Hot topics in genitourinary cancers: A multidisciplinary discussion on state-of-the-art and latest developments among international experts and patient advocacy.

Genitourinary cancers present significant challenges to oncologists, necessitating innovative approaches for improved patient outcomes. The 'Controversies in Genitourinary Cancers' congress, held in January 2024, convened international experts to address the complexities of prostate, bladder, renal and rare genitourinary cancers. Sessions explored current trends, novel treatments, and unmet needs, emphasizing collaborative efforts to advance knowledge and patient care. Through multidisciplinary engagement and patient advocacy, the congress underscored the imperative of collective action in navigating the complexities of genitourinary cancers, ultimately aiming to transform clinical practice and improve patient outcomes.

Pharmacological treatment landscape of non-metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer: a narrative review on behalf of the Meet-URO Group.

The definition of "non-metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer" (nmHSPC) can be applied to patients with prostate cancer (PC) who are androgen-deprivation therapy-naïve and without evidence of metastatic disease. This definition includes heterogeneous situations; however, PC patients at high risk of metastatic spread - and who have not started a hormonal treatment - constitute a unique category with unmet clinical needs. This narrative review critically discusses the advances that characterize the rapidly evolving diagnostic and therapeutic scenario in the nmHSPC setting. We found that nmHSPC represents a grey zone in the context of PC. New clinical trials are trying to redefine the therapeutic algorithm of these patients, but escalating treatment seems not to be the right choice for the overall population. Biomarkers able to stratify patients - including molecular ones - are urgently needed, and biomarker-based clinical trials could clarify their prognostic and predictive role in the nmHSPC scenario.

Italian Registry on Rare Urological Tumors (Meet-URO-23): The First Analysis on Collecting Duct Carcinoma of the Kidney.

INTRODUCTION: Rare genitourinary tumors are lacking of randomized and observational data. We aimed to describe the clinical characteristics and outcomes of patients with collecting duct carcinoma (CDC) through the Meet-URO 23/I-RARE database. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We performed a multicentric retrospective-prospective study within the Meet-URO network, enrolling patients from March 2021 (retrospectively up from 2011) until March 2023. The primary objective was to describe the clinical characteristics of patients with CDC, the secondary objectives were to assess the oncological outcomes in terms of relapse-free survival (RFS), progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS) and objective response rate (ORR) to treatment. RESULTS: 37 patients with CDC were enrolled. Four patients underwent only surgery, 33 received first-line systemic therapy. Median OS was 22.1 months (95% CI, 8.9-31.9). Median RFS for patients with localized disease at onset (n = 30) was 3.7 months (95% CI, 1.9-12.8), median PFS for first-line treatment was 3.3 months (95% CI, 2.7-9.9), with an ORR of 27%. Female sex and good performance status (PS) were associated with longer PFS (P = .072 and P < .01, respectively) and OS (P = .030 and P = .141, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with CDC had dismal prognosis, with scarce benefit from the available treatments. Female sex and good PS seemed to be associated with better prognosis.

Belzutifan versus Everolimus for Advanced Renal-Cell Carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Belzutifan, a hypoxia-inducible factor 2α inhibitor, showed clinical activity in clear-cell renal-cell carcinoma in early-phase studies. METHODS: In a phase 3, multicenter, open-label, active-controlled trial, we enrolled participants with advanced clear-cell renal-cell carcinoma who had previously received immune checkpoint and antiangiogenic therapies and randomly assigned them, in a 1:1 ratio, to receive 120 mg of belzutifan or 10 mg of everolimus orally once daily until disease progression or unacceptable toxic effects occurred. The dual primary end points were progression-free survival and overall survival. The key secondary end point was the occurrence of an objective response (a confirmed complete or partial response). RESULTS: A total of 374 participants were assigned to belzutifan, and 372 to everolimus. At the first interim analysis (median follow-up, 18.4 months), the median progression-free survival was 5.6 months in both groups; at 18 months, 24.0% of the participants in the belzutifan group and 8.3% in the everolimus group were alive and free of progression (two-sided P = 0.002, which met the prespecified significance criterion). A confirmed objective response occurred in 21.9% of the participants (95% confidence interval [CI], 17.8 to 26.5) in the belzutifan group and in 3.5% (95% CI, 1.9 to 5.9) in the everolimus group (P<0.001, which met the prespecified significance criterion). At the second interim analysis (median follow-up, 25.7 months), the median overall survival was 21.4 months in the belzutifan group and 18.1 months in the everolimus group; at 18 months, 55.2% and 50.6% of the participants, respectively, were alive (hazard ratio for death, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.73 to 1.07; two-sided P = 0.20, which did not meet the prespecified significance criterion). Grade 3 or higher adverse events of any cause occurred in 61.8% of the participants in the belzutifan group (grade 5 in 3.5%) and in 62.5% in the everolimus group (grade 5 in 5.3%). Adverse events led to discontinuation of treatment in 5.9% and 14.7% of the participants, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Belzutifan showed a significant benefit over everolimus with respect to progression-free survival and objective response in participants with advanced clear-cell renal-cell carcinoma who had previously received immune checkpoint and antiangiogenic therapies. Belzutifan was associated with no new safety signals. (Funded by Merck Sharp and Dohme, a subsidiary of Merck; LITESPARK-005 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04195750.).

Concomitant Administration of VEGFR Tyrosine Kinase and Proton Pump Inhibitors May Impair Clinical Outcome of Patients With Metastatic Renal Cancer.

INTRODUCTION: The administration of proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) is a common practice to reduce gastro-esophageal adverse events associated with drug treatments but may impair absorption and exposure to oncology drugs. This study investigated the effect of concomitant administration of PPIs and pazopanib, sunitinib and cabozantinib on survival of patients with metastatic clear cell renal carcinoma (mRCC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Total 451 patients receiving pazopanib, sunitinib and cabozantinib as first line treatment were enrolled in this retrospective study. Patients were defined as "no concomitant PPIs (PPI-)" if no PPIs were administered during TKIs, and as "concomitant PPIs (PPI+)" if the administration of PPIs was at least 75% of the time during which TKIs were given. RESULTS: Eighty patients administered pazopanib were PPI- and 86 PPI+; no difference in PFS was observed (10.7 vs. 11.9 months, P = .79). If patients were stratified as short (n = 89) and long (n = 77) responders, there was a significant difference in terms of PFS in PPI+ (n = 47) versus PPI- (n = 30) in long responders, being 24.7 versus 38 months (P = .04), respectively. In the sunitinib cohort, no significant difference of PFS in PPI+ (n = 102) versus PPI- (n = 131) was found, being 11.3 versus 18.1 months, respectively (P=0.15). In the cabozantinib cohort, there was a statistically significant difference in PFS of PPI+ versus PPI- (6 months vs. not reached, P = .04). No correlation with adverse events was found. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates an association between PPIs and impaired PFS in mRCC patients given pazopanib and cabozantinib and recommends caution on their concomitant use.

Feasibility of Indirect Treatment Comparisons Between Niraparib Plus Abiraterone Acetate and Other First-Line Poly ADP-Ribose Polymerase Inhibitor Treatment Regimens for Patients with BRCA1/2 Mutation-Positive Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer.

INTRODUCTION: Poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitors (PARPi) are a novel option to treat patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). Niraparib plus abiraterone acetate and prednisone (AAP) is indicated for BRCA1/2 mutation-positive mCRPC. Niraparib plus AAP demonstrated safety and efficacy in the phase 3 MAGNITUDE trial (NCT03748641). In the absence of head-to-head studies comparing PARPi regimens, the feasibility of conducting indirect treatment comparisons (ITC) to inform decisions for patients with first-line BRCA1/2 mutation-positive mCRPC has been explored. METHODS: A systematic literature review was conducted to identify evidence from randomized controlled trials on relevant comparators to inform the feasibility of conducting ITCs via network meta-analysis (NMA) or population-adjusted indirect comparisons (PAIC). Feasibility was assessed based on network connectivity, data availability in the BRCA1/2 mutation-positive population, and degree of within- and between-study heterogeneity or bias. RESULTS: NMAs between niraparib plus AAP and other PARPi regimens (olaparib monotherapy, olaparib plus AAP, and talazoparib plus enzalutamide) were inappropriate due to the disconnected network, differences in trial populations related to effect modifiers, or imbalances within BRCA1/2 mutation-positive subgroups. The latter issue, coupled with the lack of a common comparator (except for olaparib plus AAP), also rendered anchored PAICs infeasible. Unanchored PAICs were either inappropriate due to lack of population overlap (vs. olaparib monotherapy) or were restricted by unmeasured confounders and small sample size (vs. olaparib plus AAP). PAIC versus talazoparib plus enzalutamide was not possible due to lack of published arm-level baseline characteristics and sufficient efficacy outcome data in the relevant population. CONCLUSION: The current randomized controlled trial evidence network does not permit robust comparisons between niraparib plus AAP and other PARPi regimens for patients with 1L BRCA-positive mCRPC. Decision-makers should scrutinize any ITC results in light of their limitations. Real-world evidence combined with clinical experience should inform treatment recommendations in this indication.

Real World Analysis of Peritoneal Metastasis From Renal Cell Carcinoma. Meet-Uro27.

BACKGROUND: Peritoneal metastases (PM) have been reported in approximately 1% of patients with metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma (mRCC). Outcome data are limited due to the rarity of this metastatic site. Therefore, the aim of our study is to describe renal cell carcinoma (RCC) patients with PM treated as per clinical practice. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Baseline characteristics and outcome data of patients with PM from RCC were retrospectively collected from 18 Italian oncological referral centers adhering to the Meet-Uro group, from January 2016 to January 2023. RESULTS: We collect 81 RCC patients with PM. 78/81 received systemic treatment, 3/81 only best supportive care. First line treatment included tyrosine-kinase inhibitors (TKI) (46/78), ImmuneOncology (IO)-TKI (26/78) and IO-IO (6/78), with different Objective Response Rate (ORR) (43.4% in TKI monotherapy group vs 50% in IO-TKI group, respectively) and Disease Control Rate (DCR) (60.8% in TKI treated patients vs. 76.9% in IO-TKI treated patients). Median PFS was 6.4 months (95%CI 4.18-14.8) in patients treated with TKI monotherapy vs 23.7 months (95%CI 11.1-NR) in patients treated with IO-TKI (p < 0.015). The median OS (mOS) was 22.7 months (95%CI 13.32 - 64.7) in the TKI monotherapy group vs 34.5 mo (95%CI NR-NR) in the IO-TKI group with 53.8% of patients alive at 1 years in the latter group, (p < 0.16). Primary refractory patients were 36.9% for TKI and 15.3% for IO-TKI. According to International Metastatic renal cell carcinoma Database Consortium (IMDC) score, mPFS and mOS were consistent among risk categories. Median PFS was 36.6 months (95%CI 10.9-NR) for good risk patients compared to 10 months (95%CI 7.5-29.8) for intermediate risk and 2.96 months (95%CI 2.43-11.28) for poor risk population (p < 0.0005) whereas mOS was NR (95%CI 28.65-NR) for good risk patients compared to 35.3 months (95%CI 24.6-NA) and 12.4 months (95%CI 3.52-NR) for intermediate and poor risk population, respectively, (p < 0.0002). Only 34/78 (43.5%) received a second line treatment that was TKI (ORR 8.3% and DCR 41.6%) or IO (ORR 18.1% and DCR 40.9%). CONCLUSION: We report one of the largest case series regarding PM from RCC. Characteristics of patients suggest a more aggressive behavior of PM from mRCC. Outcome data suggest that TKI-IO as first line treatment, and TKI as second line, confirm their activity for these patients with dismal prognosis.

Gender Difference in sidE eFfects of ImmuNotherapy: a possible clue to optimize cancEr tReatment (G-DEFINER): study protocol of an observational prospective multicenter study.

BACKGROUND: Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have significantly improved outcomes in various cancers. ICI treatment is associated with the incidence of immune-related adverse events (irAEs) which can affect any organ. Data on irAEs occurrence in relation to sex- differentiation and their association with gender-specific factors are limited. AIMS: The primary objective of the G-DEFINER study is to compare the irAEs incidence in female and male patients who undergo ICI treatment. Secondary objectives are: to compare the irAEs incidence in pre- and postmenopausal female patients; to compare the irAEs incidence in female and male patients according to different clinical and gender-related factors (lifestyle, psychosocial, and behavioral factors). Exploratory objectives of the study are to compare and contrast hormonal, gene-expression, SNPs, cytokines, and gut microbiota profiles in relation to irAEs incidence in female and male patients. METHODS AND RESULTS: The patients are recruited from Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, Italy, St Vincent's University Hospital, Ireland, Oslo University Hospital, Norway, and Karolinska Insitutet/Karolinska University Hospital, Sweden. The inclusion of patients was delayed due to the Covid pandemic, leading to a total of 250 patients recruited versus a planned number of 400 patients. Clinical and translational data will be analyzed. INTERPRETATION: The expected outcomes are to improve the management of cancer patients treated with ICIs, leading to more personalized clinical approaches that consider potential toxicity profiles. The real world nature of the trial makes it highly applicable for timely irAEs diagnosis.

Avelumab Plus Intermittent Axitinib in Previously Untreated Patients with Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma. The Tide-A Phase 2 Study.

BACKGROUND: Combinations of vascular endothelial growth factor receptor (VEGFR) tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) plus immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) against PD1/PD-L1 are the standard first-line therapy for patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC), irrespective of the prognostic class. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the feasibility and safety of withdrawing VEGFR-TKI but continuing anti-PD1/PD-L1 in patients who achieve a response to their combination. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This was a single-arm phase 2 trial in patients with treatment-naïve mRCC with prior nephrectomy, without symptomatic/bulky disease and no liver metastases. INTERVENTION: Enrolled patients received axitinib + avelumab; after 36 wk of therapy those who achieved a tumour response interrupted axitinib and continued avelumab maintenance until disease progression. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: The primary endpoint was the rate of patients without progression 8 wk after the axitinib interruption. The secondary endpoints were the median value for progression-free (mPFS) and overall (mOS) survival and the safety in the overall population. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: Seventy-nine patients were enrolled and 75 were evaluated for efficacy. A total of 29 (38%) patients had axitinib withdrawn, as per the study design, with 72% of them having no progression after 8 wk and thus achieving the primary endpoint. The mPFS of the overall population was 24 mo, while the mOS was not reached. The objective response rate was 76% (12% complete response and 64% partial response), with 19% of patients having stable disease. In the patients who discontinued axitinib, the incidence of adverse events of any grade was 59% for grade 3 and 3% for grade 4. This study was limited by the lack of a comparative arm. CONCLUSIONS: The TIDE-A study demonstrates that the withdrawal of VEGFR-TKI with ICI maintenance is feasible for selected mRCC patients with evidence of a response to the VEGFR-TKI + ICI combination employed in first-line therapy. Axitinib interruption with avelumab maintenance leads to decreased side effects and should be investigated further as a new strategy to delay tumour progression. PATIENT SUMMARY: We evaluated whether certain patients with advanced kidney cancer treated with the fist-line combination of axitinib plus avelumab can interrupt the axitinib in case of a tumour response after 36 wk of therapy. We found that axitinib interruption improved the safety of the combination, while the maintenance with avelumab might delay tumour progression.

A phase II study evaluating the efficacy of enzalutamide and the role of liquid biopsy for evaluation of ARv7 in mCRPC patients with measurable metastases including visceral disease (Excalibur study).

Background: Up to 30% of patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) develop visceral metastases, which are associated with a poor prognosis. Objectives: Efficacy of enzalutamide in mCRPC patients with measurable metastases, including visceral and/or extra-regional lymph nodes. Methods: In this phase II multicenter study, patients with mCRPC and measurable metastases received enzalutamide as the first line. Primary endpoint: 3-month (mo) disease control rate (DCR) defined as the proportion of patients with complete (CR) or partial response (PR) or stable disease (SD) as per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors 1.1. Secondary endpoint: safety. Exploratory endpoint: the association between ARv7 splicing variants in basal circulating tumor cell (CTC)-enriched blood samples and treatment response/resistance using the AdnaTest ProstateCancerSelect kit and the AdnaTest ProstateCancer Panel AR-V7. Results: From March 2017 to January 2021, 68 patients were enrolled. One patient never started treatment. Median age: 72 years. A total of 52 patients (78%) received enzalutamide as a first line for mCRPC. The median follow-up was 32 months. At the 3-month assessment, 24 patients presented an SD, 1 patient achieved a CR, and 23 patients had a PR (3-mo-DCR of 72%). Discontinuations due to adverse events (AEs), disease-related death, or disease progression occurred in 9%, 6%, and 48% of patients. All patients reported at least one grade (G) 1-2 AE: the most common were fatigue (49%) and hypertension (33%). Six G3 AEs were reported: two hypertension, one seizure, one fatigue, one diarrhea, and one headache. Basal detection of ARv7 was significantly associated with poor treatment response (p = 0.034) and a nonsignificant association (p = 0.15) was observed between ARv7 detection and response assessments. At month 3, ARv7 was detected in 57%, 25%, and 15% of patients undergoing progressive disease, SD, and PR, respectively. Conclusion: The study met its primary endpoint, showing the efficacy of enzalutamide in men with mCRPC and measurable metastatic lesions in visceral and/or lymph node sites. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03103724. First Posted: 6 April 2017. First patient enrollment: 19 April 2017.

Long-Term Survival in Patients With Relapsed/Refractory Advanced Renal Cell Carcinoma Treated With Tivozanib: Analysis of the Phase III TIVO-3 Trial.

BACKGROUND: Tivozanib is an oral vascular endothelial growth factor receptor (VEGFR) tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) with efficacy in advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC). Long-term exploratory analyses from the TIVO-3 trial in relapsed/refractory (R/R) RCC including patients (26%) with prior immuno-oncology (IO) therapy are reported. METHODS: Patients with R/R advanced RCC that progressed with 2 or 3 prior systemic therapies (≥1 VEGFR TKI) were randomized to tivozanib 1.5 mg QD or sorafenib 400 mg BID, stratified by IMDC risk and previous therapy. Safety, investigator-assessed long-term progression-free survival (LT-PFS), and serial overall survival (OS) were assessed. RESULTS: Mean time on treatment was 11.0 months with tivozanib (n = 175) and 6.3 months with sorafenib (n = 175). Fewer grade ≥3 treatment-related adverse events occurred with tivozanib (46%) than sorafenib (55%). Dose modification rates were lower with tivozanib than sorafenib across age/prior IO subgroups; prior IO therapy did not impact dose reductions or discontinuations in either arm. Landmark LT-PFS rates were higher with tivozanib (3 years: 12.3% vs 2.4%; 4 years: 7.6% vs 0%). After 22.8 months mean follow-up, the OS HR was 0.89 (95% CI, 0.70-1.14); when conditioned on 12-month landmark PFS, tivozanib showed significant OS improvement over sorafenib (HR, 0.45; 95% CI, 0.22-0.91; 2-sided P = .0221). CONCLUSIONS: Tivozanib demonstrated a consistent safety profile and long-term survival benefit in patients with R/R advanced RCC who were alive and progression free at 12 months. These post hoc exploratory analyses of LT-PFS and conditional OS support a clinically meaningful improvement with tivozanib versus sorafenib in this advanced RCC population.

Impact of Prior Cytoreductive Nephrectomy on Efficacy in Patients with Synchronous Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Treated with Avelumab plus Axitinib or Sunitinib: Post Hoc Analysis from the JAVELIN Renal 101 Phase 3 Trial.

Data on the effects of prior cytoreductive nephrectomy (CN) in patients with renal cell carcinoma (RCC) with synchronous metastases (M1 disease) before immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) treatment are limited. In this post hoc analysis of treatment-naive patients with advanced RCC from the phase 3 JAVELIN Renal 101 trial, we assessed efficacy outcomes in the avelumab + axitinib and sunitinib arms in patients who were initially diagnosed with M1 disease (n = 412) grouped by prior CN (yes vs no). Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were analyzed using multivariable Cox regression, and objective response rates (ORRs) were analyzed using logistic regression. After adjusting for imbalances in baseline variables, the hazard ratio (HR) for PFS in the prior CN versus no prior CN subgroup was 0.79 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.53-1.16) in the avelumab + axitinib arm, and 1.15 (95% CI 0.77-1.70) in the sunitinib arm. The corresponding HRs for OS were 0.59 (95% CI 0.38-0.93) and 0.86 (95% CI, 0.55-1.34), and the odds ratios for ORR were 2.67 (95% CI 1.32-5.41) and 2.02 (95% CI 0.82-4.94), respectively. Prospective studies of the potential benefits of CN and its appropriate timing in patients receiving first-line treatment with ICI-containing combinations are warranted. PATIENT SUMMARY: This study looked at patients with kidney cancer whose disease had already spread outside the kidneys when it was first detected. We found that patients whose kidney had been removed before starting treatment with avelumab + axitinib had better outcomes than those whose kidney had not been removed. For patients treated with sunitinib, the results were more similar between the groups with and without prior kidney removal. However, statistical tests did not find any significant differences. The JAVELIN Renal 101 trial is registered on ClinicalTrials.gov as NCT02684006.

CaboCombo: a prospective, phase IV study of first-line cabozantinib + nivolumab for advanced renal cell carcinoma.

Cabozantinib plus nivolumab was approved as a first-line (1L) treatment for advanced renal cell carcinoma (aRCC) following the CheckMate 9ER trial. CaboCombo (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT05361434) is a non-interventional study designed to evaluate the effectiveness and tolerability of cabozantinib plus nivolumab in a real-world setting. Overall, 311 patients with clear-cell aRCC receiving 1L cabozantinib plus nivolumab will be recruited from at least 70 centers in seven countries worldwide. The primary end point is overall survival at 18 months. Secondary end points include progression-free survival, objective response rate, safety, patterns of treatment, subsequent anticancer therapies and quality of life. CaboCombo will provide real-world evidence on the characteristics, treatment sequences, and outcomes of patients with aRCC receiving 1L cabozantinib plus nivolumab.

Renal cell carcinomas (RCC) are cancers that grow in the kidneys. Clear-cell RCC is the most common type reported in almost three quarters of patients. RCC tumors become advanced if they grow and spread to other parts of the body. In a clinical trial called CheckMate 9ER, a combination of two drugs called cabozantinib and nivolumab improved survival compared with a drug called sunitinib in patients with advanced clear-cell RCC who had not received any previous treatments. In CheckMate 9ER, cabozantinib plus nivolumab also reduced the size and slowed the spread of tumors compared with sunitinib. However, clinical trials only allow certain patients to participate under strict treatment conditions and so do not provide information on how a treatment will work in all patients. Researchers therefore carry out additional studies to gather extra information from real-world clinical practice. CaboCombo is a study that will look at how well cabozantinib plus nivolumab stops tumors from growing and spreading, the side effects of the drugs, and also how the drugs are used by doctors. It is an observational study, which means that researchers will observe all patients and doctors using the treatment but they will not intervene. The aim of the study is to gather information that will help doctors make treatment decisions for their patients. This article describes how the CaboCombo study will be carried out and the information it will give the researchers. The results will help physicians make decisions on the best treatment option for patients. Clinical Trial Registration: NCT05361434 (ClinicalTrials.gov).

Hematological Toxicity of PARP Inhibitors in Metastatic Prostate Cancer Patients with Mutations of BRCA or HRR Genes: A Systematic Review and Safety Meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: PARP inhibitors (PARPis) are effective treatment options for patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) as single agents or in combination with androgen receptor-targeted agents (ARTA). However, a clinically relevant adverse effect of these agents is hematological toxicity, a typical class adverse event (AE), which can lead to treatment modifications and discontinuations. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to analyze the risk of hematological AEs, including anemia, neutropenia, and thrombocytopenia secondary to PARPi treatments in mCRPC. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This systematic review and meta-analysis followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) statement. We systematically searched the PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases, the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO), and the European Society of Medical Oncology (ESMO) meeting abstracts for clinical trials concerning the use of PARPis, both as single agents and in combination, in patients with mCRPC. The search deadline was 30 June, 2023. We analyzed the pooled incidence of all grades of and ≥ G3 anemia, neutropenia, and thrombocytopenia. We subsequently calculated risk ratios (RRs) for all grades of and ≥ G3 AEs of PARPis versus non-PARPis from randomized clinical trials (RCTs). RESULTS: Eleven phase 2/3 trials with olaparib, niraparib, rucaparib, and talazoparib administered as single agents or combined with ARTA were selected. Anemia was the most common all grades (38.6%) and ≥ G3 AE (24.9%). In the analysis of relative risk, six RCTs were included. The administration of PARPis significantly increased the risk of developing all grades of anemia (RR = 2.44), neutropenia (RR = 3.15), and thrombocytopenia (RR = 4.66) compared with non-PARPis. Similarly, a significant increase in the risk of ≥ G3 anemia (RR = 5.73) and thrombocytopenia (RR = 5.44), and a not significant increased risk of neutropenia (RR = 3.41), were detected. CONCLUSIONS: In mCRPC, PARPis increase the risk of hematological toxicity compared with other treatments, both as single agents or combined with ARTA (high-quality evidence). Clinicians should be aware of this risk and the correct management, especially with the expected increased PARPis use in mCRPC.

Characteristics and outcomes of immunotherapy-related liver injury in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma versus other advanced solid tumours.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Immune-related liver injury (irLI) is commonly observed in patients with cancer treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs). We aimed to compare the incidence, clinical characteristics, and outcomes of irLI between patients receiving ICIs for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) vs. other solid tumours. METHODS: Two separate cohorts were included: 375 patients with advanced/unresectable HCC, Child-Pugh A class treated with first-line atezolizumab+bevacizumab from the AB-real study, and a non-HCC cohort including 459 patients treated with first-line ICI therapy from the INVIDIa-2 multicentre study. IrLI was defined as a treatment-related increase of aminotransferase levels after exclusion of alternative aetiologies of liver injury. The incidence of irLI was adjusted for the duration of treatment exposure. RESULTS: In patients with HCC, the incidence of any grade irLI was 11.4% over a median treatment exposure of 4.4 months (95% CI 3.7-5.2) vs. 2.6% in the INVIDIa-2 cohort over a median treatment exposure of 12.4 months (95% CI 11.1-14.0). Exposure-adjusted-incidence of any grade irLI was 22.1 per 100-patient-years in patients with HCC and 2.1 per 100-patient-years in patients with other solid tumours (p <0.001), with median time-to-irLI of 1.4 and 4.7 months, respectively. Among patients who developed irLI, systemic corticosteroids were administered in 16.3% of patients with HCC and 75.0% of those without HCC (p <0.001), and irLI resolution was observed in 72.1% and 58.3%, respectively (p = 0.362). In patients with HCC, rates of hepatic decompensation and treatment discontinuation due to irLI were 7%. Grade 1-2 irLI was associated with improved overall survival only in patients with HCC (hazard ratio 0.53, 95% CI 0.29-0.96). CONCLUSIONS: Despite higher incidence and earlier onset, irLI in patients with HCC is characterised by higher rates of remission and lower requirement for corticosteroid therapy (vs. irLI in other solid tumours), low risk of hepatic decompensation and treatment discontinuation, not negatively affecting oncological outcomes. IMPACT AND IMPLICATIONS: Immune-related liver injury (irLI) is common in patients with cancer receiving immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs), but whether irLI is more frequent or it is associated with a worse clinical course in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), compared to other tumours, is not known. Herein, we compared characteristics and outcomes of irLI in two prospective cohorts including patients treated with ICIs for HCC or for other oncological indications. irLI is significantly more common and it occurs earlier in patients with HCC, also after adjustment for duration of treatment exposure. However, outcomes of patients with HCC who developed irLI are not negatively affected in terms of requirement for corticosteroid therapy, hepatic decompensation, treatment discontinuation and overall survival.

Using peripheral immune-inflammatory blood markers in tumors treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors: An INVIDIa-2 study sub-analysis.

The neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) and systemic immune-inflammatory index (SII) have been reported as prognosticators in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), renal cell carcinoma (RCC), and melanoma. This analysis of the INVIDIa-2 study on influenza vaccination in patients with cancer treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) assessed NLR and SII on overall survival (OS) by literature-reported (LR), receiver operating characteristic curve (ROC)-derived (ROC) cutoffs or as continuous variable (CV). NLR and SII with ROC cutoffs of <3.4 (p < 0.001) and <831 (p < 0.001) were independent factors for OS in multivariate analysis. SII with LR, ROC, or CV significantly predicted OS in NSCLC (p = 0.002, p = 0.003, p = 0.003), RCC (p = 0.034, p = 0.014, p = 0.014), and melanoma (p = 0.038, p = 0.022, p = 0.019). NLR with LR and ROC cutoffs predicted OS in first line (p < 0.001 for both) and second line or beyond (p = 0.006 for both); likewise SII (p < 0.001; p = 0.002 and p < 0.001). NLR and SII are prognosticators in NSCLC, RCC, and melanoma treated with ICIs.

Integrating Red Blood Cell Features and Hemoglobin Levels in Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Patients Treated with Pazopanib or Cabozantinib: An Easily Exploitable Prognostic Score.

BACKGROUND: The advent of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) has revolutionized the metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) therapeutic landscape. Nevertheless, tyrosine-kinase inhibitors (TKIs) targeting the vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) axis still play a key role. The aim of the present study was to explore the prognostic performance of an integrated blood score, based on hemoglobin (Hb) concentration, mean corpuscular volume (MCV), and red cell distribution width (RDW), in mRCC patients treated with anti-VEGF TKIs. The primary endpoint was to correlate Hb, MCV, and RDW with progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Our multicenter retrospective observational study involved mRCC patients treated with pazopanib or cabozantinib from January 2012 to December 2020 in nine Italian centers. Clinical records and laboratory data, including Hb levels, MCV, and RDW, were collected at baseline. Descriptive statistics and univariate and multivariate analyses were performed. RESULTS: We enrolled 301 mRCC patients of which 179 (59%) underwent pazopanib, and 122 (41%) cabozantinib. We considered baseline Hb ≥12 g/dL, MCV >87 fL, and RDW ≤16% as good prognostic factors; hence, developing a multiparametric score capable of delineating 4 different categories. The number of good prognostic factors was associated with significantly longer PFS and OS (p < 0.001 for both). Therefore, we developed a red blood cell-based score by stratifying cases into two groups (2-3 versus 0-1, good factors). The impact on PFS and OS was even more striking (median PFS (mPFS): 16.3 vs 7.9 months; median OS (mOS): 33.7 vs 14.1 months)), regardless of the TKI agent. When challenged with univariate and multivariate analysis, the blood score maintained its high prognostic significance in terms of OS (multivariate analysis HR for OS: 0.53, 95% CI 0.39-0.75; p < 0.001, respectively), while the impact on PFS resulted in borderline significance. CONCLUSIONS: Our analyses demonstrate the prognostic role of a multiparametric score based on easily exploitable blood parameters, such as Hb concentration, MCV, and RDW. The red blood cell-based score may underlie the upregulation of the HIF-1α pathway and VEGF axis, thereby identifying a selected population who is likely to benefit from TKI therapy.

Impact of influenza vaccination on survival of patients with advanced cancer receiving immune checkpoint inhibitors (INVIDIa-2): final results of the multicentre, prospective, observational study.

Background: The prospective multicentre observational INVIDIa-2 study investigated the clinical effectiveness of influenza vaccination in patients with advanced cancer receiving immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI). In this secondary analysis of the original trial, we aimed to assess the outcomes of patients to immunotherapy based on vaccine administration. Methods: The original study enrolled patients with advanced solid tumours receiving ICI at 82 Italian Oncology Units from Oct 1, 2019, to Jan 31, 2020. The trial's primary endpoint was the time-adjusted incidence of influenza-like illness (ILI) until April 30, 2020, the results of which were reported previously. Secondary endpoints (data cut-off Jan 31, 2022) included the outcomes of patients to immunotherapy based on vaccine administration, for which the final results are reported herein. A propensity score matching by age, sex, performance status, primary tumour site, comorbidities, and smoking habits was planned for the present analysis. Only patients with available data for these variables were included. The outcomes of interest were overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate (ORR), and disease-control rate (DCR). Findings: The original study population consisted of 1188 evaluable patients. After a propensity score matching, 1004 patients were considered (502 vaccinated and 502 unvaccinated), and 986 of them were evaluable for overall survival (OS). At the median follow-up of 20 months, the influenza vaccination demonstrated a favourable impact on the outcome receiving ICI in terms of median OS [27.0 months (CI 19.5-34.6) in vaccinated vs. 20.9 months (16.6-25.2) in unvaccinated, p = 0.003], median progression-free survival [12.5 months (CI 10.4-14.6) vs. 9.6 months (CI 7.9-11.4), p = 0.049], and disease-control rate (74.7% vs. 66.5%, p = 0.005). The multivariable analyses confirmed the favourable impact of influenza vaccination in terms of OS (HR 0.75, 95% C.I. 0.62-0.92; p = 0.005) and DCR (OR 1.47, 95% C.I. 1.11-1.96; p = 0.007). Interpretation: The INVIDIa-2 study results suggest a favourable immunological impact of influenza vaccination on the outcome of cancer patients receiving ICI immunotherapy, further encouraging the vaccine recommendation in this population and supporting translational investigations about the possible synergy between antiviral and antitumour immunity. Funding: The Federation of Italian Cooperative Oncology Groups (FICOG), Roche S.p.A., and Seqirus.

The role of mean corpuscular volume and red cell distribution width in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma treated with tyrosine kinase inhibitors: the MARECAP retrospective study.

Background: Tyrosine-kinase inhibitors (TKIs) and immunotherapy represent the backbone treatment for metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) patients. The aim of the present study was to describe mean corpuscular volume (MCV) and red cell distribution width (RDW) in mRCC patients treated with pazopanib or cabozantinib, and to explore their potential impact on oncological outcomes. Materials and methods: We conducted a multicenter retrospective observational study in mRCC patients treated with pazopanib or cabozantinib between January 2012 and December 2020 in nine Italian centers. Descriptive statistics, univariate, and multivariate analyses were performed. Objectives: The primary endpoints were the incidence and trend over time of anemia, macrocytosis (elevated MCV), and anisocytosis (elevated RDW). The secondary endpoints were the correlations of MCV and RDW with objective response rate (ORR), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS). Results: A total of 301 patients were enrolled; mean Hb value was 12.5 g/dl, a mean increase of 1 g/dl was observed at day 15 and maintained at 3 months. Most patients had baseline macrocytosis (MCV levels > 87 fl), with a significant mean increase after 3 months of treatment. At univariate analysis patients with macrocytosis had better ORR, longer PFS, and OS. About one third of patients had baseline anisocytosis (RDW > 16%), with a significant mean increase after 3 months of treatment. At univariate analysis, patients with RDW values ⩽ 16% had higher ORR, longer PFS, and OS. At multivariate analysis, baseline macrocytosis was significantly associated with better PFS in patients treated with pazopanib and baseline anisocytosis with shorter OS in all patients. Conclusions: mRCC patients treated with pazopanib or cabozantinib may have baseline macrocytosis and anisocytosis. A significant increase of Hb, MCV, and RDW after TKIs start was observed. Baseline macrocytosis is positively correlated with PFS in patients treated with pazopanib and baseline anisocytosis affects survival of patients treated with TKIs.