Figures
Abstract
Background
VEGF driven angiogenesis plays a key role in cancer progression. We determined the clinical efficacy of bevacizumab monotherapy in patients with metastatic melanoma.
Methods and Findings
Thirty-five patients with metastatic melanoma in progression were enrolled in this phase II, single arm clinical trial. Each patient received bevacizumab monotherapy 10 mg/kg q14 d until intolerable toxicity or disease progression occurred. Clinical efficacy was evaluated as objective response, disease control (DC), and survival. We observed one complete (3%) and 5 partial (14%) responses. In addition, 5 patients experienced stable disease >6 months (14%) while 24 patients had progressive disease (PD, 69%), corresponding to a total DC at 6 months in 11 out of 35 patients (31%). Median progression free survival (PFS) was 2.14 months and median overall survival (OS) was 9 months (1.12–49). Seven of the 11 patients experiencing DC developed early hypertension (<2 months) compared to 3/24 of patients with PD (P = 0.001), and hypertension was associated with PFS (P = 0.005) and OS (P = 0.013).
Citation: Schuster C, Eikesdal HP, Puntervoll H, Geisler J, Geisler S, Heinrich D, et al. (2012) Clinical Efficacy and Safety of Bevacizumab Monotherapy in Patients with Metastatic Melanoma: Predictive Importance of Induced Early Hypertension. PLoS ONE 7(6): e38364. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0038364
Editor: Keiran Smalley, The Moffitt Cancer Center & Research Institute, United States of America
Received: March 16, 2012; Accepted: May 2, 2012; Published: June 15, 2012
Copyright: © 2012 Schuster et al. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
Funding: The work was supported by grant No 94070 from the Norwegian Cancer Association to OS and by grant No p339 from Roche Norway. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.
Competing interests: As stated above, the project has received funding from a commercial source (Roche Norway). This includes support for running costs as well as a price reduction for the investigational drug. This study involves Bevacizumab, which is a Roche product. This does not alter the authors’ adherence to all the PLoS ONE policies on sharing data and materials.
Introduction
Metastatic melanoma is a non-curable condition with limited therapeutic options. Until recently, high dose interleukin-2 and dacarbazine were the only regimens in routine use, with response rates observed in about 10% of unselected patients[1]–[3]. While the human monoclonal anti CTLA-4 antibody ipilimumab was recently shown to cause a survival benefit in stage IV melanoma [4], the drug was found active in a fraction of patients only. Improved survival was also reported for treatment of metastatic melanoma patients carrying a specific BRAF mutation (∼40% of all melanoma patients) using the highly selective V600E kinase inhibitor vemurafenib [5]. Thus, while selected patients may benefit from novel treatment options, effective treatment is still not available for a high proportion of melanoma patients. In addition, patients benefitting from conventional (interleukin-2 or dacarbazine) as well as novel (ipilimumab and vemurafenib) therapeutic strategies develop acquired therapy resistance over time, underlining the need for alternative treatment options.
Melanoma progression and metastasis is dependent on angiogenesis [6] and the vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) system seems to be particularly important [7], [8]. The humanized monoclonal antibody bevacizumab is a highly specific inhibitor of VEGF-A. Bevacizumab significantly prolonged overall survival when given in combination with chemotherapy in colorectal cancer [9] and in non-small cell lung cancer [10]. In addition, responses have been reported in clinical trials evaluating bevacizumab in combination with interferon alpha 2B [11], interferon alpha 2A [12] or chemotherapy[13]–[15] in patients with metastatic melanoma. Administered as monotherapy, bevacizumab prolonged time to progression given in patients suffering from metastatic kidney cancer [16].
To the best of our knowledge, no clinical trials have been published specifically testing the clinical efficacy of bevacizumab monotherapy in metastatic melanoma. Here, we report the results from a phase II trial evaluating clinical efficacy of bevacizumab monotherapy in patients with metastatic melanomas.
Methods
Ethics
The study was conducted in accordance with the ethical principles of the Declaration of Helsinki and the International Conference on Harmonization of Good Clinical Practice. The protocol was approved by the Regional Ethics Committee and the Norwegian Medicines Agency. All participating patients provided signed informed consent before enrolment.
Patients
Between April 2005 and August 2009, 52 patients were screened. Eligibility criteria included histologically confirmed unresectable metastatic melanoma in progression; age >18 years; WHO performance status 0–2; clinically and/or radiographically measurable disease according to RECIST; >4 weeks since adjuvant interferon; no prior interferon or interleukin for metastatic disease; recovered from prior chemotherapy; no major surgery within 28 days; no known brain metastases; absolute neutrophils >1.0×109/L; platelets >100×109/L; bilirubin, creatinine, INR <1.5×upper normal limit; no symptomatic congestive heart failure, angina pectoris, cardiac arrhythmia, history of thrombosis, uncontrolled hypertension, full dose coumarin-derived anticoagulants or NSAIDS.
Study Design
This was a phase II, open-label, single-arm, single institution clinical trial (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT00139360), performed at the Haukeland University Hospital, Bergen Norway. The full protocol is available online as supporting information (Protocol S1). The primary objective was to determine clinical efficacy, as measured by objective response (OR) and disease control (DC) defined as stable disease (with or without an objective tumor shrinkage) after 6 months on therapy. Secondary objectives were to estimate time to progression (TTP), progression free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). Finally, we aimed at exploring potential relations between side effects, including acquired hypertension as well as BRAF/NRAS mutation status as potential predictive factors to clinical response.
Initially, patients were included after confirmed progression on standard first line treatment with dacarbazine (level A, n = 15). Only after objective response was observed on bevacizumab monotherapy, all new patients were subsequently enrolled for first line treatment with bevacizumab (Level B, 20 patients) (Flow diagram S1).
Each treatment cycle consisted of bevacizumab 10 mg/kg IV on day 1 in a 2-weekly schedule. Thus, the chosen dose was higher than the doses used in bevacizumab therapies for normalization of tumor vasculature (5 mg/kg q14d) [17], [18] and in line with the dosing of bevacizumab monotherapy used in advanced renal cancer where a survival benefit was indicated (10 mg/kg q14d) [16]. Drug toxicity was assessed after each cycle, while the response rate was evaluated after every 4 cycles. Patients with disease progression or unmanageable toxicity were discontinued and offered further melanoma treatment at the clinician’s discretion. Standard clinical parameters (routine biochemistry, urine analysis, blood pressure, WHO performance status) as well as the mutational status for BRAF and NRAS were assessed for subsequent correlation with clinical outcome.
Response Assessment and Toxicity
The primary endpoint was objective response (OR) defined as complete response (CR) or partial response (PR) according to RECIST [19] as well as disease control (DC) defined as CR + PR and including stable disease (SD) for more than 6 months. Disease stabilization is considered beneficial to patients experiencing melanoma progression at the time of inclusion and DC is frequently included as an additional statistical endpoint in trials investigating new antiangiogenic drugs in which therapeutic activity and clinical benefit are present, even in the absence of radiological tumor shrinkage[20]–[22]. Importantly, all patients were in clinical and/or radiological progression at the time of inclusion. OR and DC were calculated on the basis of investigator assessment. While confirmed response after 4 weeks was not a protocol requirement, all patients achieving an objective response had a subsequent confirmation at the next routine visit every 8 weeks. Patients with clinical disease progression or death due to melanoma before first radiological progression were recorded as progressive disease (PD), and best overall response (BOR) was not available in these patients. TTP was defined as the time from enrolment to disease progression or death due to melanoma.
Adverse events were graded according to the National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse events, version 3.0 [23], and were recorded by each 2-week cycle.
Tissue Sampling and DNA Analysis
To evaluate a possible relationship between the most frequent genetic alterations in melanoma and treatment outcome, a targeted mutational analysis was performed for BRAF and NRAS. Tumor tissue was manually dissected from 3 paraffin sections (10 µm) before extracting DNA with the E.Z.N.A Tissue DNA Kit (Omega Bio-Tek, Inc., Norcross, GA, USA). BRAF exon 11 and 15, as well as NRAS exon 1 and 2 were amplified by PCR, and screened for mutations by direct Sanger sequencing. Primers are described elsewhere[24]–[26]. The sequence reactions were performed using the Terminator Cycle Sequencing kit, BigDye version 1.1 (Applied Biosystems, Foster City, CA, USA ), and were analyzed on an ABI PRISM® 3100 Genetic Analyzer, applying Sequencing Analysis software, version 3.7 (both from Applied Biosystems).
Statistical Methods
The optimal two-stage design for phase II clinical trials proposed by Simon [27] was used. The co-primary endpoint DC was used to determine sample size. It was assumed that the new regimen would have a DC rate of 30%. A DC rate of 10% or lower was considered not superior to standard first-line therapy (dacarbazine). With 10% type I error rate and 90% power a total number of 35 patients were entered in the trial.
Two sample t-test and Mann-Whitney U test were used to compare the distribution of continuous variables between two groups such as responders and non-responders. Kaplan-Meier estimates were constructed for time-to-event endpoints such as PFS and OS, and log rank-test was applied for testing differences. Due to the small sample size and the nature of the phase II study, the above analyses were considered exploratory and the results need to be confirmed in future large-scale studies.
Results
Patients
Between April 2005 and August 2009, 52 patients with metastatic or unresectable melanoma in progression were screened and 35 patients were enrolled in this trial. The seventeen screening failures were most frequently due to brain metastases, co morbidity, or withdrawal of informed consent (Fig 1). During recruitment at level A, 15 patients received bevacizumab as second/third line treatment (after DTIC failure) while additional 20 more patients were included during recruitment level B (first line therapy bevacizumab). Patient characteristics are listed in Table 1.
Between April 2005 and August 2009, 52 patients with metastatic melanoma were screened. Thirty-five of those patients were eligible according to inclusion criteria and received the study drug.
Responses, PFS and Survival
In the study population of 35 patients, we observed 1 CR (3%), 5 PR (14%), and 5 SD >6 months (14%). Thus, 24 patients (69%) progressed on therapy, including three patients who progressed clinically before radiological tumor evaluation. Best overall response (BOR), measured as the change in the sum of largest diameter of the target lesions is illustrated in Figure 2A. Duration of the responses in relation to patient characteristics is illustrated in Figure 2B. Tumor responses were observed at metastatic sites such as skin, lymph nodes, lung, liver and ovaries (Fig 3).
Panel A shows the best overall response for 32 patients who had undergone at least one tumor assessment measured as the change from baseline in the sum of the largest diameters of each target lesion. Three patients progressed clinically and/or biochemically before first tumor assessment, and are not shown. Negative values indicate tumor shrinkage, and the dashed lines indicate the threshold for a partial response (PR) and progressive disease (PD), respectively. Panel B shows the duration and characteristics of the responses in each patient.
Panel A shows ovarian metastases in a 43 years old woman. Panel B shows lung metastases in a 50 years old man. Panel C shows liver metastases and pleural effusion (*) in a 70 years old man. Arrows show the largest diameter of the lesions.
At 6 months of follow up, 11/35 (31)% of the patients had no sign of melanoma progression. This proportion was 8/20 for the first line patients and 3/15 for the second/third line patients, respectively. By August 2011, median PFS was 2.14 months whereas mean PFS was 7.7 months (range 0.8–30 months), with a median overall survival of 9 months (mean: 13, range: 1.1–49) (Fig 4 A and B). The median number of cycles was 4 (mean: 14, range: 1.0–64). No patients died of causes other than melanoma progression. Six of the patients are still alive, and 5 of them are still on bevacizumab treatment without signs of progression 15–30 months after starting bevacizumab.
Early hypertension (EH) was significantly associated with PFS (C) and OS (D).
Seven of 11 patients with DC developed early hypertension (EH) as defined by CTCAEv3.0. In contrast, only three of 24 (12.5%) patients with progressive disease (PD) developed EH (Chi-square test p<0.001). Median time to progression for patients who developed EH following bevacizumab treatment was 11.4 months compared to 2.0 months in normotensive patients. EH was significantly associated with prolonged PFS (log rank p = 0.001, Fig 4C) as well as improved overall survival (log rank p = 0.005, Fig 4D). To explore the possible association between the use of different antihypertensive drugs and disease progression we observed that 6 of 7 patients on concomitant beta blockers experienced DC following treatment with bevacizumab monotherapy. In comparison, 3/6 patients who used antihypertensive drugs other than beta blockers, or 2/22 who used no antihypertensive drugs experienced DC (Chi square test p<0.001).
Stage M1a and b disease was significantly associated with DC (7/7) as compared with M1c disease (4/28; Chi-square test p<0.001). Similarly, 9 of 14 patients with normal levels of lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) at baseline had DC as compared with 2 out of 21 with increased LDH (Chi-square test p = 0.001). No significant correlations were found between DC, OR, PFS or OS and BRAF or NRAS mutation status, performance status, sex or age.
Safety
Bevacizumab monotherapy, given as 10 mg/kg q14d IV was in general well tolerated by the patients. No treatment related deaths were recorded. Treatment was stopped in two patients with CTCAE grade 4 toxicity (1 anaphylactic shock at cycle 2 and 1 lung embolus at cycle 5) and in one patient with grade 3 gastrointestinal toxicity (partial obstruction due to disease progression at cycle 1). Treatment was interrupted in one patient with grade 3 toxicity due to symptomatic left ventricular systolic dysfunction after 16 cycles. All adverse events are listed in Table S1 (online only). No dose reduction, interruption or postponement due to fatigue or hypertension was necessary and no hemorrhage was observed. Bevacizumab was delayed until proteinuria was <2 g/24 h in three patients (<4 weeks), but no treatment was stopped permanently due to proteinuria.
Hypertension according to CTCAEv3.0 was observed in 14 (40%) patients after initiation of bevacizumab. Grade 1∶4 (11%), grade 2∶3 (9%) and grade 3∶7 (20%), respectively. Median time to induced hypertension was 43 days (mean: 59, range: 27–239). We defined early hypertension (EH) as hypertension ≥ grade I occurring before 1st tumor response evaluation at 8 weeks. EH was recorded in 10 patients whereas 4 patients developed hypertension at a later time point. As listed in Table 1, 8 (23%) of the patients were treated for hypertension at the time of inclusion. Type of antihypertensive drugs used is listed in Table S2.
Discussion
While some phase II studies have evaluated the use of bevacizumab in concert with interferon alpha 2B [11], [28], interferon alpha 2A [12] or chemotherapy [13], [14], to the best of our knowledge this is the first study evaluating bevacizumab monotherapy in metastatic malignant melanoma. Our results provide a proof-of-principle that bevacizumab monotherapy is active in metastatic melanoma with a disease control rate of 31% and a 6 months PFS rate of 31%. In consistency with our finding, a recently published study of the multi kinase inhibitor axitinib (including VEGF receptor 1, 2 and 3) given as monotherapy showed a OR rate of 18.8% and a DC rate of 37.5% in a similar patient population [29]. These results are strikingly in line with ours and are in support of a significant subgroup of melanoma patients being susceptible to anti-VEGF strategies. Although not meeting the primary objective of increased median progression free survival, a recently published placebo controlled randomized phase II study showed encouraging overall survival data in metastatic melanoma patients treated with carboplatin and paclitaxel ± bevacizumab [15]. In contrast to our present findings, the patients who benefitted most from that combination were those with increased LDH and M1C disease, possibly indicating different sensitivity between patients groups to combination therapy and monotherapy.
In metastatic melanoma new treatment options have recently emerged targeting BRAF [5] or CTLA-4 [4] showing improved overall survival, but these treatments are associated with significant toxicities and costs. In addition, for BRAF negative patients or patients with non-immunogenic disease only limited effective treatment options are available. Significantly, in our study there was a subset of patients (14%) showing long-term survival on treatment (>2 years), independent of BRAF or NRAS mutational status.
Predictive markers for response to antiangiogenic treatment are urgently needed to guide clinical decision making and to target therapy towards well selected subgroups of patients. The present lack of useful predictive biomarkers decrease the likelihood of benefits, cost-effectiveness and therapeutic outcomes [14], [30]. We provide evidence that the clinical benefit of bevacizumab monotherapy in metastatic melanoma is almost exclusively limited to those patients who develop early hypertension during treatment. This can in part be explained by the fact that some non-responders did not have sufficient time on bevacizumab to develop hypertension. Still, most of the hypertensive patients (10/14) were recorded with hypertension before the 1st tumor evaluation in week 8 (early hypertension). This phenomenon has been reported for several antiangiogenic drugs [30], and early onset hypertension is one of few markers at the present have been found to predict response to antiangiogenic drugs [30], [31].
The causal mechanism behind induced hypertension by antiangiogenic drugs is still elusive. VEGF upregulates nitric oxide [32] and prostacyclin [33], leading to vasodilatation, which is counteracted by bevacizumab. Also, the secondary hypotension following vascular permeability and leakiness caused by VEGF is counteracted by VEGF inhibition [34]. The angiogenic effect of players in the sympathetic nervous system associated with hypertension like norepinephrine (NE), has been reported [35]. Induction of VEGF and HIF-1α expression by NE was completely abolished by the beta blocker propranolol [36], suggesting a possible dual inhibition of VEGF when beta blockers are given together with bevacizumab. Clinical impact of beta blockers in cancer patients has been the focus of several large clinical and epidemiological studies, and these drugs can significantly reduce cancer progression and mortality [37]–[40], and might represent a promising drug combination with bevacizumab. Interestingly therefore, we found beta blocker use together with bevacizumab to be significantly associated with disease control. Still, this trial was not designed to analyze beta blocker use independently from hypertension, and the data must be interpreted with caution. [41]
In conclusion, bevacizumab monotherapy yielded promising data regarding disease control, progression free survival and overall survival in patients with metastatic melanoma, and the responders were typically characterized by induced hypertension early during therapy.
Supporting Information
Table S1.
Drug related toxicities of bevacizumab 10 mg/kg q2w for metastatic melanoma (n = 35). NCI CTCAE v3.0*.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0038364.s001
(DOC)
Table S2.
Antihypertensive drugs used during treatment in 35 patients.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0038364.s002
(DOC)
Acknowledgments
The authors would like to thank Gerd Lillian Hallseth, Dagfinn Ekse and Bendik Nordanger for excellent technical assistance.
Author Contributions
Conceived and designed the experiments: OS LA PL. Performed the experiments: CS HE HP JG SG DH OS. Analyzed the data: CS HE HP AM PL LA OS. Contributed reagents/materials/analysis tools: HP AM. Wrote the paper: CS HE HP JG SG DH AM PL LA OS.
References
- 1. Middleton MR, Grob JJ, Aaronson N, Fierlbeck G, Tilgen W, et al. (2000) Randomized phase III study of temozolomide versus dacarbazine in the treatment of patients with advanced metastatic malignant melanoma. J Clin Oncol 18: 158–166.
- 2. Atkins MB, Lotze MT, Dutcher JP, Fisher RI, Weiss G, et al. (1999) High-dose recombinant interleukin 2 therapy for patients with metastatic melanoma: analysis of 270 patients treated between 1985 and 1993. J Clin Oncol 17: 2105–2116.
- 3. Busch C, Geisler J, Lillehaug JR, Lonning PE (2010) MGMT expression levels predict disease stabilisation, progression-free and overall survival in patients with advanced melanomas treated with DTIC. Eur J Cancer 46: 2127–2133.
- 4. Hodi FS, O’Day SJ, McDermott DF, Weber RW, Sosman JA, et al. (2010) Improved survival with ipilimumab in patients with metastatic melanoma. N Engl J Med 363: 711–723.
- 5. Chapman PB, Hauschild A, Robert C, Haanen JB, Ascierto P, et al. (2011) Improved survival with vemurafenib in melanoma with BRAF V600E mutation. N Engl J Med 364: 2507–2516.
- 6. Streit M, Detmar M (2003) Angiogenesis, lymphangiogenesis, and melanoma metastasis. Oncogene 22: 3172–3179.
- 7. Straume O, Akslen LA (2003) Increased expression of VEGF-receptors (FLT-1, KDR, NRP-1) and thrombospondin-1 is associated with glomeruloid microvascular proliferation, an aggressive angiogenic phenotype, in malignant melanoma. Angiogenesis 6: 295–301.
- 8. Straume O, Salvesen HB, Akslen LA (1999) Angiogenesis is prognostically important in vertical growth phase melanomas. Int J Oncol 15: 595–599.
- 9. Hurwitz H, Fehrenbacher L, Novotny W, Cartwright T, Hainsworth J, et al. (2004) Bevacizumab plus irinotecan, fluorouracil, and leucovorin for metastatic colorectal cancer. N Engl J Med 350: 2335–2342.
- 10. Sandler A, Gray R, Perry MC, Brahmer J, Schiller JH, et al. (2006) Paclitaxel-carboplatin alone or with bevacizumab for non-small-cell lung cancer. N Engl J Med 355: 2542–2550.
- 11. Grignol VP, Olencki T, Relekar K, Taylor C, Kibler A, et al. (2011) A phase 2 trial of bevacizumab and high-dose interferon alpha 2B in metastatic melanoma. J Immunother 34: 509–515.
- 12. Vihinen PP, Hernberg M, Vuoristo MS, Tyynela K, Laukka M, et al. (2010) A phase II trial of bevacizumab with dacarbazine and daily low-dose interferon-alpha2a as first line treatment in metastatic melanoma. Melanoma Res 20: 318–325.
- 13. Del Vecchio M, Mortarini R, Canova S, Di Guardo L, Pimpinelli N, et al. (2010) Bevacizumab plus fotemustine as first-line treatment in metastatic melanoma patients: clinical activity and modulation of angiogenesis and lymphangiogenesis factors. Clin Cancer Res 16: 5862–5872.
- 14. Corrie PG, Basu B, Zaki KA (2010) Targeting angiogenesis in melanoma: prospects for the future. Ther Adv Med Oncol 2: 367–380.
- 15.
Kim KB, Sosman JA, Fruehauf JP, Linette GP, Markovic SN, et al. (2011) BEAM: A Randomized Phase II Study Evaluating the Activity of Bevacizumab in Combination With Carboplatin Plus Paclitaxel in Patients With Previously Untreated Advanced Melanoma. J Clin Oncol.
- 16. Yang JC, Haworth L, Sherry RM, Hwu P, Schwartzentruber DJ, et al. (2003) A randomized trial of bevacizumab, an anti-vascular endothelial growth factor antibody, for metastatic renal cancer. N Engl J Med 349: 427–434.
- 17. Jain RK (2001) Normalizing tumor vasculature with anti-angiogenic therapy: a new paradigm for combination therapy. Nat Med 7: 987–989.
- 18. Willett CG, Boucher Y, di Tomaso E, Duda DG, Munn LL, et al. (2004) Direct evidence that the VEGF-specific antibody bevacizumab has antivascular effects in human rectal cancer. Nat Med 10: 145–147.
- 19. Therasse P, Arbuck SG, Eisenhauer EA, Wanders J, Kaplan RS, et al. (2000) New guidelines to evaluate the response to treatment in solid tumors. European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer, National Cancer Institute of the United States, National Cancer Institute of Canada. J Natl Cancer Inst 92: 205–216.
- 20. Spigel DR, Burris HA 3rd, Greco FA, Shipley DL, Friedman EK, et al. (2011) Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase II trial of sorafenib and erlotinib or erlotinib alone in previously treated advanced non-small-cell lung cancer. J Clin Oncol 29: 2582–2589.
- 21. Ratain MJ, Eckhardt SG (2004) Phase II studies of modern drugs directed against new targets: if you are fazed, too, then resist RECIST. J Clin Oncol 22: 4442–4445.
- 22. Suman VJ, Dueck A, Sargent DJ (2008) Clinical trials of novel and targeted therapies: endpoints, trial design, and analysis. Cancer Invest 26: 439–444.
- 23. Trotti A, Colevas AD, Setser A, Rusch V, Jaques D, et al. (2003) CTCAE v3.0: development of a comprehensive grading system for the adverse effects of cancer treatment. Semin Radiat Oncol 13: 176–181.
- 24. Davies H, Bignell GR, Cox C, Stephens P, Edkins S, et al. (2002) Mutations of the BRAF gene in human cancer. Nature 417: 949–954.
- 25. Omholt K, Platz A, Kanter L, Ringborg U, Hansson J (2003) NRAS and BRAF mutations arise early during melanoma pathogenesis and are preserved throughout tumor progression. Clin Cancer Res 9: 6483–6488.
- 26. Akslen LA, Puntervoll H, Bachmann IM, Straume O, Vuhahula E, et al. (2008) Mutation analysis of the EGFR-NRAS-BRAF pathway in melanomas from black Africans and other subgroups of cutaneous melanoma. Melanoma Res 18: 29–35.
- 27. Simon R, Thall PF, Ellenberg SS (1994) New designs for the selection of treatments to be tested in randomized clinical trials. Stat Med 13: 417–429.
- 28. Varker KA, Biber JE, Kefauver C, Jensen R, Lehman A, et al. (2007) A randomized phase 2 trial of bevacizumab with or without daily low-dose interferon alfa-2b in metastatic malignant melanoma. Ann Surg Oncol 14: 2367–2376.
- 29.
Fruehauf J, Lutzky J, McDermott D, Brown CK, Meric JB, et al. (2011) Multicenter, Phase II Study of Axitinib, a Selective Second-Generation Inhibitor of Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor Receptors 1, 2, and 3, in Patients with Metastatic Melanoma. Clin Cancer Res.
- 30. Jubb AM, Harris AL (2010) Biomarkers to predict the clinical efficacy of bevacizumab in cancer. Lancet Oncol 11: 1172–1183.
- 31. Rini BI, Cohen DP, Lu DR, Chen I, Hariharan S, et al. (2011) Hypertension as a biomarker of efficacy in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma treated with sunitinib. J Natl Cancer Inst 103: 763–773.
- 32. Facemire CS, Nixon AB, Griffiths R, Hurwitz H, Coffman TM (2009) Vascular endothelial growth factor receptor 2 controls blood pressure by regulating nitric oxide synthase expression. Hypertension 54: 652–658.
- 33. Neagoe PE, Lemieux C, Sirois MG (2005) Vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF)-A165-induced prostacyclin synthesis requires the activation of VEGF receptor-1 and -2 heterodimer. J Biol Chem 280: 9904–9912.
- 34. Ferrara N, Alitalo K (1999) Clinical applications of angiogenic growth factors and their inhibitors. Nat Med 5: 1359–1364.
- 35. Lutgendorf SK, Cole S, Costanzo E, Bradley S, Coffin J, et al. (2003) Stress-related mediators stimulate vascular endothelial growth factor secretion by two ovarian cancer cell lines. Clin Cancer Res 9: 4514–4521.
- 36. Park SY, Kang JH, Jeong KJ, Lee J, Han JW, et al. (2010) Norepinephrine induces VEGF expression and angiogenesis by a hypoxia-inducible factor-1alpha protein-dependent mechanism. Int J Cancer 128: 2306–2316.
- 37. Barron TI, Connolly RM, Sharp L, Bennett K, Visvanathan K (2011) Beta blockers and breast cancer mortality: a population- based study. J Clin Oncol 29: 2635–2644.
- 38. Melhem-Bertrandt A, Chavez-Macgregor M, Lei X, Brown EN, Lee RT, et al. (2011) Beta-blocker use is associated with improved relapse-free survival in patients with triple-negative breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 29: 2645–2652.
- 39.
Lemeshow S, Sorensen HT, Phillips G, Yang EV, Antonsen S, et al. (2011) Beta Blockers and Survival among Danish Patients with Malignant Melanoma: A Population-Based Cohort Study. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev.
- 40. De Giorgi V, Grazzini M, Gandini S, Benemei S, Lotti T, et al. (2011) Treatment with beta-blockers and reduced disease progression in patients with thick melanoma. Arch Intern Med 171: 779–781.
- 41. Kim JC, Kim SY, Cho DH, Ha YJ, Choi EY, et al. (2011) Novel chemosensitive single-nucleotide polymorphism markers to targeted regimens in metastatic colorectal cancer. Clin Cancer Res 17: 1200–1209.