Phase II trial of afatinib in patients with advanced urothelial carcinoma with genetic alterations in ERBB1-3 (LUX-Bladder 1).

BACKGROUND: Preclinical and early clinical data suggest that the irreversible ErbB family blocker afatinib may be effective in urothelial cancers harbouring ERBB mutations. METHODS: This open-label, phase II, single-arm trial (LUX-Bladder 1, NCT02780687) assessed the efficacy and safety of second-line afatinib 40 mg/d in patients with metastatic urothelial carcinoma with ERBB1-3 alterations. The primary endpoint was 6-month progression-free survival rate (PFS6) (cohort A); other endpoints included ORR, PFS, OS, DCR and safety (cohorts A and B). Cohort A was planned to have two stages: stage 2 enrolment was based on observed antitumour activity. RESULTS: Thirty-four patients were enroled into cohort A and eight into cohort B. In cohorts A/B, PFS6 was 11.8%/12.5%, ORR was 5.9%/12.5%, DCR was 50.0%/25.0%, median PFS was 9.8/7.8 weeks and median OS was 30.1/29.6 weeks. Three patients (two ERBB2-amplified [cohort A]; one EGFR-amplified [cohort B]) achieved partial responses. Stage 2 for cohort A did not proceed. All patients experienced adverse events (AEs), most commonly (any/grade 3) diarrhoea (76.2%/9.5%). Two patients (4.8%) discontinued due to AEs and one fatal AE was observed (acute coronary syndrome; not considered treatment-related). CONCLUSIONS: An exploratory biomarker analysis suggested that basal-squamous tumours and ERBB2 amplification were associated with superior response to afatinib. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT02780687.

Ribociclib plus letrozole versus chemotherapy for postmenopausal women with hormone receptor-positive, HER2-negative, luminal B breast cancer (CORALLEEN): an open-label, multicentre, randomised, phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: In hormone receptor-positive, HER2-negative early stage breast cancer, cyclin-dependent kinases 4 and 6 (CDK4/6) inhibition in combination with endocrine therapy could represent an alternative to multiagent chemotherapy. We aimed to evaluate the biological and clinical activity of neoadjuvant ribociclib plus letrozole in the luminal B subtype of early stage breast cancer. METHODS: CORALLEEN is a parallel-arm, multicentre, randomised, open-label, phase 2 trial completed across 21 hospitals in Spain. We recruited postmenopausal women (≥18 years) with stage I-IIIA hormone receptor-positive, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status 0-1, HER2-negative breast cancer and luminal B by PAM50 with histologically confirmed, operable primary tumour size of at least 2 cm in diameter as measured by MRI. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) using a web-based system and permuted blocks of 25 to receive either six 28-days cycles of ribociclib (oral 600 mg once daily for 3 weeks on, 1 week off) plus daily letrozole (oral 2·5 mg/day) or four cycles of doxorubicin (intravenous 60 mg/m2) and cyclophosphamide (intravenous 600 mg/m2) every 21 days followed by weekly paclitaxel (intravenous 80 mg/m2) for 12 weeks. The total duration of the neoadjuvant therapy was 24 weeks. Randomisation was stratified by tumour size and nodal involvement. Samples were prospectively collected at baseline (day 0), day 15, and surgery. The primary endpoint was to evaluate the proportion of patients with PAM50 low-risk-of-relapse (ROR) disease at surgery in the modified intention-to-treat population including all randomly assigned patients who received study drug and had a baseline and at least one post-baseline measurement of ROR score. The PAM50 ROR risk class integrated gene expression data, tumour size, and nodal status to define prognosis. This trial was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03248427. FINDINGS: Between July 27, 2017 to Dec 7, 2018, 106 patients were enrolled. At baseline, of the 106 patients, 92 (87%) patients had high ROR disease (44 [85%] of 52 in the ribociclib and letrozole group and 48 [89%] of 54 in the chemotherapy group) and 14 (13%) patients had intermediate-ROR disease (eight [15%] and six [11%]). Median follow-up was 200·0 days (IQR 191·2-206·0). At surgery, 23 (46·9%; 95% CI 32·5-61·7) of 49 patients in the ribociclib plus letrozole group and 24 (46·1%; 32·9-61·5) of 52 patients in the chemotherapy group were low-ROR. The most common grade 3-4 adverse events in the ribociclib plus letrozole group were neutropenia (22 [43%] of 51 patients) and elevated alanine aminotransferase concentrations (ten [20%]). The most common grade 3-4 adverse events in the chemotherapy group were neutropenia (31 [60%] of 52 patients) and febrile neutropenia (seven [13%]). No deaths were observed during the study in either group. INTERPRETATION: Our results suggest that some patients with high-risk, early stage, hormone receptor-positive, HER2-negative breast cancer could achieve molecular downstaging of their disease with CDK4/6 inhibitor and endocrine therapy. FUNDING: Novartis, Nanostring, Breast Cancer Research Foundation-AACR Career Development Award.

Management of Infection and Febrile Neutropenia in Patients with Solid Cancer. / Manejo de la infección y la neutropenia febril en el paciente con cáncer sólido.

A group of experts from the Spanish Society of Infectious Diseases and Clinical Microbiology (SEIMC) and the Spanish Society of Medical Oncology (SEOM) have reviewed in this paper the main aspects to be considered in the evaluation of patients with solid cancer and infectious diseases. They have established a series of recommendations on the prevention of the most prevalent infections in these patients, the use of vaccines, the control measures of vascular catheter infection and prevention of infections before certain surgical procedures. Also the criteria for management of febrile neutropenia and the use of colony-stimulating factors were revised. Finally they provide a series of recommendations for the treatment of cancer patients with severe infection. The document is completed with a series of measures for the control of hospital infection.

SIADH-related hyponatremia in hospital day care units: clinical experience and management with tolvaptan.

Hyponatremia (Na ˂ 135 mmol/l) is the most frequent electrolyte disorder in clinical practice, and the syndrome of inappropriate antidiuretic hormone secretion (SIADH) is the commonest cause of hyponatremia in cancer patients. Correcting hyponatremia in these patients can reduce morbidity and mortality, increase the response to anti-cancer agents, and help reduce hospital length of stay and costs. Tolvaptan is an oral medication used to treat SIADH-related hyponatremia patients that needs to be initiated at hospital so patients can have their serum sodium monitored. If tolvaptan could be initiated in hospital day care units (DCUs), performing the same tests, hospitalization could be avoided, quality of life improved, and costs reduced. This is the first publication where a panel of oncologists are sharing their experience and making some recommendations with the use of tolvaptan to treat SIADH-related hyponatremia in DCU after collecting and examining 35 clinical cases with these type of patients. The conclusion from this retrospective observational analysis is that the use of tolvaptan in DCU is safe and effective in the therapeutic management of SIADH-related hyponatremia.

Incidence of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting with moderately emetogenic chemotherapy: ADVICE (Actual Data of Vomiting Incidence by Chemotherapy Evaluation) study.

PURPOSE: This study aims to determine the incidence of nausea and vomiting (CINV) after moderately emetogenic chemotherapy (MEC), under medical practice conditions and the accuracy with which physicians perceive CINV. METHODS: Chemotherapy-naive patients receiving MEC between April 2012 and May 2013 were included. Patients completed a diary of the intensity of nausea and number of vomiting episodes. Complete response and complete protection were assessed as secondary endpoints. RESULTS: Of 261 patients included, 240 were evaluated. Median age was 64 years, 44.2 % were female and 11.2 % were aged less than 50 years; 95.3 % of patients received a combination of 5-hydroxytryptamine 3 (5-HT3) antagonist + corticosteroid as antiemetic treatment. Vomiting within 5 days of chemotherapy administration occurred in 20.8 %, nausea in 42 % and significant nausea in 23.8 % of patients. An increase in the percentage of patients with significant nausea (from 9.4 to 21.7 %) and vomiting (from 9.2 to 16.5 %) was observed from the acute to the delayed phase. Complete response was 84.2 % in the acute phase, 77 % in the late phase and 68.9 % in overall period. Complete protection was 79.5 % in the acute phase, 68.8 % in the late phase and 62.4 % throughout the study period. Physicians estimated prophylaxis would be effective for 75 % of patients receiving MEC, compared with 54.1 % obtained from patients' diary. CONCLUSION: Despite receiving prophylactic treatment, 31 % of patients did not achieve a complete response and 38 % complete protection. In general, nausea was worse controlled than vomiting. The results also showed the late phase was worse controlled than the acute phase in all variables. Healthcare providers overestimated the effectiveness of antiemetic prophylaxis.

Tolerability of Olaparib Combined with Abiraterone in Patients with Metastatic Castration-resistant Prostate Cancer: Further Results from the Phase 3 PROpel Trial.

BACKGROUND: The PROpel study (NCT03732820) demonstrated a statistically significant progression-free survival benefit with olaparib plus abiraterone versus placebo plus abiraterone in the first-line metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) setting, irrespective of homologous recombination repair mutation status. OBJECTIVE: We report additional safety analyses from PROpel to increase clinical understanding of the adverse-event (AE) profiles of olaparib plus abiraterone versus placebo plus abiraterone. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A randomised (1:1), double-blind, placebo-controlled trial was conducted at 126 centres in 17 countries (October 2018-January 2020). Patients had mCRPC and no prior systemic mCRPC treatment. INTERVENTION: Olaparib (300 mg bid) or placebo with abiraterone (1000 mg od) plus prednisone/prednisolone (5 mg bid). OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: The data cut-off date was July 30, 2021. Safety was assessed by AE reporting (Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events v4.03) and analysed descriptively. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: The most common AEs (all grades) for olaparib plus abiraterone versus placebo plus abiraterone were anaemia (46.0% vs 16.4%), nausea (28.1% vs 12.6%), and fatigue (27.9% vs 18.9%). Grade ≥3 anaemia occurred in 15.1% versus 3.3% of patients in the olaparib plus abiraterone versus placebo plus abiraterone arm. The incidences of the most common AEs for olaparib plus abiraterone peaked early, within 2 mo, and were managed typically by dose modifications or standard medical practice. Overall, 13.8% versus 7.8% of patients discontinued treatment with olaparib plus abiraterone versus placebo plus abiraterone because of an AE; 3.8% versus 0.8% of patients discontinued because of anaemia. More venous thromboembolism events were observed in the olaparib plus abiraterone arm (any grade, 7.3%; grade ≥3, 6.8%) than in the placebo plus abiraterone arm (any grade, 3.3%; grade ≥3, 2.0%), most commonly pulmonary embolism (6.5% vs 1.8% for olaparib plus abiraterone vs placebo plus abiraterone). CONCLUSIONS: Olaparib plus abiraterone has a manageable and predictable safety profile. PATIENT SUMMARY: The PROpel trial showed that in patients who had not received any previous treatment for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer, olaparib combined with abiraterone was more effective in delaying progression of the disease than abiraterone alone. Most side effects caused by combining olaparib with abiraterone could be managed with supportive care methods, by pausing olaparib administration for a short period of time and/or by reducing the dose of olaparib.

The role of pharmacogenomics in metastatic renal cell carcinoma.

Pharmacogenomics is the study of how variation in the genetic background affects an individual's response to a specific drug and/or its metabolism. Using knowledge about the genes which produce the enzymes that metabolize a specific drug, a physician may decide to raise or lower the dose, or even change to a different drug. Targeted therapy with tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) and mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) inhibitors has led to a substantial improvement in the standard of care for patients with advanced or metastatic renal cell carcinoma (RCC). Although few studies have identified biomarkers that predict the response of targeted drugs in the treatment of metastatic RCC, some associations have been found. Several studies have identified genetic polymorphisms with implications in the pharmacokinetics and/or pharmacodynamics of TKIs and mTOR inhibitors and which are associated with a prolonged progression-free survival and/or overall survival in patients with metastatic RCC. Among the genes of interest, we should consider IL8, FGFR2, VEGFA, FLT4, and NR1I2. In this review, we discuss single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) associated with outcome and toxicity following targeted therapies and provide recommendations for future trials to facilitate the use of SNPs in personalized therapy for this disease.

Quality of life with palbociclib plus fulvestrant versus placebo plus fulvestrant in postmenopausal women with endocrine-sensitive hormone receptor-positive and HER2-negative advanced breast cancer: patient-reported outcomes from the FLIPPER trial.

Background: In the FLIPPER trial, palbociclib/fulvestrant significantly improved progression-free survival (PFS) compared with placebo/fulvestrant in postmenopausal women with HR+/HER2- advanced breast cancer (ABC). Objective: We assessed health-related quality of life (QoL) using patient-reported outcomes (PROs). Design and methods: In this phase II double-blinded study, PROs were assessed at baseline after every three cycles and at the end of the treatment using the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer QLQ-C30 and QLQ-BR23. Time to deterioration (TTD) in global health status (GHS)/QoL was defined as a decrease of ⩾10 points. Changes from baseline (CFB) and TTD were analysed using linear mixed-effect and Cox regression models, respectively. Results: Of the 189 randomised (1:1) patients, 178 (94%) completed ⩾1 post-baseline assessment; 50% received ⩾22 cycles of study treatment, with a questionnaire compliance >90%. Mean baseline scores were comparable between arms. GHS/QoL scores were maintained throughout the palbociclib/fulvestrant treatment. CFB showed significant differences for GHS/QoL, appetite loss, constipation and systemic therapy side effect scores favouring placebo/fulvestrant. TTD in GHS/QoL was delayed in placebo/fulvestrant versus palbociclib/fulvestrant [30.3 versus 11.1 months; adjusted hazard ratio (aHR): 1.57, 95% CI: 1.03-2.39, p = 0.036]; this difference was not significant in patients with progressive disease (aHR: 1.2, 95% CI: 0.6-2.2, p = 0.658). No statistically significant differences in TTD were found for the other QLQ-C30 and QLQ-BR23 scales. Conclusions: Although TTD in GHS/QoL was prolonged with placebo/fulvestrant, no differences were observed on other functional or symptom scales. This finding and the improvement in PFS support the combination of palbociclib/fulvestrant as a beneficial therapeutic option for HR+/HER2- ABC. Trial registration number: Sponsor Study Code: GEICAM/2014-12EudraCT Number: 2015-002437-21ClinTrials.gov reference: NCT02690480.

SEOM clinical guideline emesis (2021).

Among the side effects of anticancer treatment, chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) is one of the most feared given its high prevalence, affecting up to 40% of patients. It can impair patient's quality of life and provoke low adherence to cancer treatment or chemotherapy dose reductions that can comprise treatment efficacy. Suffering CINV depends on factors related to the intrinsic emetogenicity of antineoplastic drugs and on patient characteristics. CINV can appear at different times regarding the administration of antitumor treatment and the variability of risk according to the different antitumor regimens has, as a consequence, the need for a different and adapted antiemetic treatment prophylaxis to achieve the desired objective of complete protection of the patient in the acute phase, in the late phase and in the global phase of emesis. As a basis for the recommendations, the level of emetogenicity of anticancer treatment is considered and they are classified as high, moderate, low and minimal emetogenicity and these recommendations are based on the use of antiemetic drugs with a high therapeutic index: anti 5-HT, anti-NK and steroids. Despite having highly effective treatments, clinical reality shows that they are not applied enough, so evidence-based recommendations are needed to show the best options and help in decision-making. To cover all the antiemetic prophylaxis options, we have also included recommendations for oral treatments, multiday regimens and radiation-induced emesis prevention.

Activity of a multitargeted chemo-switch regimen (sorafenib, gemcitabine, and metronomic capecitabine) in metastatic renal-cell carcinoma: a phase 2 study (SOGUG-02-06).

BACKGROUND: Maximum tolerated dose (MTD) chemotherapy followed by metronomic chemotherapy (low doses given on a frequent schedule) acts on tumour vascular endothelial cells by increasing the anti-tumour effect of anti-angiogenic agents. This multicentre, phase 2 study investigated the effectiveness of MTD gemcitabine combined with metronomic capecitabine plus the multikinase inhibitor sorafenib for the treatment of metastatic renal-cell carcinoma (RCC). METHODS: Patients were enrolled at eight centres across Spain between Dec 13, 2006, and April 17, 2008. Patients were aged 18 years or older, had confirmed metastatic RCC with clear-cell histology, had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1, had not undergone previous therapy, and were unsuitable for, or intolerant to, immunotherapy. Treatment consisted of intravenous gemcitabine 1000 mg/m(2) (days 1 and 8), oral capecitabine 500 mg/m(2) twice a day (final dose after adjustment, days 1-14), and oral sorafenib 400 mg twice a day (days 1-21), for six cycles, followed by sorafenib monotherapy (at the investigator's discretion if clinical benefit was maintained). The primary endpoint was median progression-free survival (PFS) analysed in a population of all patients who received treatment. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00496301. FINDINGS: 44 patients enrolled in the study, 40 of whom received treatment. Median PFS for these patients was 11.1 months (95% CI 7.9-17.1). A partial response was achieved in 20 patients, and stable disease in 17 patients. Most adverse events were grade 1 or 2. Grade 3 adverse events were fatigue or asthenia (n=9), hand-foot skin reaction (n=11), mucositis (n=3), diarrhoea (n=2), infection (n=2), and allergic reaction, hypertension, and rash (all n=1). Grade 3 haematological toxicity was noted in nine patients. One death due to pulmonary embolism was reported as grade 5 dyspnoea possibly related to study drug. INTERPRETATION: PFS and response rates were greater than those previously observed with gemcitabine and capecitabine or sorafenib monotherapy in patients with metastatic RCC. Adverse events were manageable in most patients. These findings provide preliminary confirmation of the synergistic activity of the chemo-switch concept seen in preclinical studies, and merit further exploration. FUNDING: Spanish Oncology Genitourinary Group (SOGUG).

Stratification and management of cardiovascular risk in cancer patients. A consensus document of the SEC, FEC, SEOM, SEOR, SEHH, SEMG, AEEMT, AEEC, and AECC.

Both cancer treatment and survival have significantly improved, but these advances have highlighted the deleterious effects of vascular complications associated with anticancer therapy. This consensus document aims to provide a coordinated, multidisciplinary and practical approach to the stratification, monitoring and treatment of cardiovascular risk in cancer patients. The document is promoted by the Working Group on Cardio Oncology of the Spanish Society of Cardiology (SEC) and was drafted in collaboration with experts from distinct areas of expertise of the SEC and the Spanish Society of Hematology and Hemotherapy (SEHH), the Spanish Society of Medical Oncology (SEOM), the Spanish Society of Radiation Oncology (SEOR), the Spanish Society of General and Family Physicians (SEMG), the Spanish Association of Specialists in Occupational Medicine (AEEMT), the Spanish Association of Cardiovascular Nursing (AEEC), the Spanish Heart Foundation (FEC), and the Spanish Cancer Association (AECC).

The Challenge of Managing Bladder Cancer and Upper Tract Urothelial Carcinoma: A Review with Treatment Recommendations from the Spanish Oncology Genitourinary Group (SOGUG).

Bladder cancer is the fourth most common cancer in men and the ninth most common in women in the Western world. The management of bladder carcinoma requires a multidisciplinary approach. Optimal treatment depends on several factors, including histology, stage, patient status, and possible comorbidities. Here we review recent findings on the treatment of muscle-invasive bladder carcinoma, advanced urothelial carcinoma, upper tract urothelial carcinoma, non-urothelial carcinoma, and urologic complications arising from the disease or treatment. In addition, we present the recommendations of the Spanish Oncology Genitourinary Group for the treatment of these diseases, based on a focused analysis of clinical management and the potential of current research, including recent findings on the potential benefit of immunotherapy. In recent years, whole-genome approaches have provided new predictive biomarkers and promising molecular targets that could lead to precision medicine in bladder cancer. Moreover, the involvement of other specialists in addition to urologists will ensure not only appropriate therapeutic decisions but also adequate follow-up for response evaluation and management of complications. It is crucial, however, to apply recent molecular findings and implement clinical guidelines as soon as possible in order to maximize therapeutic gains and improve patient prognosis.

Equity, barriers and cancer disparities: study of the Spanish Society of Medical Oncology on the access to oncologic drugs in the Spanish Regions.

PURPOSE: The Spanish Society of Medical Oncology (SEOM) has conducted a study on the access to oncologic drugs across the 17 Spanish Regions with the aim of identifying potential heterogeneities and making proposals for eliminating the barriers identified at the different levels. METHODS: An Expert Panel made up of medical oncologists designed a survey on certain indications approved for 11 drugs in the approach of breast cancer, melanoma, lung cancer, prostate cancer and support treatment. This survey was sent to 144 National Health System (NHS) hospitals. RESULTS: 77 hospitals answered the survey. The information modules analysed were: scope of the Commission that establishes binding decisions related to drug access; conditions, stages and periods of drug application, approval and administration processes; barriers to accessing drugs. CONCLUSIONS: The study shows variability in drug access. The SEOM makes proposals addressed to reducing the differences identified and homogenizing drug access conditions.

A Prospective Observational Study for Assessment and Outcome Association of Circulating Endothelial Cells in Clear Cell Renal Cell Carcinoma Patients Who Show Initial Benefit from First-line Treatment. The CIRCLES (CIRCuLating Endothelial cellS) Study (SOGUG-CEC-2011-01).

BACKGROUND: Markers able to predict the response to antiangiogenics in metastatic clear cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC) are not available. The development of new treatment options like immunotherapy are reaching the clinic; therefore, predictors of benefit from these different available treatments are increasingly needed. OBJECTIVE: In this study, we prospectively assessed the association of circulating endothelial cells (CECs) in peripheral blood with long-term benefit from first-line treatment in ccRCC. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A prospective observational study was designed involving 13 institutions of the Spanish Oncology Genitourinary Group. Adult patients diagnosed with advanced ccRCC who had achieved response or disease stabilization after 3 mo on first-line therapy were eligible. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: CECs were isolated from peripheral blood, captured with ferrofluids coated with monoclonal antibodies directed against the CD146 antigen, and assessed centrally with an automated standardized system. CECs were defined as 4',6-diamidino-2-phenylindole+, CD105+, and CD45-. Blood samples were systematically taken every 6 wk for 15 mo or until tumor progression, whichever occurred first. Clinical data were externally monitored at all centers. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: From August 9, 2011, to January 17, 2013, 75 patients were enrolled in the study. Patients with baseline CECs above the median showed a significantly longer progression-free survival than those with low CECs (22.2 mo vs 12.2 mo) with a hazard ratio of 2.5 (95% confidence interval: 1.2-5.3, p=0.016). There was no difference between CEC levels at baseline and at tumor progression (medians of 50 CECs/4ml and 52 CECs/4ml, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Under antiangiogenic treatment, the detection of higher CEC levels is associated with clinical benefit in terms of progression-free survival in ccRCC. PATIENT SUMMARY: Antiangiogenics are the cornerstone of treatment in kidney cancer. Since they target endothelial rather than tumor cells, we studied the correlation between levels of circulating endothelial cells in peripheral blood and long-term benefit in patients on antiangiogenic therapy. Higher levels were associated with long-term benefit, suggesting that this determination could help to separate best responders from those who could require a more intensive approach.