Oncogenic BRAF and NRAS mutations are frequent in malignant melanoma. BRAF that is activated by the common V600E and other mutations, as well as by upstream NRAS mutations, has been shown to require the molecular chaperone heat shock protein 90 (HSP90) for stabilization and is depleted by the HSP90 inhibitor 17-allylamino-17-demethoxygeldanamycin (17-AAG)]. Here, we explore the possible relationship between tumor BRAF and NRAS mutations and clinical response to 17-AAG in six patients with metastatic malignant melanoma who received pharmacologically active doses of 17-AAG as part of a phase I clinical trial. One patient with disease stabilization for 49 months had a G13DNRAS mutation and WTBRAF. A second patient who had stable disease for 15 months had a V600EBRAF mutation and WTNRAS. These preliminary results suggest that BRAF and NRAS mutation status should be determined in prospective phase II studies of HSP90 inhibitors in melanoma. [Mol Cancer Ther 2008;7(4):737–9]

Heat shock protein 90 (HSP90) is a highly conserved molecular chaperone regulating stabilization, activation, and degradation of client proteins. The list of HSP90 client proteins includes CRAF, ERB-B2, BCR-ABL, CDK4, AKT, mutant p53, MET, h-TERT, and HIF1-α, which are known to contribute to the multiple hallmark traits of malignancy (1, 2).

Several HSP90 inhibitors are now in clinical development. 17-Allylamino-17-demethoxygeldanamycin (17-AAG) is a benzoquinone ansamycin that inhibits HSP90 by competing with ATP at the nucleotide binding site in the amino-terminal domain of the chaperone. Inhibition of HSP90 by 17-AAG leads to the degradation of multiple client proteins by the ubiquitin-proteasome pathway (13). Multiple phase I trials of 17-AAG have been carried out and it is possible to reach pharmacologically relevant drug concentrations and show client protein depletion with a variety of dosing schedules (48).

Malignant melanoma represents an increasing health problem. The global incidence of melanoma ranges between 2.3/100,000 and 2.6/100,000 (9). Treatment options for metastatic disease include biochemotherapy (10), with modest results. Hence, there is an urgent need to explore new molecularly targeted agents. Mutations of BRAF and NRAS genes have been shown in ∼53% to 66% and 9% to 29% of all melanomas, respectively (1114). Mutant BRAF and NRAS can activate the downstream MEK1/2-ERK1/2 oncogenic signal transduction pathway independently (11, 15). Interestingly, most melanomas have either BRAF or NRAS mutations, but not both (1114). The most common V600EBRAF mutant has been shown to be a client protein of HSP90 (16, 17). Cell lines exposed to HSP90 inhibitors show a depletion of V600EBRAF but not WTBRAF (16, 17). In fact, most but not all BRAF mutant forms were hypersensitive to 17-AAG depletion, as was wild-type BRAF activated by mutant NRAS (16, 17). In addition, wild-type CRAF is an HSP90 client protein that is depleted as effectively as mutant/activated BRAF (16, 17). Taken together, the results explain why no obvious relationship was observed between NRAS and BRAF mutation status and sensitivity to 17-AAG in melanoma cell lines (16, 17). Nevertheless, it is important to extend the preclinical studies to explore any possible relationship between BRAF and NRAS mutation status and response to 17-AAG in patients with melanoma.

A phase I trial in which 17-AAG was administered weekly was conducted under the auspices of Cancer Research UK at the Royal Marsden Hospital in a collaborative project between the Cancer Research UK and the Cancer Therapy Evaluation Program at the National Cancer Institute. The protocol was reviewed by the Cancer Research UK protocol review committee and the clinical research and ethics committees of the Royal Marsden Hospital. All patients signed informed consent prior to entry into the study.

Using tumor material available from the phase I study, we looked for any relationship between BRAF and NRAS mutation status and disease stabilization in patients with melanoma. Pretreatment paraffin-embedded biopsies were used for analysis. Eight-micrometer sections of paraffin-embedded melanoma samples were stained with Fast Red after deparaffinizing. Regions of tumor tissue were obtained by laser capture microdissection using the Pixel II LM system (Arcturus Engineering, Inc.) and the CapSure HS LCM (Arcturus Engineering). Captured tumor regions were digested in 25 μL of proteinase K buffer following a standard protocol at 55°C overnight. After overnight incubation, the samples were incubated at 95°C for 10 min to inactivate the proteinase K. Ten microliters of the DNA solution was added as a template and sequential PCR was done to amplify exon 15 of BRAF and exon 2 of NRAS by previously validated and published methods (17). As this was a retrospective analysis, it was unfortunately not possible to analyze the expression of mutant/wild-type BRAF or NRAS protein by Western blots due to the lack of appropriate biopsy material.

At doses of 320 to 450 mg/m2/wk, 12 patients were treated. Six of these patients had metastatic malignant melanoma and had plasma concentrations in excess of the levels needed to inhibit human tumor xenografts in animal models (18). Pretreatment and posttreatment tumor biopsies showed target inhibition. Radiologic response was evaluated by computerized tomography scans done every 8 weeks or earlier if clinically indicated. No patient had a complete or partial response. However, patients progressed over variable (1–49 months) periods of time while receiving 17-AAG (4). This is consistent with results from human melanoma xenograft models which show that 17-AAG used as a single agent causes tumor growth delay rather than regression (19).

Table 1 summarizes the NRAS and BRAF mutation status and time to progression in the six patients with malignant melanoma who received therapeutic doses of 17-AAG. Figure 1 shows representative traces of the patients' wild-type or mutant BRAF and NRAS status. Three patients had a V600EBRAF mutation whereas three patients had wild-type WTBRAF. One patient out of the six had a G13DNRAS mutation, whereas five patients had WTNRAS. The NRAS and BRAF mutations were mutually exclusive. Two patients were wild-type for both genes. It was interesting to note that the only patient who had an NRAS mutation (G13DNRAS) together with WTBRAF had a prolonged time to progression of 49 months, which is in excess of what is clinically predicted (20). A second patient who had a time to progression of 15 months had V600EBRAF and WTNRAS. Patients who had melanomas with WTBRAF/WTNRAS mutational status all progressed within 1 to 1.5 months while receiving 17-AAG.

Table 1.

BRAF and NRAS mutations in melanoma specimens: relationship with time to progression

Patient no.BRAFNRASTime to progression while on 17-AAG (mo)
20 WT G13D 49 
24 V600E WT 
25 V600E WT 1.5 
26 WT WT 1.5 
27 V600E WT 15 
28 WT WT 
Patient no.BRAFNRASTime to progression while on 17-AAG (mo)
20 WT G13D 49 
24 V600E WT 
25 V600E WT 1.5 
26 WT WT 1.5 
27 V600E WT 15 
28 WT WT 

NOTE: Six patients with metastatic malignant melanoma were treated with 17-AAG at doses of 320 to 450 mg/m2/wk. The time to progression on treatment along with BRAF and NRAS mutation status are summarized.

Figure 1.

Representative traces of mutation status. A, patient 28 WTBRAF exon 15, codon 600: valine (GTG, arrow). B, patient 27 V600EBRAF exon 15, codon 600, showing a valine → glutamic acid substitution (GTG to GAG, arrow). C, patient 25 WTNRAS exon 2, codon 13 (GGT, arrow). D, patient 20 G13DNRAS exon 2, codon 13 showing a glycine → aspartic acid substitution (GGT to GAT, arrow).

Figure 1.

Representative traces of mutation status. A, patient 28 WTBRAF exon 15, codon 600: valine (GTG, arrow). B, patient 27 V600EBRAF exon 15, codon 600, showing a valine → glutamic acid substitution (GTG to GAG, arrow). C, patient 25 WTNRAS exon 2, codon 13 (GGT, arrow). D, patient 20 G13DNRAS exon 2, codon 13 showing a glycine → aspartic acid substitution (GGT to GAT, arrow).

Close modal

To conclude, in this small study of six patients with malignant melanoma treated with pharmacologically active doses of 17-AAG, two patients with prolonged disease stabilization had either V600EBRAF or G13DNRAS mutations. Although the numbers are small, we suggest further prospective analysis of BRAF and NRAS mutations in all phase II trials of HSP90 inhibitors in malignant melanoma.

Grant support: Cancer Research UK programme grants C309/A8274 and C309/A2187.

1
Sharp S, Workman P. Inhibitors of the HSP90 molecular chaperone: current status.
Adv Cancer Res
2006
;
95
:
323
–48.
2
Powers MV, Workman P. Targeting of multiple signalling pathways by heat shock protein 90 molecular chaperone inhibitors.
Endocr Relat Cancer
2006
;
13
Suppl 1:
S125
–35.
3
Workman P, Burrows F, Neckers L, Rosen N. Drugging the cancer chaperone HSP90: combinatorial therapeutic exploitation of oncogene addiction and tumor stress.
Ann NY Acad Sci
2007
;
1113
:
202
–16.
4
Banerji U, O'Donnell A, Scurr M, et al. Phase I pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic study of 17-allylamino, 17-demethoxygeldanamycin in patients with advanced malignancies.
J Clin Oncol
2005
;
23
:
4152
–61.
5
Goetz MP, Toft D, Reid J, et al. Phase I trial of 17-allylamino-17-demethoxygeldanamycin in patients with advanced cancer.
J Clin Oncol
2005
;
23
:
1078
–87.
6
Ramanathan RK, Trump DL, Eiseman JL, et al. Phase I pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic study of 17-(allylamino)-17-demethoxygeldanamycin (17AAG, NSC 330507), a novel inhibitor of heat shock protein 90, in patients with refractory advanced cancers.
Clin Cancer Res
2005
;
11
:
3385
–91.
7
Grem JL, Morrison G, Guo XD, et al. Phase I and pharmacologic study of 17-(allylamino)-17-demethoxygeldanamycin in adult patients with solid tumors.
J Clin Oncol
2005
;
23
:
1885
–93.
8
Solit DB, Ivy SP, Kopil C, et al. Phase I trial of 17-allylamino-17-demethoxygeldanamycin in patients with advanced cancer.
Clin Cancer Res
2007
;
13
:
1775
–82.
9
Pisani P, Bray F, Parkin DM. Estimates of the world-wide prevalence of cancer for 25 sites in the adult population.
Int J Cancer
2002
;
97
:
72
–81.
10
Tarhini AA, Kirkwood JM, Gooding WE, Cai C, Agarwala SS. Durable complete responses with high-dose bolus interleukin-2 in patients with metastatic melanoma who have experienced progression after biochemotherapy.
J Clin Oncol
2007
;
25
:
3802
–7.
11
Davies H, Bignell GR, Cox C, et al. Mutations of the BRAF gene in human cancer.
Nature
2002
;
417
:
949
–54.
12
Edlundh-Rose E, Egyhazi S, Omholt K, et al. NRAS and BRAF mutations in melanoma tumours in relation to clinical characteristics: a study based on mutation screening by pyrosequencing.
Melanoma Res
2006
;
16
:
471
–8.
13
Goel VK, Lazar AJ, Warneke CL, Redston MS, Haluska FG. Examination of mutations in BRAF, NRAS, PTEN in primary cutaneous melanoma.
J Invest Dermatol
2006
;
126
:
154
–60.
14
Reifenberger J, Knobbe CB, Sterzinger AA, et al. Frequent alterations of Ras signaling pathway genes in sporadic malignant melanomas.
Int J Cancer
2004
;
109
:
377
–84.
15
Dhomen N, Marais R. New insight into BRAF mutations in cancer.
Curr Opin Genet Dev
2007
;
17
:
31
–9.
16
Grbovic OM, Basso AD, Sawai A, et al. V600E B-Raf requires the Hsp90 chaperone for stability and is degraded in response to Hsp90 inhibitors.
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A
2006
;
103
:
57
–62.
17
da Rocha Dias S, Friedlos F, Light Y, Springer C, Workman P, Marais R. Activated B-RAF is an Hsp90 client protein that is targeted by the anticancer drug 17-allylamino-17-demethoxygeldanamycin.
Cancer Res
2005
;
65
:
10686
–91.
18
Banerji U, Walton M, Raynaud F, et al. Pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic relationships for the heat shock protein 90 molecular chaperone inhibitor 17-allylamino, 17-demethoxygeldanamycin in human ovarian cancer xenograft models.
Clin Cancer Res
2005
;
11
:
7023
–32.
19
Burger AM, Fiebig HH, Stinson SF, Sausville EA. 17-(Allylamino)-17-demethoxygeldanamycin activity in human melanoma models.
Anticancer Drugs
2004
;
15
:
377
–87.
20
Balch CM, Buzaid AC, Soong SJ, et al. Final version of the American Joint Committee on Cancer staging system for cutaneous melanoma.
J Clin Oncol
2001
;
19
:
3635
–48.