Outcome of adjuvant BRAF and MEK inhibition with dabrafenib and trametinib in BRAF V600K– compared to V600E-mutated melanoma.

M Michael Weichenthal (Department of Dermatology, University Hospital Schleswig-Holstein (UKSH), Campus Kiel, Kiel, Germany) E Eva Ellebaek P Peter Mohr (Elbe Klinikum Buxtehude, Buxtehude, Germany) M Mirna Šitum (“Sestre milosrdnice” University Hospital Centre, Zagreb, Croatia) J Joanna Mangana (Department of Dermatology, University Hospital Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland) V Vanna Chiarion Sileni (Istituto Oncologico veneto IOV-IRCCS, Padova, Italy) I Imke von Wasielewski (Department of Dermatology and Allergy, Skin Cancer Center Hannover, Hannover Medical School, Hannover, Germany) C Christoffer Gebhardt (Department of Dermatology/Skin Cancer Center, University Medical Center Hospital Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany) P Piotr Rutkowski (Maria Sklodowska-Curie National Research Institute of Oncology, Warsaw, Poland) F Friedegund Elke Meier (University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technical University Dresden, Department of Dermatology, Dresden, Germany) P Paolo Antonio Ascierto (Università degli Studi di Napoli “Federico II” and Istituto Nazionale Tumori IRCCS Fondazione “G. Pascale”, Naples, Italy) R Ralf Gutzmer (Department of Dermatology, Johannes Wesling Medical Center, Ruhr University, Minden, Germany) I Inge Marie Svane D Dirk Schadendorf H Helen Gogas (National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Athens, Greece)

Abstract

9576 Background: Patients with resected stage III BRAF V600 mutated melanoma can be treated with combined dabrafenib and trametinib (D/T) with significant improvement of recurrence-free survival (RFS). The results of the pivotal Combi-AD study showed overall survival (OS) improvement only for patients with BRAF V600E mutations, while for V600K there was even an OS impairment as compared to placebo, although not statistically significant. Methods: We analysed EUMelaReg data for patients with adjuvant D/T therapy for resected stage III melanoma. Only patients with V600E and V600K mutations were selected, where n=93 from a total of 1,033 patients (9.0 %) harboured V600K. Results: Demographics of patients with V600K mutations differed significantly for age (67 vs. 58 years, p <0.001) and a higher proportion of males (67.0% vs. 54.6%, p=0.03) at baseline. Other baseline variables, including substage, were not significantly different. One year of treatment was completed in 51.6% for V600K, and 62.8% for V600E, respectively, while with V600K mutations 22.6% of the patients stopped for toxicity (vs. 18.8% with V600E), and 10.8% for disease recurrence (vs. 6.9%), which was not statistically significant. After a median follow-up of 41.7 (V600K) and 41.2 (V600E) months, Kaplan-Meier analysis estimated 4-year overall survival of 75.7% for V600K compared to 77.8% for V600E. The 4-y-RFS estimates were 48.3% for V600K and 47.0% for V600E. These differences were not statistically significant. Cox regression analysis revealed no different results when adjusted for demographic co-variates, including age and sex, for RFS and OS, respectively. Conclusions: It appears that V600E and V600K mutations are not associated with a different outcome from adjuvant treatment with combined D/T. The findings offer no explanation for differences found in the Combi-AD trial, although part of these differences also resulted from a different natural course of V600K mutated melanomas the placebo group. A longer follow-up will help to further confirm these results and also analyse the possible role of further treatments in the metastatic setting. Baseline characteristics and outcome. V600E(N=940) V600K(N=93) P-value SEX 0.035 Female 426 (45.3%) 31 (33.3%) Male 514 (54.7%) 62 (66.7%) AGE <0.001 Mean (SD) 57.4 (13.8) 65.6 (11.9) Median [Min, Max] 58.0 [17.0, 90.0] 67.0 [28.0, 87.0] ECOG 0.1 0 846 (90.0%) 82 (88.2%) 1 51 (5.4%) 8 (8.6%) 2 5 (0.5%) 2 (2.2%) Baseline Stage 0.34 III 8 (0.9%) 1 (1.1%) IIIA 126 (13.4%) 7 (7.5%) IIIB 293 (31.2%) 29 (31.2%) IIIC 470 (50.0%) 54 (58.1%) IIID 43 (4.6%) 2 (2.2%) STAGE III DIAGNOSIS TYPE 0.96 Primary Diagnosis 679 (72.2%) 68 (73.1%) Relapse 260 (27.7%) 25 (26.9%) SUBTYPE 0.06 SSM 358 (38.1%) 26 (28.0%) NMM 315 (33.5%) 44 (47.3%) NOS 207 (22.0%) 18 (19.4%) MUP 49 (5.2%) 4 (4.3%) OUTCOME 4-Year RFS (95%-CI) 0.47 (0.43; 0.51) 0.48 (0.38; 0.61) 0.94 4-Year OS (95%-CI) 0.78 (0.75; 0.81) 0.76 (0.65; 0.88) 0.94

Article Details

Volume / Issue Vol. 44, Issue 16_suppl
Published June 01, 2026
Pages 9576-9576
ISSN 0732-183X
Publisher Lippincott Williams & Wilkins

Journal Info

Journal of Clinical Oncology

Lippincott Williams & Wilkins

ISSN: 0732-183X Health Sciences

Authors (15)

M

Michael Weichenthal

Department of Dermatology, University Hospital Schleswig-Holstein (UKSH), Campus Kiel, Kiel, Germany

E

Eva Ellebaek

P

Peter Mohr

Elbe Klinikum Buxtehude, Buxtehude, Germany

M

Mirna Šitum

“Sestre milosrdnice” University Hospital Centre, Zagreb, Croatia

J

Joanna Mangana

Department of Dermatology, University Hospital Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland

V

Vanna Chiarion Sileni

Istituto Oncologico veneto IOV-IRCCS, Padova, Italy

I

Imke von Wasielewski

Department of Dermatology and Allergy, Skin Cancer Center Hannover, Hannover Medical School, Hannover, Germany

C

Christoffer Gebhardt

Department of Dermatology/Skin Cancer Center, University Medical Center Hospital Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany

P

Piotr Rutkowski

Maria Sklodowska-Curie National Research Institute of Oncology, Warsaw, Poland

F

Friedegund Elke Meier

University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technical University Dresden, Department of Dermatology, Dresden, Germany

P

Paolo Antonio Ascierto

Università degli Studi di Napoli “Federico II” and Istituto Nazionale Tumori IRCCS Fondazione “G. Pascale”, Naples, Italy

R

Ralf Gutzmer

Department of Dermatology, Johannes Wesling Medical Center, Ruhr University, Minden, Germany

I

Inge Marie Svane

D

Dirk Schadendorf

H

Helen Gogas

National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Athens, Greece