50 Gene Panel and NRAS
REGISTER
The information on this site is not intended or implied to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. Content within the patient forum is user-generated and has not been reviewed by medical professionals. Other sections of the Melanoma Research Foundation website include information that has been reviewed by medical professionals as appropriate. All medical decisions should be made in consultation with your doctor or other qualified medical professional.

50 Gene Panel and NRAS

› Forums › General Melanoma Community › 50 Gene Panel and NRAS

  • Post
    • January 20, 2015 at 9:53 pm
    AshleyS
    Participant

    Hey folks,

    My doc recently received the results from my 50 gene panel. I already knew I was BRAF wild, but the panel showed I do have a NRAS mutation. what questions should I ask about this? Any other advice? Thanks!

    Ashley

Viewing 8 reply threads
  • Replies
      • January 21, 2015 at 1:24 pm
      Bubbles
      Participant

      Hey Ashley,

      I would certainly be asking about MEK 162, now called Binimetinib.  Here's some of the early info:

      http://chaoticallypreciselifeloveandmelanoma.blogspot.com/2013/01/better-news-for-mek-and-brafmek-combos.html

      http://chaoticallypreciselifeloveandmelanoma.blogspot.com/2014/06/pretty-darn-impressivea-chat-between.html

      In the last post, specifically this:  Targeted therapies
      Weber:  I was very impressed with Sosman's presentation of the CDK-4 inhibitor combined with the MEK inhibitor 162…a 33% response rate, …phase 1 study with only 22 patients….Nonetheless, the NRAS-mutated population – which are BRAF wild-type because the 2 mutations are mutually exclusive – was a relatively hopeless cohort in terms of targeted therapy, and now it looks like there will be a useful and efficacious targeted therapy for at least 15% of melanoma patients who are NRAS-mutated BRAF wild-type. 

      Sosman is at Vanderbilt in Nashville.  Several studies wth MEK162 are ongoing.  I wish you my best.  C

      • January 21, 2015 at 1:24 pm
      Bubbles
      Participant

      Hey Ashley,

      I would certainly be asking about MEK 162, now called Binimetinib.  Here's some of the early info:

      http://chaoticallypreciselifeloveandmelanoma.blogspot.com/2013/01/better-news-for-mek-and-brafmek-combos.html

      http://chaoticallypreciselifeloveandmelanoma.blogspot.com/2014/06/pretty-darn-impressivea-chat-between.html

      In the last post, specifically this:  Targeted therapies
      Weber:  I was very impressed with Sosman's presentation of the CDK-4 inhibitor combined with the MEK inhibitor 162…a 33% response rate, …phase 1 study with only 22 patients….Nonetheless, the NRAS-mutated population – which are BRAF wild-type because the 2 mutations are mutually exclusive – was a relatively hopeless cohort in terms of targeted therapy, and now it looks like there will be a useful and efficacious targeted therapy for at least 15% of melanoma patients who are NRAS-mutated BRAF wild-type. 

      Sosman is at Vanderbilt in Nashville.  Several studies wth MEK162 are ongoing.  I wish you my best.  C

      • January 21, 2015 at 1:24 pm
      Bubbles
      Participant

      Hey Ashley,

      I would certainly be asking about MEK 162, now called Binimetinib.  Here's some of the early info:

      http://chaoticallypreciselifeloveandmelanoma.blogspot.com/2013/01/better-news-for-mek-and-brafmek-combos.html

      http://chaoticallypreciselifeloveandmelanoma.blogspot.com/2014/06/pretty-darn-impressivea-chat-between.html

      In the last post, specifically this:  Targeted therapies
      Weber:  I was very impressed with Sosman's presentation of the CDK-4 inhibitor combined with the MEK inhibitor 162…a 33% response rate, …phase 1 study with only 22 patients….Nonetheless, the NRAS-mutated population – which are BRAF wild-type because the 2 mutations are mutually exclusive – was a relatively hopeless cohort in terms of targeted therapy, and now it looks like there will be a useful and efficacious targeted therapy for at least 15% of melanoma patients who are NRAS-mutated BRAF wild-type. 

      Sosman is at Vanderbilt in Nashville.  Several studies wth MEK162 are ongoing.  I wish you my best.  C

      • January 21, 2015 at 7:21 pm
      kylez
      Participant

      Ashley, if you don't mind me asking, what was the specific NRAS mutation they found? I'm curious, mine is "G12A". But there are at least a few different ones besides that. The test for me was done back in 2011, so it wasn't the new test you had. I think it was something special that UCSF did at that time, sequencing patient's tumor samples.

      You can ask if there are any specific therapies targeting NRAS mutations they are aware of, or lacking that, what therapies he recommends for wild type (likely the immune therapies). There's not very much I know about NRAS other than it's been identified as a oncogene driver for melanoma. There are just a very few trials I remember seeing that are testing drug combinations specifically for patients with NRAS-positive tumors. Here's one, this might be the one Celeste is referring to. Other than that, an article or two about the impact of NRAS mutations on overall prognosis. One said prognosis is a little worse for NRAS patients, possibly because (this is me reading into it) there aren't targeted drugs yet like there are for BRAF positive patients. Another was about NRAS-positive patients doing better on high-dose IL2 than non-NRAS patients. I don't think newer immune therapies were included in that assessment/study, guessing perhaps the data is not there or hasn't been analyzed yet.

      Good luck with your upcoming doctor appointment! -Kyle

       
        • January 21, 2015 at 7:22 pm
        kylez
        Participant

        (she or he, that is…)

        • January 21, 2015 at 7:22 pm
        kylez
        Participant

        (she or he, that is…)

        • January 21, 2015 at 7:22 pm
        kylez
        Participant

        (she or he, that is…)

      • January 21, 2015 at 7:21 pm
      kylez
      Participant

      Ashley, if you don't mind me asking, what was the specific NRAS mutation they found? I'm curious, mine is "G12A". But there are at least a few different ones besides that. The test for me was done back in 2011, so it wasn't the new test you had. I think it was something special that UCSF did at that time, sequencing patient's tumor samples.

      You can ask if there are any specific therapies targeting NRAS mutations they are aware of, or lacking that, what therapies he recommends for wild type (likely the immune therapies). There's not very much I know about NRAS other than it's been identified as a oncogene driver for melanoma. There are just a very few trials I remember seeing that are testing drug combinations specifically for patients with NRAS-positive tumors. Here's one, this might be the one Celeste is referring to. Other than that, an article or two about the impact of NRAS mutations on overall prognosis. One said prognosis is a little worse for NRAS patients, possibly because (this is me reading into it) there aren't targeted drugs yet like there are for BRAF positive patients. Another was about NRAS-positive patients doing better on high-dose IL2 than non-NRAS patients. I don't think newer immune therapies were included in that assessment/study, guessing perhaps the data is not there or hasn't been analyzed yet.

      Good luck with your upcoming doctor appointment! -Kyle

       
      • January 21, 2015 at 7:21 pm
      kylez
      Participant

      Ashley, if you don't mind me asking, what was the specific NRAS mutation they found? I'm curious, mine is "G12A". But there are at least a few different ones besides that. The test for me was done back in 2011, so it wasn't the new test you had. I think it was something special that UCSF did at that time, sequencing patient's tumor samples.

      You can ask if there are any specific therapies targeting NRAS mutations they are aware of, or lacking that, what therapies he recommends for wild type (likely the immune therapies). There's not very much I know about NRAS other than it's been identified as a oncogene driver for melanoma. There are just a very few trials I remember seeing that are testing drug combinations specifically for patients with NRAS-positive tumors. Here's one, this might be the one Celeste is referring to. Other than that, an article or two about the impact of NRAS mutations on overall prognosis. One said prognosis is a little worse for NRAS patients, possibly because (this is me reading into it) there aren't targeted drugs yet like there are for BRAF positive patients. Another was about NRAS-positive patients doing better on high-dose IL2 than non-NRAS patients. I don't think newer immune therapies were included in that assessment/study, guessing perhaps the data is not there or hasn't been analyzed yet.

      Good luck with your upcoming doctor appointment! -Kyle

       
      • January 21, 2015 at 7:42 pm
      Bubbles
      Participant

      And…a point you all may already know….BRAF status doesn't seem to make responses any better or worse when it comes to immunotherapy….Nivo/Opdivo, Keytruda, or Ipi/Yervoy or any combination.  This is out of ASCO, June 2014:

      Survival, response duration, and activity by BRAF mutation status of nivolumab (anti-PD1, BMS-936588) and ipilimumab concurrent therapy in advanced melanoma
      Abstract LBA9003

      Sznol, Kluger, Kirkwood, Wolchok, et al

      53 melanoma patients were enrolled from 2009-2012 and were given ipi and nivo concurrently, then followed by nivo alone (with a variety of dosing patterns). Patients with and without BRAF had similar response. 
       

      NIVO (mg/kg) +
      IPI (mg/kg) [n]      		 1-Y OS rate,
      % [pts at risk]      		 Median
      OS, mo      		 ACAR,
      %      		 ACAR by BRAF
      MT status,* % [n]
      Pos Neg Unk
      0.3 + 3 [14] 56 [7] 14.8 57 50 [4] 67 [3] 57 [7]
      1 + 3 [17] 94 [13] NR 65 50 [2] 50 [6] 78 [9]
      3 + 1 [16] 89 [3] NR 81 67 [3] 85 [13] – [0]
      3 + 3 [6] 100 [5] NR 83 100 [1] 75 [4] 100 [1]
      Concurrent [53] 82 [28] 39.7 70 60 [10] 73 [26] 71 [17]
      Sequenced† [32] Insufficient
      followup      		 13.0 44 44 [9] 47 [15] 38 [8]

       So with ipi and nivo, combo or alone, BRAF status doesn't seem to affect response.

       

      If it helps….C

      • January 21, 2015 at 7:42 pm
      Bubbles
      Participant

      And…a point you all may already know….BRAF status doesn't seem to make responses any better or worse when it comes to immunotherapy….Nivo/Opdivo, Keytruda, or Ipi/Yervoy or any combination.  This is out of ASCO, June 2014:

      Survival, response duration, and activity by BRAF mutation status of nivolumab (anti-PD1, BMS-936588) and ipilimumab concurrent therapy in advanced melanoma
      Abstract LBA9003

      Sznol, Kluger, Kirkwood, Wolchok, et al

      53 melanoma patients were enrolled from 2009-2012 and were given ipi and nivo concurrently, then followed by nivo alone (with a variety of dosing patterns). Patients with and without BRAF had similar response. 
       

      NIVO (mg/kg) +
      IPI (mg/kg) [n]      		 1-Y OS rate,
      % [pts at risk]      		 Median
      OS, mo      		 ACAR,
      %      		 ACAR by BRAF
      MT status,* % [n]
      Pos Neg Unk
      0.3 + 3 [14] 56 [7] 14.8 57 50 [4] 67 [3] 57 [7]
      1 + 3 [17] 94 [13] NR 65 50 [2] 50 [6] 78 [9]
      3 + 1 [16] 89 [3] NR 81 67 [3] 85 [13] – [0]
      3 + 3 [6] 100 [5] NR 83 100 [1] 75 [4] 100 [1]
      Concurrent [53] 82 [28] 39.7 70 60 [10] 73 [26] 71 [17]
      Sequenced† [32] Insufficient
      followup      		 13.0 44 44 [9] 47 [15] 38 [8]

       So with ipi and nivo, combo or alone, BRAF status doesn't seem to affect response.

       

      If it helps….C

      • January 21, 2015 at 7:42 pm
      Bubbles
      Participant

      And…a point you all may already know….BRAF status doesn't seem to make responses any better or worse when it comes to immunotherapy….Nivo/Opdivo, Keytruda, or Ipi/Yervoy or any combination.  This is out of ASCO, June 2014:

      Survival, response duration, and activity by BRAF mutation status of nivolumab (anti-PD1, BMS-936588) and ipilimumab concurrent therapy in advanced melanoma
      Abstract LBA9003

      Sznol, Kluger, Kirkwood, Wolchok, et al

      53 melanoma patients were enrolled from 2009-2012 and were given ipi and nivo concurrently, then followed by nivo alone (with a variety of dosing patterns). Patients with and without BRAF had similar response. 
       

      NIVO (mg/kg) +
      IPI (mg/kg) [n]      		 1-Y OS rate,
      % [pts at risk]      		 Median
      OS, mo      		 ACAR,
      %      		 ACAR by BRAF
      MT status,* % [n]
      Pos Neg Unk
      0.3 + 3 [14] 56 [7] 14.8 57 50 [4] 67 [3] 57 [7]
      1 + 3 [17] 94 [13] NR 65 50 [2] 50 [6] 78 [9]
      3 + 1 [16] 89 [3] NR 81 67 [3] 85 [13] – [0]
      3 + 3 [6] 100 [5] NR 83 100 [1] 75 [4] 100 [1]
      Concurrent [53] 82 [28] 39.7 70 60 [10] 73 [26] 71 [17]
      Sequenced† [32] Insufficient
      followup      		 13.0 44 44 [9] 47 [15] 38 [8]

       So with ipi and nivo, combo or alone, BRAF status doesn't seem to affect response.

       

      If it helps….C

Viewing 8 reply threads
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
About the MRF Patient Forum

The MRF Patient Forum is the oldest and largest online community of people affected by melanoma. It is designed to provide peer support and information to caregivers, patients, family and friends. There is no better place to discuss different parts of your journey with this cancer and find the friends and support resources to make that journey more bearable.

The information on the forum is open and accessible to everyone. To add a new topic or to post a reply, you must be a registered user. Please note that you will be able to post both topics and replies anonymously even though you are logged in. All posts must abide by MRF posting policies.

Popular Topics