 weeks after two or more ipilimumab doses and, if BRAFV600 mutant-positive, previous treatment with a BRAF or MEK inhibitor or both. Patients had to have resolution of all ipilimumab-related adverse events to grade 0-1 and prednisone 10 mg/day or less for at least 2 weeks, an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status of 0 or 1, and at least one measurable lesion to be eligible. Using a centralised interactive voice response system, we randomly assigned (1:1:1) patients in a block size of six to receive intravenous pembrolizumab 2 mg/kg or 10 mg/kg every 3 weeks or investigator-choice chemotherapy (paclitaxel plus carboplatin, paclitaxel, carboplatin, dacarbazine, or oral temozolomide). Randomisation was stratified by ECOG performance status, lactate dehydrogenase concentration, and BRAFV600 mutation status. Individual treatment assignment between pembrolizumab and chemotherapy was open label, but investigators and patients were masked to assignment of the dose of pembrolizumab. We present the primary endpoint at the prespecified second interim analysis of progression-free survival in the intention-to-treat population. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01704287. The study is closed to enrolment but continues to follow up and treat patients. Findings: Between Nov 30, 2012, and Nov 13, 2013, we enrolled 540 patients: 180 patients were randomly assigned to receive pembrolizumab 2 mg/kg, 181 to receive pembrolizumab 10 mg/kg, and 179 to receive chemotherapy. Based on 410 progression-free survival events, progression-free survival was improved in patients assigned to pembrolizumab 2 mg/kg (HR 0·57, 95% CI 0·45-0·73; p<0·0001) and those assigned to pembrolizumab 10 mg/kg (0·50, 0·39-0·64; p<0·0001) compared with those assigned to chemotherapy. 6-month progression-free survival was 34% (95% CI 27-41) in the pembrolizumab 2 mg/kg group, 38% (31-45) in the 10 mg/kg group, and 16% (10-22) in the chemotherapy group. Treatment-related grade 3-4 adverse events occurred in 20 (11%) patients in the pembrolizumab 2 mg/kg group, 25 (14%) in the pembrolizumab 10 mg/kg group, and 45 (26%) in the chemotherapy group. The most common treatment-related grade 3-4 adverse event in the pembrolizumab groups was fatigue (two [1%] of 178 patients in the 2 mg/kg group and one [<1%] of 179 patients in the 10 mg/kg group, compared with eight [5%] of 171 in the chemotherapy group). Other treatment-related grade 3-4 adverse events include generalised oedema and myalgia (each in two [1%] patients) in those given pembrolizumab 2 mg/kg; hypopituitarism, colitis, diarrhoea, decreased appetite, hyponatremia, and pneumonitis (each in two [1%]) in those given pembrolizumab 10 mg/kg; and anaemia (nine [5%]), fatigue (eight [5%]), neutropenia (six [4%]), and leucopenia (six [4%]) in those assigned to chemotherapy. Interpretation: These findings establish pembrolizumab as a new standard of care for the treatment of ipilimumab-refractory melanoma. Funding: Merck Sharp & Dohme. © 2015 Elsevier Ltd.
Flaherty K.T.,Massachusetts General Hospital |
Hennig M.,Glaxosmithkline |
Lee S.J.,Dana-Farber Cancer Institute |
Ascierto P.A.,Cancer Immunotherapy and Innovative Therapy Instituto Nazionale Tumori Fondazione G Pascale |
And 13 more authors.
The Lancet Oncology | Year: 2014
Background: Recent phase 3 trials have shown an overall survival benefit in metastatic melanoma. We aimed to assess whether progression-free survival (PFS) could be regarded as a reliable surrogate for overall survival through a meta-analysis of randomised trials. Methods: We systematically reviewed randomised trials comparing treatment regimens in metastatic melanoma that included dacarbazine as the control arm, and which reported both PFS and overall survival with a standard hazard ratio (HR). We correlated HRs for overall survival and PFS, weighted by sample size or by precision of the HR estimate, assuming fixed and random effects. We did sensitivity analyses according to presence of crossover, trial size, and dacarbazine dose. Findings: After screening 1649 reports and meeting abstracts published before Sept 8, 2013, we identified 12 eligible randomised trials that enrolled 4416 patients with metastatic melanoma. Irrespective of weighting strategy, we noted a strong correlation between the treatment effects for PFS and overall survival, which seemed independent of treatment type. Pearson correlation coefficients were 0·71 (95% CI 0·29-0·90) with a random-effects assumption, 0·85 (0·59-0·95) with a fixed-effects assumption, and 0·89 (0·68-0·97) with sample-size weighting. For nine trials without crossover, the correlation coefficient was 0·96 (0·81-0·99), which decreased to 0·93 (0·74-0·98) when two additional trials with less than 50% crossover were included. Inclusion of mature follow-up data after at least 50% crossover (in vemurafenib and dabrafenib phase 3 trials) weakened the PFS to overall survival correlation (0·55, 0·03-0·84). Inclusion of trials with no or little crossover with the random-effects assumption yielded a conservative statement of the PFS to overall survival correlation of 0·85 (0·51-0·96). Interpretation: PFS can be regarded as a robust surrogate for overall survival in dacarbazine-controlled randomised trials of metastatic melanoma; we postulate that this association will hold as treatment standards evolve and are adopted as the control arm in future trials. Funding: None. © 2014 Elsevier Ltd.
Wolchok J.D.,Sloan Kettering Cancer Center |
Hodi F.S.,Dana-Farber Cancer Institute |
Weber J.S.,H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center and Research Institute |
Allison J.P.,University of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer Center |
And 8 more authors.
Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences | Year: 2013
The immunotherapeutic agent ipilimumab has helped address a significant unmet need in the treatment of advanced melanoma. Ipilimumab is a fully human monoclonal antibody that targets cytotoxic T-lymphocyte antigen-4 (CTLA-4), thereby augmenting antitumor immune responses. After decades in which a number of clinical trials were conducted, ipilimumab was the first therapy to improve overall survival in a randomized, controlled phase III trial of patients with advanced melanoma. These results led to the regulatory approval of ipilimumab at 3 mg/kg for the treatment of unresectable or metastatic melanoma. More than 17,000 patients worldwide have received ipilimumab, either as a commercial drug at 3 mg/kg or in clinical trials and expanded access programs at different doses. Consistent with its proposed mechanism of action, the most common toxicities associated with ipilimumab therapy are inflammatory in nature. These immune-related adverse events were mostly reversible when effective treatment guidelines were followed. Importantly, long-term follow-up of patients who received ipilimumab in a phase III trial showed that 24% survived at least two years, and in phase II studies, a proportion of patients survived at least five years. Evaluation of ipilimumab is ongoing in the adjuvant setting for melanoma, and for advanced disease in nonsmall cell lung, small cell lung, prostate, ovarian, and gastric cancers. © 2013 The Authors. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences published by Wiley Periodicals Inc. on behalf of The New York Academy of Sciences.
PubMed | Ospedale Niguarda Ca Granda., University of Turin, Trovagene Inc., Beverly Hills Cancer Center and 5 more.
Type: | Journal: Clinical cancer research : an official journal of the American Association for Cancer Research | Year: 2017
Tumor-derived cell-free DNA (cfDNA) from urine of patients with cancer offers non-invasive biologic material for detection of cancer-related molecular abnormalities such as mutations in Exon 2 of KRAS.A quantitative, mutation-enrichment next-generation sequencing test for detecting KRASG12/G13 mutations in urine cfDNA was developed and results were compared to clinical testing of archival tumor tissue and plasma cfDNA from patients with advanced cancer.With 90-110 mL of urine, the KRASG12/G13 cfDNA test had an analytical sensitivity of 0.002%-0.006% mutant copies in wild-type background. In 71 patients, the concordance between urine cfDNA and tumor was 73% (sensitivity, 63%; specificity, 96%) for all patients and 89% (sensitivity, 80%; specificity, 100%) for patients with urine samples of 90-110 mL. Patients had significantly fewer KRASG12/G13 copies in urine cfDNA during systemic therapy than at baseline or disease progression (P=0.002). Compared with no changes or increases in urine cfDNA KRASG12/G13 copies during therapy, decreases in these measures were associated with longer median time to treatment failure (P=0.03).A quantitative, mutation-enrichment next-generation sequencing test for detecting KRASG12/G13 mutations in urine cfDNA had good concordance with testing of archival tumor tissue. Changes in mutated urine cfDNA were associated with time to treatment failure.
PubMed | Trovagene Inc and Beverly Hills Cancer Center
Type: | Journal: Experimental hematology & oncology | Year: 2016
The increasing understanding of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) biology over the last two decades has led to the identification of multiple molecular targets. This led to the development of multiple targeted therapies in the primary and secondary resistance setting and the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) gene remains the most frequently observed molecular target in NSCLC. Tissue biopsies remain the standard for the identification of such EGFR mutations. Obtaining serial tissue biopsies, especially in the secondary resistance setting is associated with multiple medical and logistical challenges. Utilizing circulating tumor DNA(ctDNA) fragments for molecular analysis can overcome these challenges and aid in therapeutic decision-making.Here we present a present a 72-year-old Korean woman with metastatic, EGFR L858R mutated bronchogenic adenocarcinoma. She developed skeletal progression on treatment with first and second generation tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs). Repeated biopsies failed to provide informative molecular test results. A novel urine ctDNA assay was utilized and confirmed T790M positive status. The patient was started on a third generation TKI, which led to a measurable clinical response.Utilization of urine liquid biopsies for EGFR diagnostics are feasible and provided critical clinical information in this patients case. Urine liquid biopsy represents a viable alternative to tissue biopsy, particularly in the secondary resistance setting, when tissue is not available for molecular testing.
PubMed | Angeles Clinic and Research Institute, Mount Sinai Comprehensive Cancer Center, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, University of Chicago and 7 more.
Type: Clinical Trial, Phase II | Journal: Clinical cancer research : an official journal of the American Association for Cancer Research | Year: 2015
Although durable responses can be achieved with tyrosine kinase inhibitors such as imatinib in melanomas harboring KIT mutations, the efficacy of alternative inhibitors after progression to imatinib and the activity of these agents on brain metastases are unknown.We conducted a phase II study of nilotinib 400 mg twice a day in two cohorts of patients with melanomas harboring KIT mutations or amplification: (A) those refractory or intolerant to a prior KIT inhibitor; and (B) those with brain metastases. The primary endpoint was 4-month disease control rate. Secondary endpoints included response rate, time-to-progression (TTP), and overall survival (OS). A Simon two-stage and a single-stage design was planned to assess for the primary endpoint in cohorts A and B, respectively.Twenty patients were enrolled and 19 treated (11 in cohort A; 8 in cohort B). Three patients on cohort A [27%; 95% confidence interval (CI), 8%-56%] and 1 on cohort B (12.5%; 90% CI, 0.6%-47%) achieved the primary endpoint. Two partial responses were observed in cohort A (18.2%; 90% CI, 3%-47%); none were observed in cohort B. The median TTP and OS was 3.3 (90% CI, 2.1-3.9 months) and 9.1 months (90% CI, 4.3-14.2 months), respectively, in all treated patients.Nilotinib may achieve disease control in patients with melanoma harboring KIT alterations and whose disease progressed after imatinib therapy. The efficacy of this agent in KIT-altered melanoma with brain metastasis is limited.
News Article | December 6, 2016
NEW YORK--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Kadmon Holdings, Inc. (NYSE: KDMN) (“Kadmon” or the “Company”) today announced encouraging data from its ongoing Phase 2 clinical study of tesevatinib, the Company’s blood-brain barrier penetrant oral tyrosine kinase inhibitor, for the treatment of epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutation-positive non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) that has metastasized to the brain and/or the leptomeninges (membranes lining the brain and spinal cord). The data were presented today in a poster session at the International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer 17th World Conference on Lung Cancer in Vienna, Austria. Eleven of the first 13 enrolled patients treated with tesevatinib 300 mg QD in this ongoing study did not have central nervous system (CNS) progression on tesevatinib. Eight of these patients showed an improvement in clinical symptoms, often by Day 14 of treatment. Intracranial radiological improvement was documented in four patients who had follow-up MRIs. The study is being conducted in patients who have progressed with brain metastases and/or symptomatic leptomeningeal metastases while on prior therapy with other EGFR inhibitors, as well as in patients with no prior treatment and brain metastases at initial presentation. Of the 13 enrolled patients, 12 had disease progression while on prior treatment with the EGFR inhibitor erlotinib and radiation therapy to the brain, five of whom had also received other EGFR inhibitors and chemotherapy. Currently approved EGFR inhibitors have poor brain penetration, limiting their ability to treat intracranial metastases. The rapid action of tesevatinib on clinical symptoms and shrinkage of tumor volumes demonstrates conclusively that tesevatinib enters the CNS and targets EGFR-driven tumors. The study was designed specifically to assess the efficacy of tesevatinib in CNS metastases, with full knowledge that these heavily pretreated patients had extensive exposure to other EGFR inhibitors and that tesevatinib therefore may not control peripheral disease well due to the previous development of EGFR inhibitor resistance mechanisms. Thus, as expected, five of the 12 pretreated patients had peripheral disease progression, while in four of those five patients, tesevatinib controlled CNS lesions. In addition to the results observed in pretreated patients, one enrolled patient with no prior treatment who presented with brain metastases showed a robust partial response in brain metastases in an MRI taken on Study Day 29 and showed a partial response in both brain metastases and peripheral disease at Study Day 57. This patient continues on tesevatinib as of Study Day 92. These findings support the notion that tesevatinib monotherapy has the potential to be a first-line treatment in this patient population. Based on these interim results, Kadmon plans to initiate a randomized, first-line study of tesevatinib monotherapy in patients with EGFR-mutant NSCLC who present with CNS metastases. In addition, Kadmon will enroll a randomized study of tesevatinib in patients with leptomeningeal metastases who have progressed while on currently approved EGFR inhibitor therapies. “Unlike other EGFR inhibitors, tesevatinib penetrates the blood-brain barrier to reach metastases in the central nervous system, a sanctuary site for EGFR-driven cancers,” said David Berz, M.D., Ph.D., MPH, clinical oncologist at Beverly Hills Cancer Center and a principal investigator of the study. “These results indicate that tesevatinib has major therapeutic potential for CNS metastases in the first-line setting as well as in heavily pretreated patients.” “The dramatic responses observed in a high proportion of these NSCLC patients with intracranial metastases, particularly in difficult-to-treat individuals, support our continued development of tesevatinib for the treatment of metastatic NSCLC,” said Harlan W. Waksal, M.D., President and Chief Executive Officer at Kadmon. “Based on these encouraging initial results, we believe that tesevatinib as first-line therapy may treat existing CNS metastases as well as potentially prevent the development of new lesions.” Kadmon Holdings, Inc. is a fully integrated biopharmaceutical company focused on developing innovative products for significant unmet medical needs. We have a diversified product pipeline in oncology, autoimmune and fibrotic diseases and genetic diseases. This press release contains forward-looking statements. Such statements may be preceded by the words “may,” “will,” “should,” “expects,” “plans,” “anticipates,” “could,” “intends,” “targets,” “projects,” “contemplates,” “believes,” “estimates,” “predicts,” “potential” or “continue” or the negative of these terms or other similar expressions. Forward-looking statements involve known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other important factors that may cause our actual results, performance or achievements to be materially different from any future results, performance or achievements expressed or implied by the forward-looking statements. We believe that these factors include, but are not limited to, (i) the initiation, timing, progress and results of our preclinical studies and clinical trials, and our research and development programs; (ii) our ability to advance product candidates into, and successfully complete, clinical trials; (iii) our reliance on the success of our product candidates; (iv) the timing or likelihood of regulatory filings and approvals; (v) our ability to expand our sales and marketing capabilities; (vi) the commercialization of our product candidates, if approved; (vii) the pricing and reimbursement of our product candidates, if approved; (viii) the implementation of our business model, strategic plans for our business, product candidates and technology; (ix) the scope of protection we are able to establish and maintain for intellectual property rights covering our product candidates and technology; (x) our ability to operate our business without infringing the intellectual property rights and proprietary technology of third parties; (xi) costs associated with defending intellectual property infringement, product liability and other claims; (xii) regulatory developments in the United States, Europe and other jurisdictions; (xiii) estimates of our expenses, future revenues, capital requirements and our needs for additional financing; (xiv) the potential benefits of strategic collaboration agreements and our ability to enter into strategic arrangements; (xv) our ability to maintain and establish collaborations or obtain additional grant funding; (xvi) the rate and degree of market acceptance of our product candidates; (xvii) developments relating to our competitors and our industry, including competing therapies; (xviii) our ability to effectively manage our anticipated growth; (xix) our ability to attract and retain qualified employees and key personnel; and (xx) our ability to achieve cost savings and other benefits from our efforts to streamline our operations and to not harm our business with such efforts. More detailed information about Kadmon and the risk factors that may affect the realization of forward-looking statements is set forth in the Company's filings with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), including the Company's Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q filed pursuant to Section 13 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, with the SEC on November 9, 2016. Investors and security holders are urged to read these documents free of charge on the SEC's web site at www.sec.gov. The Company assumes no obligation to publicly update or revise its forward-looking statements as a result of new information, future events or otherwise.
McArthur G.A.,Peter MacCallum Cancer Center |
Chapman P.B.,Sloan Kettering Cancer Center |
Robert C.,CNRS Gustave Roussy Institute |
Larkin J.,Royal Marsden Hospital |
And 23 more authors.
The Lancet Oncology | Year: 2014
Background: In the BRIM-3 trial, vemurafenib was associated with risk reduction versus dacarbazine of both death and progression in patients with advanced BRAFV600 mutation-positive melanoma. We present an extended follow-up analysis of the total population and in the BRAFV600E and BRAFV600K mutation subgroups. Methods: Patients older than 18 years, with treatment-naive metastatic melanoma and whose tumour tissue was positive for BRAFV600 mutations were eligible. Patients also had to have a life expectancy of at least 3 months, an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status of 0 or 1, and adequate haematological, hepatic, and renal function. Patients were randomly assigned by interactive voice recognition system to receive either vemurafenib (960 mg orally twice daily) or dacarbazine (1000 mg/m2 of body surface area intravenously every 3 weeks). Coprimary endpoints were overall survival and progression-free survival, analysed in the intention-to-treat population (n=675), with data censored at crossover. A sensitivity analysis was done. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01006980. Findings: 675 eligible patients were enrolled from 104 centres in 12 countries between Jan 4, 2010, and Dec 16, 2010. 337 patients were randomly assigned to receive vemurafenib and 338 to receive dacarbazine. Median follow-up was 12·5 months (IQR 7·7-16·0) on vemurafenib and 9·5 months (3·1-14·7) on dacarbazine. 83 (25%) of the 338 patients initially randomly assigned to dacarbazine crossed over from dacarbazine to vemurafenib. Median overall survival was significantly longer in the vemurafenib group than in the dacarbazine group (13·6 months [95% CI 12·0-15·2] vs 9·7 months [7·9-12·8]; hazard ratio [HR] 0·70 [95% CI 0·57-0·87]; p=0·0008), as was median progression-free survival (6·9 months [95% CI 6·1-7·0] vs 1·6 months [1·6-2·1]; HR 0·38 [95% CI 0·32-0·46]; p<0·0001). For the 598 (91%) patients with BRAFV600E disease, median overall survival in the vemurafenib group was 13·3 months (95% CI 11·9-14·9) compared with 10·0 months (8·0-14·0) in the dacarbazine group (HR 0·75 [95% CI 0·60-0·93]; p=0·0085); median progression-free survival was 6·9 months (95% CI 6·2-7·0) and 1·6 months (1·6-2·1), respectively (HR 0·39 [95% CI 0·33-0·47]; p<0·0001). For the 57 (9%) patients with BRAFV600K disease, median overall survival in the vemurafenib group was 14·5 months (95% CI 11·2-not estimable) compared with 7·6 months (6·1-16·6) in the dacarbazine group (HR 0·43 [95% CI 0·21-0·90]; p=0·024); median progression-free survival was 5·9 months (95% CI 4·4-9·0) and 1·7 months (1·4-2·9), respectively (HR 0·30 [95% CI 0·16-0·56]; p<0·0001). The most frequent grade 3-4 events were cutaneous squamous-cell carcinoma (65 [19%] of 337 patients) and keratoacanthomas (34 [10%]), rash (30 [9%]), and abnormal liver function tests (38 [11%]) in the vemurafenib group and neutropenia (26 [9%] of 287 patients) in the dacarbazine group. Eight (2%) patients in the vemurafenib group and seven (2%) in the dacarbazine group had grade 5 events. Interpretation: Inhibition of BRAF with vemurafenib improves survival in patients with the most common BRAFV600E mutation and in patients with the less common BRAFV600K mutation. Funding: F Hoffmann-La Roche-Genentech. © 2014 Elsevier Ltd.