Abstract
In the era of therapies successfully targeting distinct molecular pathways in cancer, the incidence and relevance of brain metastases are rising. Generally, the old therapeutic nihilism with respect to brain metastasis has given way to a more pragmatic approach, aiming to optimally combine (radio)surgery, whole brain radiotherapy, and sometimes systemic chemotherapy. However, local approaches inevitably fail to address the multifocal nature of the disease, whole brain radiotherapy shows relevant neurotoxicity, and systemic chemotherapy faces the obstacle of the blood-brain/tumor-barrier. Therefore, judicious addition of targeted agents to the therapeutic armamentarium for brain metastases holds the promise to make a real difference for patients suffering from this devastating disease. Unfortunately, because of their unfavorable prognosis, patients with brain metastases have traditionally been excluded from studies with targeted therapies. This is changing now for several reasons, making it likely that we will obtain relevant clinical data in the next few years. The following chapter gives an overview of new therapies targeting molecular pathways both in the tumor stroma and in cancer cells, covering its theoretical and reported activity against brain metastases. A special emphasis will be placed on prophylaxis, i.e. prevention of macrometastasis formation.
Access provided by Autonomous University of Puebla. Download chapter PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Keywords
- Brain Metastasis
- Antiangiogenic Therapy
- Antiangiogenic Agent
- EGFR Mutation
- Breast Cancer Brain Metastasis
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
1 Introduction
Brain metastasis (BM) therapy faces the challenge to efficiently target the cancer cell, or its supportive relationship with the brain parenchyma, without damaging the delicate organ it is colonizing. Therapeutic agents targeting distinct molecular pathways of cancer cells hold the promise to do just that [1]. Furthermore, the fact that the majority of BM patients suffer from multiple metastases that occur unpredictably at different sites during the course of the disease makes a systemic therapy treating macro- and also micrometastases most adequate. Optimally, a systemic therapy might even prevent brain colonization altogether, or at least arrest single cells or micrometastases in a dormant state. Even though we are far away from having such a weapon with proven clinical efficacy at hand, there is some reason to be cautiously optimistic.
First, one of the greatest challenges of systemic brain tumor therapy can be overcome: the blood-brain/blood-tumor barrier. For example, antiangiogenic agents targeting the VEGF pathway have to reach only the endothelial cell, but do not have to cross the entire blood-tumor barrier, consisting of additional layers of thickened basement membrane, irregular pericyte coverage, and occasionally astrocyte foot processes in the brain [2–4]. In contrast, this is mandatory for all chemotherapeutics or targeted drugs that have to reach the cancer cell to exert their action. Furthermore, drug penetration to the cancer cell is also hindered by the aberrant and highly heterogeneous blood flow in brain tumor vessels lacking the normal hierarchical structure of normal brain vasculature. Finally, increased interstitial fluid pressure hinders extravasation into the tumor [5]. All in all, it is a futile challenge for most drugs available today to overcome these barriers between the blood stream and the brain tumor cell, at least in meaningful concentrations. Like antiangiogenic agents, immunomodulators targeting cells responsible for anti-tumor immunity (e.g., Ipilimumab) do not need to reach the cancer cell to exert their action.
Second, targeted small molecule and even antibody inhibitors can be designed to efficiently cross the blood-brain barrier (BBB), or linked to an agent that is actively transported over it [6]. Until recently, pharmaceutical companies did not show great interest in developing such agents. However, the rising incidence of brain diseases like Alzheimer’s or Parkinson’s changed this, and today pharmaceutical companies start drug development programs to select and/or design agents with maximum BBB penetration capabilities, including antitumor agents.
Third, it is proven that macrometastatic outgrowth in the brain can be effectively prevented – by prophylactic whole brain irradiation which targets the whole organ. Applied during a short time frame (2–3 weeks) early in the beginning of the disease, prophylactic whole brain irradiation decreases the incidence of (macro)metastasis formation by more than 50%, an effect that continues over the next 24 months [7]. This matches well with common preclinical and clinical experience that prevention of a disease is much easier than treating it when it is fully developed. Since targeted agents can be applied over long periods of time, are active in the whole body, and do not show the neurotoxicity of whole brain radiotherapy (WBRT), they seem to be perfect future candidates for brain metastasis prevention.
In the last 10 years, targeted cancer therapy [8] has grown explosively and is now established for many tumor entities. However, like established cytotoxic therapies, its role in influencing the occurrence of metastases has rarely been systemically addressed [9, 10]. Furthermore, virtually no targets for molecular therapies have been identified in small cell lung cancer (SCLC) yet, which makes the tumor entity with the highest incidence of BM formation still largely terra incognita. In general, clinical trials are not (yet) designed to prospectively investigate the rate of metastasis formation. Taken that the vast majority of cancer patients die of metastasis and not the primary tumor, this appears to be one of the most important issues for future cancer research. This chapter provides an overview of those targeted therapies that seem most suited for use in BM therapy, both of established macrometastases and of early metastatic events. Furthermore, the clinical data available today is provided, with the limitation that a controlled, prospective, randomized clinical trial testing the effect of targeted therapies on BM has not been completed yet. However, there are several clinical studies on the way that aim to explore the efficacy of targeted agents in BM therapy. At this time, patient data from small case series, retrospective analyses, or even anecdotal reports may teach us what pathways and agents might be the best candidates for future trials. In the following paragraphs, those pharmacologically targetable molecular pathways will be presented that are most promising with respect to BM therapy, because of existing clinical data or for conceptual reasons.
2 Antiangiogenic Therapy
Most antiangiogenic agents target the VEGF pathway. It is important to keep in mind that – in general – tyrosin kinase inhibitors show only moderate selectivity for one receptor (or even class of receptors) [11], which extends their activity to PDGFRs and others. During vessel formation, PDGF-BB is required for the recruitment and differentiation of pericytes, and preclinical data suggest that concomitant inhibition of VEGF and PDGF signaling can improve anti-tumor activity compared with VEGF alone [12]. It needs to be clarified if normalization of brain tumor vasculature during VEGF pathway inhibition [2] is preferable for every patient, or if agents that disturb the vasculature by disrupting pericyte support (such as PDGF receptor inhibitors) may sometimes have greater benefit. However, severe reduction or lack of pericyte coverage may also facilitate metastasis by disrupting the integrity of the vasculature [13]. In contrast, bevacizumab, the antiangiogenic agent most widely used today, inhibits only VEGF-A. Accordingly, there is rising evidence that different antiangiogenic agents can exert very different actions in vivo, which makes it problematic to generalize one finding with one inhibitor to all antiangiogenic agents. Furthermore, other pathways like the angiopoietin system are now coming into the focus of drug development. From a conceptual point of view, antiangiogenic agents that mainly prevent ligand binding/receptor activation at the endotheralial cell do not have to cross the BBB/blood-tumor-barrier, which could prove to be their most important advantage for brain tumor therapy. Therefore, the argument that large antibodies like bevacizumab do not cross the intact BBB and may therefore not be useful in brain tumors does not apply.
In primary brain tumors, antiangiogenic therapy with the humanized monoclonal anti-VEGF-A antibody bevacizumab has shown clinical activity [14], received an accelerated FDA approval due to its excellent response rates and very good progression free survival data at 6 months, and is now widely used for patients suffering from malignant gliomas. Two large double-blind, placebo-controlled phase III studies are currently investigating bevacizumab as first-line therapy for glioblastoma in addition to radio/chemotherapy (www.clinicaltrials.gov). Both have completed accrual, recruited more than 700 patients each, and first results are expected for 2013. This high level of clinical study activity is limited to primary brain tumors though. With respect to BM, there is mainly preclinical evidence from multiple animal models that antiangiogenic agents can be effective: elevated VEGF expression has been linked to the development of BM in a murine model [15]. Kim et al. showed that treatment with the VEGF-receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitor PTK787/Z 222584 reduced angiogenesis and restricted the growth of brain metastases in a murine breast cancer model [16]. In another mouse model, inhibition of VEGF signaling using bevacizumab was able to efficiently inhibit angiogenesis and metastasis formation of lung cancer, but not melanoma cells [17]. In established brain metastatic disease, high-dose bevacizumab therapy could induce vascular normalization, and blood vessel and tumor cell regression [von Baumgarten L, Kienast Y, Winkler F; unpublished data], similar to what we have found in glioblastoma [18]. However, from what is known today, the growth pattern of different tumor (sub)types in the brain is highly different, with lung carcinoma being the most angiogenesis-dependent, and melanoma being the most angiogenesis-independent (due to the ability to grow co-optive along pre-existing brain microvessels ). Breast cancer seems to be located in the middle of this continuum, but considerable variability within tumor entities is likely. It is plausible that this has great impact on the efficacy of antiangiogenic therapies [17]. Conclusively, antiangiogenic therapy has not shown efficacy in melanoma patients yet. All in all, these preclinical results argue for a serious clinical evaluation of antiangiogenic agents in BM therapy and prophylaxis. As with other tumor sites, a clinical parameter (laboratory, imaging, or histological) that predicts response to antiangiogenic therapy would be extremely helpful – but is lacking. Until then, the preclinical results strengthen the point that brain metastases from different tumor entities should be investigated separately in clinical studies.
There is limited data about the clinical activity of antiangiogenic agents in BM patients yet. This is mainly due to exclusion of patients with BM from clinical trials with antiangiogenic agents since a single patient with brain metastatic hepatocellular carcinoma (a disease with high incidence of intracranial bleedings [19]) developed a cerebral hemorrhage 2 weeks after a single dose of bevacizumab in a phase I trial [20]. Since then, large meta-analyses, retrospective case studies and a prospective phase II trial have shown that bevacizumab therapy does not increase the incidence of clinically relevant intracranial bleedings in patients with central nervous system (CNS) metastases [21–23]. This seems to be also true for tyrosine kinase inhibitors [24]. Consequently, the contraindication for BM has been removed from the bevacizumab label in Europe and most likely will be removed also in the US in due time. Several phase I and II trials evaluating bevacizumab alone or in combination with cytotoxic compounds in BM patients have been initiated and are ongoing (Table 6.1). Other drugs with antiangiogenic properties that are investigated in clinical trials enrolling BM patients include sunitinib, sorafenib, and cilengitide. Older trials evaluated non-specific antiangiogenic agents such as thalidomide, in combination with WBRT, without demonstration of improved efficacy, but high numbers of dropouts due to severe side effects [25]. Hopefully, the newer studies with more specific antiangiogenic agents will provide us with data on the efficacy of antiangiogenic drugs in established brain metastases.
The experience with antiangiogenic agents in primary brain tumors highlights several issues that may require special attention also in brain metastases [26]. VEGF-targeting drugs like bevacizumab have a BBB-stabilizing effect which leads to a reduction of brain edema and radiological contrast media uptake. This effect, which has also been shown in brain metastases [27], may lead to overestimation of tumor shrinkage and requires stringent application of adequate response criteria and clinical trial endpoints [28]. Interestingly, treatment of mice with glioblastoma with cediranib prolonged survival despite persistent brain tumor growth in mice by reducing brain edema [29]. It remains to be clarified whether a potential tumor growth-inhibitory or an anti-edematous effect is responsible for the clinical benefit in humans.
Prophylactic administration of VEGF antagonists seems also feasible and is an attractive approach that can be tested in patients at high risk for developing BM [17, 30]. In a novel preclinical animal model we used in vivo multiphoton microscopy for real-time imaging, and tested the prophylactic effect of VEGF-A blockade on the outgrowth of individual metastasizing lung cancer cells in the mouse brain [17] (Fig. 6.1). One experimental group received the anti-VEGF-A antibody bevacizumab just after tumor cell inoculation into the internal carotid artery. Bevacizumab completely prevented early angiogenic events in micrometastases, and thereby induced prolonged dormancy of micrometastatic tumors (maximum ten cells). We did not observe any effects on any other essential steps of the metastatic cascade (initial arrest at vascular branch points; early extravasation; perivascular position with close physical contact to a brain microvessel). Bevacizumab had no effect on the metastatic colonization of melanoma cells in the brain, which showed a non-angiogenic growth pattern under normal conditions. Further preclinical studies are required to determine how discontinued versus prolonged inhibition of VEGF, and combination with other treatment modalities, influences the establishment and growth of micrometastatic disease. An interesting retrospective analysis from the clinic has shown that patients with renal cell carcinoma who received sorafenib had lower incidence of brain metastases than those patients who did not receive sorafenib (3% vs. 12%). This effect stayed statistically significant over 2 years [31]. Even though both groups consisted of considerably low numbers of patients, the prophylactic properties of antiangiogenic agents is an area of important future clinical research.
It is also important to mention several caveats regarding antiangiogenic therapy for brain tumors. In 2009, anti-VEGF monotherapy became controversial with respect to tumor metastasis: accelerated tumor invasiveness and metastasis was observed in mice after pharmacological blockade of the VEGF pathway [13, 32]. However, this did not translate into impaired animal survival (partly to the contrary), and – as stated above – is not in accordance with current signals from the clinic. Furthermore, in glioblastoma, bevacizumab treatment has been suggested to increase the rate of intracerebral distant and diffuse tumor progression by increasing the tendency of glioma cells to invade the brain parenchyma along pre-existing vasculature [33, 34]. However, this view has been challenged lately in better controlled clinical studies which failed to demonstrate a different pattern of relapse in bevacizumab-treated glioblastomas [35]. Increased vascular co-option has been shown for bevacizumab-challenged brain metastatic lung cancer [17] and melanoma cells [36] in the experimental setting. Like in glioblastoma, we have to closely monitor potential pro-invasive effects of antiangiogenic therapies in controlled clinical trials of BM. Finally, the vasculature of brain metastases differs significantly from that of the primary tumor [37]. This strengthens the point that results from clinical trials investigating the systemic effects of antiangiogenic therapy cannot be transferred to the CNS setting one-to-one.
3 HER2 in Breast Cancer
HER2 amplification or overexpression is found in around 20% of primary breast tumors and is associated with poor prognosis and with the development of BM [38–41]. The incidence of BM in patients with HER2 amplified breast cancer is 25–40%. The reasons for the increased incidence of BM are unclear and are likely multifactorial: First, there is ample data that HER 2 overexpression increases the outgrowth of metastatic tumor cells in the brain by a direct biological effect [42–44]. The exact mechanism of how HER2 modulates BM formation is not known yet; it might involve HER2-induced activation of the angiogenic VEGF pathway [45–47]. Compared to HER2 amplified primary breast tumors, HER2 mRNA levels were increased fivefold in breast cancer BM [48], which supports an important role of HER2 for breast cancer metastasis growth in the brain microenvironment. In support of this, MDA-MB-231 human breast carcinoma cells transfected with HER2 produced threefold larger brain metastases than control transfected cells [43].
3.1 Trastuzumab
Another cause of the increased incidence of BM in HER2 overexpressing breast cancer could be that trastuzumab, a recombinant humanized monoclonal antibody against HER2 that is significantly improving the survival of women with HER2 amplified systemic breast cancer, is not active against breast cancer cells in the brain. Trastuzumab does not penetrate the BBB, which makes the brain a “sanctuary site” for metastatic cells [10]. Poor cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) penetration of trastuzumab was found even after WBRT and in the presence of leptomeningial carcinomatosis [49]. In line with this, several studies showed that more than two thirds of trastuzumab-treated patients present with BM at a time of systemic disease control [38, 50]. The systemic disease control with trastuzumab seems to endure even after diagnosis of BM [51]. The CNS delivery problems of systemic trastuzumab therapy have lead to attempts to bypass the BBB: trastuzumab has been injected directly into the CSF of patients that suffer from leptomeningeal carcinomatosis, with casuistic evidence of impressive and prolonged clinical activity [52, 53]. Since the HER2 status is largely (87%) consistent between matched primary tumors and cerebral metastases [44], it appears promising to investigate smaller HER2 inhibitors that have the chance to cross the BBB in sufficient concentrations for HER2-positive breast cancer patients with BM.
3.2 Lapatinib
Lapatinib is an orally available inhibitor that binds reversibly to the cytoplasmatic ATP-binding site of the HER2 and EGFR tyrosine kinases and is primarily used for treatment of trastuzumab-resistant advanced breast cancer. Its brain penetration might be compromised by drug efflux transporter activity in the BBB [54]. In fact, a recent preclinical study has found highly heterogenous lapatinib concentrations in brain metastases that depended on local BBB permeability; generally, only 10–20% of the drug concentration in peripheral metastases was reached [55]. Accordingly, two phase II trials investigating lapatinib in breast cancer patients with BM have been completed and have shown no certain [56] or only modest [57] single agent activity. In a recent study, lapatinib plus capecitabine achieved a good objective response rate of 38%, but no signs of response were found for lapatinib plus topotecan, again questioning the role of lapatinib [58]. Trials investigating lapatinib in combination with other anti-neoplastic agents are ongoing. The Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) is in the process of initiating a clinical trial for women with HER2-positive breast cancer and BM; the two treatment arms will test WBRT with or without lapatinib, in the context of a randomized phase II trial. These trials should provide a better idea whether lapatinib has relevant CNS activity or not.
It is noteworthy that there might be a decreased incidence of CNS relapses in patients treated with lapatinib in Phase III trials [59, 60], even though this was not the primary study objective, and the low patient numbers resulted in borderline significance. In a mouse model, Gril et al. tested the efficacy of early onset lapatinib treatment in breast cancer cells with HER2 overexpression, and showed an inhibition of the formation of large brain metastases by approximately 50% [61]. Taken together, lapatinib might not have a great therapeutic effect if large metastases have formed, but might very well be of preventive (“prophylactic”) benefit with respect to brain metastasis formation. Remarkably, a large ongoing phase III study can illuminate the prophylactic potential of lapatinib in brain metastasis formation. Patients with recurrent systemic HER2 positive breast carcinoma are randomized to receive lapatinib plus capecitabine vs. trastuzumab plus capecitabine, and the primary outcome measure is the incidence of CNS metastases as the site of first relapse (www.clinicaltrials.gov; NCT00820222). This is one of the very few phase III clinical trial addressing the role of targeted therapies in BM, in this case the prevention of it.
3.3 Other HER2 Targeting Agents
Afatinib is an orally available next generation tyrosine kinase inhibitor that irreversibly inhibits HER2 and EGFR tyrosine kinases. In higher doses of 40 mg/day, clinical responses of brain metastases have been observed [62]. A phase II randomized multicenter trial is now enrolling patients with HER2 positive breast carcinoma with recurrent or progressive brain metastases after trastuzumab or lapatinib treatment into three treatment arms: afatinib 40 mg/day; afatinib plus vinorelbine; investigator’s choice of treatment (www.clinicaltrials.gov; NCT01441596).
4 EGFR in Non-small Cell Lung Cancer
Ten percent (US) to 25% (Asia) of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) cases (mainly adenocarcinomas) carry EGFR activating mutations; these numbers might be higher in BM [63, 64]. A recent study has shown that EGFR mutations are found in 44% of BM from NSCLC, and are associated with a doubled median survival of patients. This was due to better intracranial and also extracranial disease control; 78% received EGFR inhibitor therapy after diagnosis of BM [63]. The oral EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors gefitinib and erlotinib are approved and routinely used for the treatment of NSCLC: gefitinib for NSCLC with mutations of EGFR and erlotinib for locally advanced or metastatic NSCLC that has failed at least one prior chemotherapy regimen. A number of case reports, small retrospective and prospective case series and non-randomized phase II trials indicate that EGFR inhibitors may be active in NSCLC BM (Table 6.2), particularly in cases with activating EGFR mutations [65–76]. Erlotinib seems to produce higher CSF concentrations than gefitinib and therefore may be preferable [77]. Unfortunately, definite results from randomized and adequately powered trials are not available [78]. Case reports suggest that dose escalation strategies should be considered, especially for patient who develop BM under standard dose EGFR inhibitor therapy [64]. This has also been shown for leptomeningeal carcinomatosis [79]. Interestingly, a recent retrospective study demonstrated a potential prophylactic role of EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors in patients with advanced NSCLC and somatic EGFR mutations. The cumulative risk of CNS progression at 1 and 2 years was 5% and 21% in patients receiving erlotinib or gefitinib vs. 24% and 31% in the chemotherapy group, indicating a potential prophylactic role of EGFR inhibitors [80].
5 BRAF in Melanoma and Beyond
Activating mutations of the serine threonine kinase v-RAF murine sarcoma viral oncogene homolog B1 (BRAF) are found in a wide range of human cancers and are frequently found in melanoma (60% of cases). More than 95% of BRAF mutations are of the V600E type, which leads to the substitution of valine by glutamic acid in the activating segment of the kinase domain of BRAF. This aberration leads to constitutive kinase activity of BRAF, thereby enhancing the proliferative and metastatic tumor potential through downstream activation of the mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK) signal transduction pathway. BRAF mutations seem to be associated with an increased risk for BM formation in patients [81], which makes this mutation overrepresented in BM and the BRAF pathway an interesting therapeutic target. Furthermore, it matches well with preclinical experience that the small proportion of melanoma cell lines that forms parenchymal BM in animals have mutated BRAF.
Several specific inhibitors of BRAF V600E mutated protein are under preclinical and clinical development and have shown favorable clinical activity in metastatic melanoma. Vemurafenib (PLX4032) produced compelling response rates of up to 70% and improved overall and progression-free survival times in BRAF V600E mutated metastatic melanoma patients [82]. Unfortunately, patients with active brain metastases have been excluded from current vemurafenib trials. However, there are favorable preliminary efficacy data on GSK2118436, another inhibitor of mutant BRAF, in patients with brain metastatic melanoma. In a phase I/II study enrolling patients with metastatic melanoma, GSK2118436 lead to shrinkage and even some complete responses of previously untreated asymptomatic brain metastases in a subpopulation of ten patients [83]. Based on these preliminary observations, a large non-randomized phase II study exploring the effect of GSK2118436 on the radiological response rate in patients with BRAF V600 mutated melanoma brain metastases was launched and almost completed (NCT0166967). Also, a phase II trial evaluating efficacy and safety of vemurafenib in patients with brain metastatic melanoma has been initiated (NCT01378975). Such systemic approaches are very promising, as expression of the therapeutic target (BRAF V600E-mutant protein) has been shown to be homogenous throughout the tumor tissue and to be consistent between different tumor manifestations in individual patients [84]. However, although most patients with BRAF V600E mutated melanomas initially show response to BRAF inhibitors, a significant number of patients develop secondary resistance and experience disease relapse. Treatment resistance may be explained by mechanisms like platelet derived growth factor (PDGFR)-beta upregulation or acquisition of N-RAS mutations or MET mutations [85, 86].
6 Cytotoxic T Lymphocyte Antigen 4 Immunomodulators in Melanoma
Ipilimumab, a human IgG1 monoclonal antibody to cytotoxic T-lymphocyte Antigen 4 (CTLA-4), activates T-cells by blocking the inhibitory action of CTLA-4. CTLA-4 ligation down-regulates T-cell responses and its clinical effects. Overall survival of patients with advanced malignant melanoma was prolonged in two randomized, double-blind multi-national phase 3 trials of ipilimumab as monotherapy [87] and in combination with dacarbazine chemotherapy [88]. Furthermore, anecdotal data and subgroup analyses imply that ipilimumab can show clinical activity against melanoma BM [89–90]. These studies demonstrated the activity of ipilimumab as a monotherapy with responses measured as tumor reduction (objective tumor response). Partial responses were noted in about 25% of patients not on corticosteroids and 5% of those on corticosteroids. Importantly, the current data implies an acceptable safety profile, including patients who previously received CNS radiation. This point has to be followed closely, since previous effective immunotherapies against targets in the CNS showed meningitis and encephalitis including serious brain swelling [91].
7 WNT Pathway
The WNT pathway has been strongly implicated in cancer including cancer stem cell maintenance [92], with 80% of colorectal cancers harboring WNT pathway mutations. Nguyen et al. identified activation of the canonical WNT/TCF pathway as a major factor for metastatic spread to the brain and the bones in NSCLC [93]. Remarkably, WNT signaling was also strongly associated with BM in breast carcinoma patients [94]. In a preclinical study, it was found that microglia promotes brain tissue colonization by breast cancer cells in a WNT-dependent manner [95]. Since the WNT pathway is critical for tissue regeneration and for the ability of stem cells in the bone marrow and gut to self-renew, there is concern that WNT pathway inhibitors could have serious side effects. Accordingly, gastrointestinal and wound healing defects were seen in animals, although these were reversible after drug removal [96]. Therefore, several researchers and pharmacological companies are moving steadily forward with WNT pathway inhibitors. At this time, a handful of WNT inhibitors are already being investigated in Phase I clinical trials, although none of them in the context of BM. Taken the strong evidence for WNT pathway involvement in BM formation, this is one of the most promising future targets for clinical trials.
8 Predictive Markers
There is currently no validated predictive marker that tells a clinician which BM will respond to a specific targeted therapy. However, it is plausible to assume that the laws of general oncology can be transferred to the brain metastatic setting. Furthermore, there seems to be a high consistency (generally around 90%) for molecular alterations in the primary tumor and the BM. This makes it reasonable to take the genetic or gene expression information from the primary tumor as stratification for BM therapy, when (a) the molecular marker is validated to be predictive for the extracranial disease, and (b) the molecular marker has been demonstrated to be consistent between primary tumor and BM. At the moment, those requirements are fulfilled for HER2 status in breast carcinoma and BRAF status in melanoma. However, it is preferable to note that the tissue from the brain metastatic lesion itself is lacking. One very promising potential predictive marker in brain metastasis is BRAF V600E in brain metastatic melanoma. Correct identification of candidate patients for BRAF inhibitors requires reliable identification of BRAF V600E mutated tumors. So far, DNA-based methods have been primarily used and a real-time PCR test kit has been approved by the FDA for diagnostic purposes. However, the feasibility of DNA-based methods in the routine diagnostic setting is limited. The mutation-specific monoclonal antibody VE1, which allows immunohistochemical detection of BRAF V600E protein in formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded tissue samples including brain metastases, has recently been generated (Fig. 6.2) [84, 97]. Immunohistochemistry using VE1 seems to be an attractive tool for the diagnostic setting and facilitates mutation screening in large tumor series, even in entities with low mutation frequencies. Finally, one ongoing area of research is the identification of predictive markers for antiangiogenic therapy. Despite intensive research in this area, no biomarker could be validated yet; candidates for brain tumors include changes in distinct MRI sequences, circulating endothelial cells, and plasma levels of cytokines, receptors, and components of the vascular basement membrane [98]. The most straightforward approach, measurement of VEGF-A and/or its receptors, did not prove successful yet. However, new retrospective analyses from large phase III trials now point towards a potential predictive role for plasma-VEGF-A in extracranial tumors; this needs to be evaluated in a prospective setting. In general, it is likely that the advent of effective targeted therapeutics will further increase the necessity of molecular analysis from BM, which might increase the future role of surgical procedures (resection, or biopsy).
9 Outlook
The advent of targeted therapies will hopefully facilitate the shift from the current practice of treating BM according to a rather crude algorithm, in many cases not even considering the histological tumor type, to rational treatment based on individual tumor characteristics. Established BM may be amenable to targeted inhibition of signaling pathways, at least in a proportion of cases. Patients with BM have long been systematically excluded from clinical trials, although there is a growing recognition in the international community that there is no rationale to continue to do so [99]. Hopefully, this will result in the realization of more high-quality trials for BM. Such studies need to take into account the large diversity of cancer entities producing brain metastases and should implement molecular stratification factors whenever possible. Basic and translational investigations are needed to identify novel molecular targets and also to understand secondary resistance mechanisms that are expected to limit lasting effects of many targeted drugs. The use of Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors or RECIST criteria to measure tumor response of molecular targeted agents might underestimate their effectiveness, as prolonged tumor stabilization should also be considered as a common mode of action. Furthermore, clinical trials should routinely include neurocognitive status and quality-of-life metrics, as both parameters are important to inform decisions regarding the individualized, therapeutic strategies in patients with BM.
A particularly interesting approach is the development of prophylactic systemic therapy to decrease the incidence of BM in high-risk patients. We see advantages, in recent years, to identify these patient subgroups by molecular and/or histological subtype. There are several approaches one can think of: After prevention of intravasation in the primary tumor, the next approach would be to interfere with tumor cell migration through the BBB with drugs targeting selectins, integrins or other adhesion molecules. Another possibility could be to inhibit growth of micrometastases by blocking ECM-degrading substances (e.g. heparanase, MMP) or early angiogenesis, as successfully exemplified with bevacizumab in experimental NSCLC [17] (Fig. 6.1). The latter seems most promising, since tumor metastasis is regarded as an early event today, which would make it likely that disseminated tumor cells or even micrometastases are already residing in the brain at the time of diagnosis of cancer. For clinical metastasis prevention studies, optimized trial designs are mandatory. Only those patients with a high risk of future BM formation should be included: when one to three brain metastases received successful local treatment, and/or when the tumor type has a known high propensity to metastasize to the brain, including SCLC, NSCLC, and breast carcinoma of the basal-like, triple-negative, and/or HER2 overexpressing subtype. Further molecular stratification approaches (e.g., WNT pathway, chemokine receptor status, BRAF) are on the horizon. The primary end point should be time to progression measured by development of new brain metastases, and secondary end points should include new BM formation thereafter, next to brain metastasis-related morbidity and mortality. Finally, drugs that are normally developed and tested in vivo with respect to their growth inhibitory effect on established tumors are not necessarily effective in terms of metastasis prevention, or might even promote metastasis formation. Therefore, a careful preclinical evaluation of candidate agents is needed before moving to clinical trials of metastasis prevention. In this regard, prophylactic WBRT could at best be displaced by systemic treatment options that are less neurotoxic and have additional effects on systemic metastasis prevention. It is reasonable to assume that this might be a targeted therapy, maybe in a low-dose regimen.
References
Preusser M, Capper D, Ilhan-Mutlu A, Berghoff AS, Birner P, Bartsch R, Marosi C, Zielinski C, Mehta MP, Winkler F, Wick W, von Deimling A (2012) Brain metastases: pathobiology and emerging targeted therapies. Acta Neuropathol 123:205–222
Winkler F, Kozin SV, Tong RT, Chae SS, Booth MF, Garkavtsev I, Xu L, Hicklin DJ, Fukumura D, di Tomaso E, Munn LL, Jain RK (2004) Kinetics of vascular normalization by VEGFR2 blockade governs brain tumor response to radiation: role of oxygenation, angiopoietin-1, and matrix metalloproteinases. Cancer Cell 6:553–563
Plate KH, Mennel HD (1995) Vascular morphology and angiogenesis in glial tumors. Exp Toxicol Pathol 47:89–94
Fidler IJ, Yano S, Zhang RD, Fujimaki T, Bucana CD (2002) The seed and soil hypothesis: vascularisation and brain metastases. Lancet Oncol 3:53–57
Jain RK, di Tomaso E, Duda DG, Loeffler JS, Sorensen AG, Batchelor TT (2007) Angiogenesis in brain tumours. Nat Rev Neurosci 8:610–622
Pardridge WM (2002) Drug and gene targeting to the brain with molecular Trojan horses. Nat Rev Drug Discov 1:131–139
Slotman B, Faivre-Finn C, Kramer G, Rankin E, Snee M, Hatton M, Postmus P, Collette L, Musat E, Senan S (2007) Prophylactic cranial irradiation in extensive small-cell lung cancer. N Engl J Med 357:664–672
Sawyers C (2004) Targeted cancer therapy. Nature 432:294–297
Sethi N, Kang Y (2011) Unravelling the complexity of metastasis – molecular understanding and targeted therapies. Nat Rev Cancer 11:735–748
Steeg PS, Camphausen KA, Smith QR (2011) Brain metastases as preventive and therapeutic targets. Nat Rev Cancer 11:352–363
Fabian MA, Biggs WH 3rd, Treiber DK, Atteridge CE, Azimioara MD, Benedetti MG, Carter TA, Ciceri P, Edeen PT, Floyd M, Ford JM, Galvin M, Gerlach JL, Grotzfeld RM, Herrgard S, Insko DE, Insko MA, Lai AG, Lelias JM, Mehta SA, Milanov ZV, Velasco AM, Wodicka LM, Patel HK, Zarrinkar PP, Lockhart DJ (2005) A small molecule-kinase interaction map for clinical kinase inhibitors. Nat Biotechnol 23:329–336
Bergers G, Song S, Meyer-Morse N, Bergsland E, Hanahan D (2003) Benefits of targeting both pericytes and endothelial cells in the tumor vasculature with kinase inhibitors. J Clin Invest 111:1287–1295
Ebos JM, Lee CR, Cruz-Munoz W, Bjarnason GA, Christensen JG, Kerbel RS (2009) Accelerated metastasis after short-term treatment with a potent inhibitor of tumor angiogenesis. Cancer Cell 15:232–239
Vredenburgh JJ, Desjardins A, Herndon JE 2nd, Marcello J, Reardon DA, Quinn JA, Rich JN, Sathornsumetee S, Gururangan S, Sampson J, Wagner M, Bailey L, Bigner DD, Friedman AH, Friedman HS (2007) Bevacizumab plus irinotecan in recurrent glioblastoma multiforme. J Clin Oncol 25:4722–4729
Yano S, Shinohara H, Herbst RS, Kuniyasu H, Bucana CD, Ellis LM, Davis DW, McConkey DJ, Fidler IJ (2000) Expression of vascular endothelial growth factor is necessary but not sufficient for production and growth of brain metastasis. Cancer Res 60:4959–4967
Kim LS, Huang S, Lu W, Lev DC, Price JE (2004) Vascular endothelial growth factor expression promotes the growth of breast cancer brain metastases in nude mice. Clin Exp Metastasis 21:107–118
Kienast Y, von Baumgarten L, Fuhrmann M, Klinkert WE, Goldbrunner R, Herms J, Winkler F (2010) Real-time imaging reveals the single steps of brain metastasis formation. Nat Med 16:116–122
von Baumgarten L, Brucker D, Tirniceru A, Kienast Y, Grau S, Burgold S, Herms J, Winkler F (2011) Bevacizumab has differential and dose-dependent effects on glioma blood vessels and tumor cells. Clin Cancer Res 17:6192–6205
Murakami K, Nawano S, Moriyama N, Sekiguchi R, Satake M, Fujimoto H, Ichikawa T (1996) Intracranial metastases of hepatocellular carcinoma: CT and MRI. Neuroradiology 38(Suppl 1):S31–S35
Gordon MS, Margolin K, Talpaz M, Sledge GW Jr, Holmgren E, Benjamin R, Stalter S, Shak S, Adelman D (2001) Phase I safety and pharmacokinetic study of recombinant human anti-vascular endothelial growth factor in patients with advanced cancer. J Clin Oncol 19:843–850
Besse B, Lasserre SF, Compton P, Huang J, Augustus S, Rohr UP (2010) Bevacizumab safety in patients with central nervous system metastases. Clin Cancer Res 16:269–278
De Braganca KC, Janjigian YY, Azzoli CG, Kris MG, Pietanza MC, Nolan CP, Omuro AM, Holodny AI, Lassman AB (2010) Efficacy and safety of bevacizumab in active brain metastases from non-small cell lung cancer. J Neurooncol 100:443–447
Socinski MA, Langer CJ, Huang JE, Kolb MM, Compton P, Wang L, Akerley W (2009) Safety of bevacizumab in patients with non-small-cell lung cancer and brain metastases. J Clin Oncol 27:5255–5261
Staehler M, Haseke N, Nuhn P, Tullmann C, Karl A, Siebels M, Stief CG, Wowra B, Muacevic A (2011) Simultaneous anti-angiogenic therapy and single-fraction radiosurgery in clinically relevant metastases from renal cell carcinoma. BJU Int 108:673–678
Knisely JP, Berkey B, Chakravarti A, Yung AW, Curran WJ Jr, Robins HI, Movsas B, Brachman DG, Henderson RH, Mehta MP (2008) A phase III study of conventional radiation therapy plus thalidomide versus conventional radiation therapy for multiple brain metastases (RTOG 0118). Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 71:79–86
Preusser M, de Ribaupierre S, Wohrer A, Erridge SC, Hegi M, Weller M, Stupp R (2011) Current concepts and management of glioblastoma. Ann Neurol 70:9–21
Mathews MS, Linskey ME, Hasso AN, Fruehauf JP (2008) The effect of bevacizumab (Avastin) on neuroimaging of brain metastases. Surg Neurol 70:649–652, discussion 653
Quant EC, Wen PY (2011) Response assessment in neuro-oncology. Curr Oncol Rep 13:50–56
Kamoun WS, Ley CD, Farrar CT, Duyverman AM, Lahdenranta J, Lacorre DA, Batchelor TT, di Tomaso E, Duda DG, Munn LL, Fukumura D, Sorensen AG, Jain RK (2009) Edema control by cediranib, a vascular endothelial growth factor receptor-targeted kinase inhibitor, prolongs survival despite persistent brain tumor growth in mice. J Clin Oncol 27:2542–2552
Kienast Y, Winkler F (2010) Therapy and prophylaxis of brain metastases. Expert Rev Anticancer Ther 10:1763–1777
Massard C, Zonierek J, Gross-Goupil M, Fizazi K, Szczylik C, Escudier B (2010) Incidence of brain metastases in renal cell carcinoma treated with sorafenib. Ann Oncol 21:1027–1031
Paez-Ribes M, Allen E, Hudock J, Takeda T, Okuyama H, Vinals F, Inoue M, Bergers G, Hanahan D, Casanovas O (2009) Antiangiogenic therapy elicits malignant progression of tumors to increased local invasion and distant metastasis. Cancer Cell 15:220–231
Zuniga RM, Torcuator R, Jain R, Anderson J, Doyle T, Ellika S, Schultz L, Mikkelsen T (2009) Efficacy, safety and patterns of response and recurrence in patients with recurrent high-grade gliomas treated with bevacizumab plus irinotecan. J Neurooncol 91:329–336
Narayana A, Kunnakkat SD, Medabalmi P, Golfinos J, Parker E, Knopp E, Zagzag D, Eagan P, Gruber D, Gruber ML (2010) Change in pattern of relapse after antiangiogenic therapy in high-grade glioma. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 82(1):77–82
Wick A, Dorner N, Schafer N, Hofer S, Heiland S, Schemmer D, Platten M, Weller M, Bendszus M, Wick W (2011) Bevacizumab does not increase the risk of remote relapse in malignant glioma. Ann Neurol 69:586–592
Leenders WP, Kusters B, Verrijp K, Maass C, Wesseling P, Heerschap A, Ruiter D, Ryan A, de Waal R (2004) Antiangiogenic therapy of cerebral melanoma metastases results in sustained tumor progression via vessel co-option. Clin Cancer Res 10:6222–6230
Jubb AM, Cesario A, Ferguson M, Congedo MT, Gatter KC, Lococo F, Mule A, Pezzella F (2011) Vascular phenotypes in primary non-small cell lung carcinomas and matched brain metastases. Br J Cancer 104:1877–1881
Lin NU, Winer EP (2007) Brain metastases: the HER2 paradigm. Clin Cancer Res 13:1648–1655
Miller KD, Weathers T, Haney LG, Timmerman R, Dickler M, Shen J, Sledge GW Jr (2003) Occult central nervous system involvement in patients with metastatic breast cancer: prevalence, predictive factors and impact on overall survival. Ann Oncol 14:1072–1077
Weil RJ, Palmieri DC, Bronder JL, Stark AM, Steeg PS (2005) Breast cancer metastasis to the central nervous system. Am J Pathol 167:913–920
Heitz F, Harter P, Lueck HJ, Fissler-Eckhoff A, Lorenz-Salehi F, Scheil-Bertram S, Traut A, du Bois A (2009) Triple-negative and HER2-overexpressing breast cancers exhibit an elevated risk and an earlier occurrence of cerebral metastases. Eur J Cancer 45:2792–2798
Pestalozzi BC, Zahrieh D, Price KN, Holmberg SB, Lindtner J, Collins J, Crivellari D, Fey MF, Murray E, Pagani O, Simoncini E, Castiglione-Gertsch M, Gelber RD, Coates AS, Goldhirsch A (2006) Identifying breast cancer patients at risk for Central Nervous System (CNS) metastases in trials of the International Breast Cancer Study Group (IBCSG). Ann Oncol 17:935–944
Palmieri D, Bronder JL, Herring JM, Yoneda T, Weil RJ, Stark AM, Kurek R, Vega-Valle E, Feigenbaum L, Halverson D, Vortmeyer AO, Steinberg SM, Aldape K, Steeg PS (2007) Her-2 overexpression increases the metastatic outgrowth of breast cancer cells in the brain. Cancer Res 67:4190–4198
Gaedcke J, Traub F, Milde S, Wilkens L, Stan A, Ostertag H, Christgen M, von Wasielewski R, Kreipe HH (2007) Predominance of the basal type and HER-2/neu type in brain metastasis from breast cancer. Mod Pathol 20:864–870
Konecny GE, Meng YG, Untch M, Wang HJ, Bauerfeind I, Epstein M, Stieber P, Vernes JM, Gutierrez J, Hong K, Beryt M, Hepp H, Slamon DJ, Pegram MD (2004) Association between HER-2/neu and vascular endothelial growth factor expression predicts clinical outcome in primary breast cancer patients. Clin Cancer Res 10:1706–1716
Laughner E, Taghavi P, Chiles K, Mahon PC, Semenza GL (2001) HER2 (neu) signaling increases the rate of hypoxia-inducible factor 1alpha (HIF-1alpha) synthesis: novel mechanism for HIF-1-mediated vascular endothelial growth factor expression. Mol Cell Biol 21:3995–4004
Izumi Y, Xu L, di Tomaso E, Fukumura D, Jain RK (2002) Tumour biology: herceptin acts as an anti-angiogenic cocktail. Nature 416:279–280
Souglakos J, Vamvakas L, Apostolaki S, Perraki M, Saridaki Z, Kazakou I, Pallis A, Kouroussis C, Androulakis N, Kalbakis K, Millaki G, Mavroudis D, Georgoulias V (2006) Central nervous system relapse in patients with breast cancer is associated with advanced stages, with the presence of circulating occult tumor cells and with the HER2/neu status. Breast Cancer Res 8:R36
Stemmler HJ, Schmitt M, Willems A, Bernhard H, Harbeck N, Heinemann V (2007) Ratio of trastuzumab levels in serum and cerebrospinal fluid is altered in HER2-positive breast cancer patients with brain metastases and impairment of blood-brain barrier. Anticancer Drugs 18:23–28
Burstein HJ, Lieberman G, Slamon DJ, Winer EP, Klein P (2005) Isolated central nervous system metastases in patients with HER2-overexpressing advanced breast cancer treated with first-line trastuzumab-based therapy. Ann Oncol 16:1772–1777
Le Scodan R, Jouanneau L, Massard C, Gutierrez M, Kirova Y, Cherel P, Gachet J, Labib A, Mouret-Fourme E (2011) Brain metastases from breast cancer: prognostic significance of HER-2 overexpression, effect of trastuzumab and cause of death. BMC Cancer 11:395
Stemmler HJ, Schmitt M, Harbeck N, Willems A, Bernhard H, Lassig D, Schoenberg S, Heinemann V (2006) Application of intrathecal trastuzumab (Herceptintrade mark) for treatment of meningeal carcinomatosis in HER2-overexpressing metastatic breast cancer. Oncol Rep 15:1373–1377
Oliveira M, Braga S, Passos-Coelho JL, Fonseca R, Oliveira J (2011) Complete response in HER2+ leptomeningeal carcinomatosis from breast cancer with intrathecal trastuzumab. Breast Cancer Res Treat 127:841–844
Polli JW, Olson KL, Chism JP, John-Williams LS, Yeager RL, Woodard SM, Otto V, Castellino S, Demby VE (2009) An unexpected synergist role of P-glycoprotein and breast cancer resistance protein on the central nervous system penetration of the tyrosine kinase inhibitor lapatinib (N-{3-chloro-4-[(3-fluorobenzyl)oxy]phenyl}-6-[5-({[2-(methylsulfonyl)ethyl]amino }methyl)-2-furyl]-4-quinazolinamine; GW572016). Drug Metab Dispos: The Biol Fate Chem 37:439–442
Taskar KS, Rudraraju V, Mittapalli RK, Samala R, Thorsheim HR, Lockman J, Gril B, Hua E, Palmieri D, Polli JW, Castellino S, Rubin SD, Lockman PR, Steeg PS, Smith QR (2011) Lapatinib distribution in HER2 overexpressing experimental brain metastases of breast cancer. Pharm Res 29(3):770–781
Lin NU, Carey LA, Liu MC, Younger J, Come SE, Ewend M, Harris GJ, Bullitt E, Van den Abbeele AD, Henson JW, Li X, Gelman R, Burstein HJ, Kasparian E, Kirsch DG, Crawford A, Hochberg F, Winer EP (2008) Phase II trial of lapatinib for brain metastases in patients with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-positive breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 26:1993–1999
Lin NU, Dieras V, Paul D, Lossignol D, Christodoulou C, Stemmler HJ, Roche H, Liu MC, Greil R, Ciruelos E, Loibl S, Gori S, Wardley A, Yardley D, Brufsky A, Blum JL, Rubin SD, Dharan B, Steplewski K, Zembryki D, Oliva C, Roychowdhury D, Paoletti P, Winer EP (2009) Multicenter phase II study of lapatinib in patients with brain metastases from HER2-positive breast cancer. Clin Cancer Res 15:1452–1459
Lin NU, Eierman W, Greil R, Campone M, Kaufman B, Steplewski K, Lane SR, Zembryki D, Rubin SD, Winer EP (2011) Randomized phase II study of lapatinib plus capecitabine or lapatinib plus topotecan for patients with HER2-positive breast cancer brain metastases. J Neurooncol 105:613–620
Cameron D, Casey M, Press M, Lindquist D, Pienkowski T, Romieu CG, Chan S, Jagiello-Gruszfeld A, Kaufman B, Crown J, Chan A, Campone M, Viens P, Davidson N, Gorbounova V, Raats JI, Skarlos D, Newstat B, Roychowdhury D, Paoletti P, Oliva C, Rubin S, Stein S, Geyer CE (2008) A phase III randomized comparison of lapatinib plus capecitabine versus capecitabine alone in women with advanced breast cancer that has progressed on trastuzumab: updated efficacy and biomarker analyses. Breast Cancer Res Treat 112:533–543
Geyer CE, Forster J, Lindquist D, Chan S, Romieu CG, Pienkowski T, Jagiello-Gruszfeld A, Crown J, Chan A, Kaufman B, Skarlos D, Campone M, Davidson N, Berger M, Oliva C, Rubin SD, Stein S, Cameron D (2006) Lapatinib plus capecitabine for HER2-positive advanced breast cancer. N Engl J Med 355:2733–2743
Gril B, Palmieri D, Bronder JL, Herring JM, Vega-Valle E, Feigenbaum L, Liewehr DJ, Steinberg SM, Merino MJ, Rubin SD, Steeg PS (2008) Effect of lapatinib on the outgrowth of metastatic breast cancer cells to the brain. J Natl Cancer Inst 100:1092–1103
Yap TA, Vidal L, Adam J, Stephens P, Spicer J, Shaw H, Ang J, Temple G, Bell S, Shahidi M, Uttenreuther-Fischer M, Stopfer P, Futreal A, Calvert H, de Bono JS, Plummer R (2010) Phase I trial of the irreversible EGFR and HER2 kinase inhibitor BIBW 2992 in patients with advanced solid tumors. J Clin Oncol 28:3965–3972
Eichler AF, Kahle KT, Wang DL, Joshi VA, Willers H, Engelman JA, Lynch TJ, Sequist LV (2010) EGFR mutation status and survival after diagnosis of brain metastasis in nonsmall cell lung cancer. Neuro Oncol 12:1193–1199
Jamal-Hanjani M, Spicer J (2011) EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors in the treatment of EGFR mutant NSCLC metastatic to the brain. Clin Cancer Res 18(4):1–7
Porta R, Sanchez-Torres JM, Paz-Ares L, Massuti B, Reguart N, Mayo C, Lianes P, Queralt C, Guillem V, Salinas P, Catot S, Isla D, Pradas A, Gurpide A, de Castro J, Polo E, Puig T, Taron M, Colomer R, Rosell R (2011) Brain metastases from lung cancer responding to erlotinib: the importance of EGFR mutation. Eur Respir J 37:624–631
Hotta K, Kiura K, Ueoka H, Tabata M, Fujiwara K, Kozuki T, Okada T, Hisamoto A, Tanimoto M (2004) Effect of gefitinib (‘Iressa’, ZD1839) on brain metastases in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer. Lung Cancer 46:255–261
Namba Y, Kijima T, Yokota S, Niinaka M, Kawamura S, Iwasaki T, Takeda Y, Kimura H, Okada T, Yamaguchi T, Nakagawa M, Okumura Y, Maeda H, Ito M (2004) Gefitinib in patients with brain metastases from non-small-cell lung cancer: review of 15 clinical cases. Clin Lung Cancer 6:123–128
Kim JE, Lee DH, Choi Y, Yoon DH, Kim SW, Suh C, Lee JS (2009) Epidermal growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitors as a first-line therapy for never-smokers with adenocarcinoma of the lung having asymptomatic synchronous brain metastasis. Lung Cancer 65:351–354
Wu C, Li YL, Wang ZM, Li Z, Zhang TX, Wei Z (2007) Gefitinib as palliative therapy for lung adenocarcinoma metastatic to the brain. Lung Cancer 57:359–364
Ma S, Xu Y, Deng Q, Yu X (2009) Treatment of brain metastasis from non-small cell lung cancer with whole brain radiotherapy and Gefitinib in a Chinese population. Lung Cancer 65:198–203
Ceresoli GL, Cappuzzo F, Gregorc V, Bartolini S, Crino L, Villa E (2004) Gefitinib in patients with brain metastases from non-small-cell lung cancer: a prospective trial. Ann Oncol 15:1042–1047
Chiu CH, Tsai CM, Chen YM, Chiang SC, Liou JL, Perng RP (2005) Gefitinib is active in patients with brain metastases from non-small cell lung cancer and response is related to skin toxicity. Lung Cancer 47:129–138
Fekrazad MH, Ravindranathan M, Jones DV Jr (2007) Response of intracranial metastases to erlotinib therapy. J Clin Oncol 25:5024–5026
Lai CS, Boshoff C, Falzon M, Lee SM (2006) Complete response to erlotinib treatment in brain metastases from recurrent NSCLC. Thorax 61:91
Lind JS, Lagerwaard FJ, Smit EF, Senan S (2009) Phase I study of concurrent whole brain radiotherapy and erlotinib for multiple brain metastases from non-small-cell lung cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 74:1391–1396
Altavilla G, Arrigo C, Santarpia MC, Galletti G, Picone G, Marabello G, Tomasello C, Pitini VV (2008) Erlotinib therapy in a patient with non-small-cell lung cancer and brain metastases. J Neurooncol 90:31–33
Masuda T, Hattori N, Hamada A, Iwamoto H, Ohshimo S, Kanehara M, Ishikawa N, Fujitaka K, Haruta Y, Murai H, Kohno N (2011) Erlotinib efficacy and cerebrospinal fluid concentration in patients with lung adenocarcinoma developing leptomeningeal metastases during gefitinib therapy. Cancer Chemother Pharmacol 67:1465–1469
Olson JJ, Paleologos NA, Gaspar LE, Robinson PD, Morris RE, Ammirati M, Andrews DW, Asher AL, Burri SH, Cobbs CS, Kondziolka D, Linskey ME, Loeffler JS, McDermott M, Mehta MP, Mikkelsen T, Patchell RA, Ryken TC, Kalkanis SN (2010) The role of emerging and investigational therapies for metastatic brain tumors: a systematic review and evidence-based clinical practice guideline of selected topics. J Neurooncol 96:115–142
Jackman DM, Holmes AJ, Lindeman N, Wen PY, Kesari S, Borras AM, Bailey C, de Jong F, Janne PA, Johnson BE (2006) Response and resistance in a non-small-cell lung cancer patient with an epidermal growth factor receptor mutation and leptomeningeal metastases treated with high-dose gefitinib. J Clin Oncol 24:4517–4520
Heon S, Yeap BY, Britt GJ, Costa DB, Rabin MS, Jackman DM, Johnson BE (2010) Development of central nervous system metastases in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer and somatic EGFR mutations treated with gefitinib or erlotinib. Clin Cancer Res 16:5873–5882
El-Osta H, Falchook G, Tsimberidou A, Hong D, Naing A, Kim K, Wen S, Janku F, Kurzrock R (2011) BRAF mutations in advanced cancers: clinical characteristics and outcomes. PLoS One 6:e25806
Chapman PB, Hauschild A, Robert C, Haanen JB, Ascierto P, Larkin J, Dummer R, Garbe C, Testori A, Maio M, Hogg D, Lorigan P, Lebbe C, Jouary T, Schadendorf D, Ribas A, O’Day SJ, Sosman JA, Kirkwood JM, Eggermont AM, Dreno B, Nolop K, Li J, Nelson B, Hou J, Lee RJ, Flaherty KT, McArthur GA (2011) Improved survival with vemurafenib in melanoma with BRAF V600E mutation. N Engl J Med 364:2507–2516
Falchook GS, Long GV, Kurzrock R, Kim KB, Arkenau TH, Brown MP, Hamid O, Infante JR, Millward M, Pavlick AC, O’Day SJ, Blackman SC, Curtis CM, Lebowitz P, Ma B, Ouellet D, Kefford RF (2012) Dabrafenib in patients with melanoma, untreated brain metastases, and other solid tumours: a phase 1 dose-escalation trial. Lancet. 379(9829):1893–901
Capper D, Berghoff AS, Magerle M, Ilhan A, Wohrer A, Hackl M, Pichler J, Pusch S, Meyer J, Habel A, Petzelbauer P, Birner P, von Deimling A, Preusser M (2011) Immunohistochemical testing of BRAF V600E status in 1,120 tumor tissue samples of patients with brain metastases. Acta Neuropathol 123:223–233
Nazarian R, Shi H, Wang Q, Kong X, Koya RC, Lee H, Chen Z, Lee MK, Attar N, Sazegar H, Chodon T, Nelson SF, McArthur G, Sosman JA, Ribas A, Lo RS (2010) Melanomas acquire resistance to B-RAF(V600E) inhibition by RTK or N-RAS upregulation. Nature 468:973–977
Wagle N, Emery C, Berger MF, Davis MJ, Sawyer A, Pochanard P, Kehoe SM, Johannessen CM, Macconaill LE, Hahn WC, Meyerson M, Garraway LA (2011) Dissecting therapeutic resistance to RAF inhibition in melanoma by tumor genomic profiling. J Clin Oncol 29:3085–3096
Hodi FS, O’Day SJ, McDermott DF, Weber RW, Sosman JA, Haanen JB, Gonzalez R, Robert C, Schadendorf D, Hassel JC, Akerley W, van den Eertwegh AJ, Lutzky J, Lorigan P, Vaubel JM, Linette GP, Hogg D, Ottensmeier CH, Lebbe C, Peschel C, Quirt I, Clark JI, Wolchok JD, Weber JS, Tian J, Yellin MJ, Nichol GM, Hoos A, Urba WJ (2010) Improved survival with ipilimumab in patients with metastatic melanoma. N Engl J Med 363:711–723
Robert C, Thomas L, Bondarenko I, O’Day S, Weber J, Garbe C, Lebbe C, Baurain JF, Testori A, Grob JJ, Davidson N, Richards J, Maio M, Hauschild A, Miller WH Jr, Gascon P, Lotem M, Harmankaya K, Ibrahim R, Francis S, Chen TT, Humphrey R, Hoos A, Wolchok JD (2011) Ipilimumab plus dacarbazine for previously untreated metastatic melanoma. N Engl J Med 364:2517–2526
Schartz NE, Farges C, Madelaine I, Bruzzoni H, Calvo F, Hoos A, Lebbe C (2010) Complete regression of a previously untreated melanoma brain metastasis with ipilimumab. Melanoma Res 20:247–250
Weber JS, Amin A, Minor D, Siegel J, Berman D, O’Day SJ (2011) Safety and clinical activity of ipilimumab in melanoma patients with brain metastases: retrospective analysis of data from a phase 2 trial. Melanoma Res 21:530–534
Schenk D (2002) Amyloid-beta immunotherapy for Alzheimer’s disease: the end of the beginning. Nat Rev Neurosci 3:824–828
Takahashi-Yanaga F, Kahn M (2010) Targeting Wnt signaling: can we safely eradicate cancer stem cells? Clin Cancer Res 16:3153–3162
Nguyen DX, Chiang AC, Zhang XH, Kim JY, Kris MG, Ladanyi M, Gerald WL, Massague J (2009) WNT/TCF signaling through LEF1 and HOXB9 mediates lung adenocarcinoma metastasis. Cell 138:51–62
Smid M, Wang Y, Zhang Y, Sieuwerts AM, Yu J, Klijn JG, Foekens JA, Martens JW (2008) Subtypes of breast cancer show preferential site of relapse. Cancer Res 68:3108–3114
Pukrop T, Dehghani F, Chuang HN, Lohaus R, Bayanga K, Heermann S, Regen T, Van Rossum D, Klemm F, Schulz M, Siam L, Hoffmann A, Trumper L, Stadelmann C, Bechmann I, Hanisch UK, Binder C (2010) Microglia promote colonization of brain tissue by breast cancer cells in a Wnt-dependent way. Glia 58:1477–1489
Garber K (2009) Drugging the Wnt pathway: problems and progress. J Natl Cancer Inst 101:548–550
Capper D, Preusser M, Habel A, Sahm F, Ackermann U, Schindler G, Pusch S, Mechtersheimer G, Zentgraf H, von Deimling A (2011) Assessment of BRAF V600E mutation status by immunohistochemistry with a mutation-specific monoclonal antibody. Acta Neuropathol 122:11–19
Duda DG, Ancukiewicz M, Jain RK (2010) Biomarkers of antiangiogenic therapy: how do we move from candidate biomarkers to valid biomarkers? J Clin Oncol 28:183–185
Wen PY, Schiff D, Cloughesy TF, Reardon DA, Batchelor TT, Chabner BA, Flaherty K, de Groot JF, Gilbert MR, Galanis E, Chang SM, Schwartz GK, Peereboom D, Mehta MP, Yung WK, Grossman SA, Prados MD, Deangelis LM (2011) It is time to include patients with brain tumors in phase I trials in oncology. J Clin Oncol 29:3211–3213
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2012 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Winkler, F. (2012). Possibilities of Targeted Therapies for Brain Metastasis. In: Palmieri, D. (eds) Central Nervous System Metastasis, the Biological Basis and Clinical Considerations. Cancer Metastasis - Biology and Treatment, vol 18. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-5291-7_6
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-5291-7_6
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-94-007-5290-0
Online ISBN: 978-94-007-5291-7
eBook Packages: Biomedical and Life SciencesBiomedical and Life Sciences (R0)