Efficacy of Regorafenib and Trifluridine/Tipiracil According to Extended RAS Evaluation in Advanced Metastatic Colorectal Cancer Patients: A Multicenter Retrospective Analysis.

BACKGROUND: There are few molecular markers driving treatment selection in later lines of treatment for advanced colorectal cancer patients. The vast majority of patients who progress after first- and second-line therapy undergo chemotherapy regardless of molecular data. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to assess the prognostic and predictive effects of specific RAS mutations on overall survival of patients receiving regorafenib (rego), trifluridine/tipiracil (TFD/TPI), or both. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This was a retrospective observational study based on data from a previous study of our research network, involving nine Italian institutions over a 10-year timeframe (2012-2022). Extended RAS analysis, involving KRAS exon 2-4 and NRAS exon 2-4, and BRAF were the main criteria for inclusion in this retrospective evaluation. Patients with BRAF mutation were excluded. Patients were classified according to treatment (rego- or TFD/TPI-treated) and RAS mutational status (wild-type [WT], KRAS codon 12 mutations, KRAS codon 13 mutations, KRAS rare mutations and NRAS mutations, KRAS G12C mutation and KRAS G12D mutation). RESULTS: Overall, 582 patients were included in the present analysis. Overall survival did not significantly differ in rego-treated patients according to RAS extended analysis, although a trend toward a better median survival in patients carrying G12D mutation (12.0 months), Codon 13 mutation (8.0 months), and Codon 12 mutation (7.0 months) has been observed, when compared with WT patients (6.0 months). Overall survival did not significantly differ in TFD/TPI-treated patients according to RAS extended analysis, although a trend toward a better median survival in WT patients had been observed (9.0 months) in comparison with the entire population (7.0 months). Patients receiving both drugs displayed a longer survival when compared with the population of patients receiving rego alone (p = 0.005) as well as the population receiving TFD/TPI alone (p < 0.001), suggesting a group enriched for favorable prognostic factors. However, when each group was analyzed separately, the addition of TFD/TPI therapy to the rego-treated group improved survival only in all-RAS WT patients (p = 0.003). Differently, the addition of rego therapy to TFD/TPI-treated patients significantly improved OS in the Codon 12 group (p = 0.0004), G12D group (p = 0.003), and the rare mutations group (p = 0.02), in addition to all-RAS WT patients (p = 0.002). The rego-TFD/TPI sequence, compared with the reverse sequence, significantly improved OS only in the KRAS codon 12 group (p = 0.003). CONCLUSIONS: Our data demonstrate that RAS mutations do not affect outcome in rego-treated patients as well as TFD/TPI-treated patients. Nevertheless, a trend toward a higher efficacy of rego in RAS-mutated (in particular codon 12, rare RAS mutations, and G12D) patients has been recorded. The rego-TFD/TPI sequence seems to be superior to the reverse sequence in patients carrying an RAS codon 12 mutation, although the impact of other factors as disease burden or performance status cannot be excluded.

Focus on RAS Codon 61 Mutations in Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: A Retrospective Analysis.

RAS mutations involving codon 61 are rare in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC), accounting for only 1-4%, but they have recently been identified with high frequency in the circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) of patients with secondary resistance to anti-EGFRs. This retrospective monocentric study aimed to investigate the clinical phenotype and prognostic performance of codon 61 RAS-mutated mCRC. Fifty patients with codon 61 RAS-mutated mCRC treated at our institution between January 2013 and December 2021 were enrolled. Additional datasets of codon 61 RAS wild-type mCRCs (648 patients) were used as comparators. The endpoint for prognostic assessment was overall survival (OS). Metastatic involvement of the peritoneum or ovary was significantly more frequent in codon 61 RAS-mutated mCRC compared to codon 61 RAS wild-type (54 vs. 28.5%), non-codon 61 RAS-mutated (35.6%), BRAF V600E-mutated (25%), and RAS/BRAF wild-type (20.5%) cohorts. At a median follow up of 96.2 months, the median OS for codon 61 RAS-mutated patients was significantly shorter compared to RAS/BRAF wild-type (26.9 vs. 36.0 months, HR 0.56) patients, while no significant difference was observed compared to non-codon 61 RAS-mutated and BRAF V600E-mutated patients. We showed a negative prognostic impact and a statistically significant correlation between codon 61 RAS mutations and metastatic involvement of the peritoneum and ovary.

External validation of a red cell-based blood prognostic score in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma treated with first-line immunotherapy combinations.

Immunotherapy combinations with tyrosine-kinase inhibitors (TKIs) and immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) had significantly improved outcomes of patients with mRCC. Predictive and prognostic factors are crucial to improve patients' counseling and management. The present study aimed to externally validate the prognostic value of a previously developed red cell-based score, including hemoglobin (Hb), mean corpuscular volume (MCV) and red cell distribution width (RDW), in patients with mRCC treated with first-line immunotherapy combinations (TKI plus ICI or ICI plus ICI). We performed a sub-analysis of a multicentre retrospective observational study (ARON-1 project) involving patients with mRCC treated with first-line immunotherapy combinations. Uni- and multivariable Cox regression models were used to assess the correlation between the red cell-based score and progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS). Logistic regression were used to estimate the correlation between the score and the objective response rate (ORR). The prognostic impact of the red cell-based score on PFS and OS was confirmed in the whole population regardless of the immunotherapy combination used [median PFS (mPFS): 17.4 vs 8.2 months, HR 0.66, 95% CI 0.47-0.94; median OS (mOS): 42.0 vs 17.3 months, HR 0.60, 95% CI 0.39-0.92; p < 0.001 for both]. We validated the prognostic significance of the red cell-based score in patients with mRCC treated with first-line immunotherapy combinations. The score is easy to use in daily clinical practice and it might improve patient counselling.

Theranostics revolution in prostate cancer: Basics, clinical applications, open issues and future perspectives.

In the last years, theranostics has expanded the therapeutic options available for prostate cancer patients. In this review, we explore this dynamic field and its potential to revolutionize precision medicine for prostate cancer. We delve into the foundational principles, clinical applications, and emerging opportunities, emphasizing the potential synergy between radioligand therapy and other systemic treatments. Additionally, we address the ongoing challenges, including optimizing patient selection, assessing treatment responses, and determining the role of theranostics within the broader landscape of prostate cancer treatment.

Retrospective Correlation between First Drug Treatment Duration and Survival Outcomes in Sequential Treatment with Regorafenib and Trifluridine/Tipiracil in Refractory Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: A Real-World Subgroup Analysis.

Background: Patients with refractory metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) rarely receive third-line or further treatment. In this context, regorafenib (R) and trifluridine/tipiracil (T) are two important novel therapeutic choices with statistically significant increases in overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), and disease control, with different toxicity profiles. This study is a subgroup analysis of our larger retrospective study, already published, whose objective was to assess the outcomes of patients when R and T were given sequentially. Patients and Methods: The study involved thirteen Italian cancer centers on a 10-year retrospective observation (2012-2022). In this subgroup analysis, we focused our attention on the correlation between the first drug treatment duration (<3 months, 3 to <6 months and ≥6 months) and survival outcomes in patients who had received the sequence regorafenib-to-trifluridine/tipiracil, or vice versa. Results: The initial study included 866 patients with mCRC who received sequential T/R, or R/T, or T or R alone. This analysis is focused on evaluating the impact of the duration of the first treatment in the sequence on clinical outcomes (OS, PFS) and includes 146 and 116 patients of the T/R and R/T sequences, respectively. Based on the duration of the first drug treatment, subgroups for the T/R sequence included 27 patients (18.4%) who received T for <3 months, 86 (58.9%) treated for 3 to <6 months, and 33 (22.6%) treated for ≥6 months; in the reverse sequence (R as the first drug), subgroups included 18 patients (15.5%) who received their first treatment for <3 months, 62 (53.4%) treated for 3 to <6 months, and 35 (31.0%) treated for ≥6 months. In patients who received their first drug treatment for a period of 3 to <6 months, the R/T sequence had a significantly longer median OS (13.7 vs. 10.8 months, p = 0.0069) and a longer median PFS (10.8 vs. 8.5 months, p = 0.0003) than the T/R group. There were no statistically significant differences between groups with first drug treatment durations of <3 months and ≥6 months. Conclusions: Our analysis seems to suggest that the administration of R for a period of 3 to <6 months before that of T can prolong both OS and PFS, as compared to the opposite sequence.

2023 ASCO Genitourinary Cancers Symposium: a focus on urothelial carcinoma.

In this article, we describe the main acquisitions of urothelial carcinoma (UC) management reported at the 2023 American Society of Clinical Oncology Genitourinary Cancers Symposium. A major development of this year was characterized by the confirmation of a disease-free survival advantage of adjuvant nivolumab for high-risk muscle-invasive urothelial carcinoma after radical resection at longer follow-up. In the metastatic setting, the updated analysis of the IMvigor130 study confirmed the failure of the strategy of adding immunotherapy (i.e. atezolizumab) to first-line chemotherapy; analogously atezolizumab monotherapy did not improve overall survival compared to chemotherapy in untreated metastatic urothelial carcinoma (mUC). Furthermore, interesting data were presented concerning future treatment options. In particular, immunotherapy (IO) with pembrolizumab showed promising activity in patients with high-risk non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer unresponsive to bacillus Calmette-Guérin (KEYNOTE-057). The antibody-drug conjugate sacituzumab govitecan demonstrated a relevant activity in platinum (PT)-ineligible mUC patients progressed after prior IO. Certainly, the lack of predictive biomarkers of response to a specific therapy highlights the urgent need for comprehensive characterization of UC for a personalized therapeutic approach that will improve patient outcomes.

Treatment Settings and Outcomes with Regorafenib and Trifluridine/Tipiracil at Third-Line Treatment and beyond in Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: A Real-World Multicenter Retrospective Study.

BACKGROUND: Patients with refractory mCRC rarely undergo third-line or subsequent treatment. This strategy could negatively impact their survival. In this setting, regorafenib (R) and trifluridine/tipiracil (T) are two key new treatment options with statistically significant improvements in overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), and disease control with different tolerance profiles. This study aimed to retrospectively evaluate the efficacy and safety profiles of these agents in real-world practice. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In 2012-2022, 866 patients diagnosed with mCRC who received sequential R and T (T/R, n = 146; R/T, n = 116]) or T (n = 325]) or R (n = 279) only were retrospectively recruited from 13 Italian cancer institutes. RESULTS: The median OS is significantly longer in the R/T group (15.9 months) than in the T/R group (13.9 months) (p = 0.0194). The R/T sequence had a statistically significant advantage in the mPFS, which was 8.8 months with T/R vs. 11.2 months with R/T (p = 0.0005). We did not find significant differences in outcomes between groups receiving T or R only. A total of 582 grade 3/4 toxicities were recorded. The frequency of grade 3/4 hand-foot skin reactions was higher in the R/T sequence compared to the reverse sequence (37.3% vs. 7.4%) (p = 0.01), while grade 3/4 neutropenia was slightly lower in the R/T group than in the T/R group (66.2% vs. 78.2%) (p = 0.13). Toxicities in the non-sequential groups were similar and in line with previous studies. CONCLUSIONS: The R/T sequence resulted in a significantly longer OS and PFS and improved disease control compared with the reverse sequence. R and T given not sequentially have similar impacts on survival. More data are needed to define the best sequence and to explore the efficacy of sequential (T/R or R/T) treatment combined with molecular-targeted drugs.

2023 ASCO genitourinary cancers symposium: focus on renal cell carcinoma.

This article describes the main acquisitions of renal cell carcinoma (RCC) management presented during the 2023 American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) Genitourinary Cancers Symposium. In particular, the efficacy of adjuvant pembrolizumab in patients with resected renal cell carcinoma (RCC) at increased risk of recurrence was confirmed through a subgroup analysis. In the metastatic setting, the updated analysis of the CheckMate 9ER study confirmed the efficacy in terms of overall survival (OS) of the combination of nivolumab plus cabozantinib; of note, this survival advantage was clear in the subgroup of patients at poor IMDC prognosis, but not in favorable IMDC risk group patients. As concern the triplet therapy (i.e. nivolumab+ipilumumab+cabozantinib), the updated analysis of the COSMIC-313 study confirmed a significant PFS advantage in the subgroup of mRCC patients at intermediate IMDC risk, while the lack of benefit in the poor risk group supports the critical role of immunotherapy (but not of VEGFR-TKIs) in this poor prognosis subgroup of patients. Finally, the activity of cabozantinib as second-line therapy after progression to ICI-based combinations was prospectively assessed. This 2023 ASCO Genitourinary Cancer Symposium laid the foundations for further knowledge development necessary for an increasingly personalized management of mRCC.

Efficacy of third-line anti-EGFR-based treatment versus regorafenib or trifluridine/tipiracil according to primary tumor site in RAS/BRAF wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer patients.

Background: Right- (R) and left-sided (L) metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) exhibit different clinical and molecular features. Several retrospective analyses showed that survival benefit of anti-EGFR-based therapy is limited to RAS/BRAF wt L-sided mCRC patients. Few data are available about third-line anti-EGFR efficacy according to primary tumor site. Methods: RAS/BRAF wt patients mCRC treated with third-line anti-EGFR-based therapy versus regorafenib or trifluridine/tipiracil (R/T) were retrospectively collected. The objective of the analysis was to compare treatment efficacy according to tumor site. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS); secondary endpoints were overall survival (OS), response rate (RR) and toxicity. Results: A total of 76 RAS/BRAF wt mCRC patients, treated with third-line anti-EGFR-based therapy or R/T, were enrolled. Of those, 19 (25%) patients had a R-sided tumor (9 patients received anti-EGFR treatment and 10 patients R/T) and 57 (75%) patients had a L-sided tumor (30 patients received anti-EGFR treatment and 27 patients R/T). A significant PFS [7.2 vs 3.6 months, HR 0.43 (95% CI 0.2-0.76), p= 0.004] and OS benefit [14.9 vs 10.9 months, HR 0.52 (95% CI 0.28-0.98), p= 0.045] in favor of anti-EGFR therapy vs R/T was observed in the L-sided tumor group. No difference in PFS and OS was observed in the R-sided tumor group. A significant interaction according to primary tumor site and third-line regimen was observed for PFS (p= 0.05). RR was significantly higher in L-sided patients treated with anti-EGFR vs R/T (43% vs. 0%; p <0.0001), no difference was observed in R-sided patients. At the multivariate analysis, third-line regimen was independently associated with PFS in L-sided patients. Conclusions: Our results demonstrated a different benefit from third-line anti-EGFR-based therapy according to primary tumor site, confirming the role of L-sided tumor in predicting benefit from third-line anti-EGFR vs R/T. At the same time, no difference was observed in R-sided tumor.