Bone Pain and Survival Among Patients With Metastatic, Hormone-Sensitive Prostate Cancer: A Secondary Analysis of the SWOG-1216 Trial.

Importance: The presence of bone pain is significantly associated with worse overall survival (OS) in patients with castration-resistant prostate cancer. However, there are few data regarding bone pain and survival outcomes in the context of metastatic, hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (MHSPC). Objective: To compare survival outcomes among patients with MHSPC by presence or absence of baseline bone pain at diagnosis. Design, Setting, and Participants: This post hoc secondary analysis, conducted from September 1 to December 31, 2023, used patient-level data from SWOG-1216, a phase 3, prospective randomized clinical trial that enrolled patients with newly diagnosed MHSPC from 248 academic and community centers across the US from March 1, 2013, to July 15, 2017. All patients in the intention-to-treat population who had available bone pain status were eligible and included in this secondary analysis. Interventions: In the SWOG-1216 trial, patients were randomized (1:1) to receive either androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) with orteronel, 300 mg orally twice daily (experimental group), or ADT with bicalutamide, 50 mg orally daily (control group), until disease progression, unacceptable toxic effects, or patient withdrawal. Main Outcomes and Measures: Overall survival was the primary end point; progression-free survival (PFS) and prostate-specific antigen (PSA) response were secondary end points. Cox proportional hazards regression models were used for both univariable and multivariable analyses adjusting for age, treatment type, Gleason score, disease volume, Zubrod performance status, and PSA level. Results: Of the 1279 male study participants, 301 (23.5%) had baseline bone pain at MHSPC diagnosis and 896 (70.1%) did not. Bone pain status was unavailable in 82 patients (6.4%). The median age of the 1197 patients eligible and included in this secondary analysis was 67.6 years (IQR, 61.8-73.6 years). Compared with patients who did not experience bone pain, those with baseline bone pain were younger (median age, 66.0 [IQR, 60.1-73.4] years vs 68.2 [IQR, 62.4-73.7] years; P = .02) and had a higher incidence of high-volume disease (212 [70.4%] vs 373 [41.6%]; P < .001). After adjustment, bone pain was associated with shorter PFS and OS. At a median follow-up of 4.0 years (IQR, 2.5-5.4 years), patients with bone pain had median PFS of 1.3 years (95% CI, 1.1-1.7 years) vs 3.7 years (95% CI, 3.3-4.2 years) in patients without initial bone pain (adjusted hazard ratio [AHR], 1.46; 95% CI, 1.22-1.74; P < .001) and OS of 3.9 years (95% CI, 3.3-4.8 years) vs not reached (NR) (95% CI, 6.6 years to NR) in patients without initial bone pain (AHR, 1.66; 95% CI, 1.34-2.05; P < .001). Conclusions and Relevance: In this post hoc secondary analysis of the SWOG-1216 randomized clinical trial, patients with baseline bone pain at MHSPC diagnosis had worse survival outcomes than those without bone pain. These data suggest prioritizing these patients for enrollment in clinical trials, may aid patient counseling, and indicate that the inclusion of bone pain in prognostic models of MHSPC may be warranted. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01809691.

Clinical Effectiveness of Targeted Therapies Following Nivolumab Therapy in Patients with Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma: A Real-World Study.

Background: The treatment and escape for metastatic renal cell carcinoma (RCC) has rapidly evolved, particularly with the integration of immune therapies into first-line regimens. However, optimal strategies following progression in first-line immunotherapy remain uncertain. This study aims to evaluate the efficacy and safety of axitinib and cabozantinib as third-line therapies after progression on nivolumab following first-line VEGF-TKI therapy. Methods: Patients with metastatic RCC who progressed on prior nivolumab treatment after receiving first-line VEGF-TKI therapy were included. Data on patient characteristics, treatment regimens, response rates, progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS) were collected. Statistical analyses were conducted to assess the prognostic factors and treatment outcomes. Results: A total of 46 patients were included who were predominantly male (83%) with clear-cell histology (89%). The median PFS on first-line TKI therapy was 10.2 months. All the patients received nivolumab as a second-line therapy, with a median of 12 cycles. The median second-line PFS was seven months. Third-line therapies included axitinib (24 patients) and cabozantinib (20 patients). The median PFS for axitinib and cabozantinib was six months, with comparable survival outcomes. The IMDC risk group and treatment tolerability were significant predictors of survival in multivariate analysis. Adverse events were manageable, with hypertension, fatigue, and diarrhea being the most common. Conclusion: Axitinib and cabozantinib show promise as third-line therapies post-nivolumab progression in metastatic RCC, though prospective validation is warranted. This study underscores the need for further research to establish treatment standards in this evolving landscape.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of rezvilutamide versus bicalutamide in the treatment of metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer.

OBJECTIVES: The economic implications of combining rezvilutamide with androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) remain uncertain, despite the observed survival advantages compared with bicalutamide plus ADT. Therefore, this study evaluates the cost-effectiveness of rezvilutamide plus ADT as the first-line treatment of metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC) from the perspective of the Chinese healthcare system. DESIGN: A partitioned survival model was developed to assess the cost-effectiveness of rezvilutamide combined with ADT. Clinical data were obtained from the CHART trial. Costs and utility values were obtained from local estimate and published literature. Only direct medical costs were included in the model. INTERVENTIONS: Rezvilutamide was administered at 240 mg daily or bicalutamide at 50 mg daily until progression. OUTCOME MEASURES: The main outputs of the model included costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), which were used to determine the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analysis (PSA) were used to explore model uncertainties. RESULTS: The rezvilutamide group showed an expected gain of 2.28 QALYs and an incremental cost of US$60 758.82 compared with the bicalutamide group. The ICER for rezvilutamide group versus bicalutamide group was US$26 656.94 per QALY. The variables with the greatest impact on the model results were the utility for progression-free survival state and the price of rezvilutamide. PSA revealed that rezvilutamide group had 100% probability of being cost-effective at a willingness-to-pay threshold of US$35707.5 per QALY. CONCLUSION: Rezvilutamide in combination with ADT is more cost-effective compared with bicalutamide plus ADT as the first-line treatment of mHSPC from the perspective of the Chinese healthcare system.

Comparison of the Efficacy and Safety of Nivolumab Plus Cabozantinib versus Sunitinib in the Treatment of Elderly Patients with Advanced Clear Cell Renal Cell Carcinoma.

OBJECTIVE: Advanced clear cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC) seriously affects the life and health of patients, but effective treatment for this disease is still lacking in clinic. This study investigated the efficacy of nivolumab plus cabozantinib versus sunitinib in the treatment of elderly patients with advanced ccRCC. METHODS: The clinical data of 216 elderly patients with advanced ccRCC in our hospital from January 2020 to January 2022 were retrospectively analysed. On the basis of different treatment regimens, patients were divided into the cabozantinib group (n = 111, receiving nivolumab and cabozantinib) and the sunitinib group (n = 105, receiving nivolumab and sunitinib). The overall survival time, disease control rates, health status, incidence of adverse events and identification of prognostic risk were compared between the two groups. RESULTS: The cabozantinib group had higher overall survival time, disease control rate and scores in the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Kidney Symptom Index and EuroQol-Five Dimensions-Three Levels Questionnaire than the sunitinib group. The incidence of adverse events in the cabozantinib group was lower than that in the sunitinib group (p < 0.001). However, no difference existed in the identification of prognostic risk between the two groups (p > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The effect of nivolumab plus cabozantinib on the treatment of elderly patients with advanced ccRCC is better than that of nivolumab plus sunitinib, with fewer adverse reactions and higher safety. However, the research results require further clinical studies to confirm and promote.

Programmed cell death-1 is involved with peripheral blood immune cell profiles in patients with hepatitis C virus antiviral therapy.

Mutations in the non-structural protein regions of hepatitis C virus (HCV) are a cause of a non-sustained virological response (SVR) to treatment with direct-acting antivirals (DAAs) for chronic hepatitis; however, there are non-SVR cases without these mutations. In this study, we examined immune cell profiles in peripheral blood before and after ombitasvir/paritaprevir/ritonavir treatment and screened for genes that could be used to predict the therapeutic effects of DAAs. Fluorescence-activated cell sorting analysis indicated that the median frequencies of programmed cell death-1-positive (PD-1+) effector regulatory T cells (eTregs), PD-1+CD8+ T cells, and PD-1+Helper T cells were decreased significantly in SVR cases, but without significant changes in non-SVR cases. The frequency of PD-1+ naïve Tregs was significantly higher in the SVR group than in the non-SVR group before and after treatment. Similar results were found in patients treated with other DAAs (e.g., daclatasvir plus asunaprevir) and supported an immune response after HCV therapy. RNA-sequencing analysis indicated a significant increase in the expression of genes associated with the immune response in the SVR group, while genes related to intracellular and extracellular signal transduction were highly expressed in the non-SVR group. Therefore, we searched for genes associated with PD-1+ eTregs and CD8+ T cells that were significantly different between the SVR and non-SVR groups and found that T-box transcription factor 21 was associated with the non-SVR state. These results indicate that PD-1-related signaling pathways are associated with a non-SVR mechanism after DAAs treatment separate from mutation-related drug resistance.

Duration of androgen deprivation therapy with postoperative radiotherapy for prostate cancer: a comparison of long-course versus short-course androgen deprivation therapy in the RADICALS-HD randomised trial.

BACKGROUND: Previous evidence supports androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) with primary radiotherapy as initial treatment for intermediate-risk and high-risk localised prostate cancer. However, the use and optimal duration of ADT with postoperative radiotherapy after radical prostatectomy remains uncertain. METHODS: RADICALS-HD was a randomised controlled trial of ADT duration within the RADICALS protocol. Here, we report on the comparison of short-course versus long-course ADT. Key eligibility criteria were indication for radiotherapy after previous radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer, prostate-specific antigen less than 5 ng/mL, absence of metastatic disease, and written consent. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) to add 6 months of ADT (short-course ADT) or 24 months of ADT (long-course ADT) to radiotherapy, using subcutaneous gonadotrophin-releasing hormone analogue (monthly in the short-course ADT group and 3-monthly in the long-course ADT group), daily oral bicalutamide monotherapy 150 mg, or monthly subcutaneous degarelix. Randomisation was done centrally through minimisation with a random element, stratified by Gleason score, positive margins, radiotherapy timing, planned radiotherapy schedule, and planned type of ADT, in a computerised system. The allocated treatment was not masked. The primary outcome measure was metastasis-free survival, defined as metastasis arising from prostate cancer or death from any cause. The comparison had more than 80% power with two-sided α of 5% to detect an absolute increase in 10-year metastasis-free survival from 75% to 81% (hazard ratio [HR] 0·72). Standard time-to-event analyses were used. Analyses followed intention-to-treat principle. The trial is registered with the ISRCTN registry, ISRCTN40814031, and ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT00541047. FINDINGS: Between Jan 30, 2008, and July 7, 2015, 1523 patients (median age 65 years, IQR 60-69) were randomly assigned to receive short-course ADT (n=761) or long-course ADT (n=762) in addition to postoperative radiotherapy at 138 centres in Canada, Denmark, Ireland, and the UK. With a median follow-up of 8·9 years (7·0-10·0), 313 metastasis-free survival events were reported overall (174 in the short-course ADT group and 139 in the long-course ADT group; HR 0·773 [95% CI 0·612-0·975]; p=0·029). 10-year metastasis-free survival was 71·9% (95% CI 67·6-75·7) in the short-course ADT group and 78·1% (74·2-81·5) in the long-course ADT group. Toxicity of grade 3 or higher was reported for 105 (14%) of 753 participants in the short-course ADT group and 142 (19%) of 757 participants in the long-course ADT group (p=0·025), with no treatment-related deaths. INTERPRETATION: Compared with adding 6 months of ADT, adding 24 months of ADT improved metastasis-free survival in people receiving postoperative radiotherapy. For individuals who can accept the additional duration of adverse effects, long-course ADT should be offered with postoperative radiotherapy. FUNDING: Cancer Research UK, UK Research and Innovation (formerly Medical Research Council), and Canadian Cancer Society.

Adding 6 months of androgen deprivation therapy to postoperative radiotherapy for prostate cancer: a comparison of short-course versus no androgen deprivation therapy in the RADICALS-HD randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Previous evidence indicates that adjuvant, short-course androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) improves metastasis-free survival when given with primary radiotherapy for intermediate-risk and high-risk localised prostate cancer. However, the value of ADT with postoperative radiotherapy after radical prostatectomy is unclear. METHODS: RADICALS-HD was an international randomised controlled trial to test the efficacy of ADT used in combination with postoperative radiotherapy for prostate cancer. Key eligibility criteria were indication for radiotherapy after radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer, prostate-specific antigen less than 5 ng/mL, absence of metastatic disease, and written consent. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) to radiotherapy alone (no ADT) or radiotherapy with 6 months of ADT (short-course ADT), using monthly subcutaneous gonadotropin-releasing hormone analogue injections, daily oral bicalutamide monotherapy 150 mg, or monthly subcutaneous degarelix. Randomisation was done centrally through minimisation with a random element, stratified by Gleason score, positive margins, radiotherapy timing, planned radiotherapy schedule, and planned type of ADT, in a computerised system. The allocated treatment was not masked. The primary outcome measure was metastasis-free survival, defined as distant metastasis arising from prostate cancer or death from any cause. Standard survival analysis methods were used, accounting for randomisation stratification factors. The trial had 80% power with two-sided α of 5% to detect an absolute increase in 10-year metastasis-free survival from 80% to 86% (hazard ratio [HR] 0·67). Analyses followed the intention-to-treat principle. The trial is registered with the ISRCTN registry, ISRCTN40814031, and ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT00541047. FINDINGS: Between Nov 22, 2007, and June 29, 2015, 1480 patients (median age 66 years [IQR 61-69]) were randomly assigned to receive no ADT (n=737) or short-course ADT (n=743) in addition to postoperative radiotherapy at 121 centres in Canada, Denmark, Ireland, and the UK. With a median follow-up of 9·0 years (IQR 7·1-10·1), metastasis-free survival events were reported for 268 participants (142 in the no ADT group and 126 in the short-course ADT group; HR 0·886 [95% CI 0·688-1·140], p=0·35). 10-year metastasis-free survival was 79·2% (95% CI 75·4-82·5) in the no ADT group and 80·4% (76·6-83·6) in the short-course ADT group. Toxicity of grade 3 or higher was reported for 121 (17%) of 737 participants in the no ADT group and 100 (14%) of 743 in the short-course ADT group (p=0·15), with no treatment-related deaths. INTERPRETATION: Metastatic disease is uncommon following postoperative bed radiotherapy after radical prostatectomy. Adding 6 months of ADT to this radiotherapy did not improve metastasis-free survival compared with no ADT. These findings do not support the use of short-course ADT with postoperative radiotherapy in this patient population. FUNDING: Cancer Research UK, UK Research and Innovation (formerly Medical Research Council), and Canadian Cancer Society.

A phase 1 study of concurrent cabozantinib and cetuximab in recurrent or metastatic head and neck squamous cell cancer.

OBJECTIVES: Epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) inhibition with cetuximab is a standard treatment for head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC). Activation of the receptor tyrosine kinases AXL, MET and VEGFR can mediate resistance to cetuximab. Cabozantinib, a multikinase inhibitor (MKI) targeting AXL/MET/VEGFR, has demonstrated antitumor activity in preclinical models of HNSCC. This investigator- initiated phase I trial evaluated the safety and efficacy of cetuximab plus cabozantinib in patients with recurrent/metastatic (R/M) HNSCC. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients received cetuximab concurrently with cabozantinib daily on a 28-day cycle. Using a 3 + 3 dose-escalation design, the primary endpoint was to determine the maximally tolerated dose (MTD) of cabozantinib. Secondary endpoints included overall response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS) RESULTS: Among the 20 patients enrolled, most had prior disease progression on immune checkpoint inhibitors (95 %), platinum-based chemotherapy (95 %), and cetuximab (80 %). No dose-limiting toxicities were recorded and the MTD for cabozantinib was established to be 60 mg. Grade ≥ 3 adverse events occurred in 65 % of patients (n = 13). ORR was 20 %, with 4 partial responses (PRs). Two PRs were observed in cetuximab-naïve patients (n = 4), with an ORR of 50 % in this subgroup. In the overall population, DCR was 75 %, median PFS was 3.4 months and median OS was 8.1 months. CONCLUSION: Cetuximab plus cabozantinib demonstrated a manageable toxicity profile and preliminary efficacy in patients with heavily treated R/M HNSCC. The combination of cetuximab with MKIs targeting the AXL/MET/VEGFR axis warrants further investigation, including in cetuximab-naïve patients.

Comparison of Cabozantinib and Axitinib as Second-line Therapy After Nivolumab Plus Ipilimumab in Patients With Metastatic Clear Cell Renal Cell Carcinoma: A Comparative Analysis of Retrospective Real-world Data.

BACKGROUND: To date, no studies have compared the treatment outcomes of second-line therapies in patients with metastatic clear cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC). This study retrospectively evaluated the efficacy of cabozantinib and axitinib as second-line treatments in patients with metastatic ccRCC who previously received immune-oncology combination therapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with metastatic ccRCC treated with cabozantinib and axitinib as second-line therapy after nivolumab-ipilimumab treatment were identified among 243 patients with RCC treated between August 1, 2018 and January 31, 2022 at 34 institutions belonging to the Japanese Urological Oncology Group. Patients were assessed for treatment outcomes, including progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival, objective response rate (ORR), and incidence rate of treatment-related adverse events (AEs). RESULTS: Forty-eight patients treated with cabozantinib and 60 treated with axitinib as second-line therapy after nivolumab-ipilimumab treatment for metastatic ccRCC were identified. The median PFS (95% confidence interval) was 11.0 months (9.0-16.0) with cabozantinib and 9.5 months (6.0-13.0) with axitinib. The ORRs were 37.5% (cabozantinib) and 38.3% (axitinib). The rates of any-grade AEs and grade ≥3 AEs were 79.2% (cabozantinib) versus 63.3% (axitinib; P = .091) and 35.4% (cabozantinib) versus 23.3% (axitinib; P = .202), respectively. In the poor-risk group, PFS was longer in the cabozantinib group than in the axitinib group (P = .033). CONCLUSION: The efficacy and safety of cabozantinib and axitinib were comparable. In the poor-risk group, cabozantinib was more effective than axitinib. These findings provide valuable insights into the selection of second-line treatment options after nivolumab-ipilimumab treatment in patients with metastatic ccRCC.

Cabozantinib in patients with unresectable and progressive metastatic phaeochromocytoma or paraganglioma (the Natalie Trial): a single-arm, phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: Metastatic phaeochromocytomas and paragangliomas (MPPGs) are orphan diseases. Up to 50% of MPPGs are associated with germline pathogenic variants of the SDHB gene. These tumours and many non-familial MPPGs exhibit a phenotype that is characterised by abnormal angiogenesis. We aimed to assess the activity and safety of cabozantinib, an antiangiogenic multi-tyrosine kinase inhibitor, in patients with MPPGs. METHODS: The Natalie Trial is a single-arm, phase 2 clinical trial being conducted at The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center (Houston, TX, USA). Patients aged 18 years or older with histologically confirmed, progressive, and unresectable MPPGs, with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-2, were treated with oral cabozantinib 60 mg/day. The primary endpoint was the investigator-assessed overall response rate per the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours version 1.1 criteria. All outcomes were assessed in all evaluable participants who received any amount of study treatment. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02302833) and is active but not recruiting. FINDINGS: From March 10, 2015, to May 11, 2021, 17 patients (13 male participants and four female participants) were enrolled. The median follow-up was 25 months (IQR 18-49). The overall response rate was 25·0% (95% CI 7·3-52·4; four of 16 patients). Seven grade 3 adverse events were reported in six patients, including single cases of hand-and-foot syndrome, hypertension, rectal fistula, QT prolongation, and asymptomatic hypomagnesaemia, and two cases of asymptomatic elevations of amylase and lipase. There were no grade 4 adverse events and no patient died on-study. INTERPRETATION: Cabozantinib shows promising activity in patients with MPPGs. FUNDING: Team NAT Foundation, Margaret Cazalot, and Clarence P Cazalot.

Cabozantinib monotherapy for advanced adrenocortical carcinoma: a single-arm, phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: Adrenocortical carcinoma is a rare malignancy with poor response to systemic chemotherapy. Mitotane is the only approved therapy for adrenocortical carcinoma. Cabozantinib is a multikinase inhibitor approved in multiple malignancies. This is the first prospective trial to explore the anti-tumour activity, safety, and pharmacokinetic profile of cabozantinib in patients with advanced adrenocortical carcinoma. METHODS: This investigator-initiated, single-arm, phase 2 trial in adult patients (aged ≥18 years) with advanced adrenocortical carcinoma was done at the University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center (Houston, TX, USA). Eligible patients had histologically confirmed adrenocortical carcinoma, were not candidates for surgery with curative intent, had measurable disease, had an estimated life expectancy of at least 3 months, and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status of 0-2 with adequate organ function. Patients who had used mitotane within 6 months of study participation were required to have a serum mitotane level of less than 2 mg/L. Patients were given oral cabozantinib 60 mg daily with the option of dose reduction to manage adverse events. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival at 4 months, assessed in all patients who received at least one dose of study drug per protocol. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03370718, and is now complete. FINDINGS: Between March 1, 2018, and May 31, 2021, we enrolled 18 patients (ten males and eight females), all of whom received at least one dose of study treatment. Of the 18 patients, eight (44%) had an ECOG performance status of 0, nine (50%) patients had a performance status of 1, and one (6%) patient had a performance status of 2. Median follow-up was 36·8 months (IQR 30·2-50·3). At 4 months, 13 (72·2%; 95% CI 46·5-90·3) of 18 patients had progression-free survival and median progression-free survival was 6 months (95% CI 4·3 to not reached). One patient remains on treatment. Treatment-related adverse events of grade 3 or worse occurred in 11 (61%) of 18 patients. The most common grade 3 adverse events were lipase elevation (three [17%] of 18 patients), elevated γ-glutamyl transferase concentrations (two [11%] patients), elevated alanine aminotransferase concentrations (two [11%] patients), hypophosphatemia (two [11%] patients), and hypertension (two [11%] patients). One (6%) of 18 patients had grade 4 hypertension. No treatment related deaths occurred on study. INTERPRETATION: Cabozantinib in advanced adrenocortical carcinoma showed promising efficacy with a manageable and anticipated safety profile. Further prospective studies with cabozantinib alone and in combination with immune checkpoint therapy are ongoing. FUNDING: Exelixis.

Hedgehog pathway inhibitors for locally advanced and metastatic basal cell carcinoma: A real-world single-center retrospective review.

Basal cell carcinoma (BCC) is highly curable by surgical excision or radiation. In rare cases, BCC can be locally destructive or difficult to surgically remove. Hedgehog inhibition (HHI) with vismodegib or sonidegib induces a 50-60% response rate. Long-term toxicity includes muscle spasms and weight loss leading to dose decreases. This retrospective chart review also investigates the impact of CoQ10 and calcium supplementation in patients treated with HHI drugs at a single academic medical center from 2012 to 2022. We reviewed the charts of adult patients diagnosed with locally advanced or metastatic BCC treated with vismodegib or sonidegib primarily for progression-free survival (PFS). Secondary objectives included overall survival, BCC-specific survival, time to and reasons for discontinuation, overall response rate, safety and tolerability, use of CoQ10 and calcium supplements, and insurance coverage. Of 55 patients assessable for outcome, 34 (61.8%) had an overall clinical benefit, with 25 (45.4%) having a complete response and 9 (16.3%) a partial response. Stable disease was seen in 14 (25.4%) and 7 (12.7%) progressed. Of the 34 patients who responded to treatment, 9 recurred. Patients who were rechallenged with HHI could respond again. The median overall BCC-specific survival rate at 5 years is 89%. Dose reductions or discontinuations for vismodegib and sonidegib occurred in 59% versus 24% of cases, or 30% versus 9% of cases, respectively. With CoQ10 and calcium supplementation, only 17% required a dose reduction versus 42% without. HHI is highly effective for treating advanced BCC but may require dosing decreases. Sonidegib was better tolerated than vismodegib. CoQ10 and calcium supplementation can effectively prevent muscle spasms.

Multicentre phase II trial of cabozantinib in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma after immune checkpoint inhibitor treatment.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Prospective data on treatment after immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) therapy in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) are lacking. We conducted a phase II multicentre study on cabozantinib after ICI treatment in HCC. METHODS: This is an investigator-initiated, single-arm, clinical trial involving academic centres in Hong Kong and Korea. Key eligibility criteria included diagnosis of HCC, refractoriness to prior ICI-based treatment, and Child-Pugh A liver function. A maximum of two prior lines of therapy were allowed. All patients were commenced on cabozantinib at 60 mg/day. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS). RESULTS: Forty-seven patients were recruited from Oct 2020 to May 2022; 27 and 20 patients had received one and two prior therapies, respectively. Median follow-up was 11.2 months. The median PFS was 4.1 months (95% CI 3.3-5.3). The median overall survival (OS) was 9.9 months (95% CI 7.3-14.4), and the 1-year OS rate was 45.3%. Partial response and stable disease occurred in 3 (6.4%) and 36 (76.6%) patients, respectively. When used as a second-line treatment (n = 27), cabozantinib was associated with a median PFS and OS of 4.3 (95% CI 3.3-6.7) and 14.3 (95% CI 8.9-NR) months, respectively. The corresponding median PFS and OS were 4.3 (95% CI 3.3-11.0) and 14.3 (95% CI 9.0-NR) months, respectively, for those receiving ICI-based regimens with proven benefits (n = 17). The most common grade 3-4 treatment-related adverse event was thrombocytopenia (6.4%). The median dose of cabozantinib was 40 mg/day. The number of prior therapies was an independent prognosticator (one vs. two; hazard ratio = 0.37; p = 0.03). CONCLUSIONS: Cabozantinib demonstrated efficacy in patients who had received prior ICI regimens; survival data for second-line cabozantinib following first-line ICI regimens provide a reference for future clinical trial design. The number of prior lines of treatment may be considered a stratification factor in randomised studies. IMPACT AND IMPLICATIONS: Prospective data on systemic treatment following prior immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) therapy for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) are lacking. This phase II clinical trial provides efficacy and safety data on cabozantinib in patients who had received prior ICI-based treatment. Exploratory analyses showed that the performance of cabozantinib differed significantly when used as a second- or third-line treatment. The above data could be used as a reference for clinical practice and the design of future clinical trials on subsequent treatment lines following ICIs. GOV IDENTIFIER: NCT04588051.

Cabozantinib with immune checkpoint inhibitor versus cabozantinib monotherapy in patients with metastatic clear cell renal cell carcinoma progressing after prior immune checkpoint inhibitor.

INTRODUCTION: Rechallenge with antibodies targeting programmed cell death protein-1 or its ligand (PD-1/L1) after discontinuation or disease progression in solid tumors following a prior PD-1/L1 treatment is often practiced in clinic. This study aimed to investigate if adding PD-1/L1 inhibitors to cabozantinib, the most used second-line treatment in real-world patients with metastatic clear cell renal cell carcinoma (mccRCC), offers additional benefits. METHODS: Using de-identified patient-level data from a large real-world US-based database, patients diagnosed with mccRCC, who received any PD-1/L1-based combination in first-line (1L) setting, followed by second-line (2L) therapy with either cabozantinib alone or in combination with PD-1/L1 inhibitors were included. Patients given a cabozantinib-containing regimen in 1L were excluded. The study end points were real-world time to next therapy (rwTTNT) and real-world overall survival (rwOS) by 2L. RESULTS: Of 12,285 patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma in the data set, 348 patients met eligibility and were included in the analysis. After propensity score matching weighting, cabozantinib with PD-1/L1 inhibitors versus cabozantinib (ref.) had similar rwTTNT and rwOS in the 2L setting. Hazard ratios and 95% confidence interval (CI) for rwTTNT and rwOS are 0.74 (95% CI, 0.49-1.12) and 1.15 (95% CI, 0.73-1.79), respectively. CONCLUSION: In this study, the results align with the phase 3 CONTACT-03 trial results, which showed no additional benefit of adding PD-L1 inhibitor to cabozantinib compared to cabozantinib alone in 2L following PD-1/L1-based therapies in 1L. These results from real-world patients strengthen the evidence regarding the futility of rechallenge with PD-1/L1 inhibitors.

Nivolumab plus cabozantinib versus sunitinib for first-line treatment of advanced renal cell carcinoma: extended follow-up from the phase III randomised CheckMate 9ER trial.

BACKGROUND: Nivolumab plus cabozantinib (NIVO + CABO) was approved for first-line treatment of advanced renal cell carcinoma (aRCC) based on superiority versus sunitinib (SUN) in the phase III CheckMate 9ER trial (18.1 months median survival follow-up per database lock date); efficacy benefit was maintained with an extended 32.9 months of median survival follow-up. We report updated efficacy and safety after 44.0 months of median survival follow-up in intent-to-treat (ITT) patients and additional subgroup analyses, including outcomes by International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium (IMDC) prognostic risk score. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with treatment-naïve aRCC received NIVO 240 mg every 2 weeks plus CABO 40 mg once daily or SUN 50 mg for 4 weeks (6-week cycles), until disease progression/unacceptable toxicity (maximum NIVO treatment, 2 years). Primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS) per blinded independent central review (BICR). Secondary endpoints were overall survival (OS), objective response rate (ORR) per BICR, and safety and tolerability. RESULTS: Overall, 323 patients were randomised to NIVO + CABO and 328 to SUN. Median PFS was improved with NIVO + CABO versus SUN [16.6 versus 8.4 months; hazard ratio (HR) 0.59; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.49-0.71]; median OS favoured NIVO + CABO versus SUN (49.5 versus 35.5 months; HR 0.70; 95% CI 0.56-0.87). ORR (95% CI) was higher with NIVO + CABO versus SUN [56% (50% to 62%) versus 28% (23% to 33%)]; 13% versus 5% of patients achieved complete response, and median duration of response was 22.1 months versus 16.1 months, respectively. PFS and OS favoured NIVO + CABO over SUN across intermediate, poor and intermediate/poor IMDC risk subgroups; higher ORR and complete response rates were seen with NIVO + CABO versus SUN regardless of IMDC risk subgroup. Any-grade (grade ≥3) treatment-related adverse events occurred in 97% (67%) versus 93% (55%) of patients treated with NIVO + CABO versus SUN. CONCLUSIONS: After extended follow-up, NIVO + CABO maintained survival and response benefits; safety remained consistent with previous follow-ups. These results continue to support NIVO + CABO as a first-line treatment for aRCC. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03141177.