Factors patients consider when accessing oral health care.

The aim of this cross-sectional study was to understand patients' perceived importance of clinic- and clinician-related factors and contextual characteristics that shape the importance ratings for factors patients consider when accessing oral health care. This study was conducted at Griffith University Dental Clinic, Gold Coast, Australia. Patients answered a self-administered questionnaire on demographics and perceived need for attendance, which constituted the explanatory variables. In the second part of the questionnaire, patients were asked to rate the importance of 17 items related to the provision and quality of oral health services using a five-point scale. Exploratory factor analysis (EFA) was conducted to determine the dimensionality of the questionnaire. The questionnaire was completed by 298 patients. The importance of some of the clinician-related factors, such as 'concern for patients' and 'access to specialist care', were associated with sex, age and employment status. EFA revealed a two-factor structure, which consisted of items related to clinician characteristics and clinic environment characteristics. Female participants had higher importance scores for clinic environment characteristics (mean (±s.d.) 38.00 ± 4.86 vs 35.45 ± 6.30; P < 0.05) and clinician characteristics (32.39 ± 2.85 vs 31.33 ± 3.39; P < 0.05) than male participants. In conclusion, various clinician- and clinic-related aspects were considered important for the provision and quality of oral health services, with the importance of these factors associated with some contextual characteristics. Application of Andersen's behavioural model of health services use provided a framework that offers important insights into patient beliefs and perceptions towards oral health services and can serve as a baseline for future studies in dental clinics across Australia.

The influence of family socioeconomic status on toothbrushing practices in Australian children.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the relationship between toothbrushing behavior and socio-demographic characteristics in Australian children. METHODS: Data were collected through the 2012-2014 Australian National Child Oral Health Survey (NCOHS). NCOHS was a cross-sectional survey of representative school children aged 5-14 years of Australia with a total sample size of 24,664 children. RESULTS: Two-thirds (69%) of Australian children brushed twice or more times a day and the mean age of starting toothbrushing with fluoridated toothpaste was 24 months. Males were less consistent with toothbrushing than females (OR = 0.85; 95% CI: 0.74-0.97) and the likelihood of brushing twice or more a day improved with the increase in age (OR = 1.05; 95% CI: 1.02-1.08). Children with university educated (OR = 1.80; 95% CI: 1.44-2.26), vocational trained parents'/guardians' (OR = 1.45, 95% CI 1.11-1.90), living in families with an income of >AU$120,000 (OR = 1.42; 95% CI: 1.08-1.89) and having an overseas born parent (OR = 1.30; 95% CI: 1.07-1.58) were more likely to brush their teeth twice or more a day than their comparative counterparts. Children in households with two children (OR = 1.33; 95% CI: 1.07-1.64) were more likely to brush twice or more than single-child households. Children with a health welfare card tended to delay the start of toothbrushing by 1.4 months in comparison to those without a welfare card. Children with one of the caregivers born overseas started brushing later than those with Australia born caregivers (B = 1.04; SE = 0.46). Children living in high income and educated families and households with two or more children tended to start toothbrushing at an earlier age. CONCLUSIONS: Several family socio-demographic factors influenced toothbrushing habits in Australian children.

Guillain-Barre syndrome observed with adoptive transfer of lymphocytes genetically engineered with an NY-ESO-1 reactive T-cell receptor.

BACKGROUND: Adoptive transfer of autologous T-lymphocytes transduced with a high affinity NY-ESO-1-reactive T-cell receptor (NY-ESO-1c259 T-cells) has emerged as a promising therapeutic strategy for patients with refractory synovial sarcoma. Secondary autoimmune T-cell mediated toxicities can occur long after initial adoptive T-cell transfer. We report on the first two cases of the development and management of Guillain-Barre syndrome in synovial sarcoma patients who received NY-ESO-1c259 T-cells. CASE PRESENTATION: A 47 year-old woman and 39 year-old woman with refractory metastatic SS were treated with fludarabine-cyclophosphamide lymphodepletion followed by adoptive transfer of NY-ESO-1c259 T-cells. On day 42 after adoptive T-cell therapy, patient one presented to the emergency room with a one-week history of numbness, paresthesia, and heaviness to both legs progressing to difficulty walking on the day of presentation. Although MRI brain and lumbar puncture were negative, electromyography (EMG) and nerve conduction studies (NCS) of the lower extremities and right arm performed revealed an abnormal study suggestive of a very mild, distal, motor, axonal polyneuropathy. Patient two presented on day 113 with bilateral foot numbness, left foot drop, unsteady gait, and pain in the left thigh, which progressed over two week to bilateral leg weakness, inability to walk, and numbness bilaterally in the hands, legs, and feet. Both patients received intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG) 0.4 g/kg/day for 5 days for possible acute inflammatory demyelinating polyneuropathy (AIDP) likely related to NY-ESO-1 targeting T-cell therapy. After 3 and 5 doses, respectively, of IVIG, the patients reported improvement in symptoms and strength, and were later transferred to an inpatient rehabilitation facility to continue gaining strength. At patient one's neurology follow-up on day 95, she reported only mild left lower extremity (LLE) weakness and was gradually successfully regaining independence in motor function. At patient two's 9-month follow-up, the patient had regained normal function and independence. CONCLUSIONS: Given the expanding applications of immunotherapy in cancer management, clinicians should stay vigilant against the potential development of unusual but life-threatening immune-mediated toxicities.

Immune checkpoint inhibitor related myasthenia gravis: single center experience and systematic review of the literature.

BACKGROUND: Myasthenia gravis (MG) is a rare but life-threatening adverse event of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI). Given the limited evidence, data from a large cohort of patients is needed to aid in recognition and management of this fatal complication. METHODS: We reviewed our institutional databases to identify patients who had cancer and MG in the setting of ICI. We systematically reviewed the literature through August 2018 to identify all similar reported patients. We collected data on clinical and diagnostic features, management, and outcomes of these cases. RESULTS: Sixty-five patients were identified. Median age was 73 years; 42 (65%) were males, 31 (48%) had metastatic melanoma, and 13 (20%) had a preexisting MG before ICI initiation. Most patients received anti-PD-1 (82%). Sixty-three patients (97%) developed ICI-related MG (new onset or disease flare) after a median of 4 weeks (1 to 16 weeks) of ICI initiation. Twenty-four patients (37%) experienced concurrent myositis, and respiratory failure occurred in 29 (45%). ICI was discontinued in 61 patients (97%). Death was reported in 24 patients (38%); 15 (23%) due to MG complication. A better outcome was observed in patients who received intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG) or plasmapheresis (PLEX) as first-line therapy than in those who received steroids alone (95% vs 63% improvement of MG symptoms, p = 0.011). CONCLUSIONS: MG is a life-threatening adverse event of acute onset and rapid progression after ICI initiation. Early use of IVIG or PLEX, regardless of initial symptoms severity, may lead to better outcomes than steroids alone. Our data suggest the need to reassess the current recommendations for management of ICI-related MG until prospective longitudinal studies are conducted to establish the ideal management approach for these patients.

Corrections to: Checkpoint inhibitor therapy for cancer in solid organ transplantation recipients: an institutional experience and a systematic review of the literature.

Following publication of the original article [1], the authors reported an error in the Acknowledgments section. It should be read: 'We are grateful to Mohsin Shah from the Department of Emergency Medicine at The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center for assisting in study selection, and to Gregory F. Pratt from the Research Medical Library and Erica Goodoff, from the Department of Scientific Publications at The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center for their valuable contributions.

Checkpoint inhibitor therapy for cancer in solid organ transplantation recipients: an institutional experience and a systematic review of the literature.

BACKGROUND: Checkpoint inhibitors (CPIs) have revolutionized the treatment of cancer, but their use remains limited by off-target inflammatory and immune-related adverse events. Solid organ transplantation (SOT) recipients have been excluded from clinical trials owing to concerns about alloimmunity, organ rejection, and immunosuppressive therapy. Thus, we conducted a retrospective study and literature review to evaluate the safety of CPIs in patients with cancer and prior SOT. METHODS: Data were collected from the medical records of patients with cancer and prior SOT who received CPIs at The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center from January 1, 2004, through March 31, 2018. Additionally, we systematically reviewed five databases through April 2018 to identify studies reporting CPIs to treat cancer in SOT recipients. We evaluated the safety of CPIs in terms of alloimmunity, immune-related adverse events, and mortality. We also evaluated tumor response to CPIs. RESULTS: Thirty-nine patients with allograft transplantation were identified. The median age was 63 years (range 14-79 years), 74% were male, 62% had metastatic melanoma, 77% received anti-PD-1 agents, and 59% had prior renal transplantation, 28% hepatic transplantation, and 13% cardiac transplantation. Median time to CPI initiation after SOT was 9 years (range 0.92-32 years). Allograft rejection occurred in 41% of patients (11/23 renal, 4/11 hepatic, and 1/5 cardiac transplantations), at similar rates for anti-CTLA-4 and anti-PD-1 therapy. The median time to rejection was 21 days (95% confidence interval 19.3-22.8 days). There were no associations between time since SOT and frequency, timing, or type of rejection. Overall, 31% of patients permanently discontinued CPIs because of allograft rejection. Graft loss occurred in 81%, and death was reported in 46%. Of the 12 patients with transplantation biopsies, nine (75%) had acute rejection, and five of these rejections were T cell-mediated. In melanoma patients, 36% responded to CPIs. CONCLUSIONS: SOT recipients had a high allograft rejection rate that was observed shortly after CPI initiation, with high mortality rates. Further studies are needed to optimize the anticancer treatment approach in these patients.

Olaratumab in the management of advanced soft tissue sarcoma.

Olaratumab, the first-in-class anti-PDGFRα monoclonal antibody, has been contingently approved in combination with doxorubicin to treat adult patients with advanced soft tissue sarcoma for improving progression-free and overall survival. Olaratumab-doxorubicin combination has tolerable safety profile, which mimics that of doxorubicin monotherapy, with the exception of infusion-related reactions. Survival data of an ongoing confirmatory phase 3 trial are forthcoming to ascertain the optimal role of this product in the management algorithm of advanced soft tissue sarcoma. Active research is ongoing to identify biomarkers predictive of clinical benefit to olaratumab, to expand its utility to the pediatric population, and to explore its safety and efficacy in combination with other active regimens.

Endoscopic and Histologic Features of Immune Checkpoint Inhibitor-Related Colitis.

Background: Diarrhea and colitis are the second most common immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICPI)-induced adverse events. However, a comprehensive characterization of the endoscopic and histologic features of ICPI-induced diarrhea and colitis is lacking. Therefore, we aimed to describe endoscopic and histologic features of ICPI-induced gastrointestinal toxicities and to assess their association with patients' clinical characteristics and outcomes. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed records of 53 patients with ICPI-related diarrhea/colitis between 2011 and 2017. We collected data on demographics, diarrhea/colitis grade, treatment, and endoscopic and histologic findings. Long-term follow-up included repeat endoscopy findings, diarrhea recurrence, and overall survival. We compared groups by treatment, endoscopic and histologic findings, and constructed Kaplan-Meier survival curves. Results: Most patients had grade 2 or higher diarrhea (87%) and colitis (60%). Thirty-one patients were successfully treated with corticosteroids, and 22 additionally required infliximab. On endoscopy, 21 (40%) patients had ulcerations and 22 (42%) had nonulcerative inflammation. Patients with ulcerations had more steroid-refractory disease (P = 0.044) and high-grade diarrhea (P = 0.033). Histology showed mostly acute (23%) or chronic (60%) inflammation. During mean follow-up duration of 18.9 months, 19 (36%) developed recurrent diarrhea. Most patients had persistent endoscopic (8/13, 62%) and histologic (9/11, 82%) inflammation. Patients with higher-grade adverse events had improved survival. Higher-grade colitis was associated with endoscopic inflammation (P = 0.039), but grade of diarrhea was not associated with endoscopic inflammation or grade of colitis. Conclusion: 10.1093/ibd/izy104_video1izy104.video15808053084001.

Avelumab: A Review of Its Application in Metastatic Merkel Cell Carcinoma.

OBJECTIVE: To summarize the clinical development of avelumab and its clinical relevance in metastatic Merkel cell carcinoma (MCC). DATA SOURCES: An English-language literature search using PubMed was performed using the terms avelumab, anti-PD-1, anti-PD-L1, and MCC from January of 1950 to March 2018. Data were also obtained from package inserts, meeting abstracts, and clinical registries. STUDY SELECTION/DATA EXTRACTION: All relevant published articles of avelumab were reviewed. Clinical trial registries and meeting abstracts were used for information about ongoing trials. DATA SYNTHESIS: Avelumab is a fully human monoclonal antibody that inhibits programmed death ligand-1, which reverses T-cell exhaustion and induces antitumor responses. Avelumab is safe and effective in previously treated metastatic MCC based on a phase II trial of previously treated patients with objective response rates in 28 of 88 patients, including 10 complete responses and 19 partial responses. Median overall survival (OS) was 12.9 months, and 1-year progression-free survival and OS were 30% and 52%, respectively. Grade 3 treatment-related side effects included lymphopenia (2 patients), serum creatine phosphokinase increase (1 patient), aminotransferase elevation (1 patient), and serum cholesterol increase (1 patient). Relevance to Patient Care and Clinical Practice: This review outlines the pharmacology and clinical trial data for avelumab in metastatic MCC and guides clinicians on avelumab's place in therapy. CONCLUSIONS: Avelumab is the first Food and Drug Administration-approved medication for metastatic MCC and provides an advantage of durable responses and possibly improved tolerability compared with traditional platinum-based chemotherapy. Clinical trials are under way to expand its utility into the adjuvant and frontline settings.

Anti-programmed cell death-1 (PD-1) monoclonal antibodies in treating advanced melanoma -- a clinical update.

Since their approval by regulatory agencies worldwide, the anti-PD-1 monoclonal antibodies (mAbs), as monotherapy or in combination with ipilimumab, have become the standard frontline therapy for advanced BRAF-wild-type melanoma and an eminent rival to targeted therapy in the first-line setting for unresectable BRAF-mutated melanoma. Mature survival data from randomized phase 3 trials have emerged, confirming their position in the current treatment schema for advanced melanoma. Recently, the clinical utility of anti-PD-1 agents has extended into other disease settings, such as resected high-risk melanomas, non-cutaneous subtypes, and brain metastases. How to best combat resistance to anti-PD-1 mAbs remains the major focus of clinical investigations. This review aims to provide an update on the recent progress and current challenges relating to the clinical application of anti-PD-1 agents in the treatment of advanced melanoma.

Successful treatment of arthritis induced by checkpoint inhibitors with tocilizumab: a case series.

BACKGROUND: Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have significantly improved outcomes for patients with numerous cancers. However, these therapies are associated with immune-related adverse events (irAEs), which are inflammatory side effects potentially affecting any organ. Cases of ICI-induced inflammatory arthritis have also been reported. In general, mild irAEs are treated with corticosteroids, while tumour necrosis factor-α (TNFα) inhibitors are reserved for refractory cases. However, prolonged use of TNFα inhibitor (TNFαi) can induce widespread, significant immunosuppression, which can negatively impact the antitumour efficacy of ICI therapy. Therefore, in clinical scenarios where patients develop severe immunotherapy-induced irAEs, an unmet need exists for alternative therapeutic strategies that are effective and without immune dampening effects. CASE REPORTS: The anti-interleukin (IL)-6 receptor antibody, tocilizumab, is a biological agent Food and Drug Administration approved for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis and juvenile idiopathic arthritis. Here, we report on three patients who developed severe polyarthritis while receiving ICI therapy and were treated with tocilizumab. All three patients demonstrated significant clinical improvement; one patient maintained a durable antitumour response derived from checkpoint inhibition. CONCLUSIONS: These three cases suggest that anti-IL-6 receptor antibody may be an effective alternative to corticosteroids or TNFαi for the treatment of arthritis irAEs.

Treatment patterns, efficacy and toxicity of regorafenib in gastrointestinal stromal tumour patients.

Regorafenib was approved as third-line therapy for advanced Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumour (GIST) at a starting dose of 160 mg daily 3 weeks on, 1 week off, based on improvement in progression free survival over placebo (4.8 vs. 0.9 months), but the response rate was low at 4.5%. Given the high toxicity rate in GIST patients, there is variability in the post-marketing dosing of regorafenib. We aimed to summarize our experience regarding prescribing patterns, efficacy and toxicity of regorafenib and determine the role of response assessment by Choi criteria in GIST patients. We included 28 patients who received regorafenib from our pharmacy. Baseline patient characteristics and treatment outcomes were recorded and an independent radiologist assessed response using Choi and RECIST. Seventy-nine percent of patients started at a 120 mg continuous daily dosing schedule, different from the standard intermittent dosing schedule. Grade 3/4 adverse events were experienced by 43% of patients. Median progression-free survival was 8.7 months. Continuous dosing with regorafenib at 120 mg daily is the preferred prescribing pattern and appears to be better tolerated and with comparable efficacy to the current standard dose. Similar to imatinib, the partial response rate for regorafenib by Choi (29%) was higher compared to RECIST (4%).

The efficacy and safety of adjuvant interferon-alfa therapy in the evolving treatment landscape for resected high-risk melanoma.

INTRODUCTION: Patients with resected stage II or III melanoma are at high risk of recurrence, with 5-year mortality rate of 40-60%. Adjuvant interferon-alfa has demonstrated a small RFS and OS benefit versus observation in this patient population. However, the adjuvant treatment landscape is evolving rapidly. Areas covered: This review aims to summarize the safety and efficacy profiles of adjuvant IFNα/PEG-IFNα, revisit the controversy surrounding its application, and reappraise its position in the rapidly changing treatment landscape of resected melanoma. A literature search using PubMed database was undertaken using search words melanoma, interferon-alfa, pegylated interferon-alfa, adjuvant therapy. Expert opinion: Currently, there is no international consensus regarding the optimal dosing schedule for adjuvant IFNα, but HD IFNα-2b remains the most widely used regimen. The AEs of HD IFNα-2b are substantial; however, toxicity management experience amassed over the past 2 decades has significantly improved safety. Many exciting studies are ongoing to examine the roles of immune checkpoint inhibitors and BRAF-targeted therapies in the adjuvant setting and will further delineate the role of adjuvant IFNα.

An Unusual Case of Central Retinal Vein Occlusion and Review of the Toxicity Profile of Regorafenib in GIST Patients.

Gastrointestinal stromal tumor (GIST) is the most common sarcoma of the gastrointestinal tract with around 5000 new cases per year. Outcomes for patients with GIST dramatically improved after the development of tyrosine kinase inhibitors targeted against the aberrant signaling pathways that drive GIST oncogenesis. Majority of patients derive benefit from first-line imatinib, and the type of driver mutation is predictive of response. However, almost half of the patients eventually develop resistance to initial targeted therapy and further lines of treatment do not have the same impact. Regorafenib is an oral multi-kinase inhibitor approved as a third-line therapy for advanced GIST and though its efficacy is limited in comparison to imatinib, it has activity across the various driver mutation categories in GIST even in the setting of imatinib resistance. Herein, we describe a case of central retinal vein occlusion (CRVO) secondary to regorafenib and review regorafenib's efficacy and toxicity profile.

Anti-programmed cell death-1 (PD-1) monoclonal antibodies in treating advanced melanoma.

The anti-programmed cell death-1 (PD-1) monoclonal antibodies pembrolizumab and nivolumab have been contingently approved for the treatment of patients with advanced melanoma based on their durable response, high response rate, and favorable safety profile. Mature survival data from randomized phase III trials are eagerly awaited to confirm their position as the standard-of-care frontline or second-line therapy in advanced melanoma management algorithm. The immune-related adverse events associated with these novel agents are somewhat different than those of ipilimumab, considering the manifestation of pneumonitis and acute renal failure. Active research is ongoing to identify biomarkers predictive of clinical benefit to the anti-PD1 monoclonal antibodies, to expand their utility in other disease settings, and to explore their safety and efficacy in combination with other therapeutic agents. Unanswered questions concerning optimal dosing schedule, treatment duration, and therapy sequencing will also need to be addressed in future investigations.

Ipilimumab in the treatment of advanced melanoma - a clinical update.

INTRODUCTION: Ipilimumab has become an important treatment option for patients with advanced melanoma; however, active research perseveres to resolve many clinical practice issues and to further improve the therapeutic index of this agent. AREAS COVERED: This article aims to provide an update on long-term data, current challenge and recent progress relating to the clinical application of ipilimumab in the treatment of advanced melanoma. A literature search using PubMed database was conducted using search words ipilimumab, melanoma, treatment sequencing, adjuvant therapy, combination therapy, and biomarkers. Data were also obtained from meeting abstracts and clinical trial registries. EXPERT OPINION: Signal of clinical activity as adjuvant therapy in patients with resected high-risk melanoma begins to emerge, but longer follow-up is required for confirmation. Many issues, such as optimal dosing schedules and therapeutic sequences, remain unraveled. At present, treatment should be individualized based on patient- and disease-specific factors. Immunotherapy like ipilimumab still represents the best treatment option for durable remission; however, targeted therapies are more appropriate for patients with BRAF V600-mutated tumor who are symptomatic or have rapidly growing disease. With novel therapeutic options in the pipeline, the role of ipilimumab continues to evolve in the rapidly changing treatment landscape of advanced melanoma. Most likely, this agent will be utilized in combinatorial or sequential approach.

Controversies in the management of advanced melanoma: "gray" areas amid the "black and blue".

OBJECTIVE: To examine the current controversies and discuss consensus recommendations regarding treatment sequencing and the role of BRAF inhibitor at disease progression. DATA SOURCE: An English-language literature search of MEDLINE/PubMed (1966-May 2014), using the keywords advanced melanoma, ipilimumab, cytotoxic T-lymphocyte antigen 4, dabrafenib, vemurafenib, BRAF inhibitor, trametinib, MEK inhibitor, and treatment sequencing was conducted. Data were also obtained from package inserts, meeting abstracts, and clinical registries. STUDY SELECTION AND DATA EXTRACTION: All relevant published articles and abstracts on ipilimumab, vemurafenib, dabrafenib, and trametinib were reviewed. Clinical trial registries and meeting abstracts were used for ongoing studies. DATA SYNTHESIS: The availability of new agents has made therapy selection more complex. Immunotherapy supporters reason that immunotherapy offers the best chance for long-term benefit and does not compromise the antitumor activity of subsequent BRAF inhibitors. Targeted therapy advocates rely on the high probability and rapid onset of response to BRAF inhibitors. Currently, there is insufficient evidence regarding the role of BRAF inhibitor at disease progression. CONCLUSIONS: Therapy should be individualized based on patient- and disease-specific factors. Immunotherapy represents the best option for durable remission; however, targeted therapy is more appropriate for patients who are symptomatic or have rapidly growing tumors. The novel therapies have also demonstrated meaningful intracranial activity; thus, the presence of brain metastases should be taken into consideration in selecting therapy. Limited data exist about the continuation of BRAF inhibitors after therapeutic failure. Active research is ongoing to define the best option for patients with BRAF inhibitor refractory disease.

Managing Side Effects of Vemurafenib Therapy for Advanced Melanoma.

Somatic point mutations in the BRAF gene have been found in approximately 50% of melanomas. BRAF (V600E), the most common mutation, results in the constitutive activation of BRAF (V600E) kinase, sustaining MAPK signaling and perpetuating cell growth. This groundbreaking discovery led to the clinical development of vemurafenib, a selective BRAF inhibitor. Vemurafenib has been approved for the treatment of patients with BRAF (V600E)-positive unresectable or metastatic melanoma based on survival benefit demonstrated in a randomized phase III study. The current approved dosing schedule of vemurafenib is 960 mg orally twice a day until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Vemurafenib is well tolerated, with the most common adverse effects including skin reactions, photosensitivity, headache, and arthralgia. Active research is ongoing to expand the utility of vemurafenib into the adjuvant setting and to circumvent rapid emergence of drug resistance.

Dabrafenib therapy for advanced melanoma.

OBJECTIVE: To summarize the clinical development of dabrafenib and to highlight the clinically relevant distinct characteristics of dabrafenib in contrast to vemurafenib. DATA SOURCE: An English-language literature search of MEDLINE/PubMed (1966-June 2013), using the keywords GSK2118436, dabrafenib, vemurafenib, selective BRAF inhibitor, and advanced melanoma, was conducted. Data were also obtained from package inserts, meeting abstracts, and clinical registries. STUDY SELECTION AND DATA EXTRACTION: All relevant published articles on dabrafenib and vemurafenib were reviewed. Clinical trial registries and meeting abstracts were used for information about ongoing studies. DATA SYNTHESIS: BRAF(V600E) mutation confers constitutive BRAK kinase activation in melanoma cells, promoting tumor growth. This discovery led to the development of BRAF kinase inhibitors like vemurafenib and dabrafenib. Dabrafenib has been approved to treat patients with BRAF(V600E)-positive unresectable or metastatic melanoma based on its clinical benefit demonstrated in a randomized phase III study. It has also been shown to be safe and effective in patients with BRAF mutant advanced melanoma involving the brain. Dabrafenib is well tolerated, with the most common adverse effects being hyperkeratosis, headache, pyrexia, and arthralgia. Currently, there is no evidence to suggest that one BRAF inhibitor is superior to the other. With similar efficacy, therapy selection will likely be influenced by differential tolerability and cost. CONCLUSIONS: Dabrafenib joins vemurafenib to confirm the superior clinical outcome of the BRAF inhibitors when compared with dacarbazine in patients with BRAF(V600E)-positive advanced melanoma. Active research is ongoing to expand its utility into the adjuvant setting and to circumvent rapid emergence of drug resistance.