Association of Tumor Mutational Burden and Microsatellite Instability With Response and Outcomes in Patients With Urothelial Carcinoma Treated With Immune Checkpoint Inhibitor.

BACKGROUND: Microsatellite Instability (MSI) and Tumor Mutational Burden (TMB) are associated with immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) efficacy. We examined the association between TMB and MSI status with survival in patients with urothelial carcinoma (UC) treated with ICI. METHODS: Patients from 15 institutions were treated with ICI monotherapy. Primary endpoint was overall survival and secondary endpoints included observed response rate (ORR), and progression-free (PFS) calculated from ICI initiation. TMB was analyzed as dichotomous (≥10 vs. <10 mut/Mb) and continuous variable. RESULTS: We identified 411 patients: 203 were treated with ICI 1L/upfront; 104 with 2 + L. For the 1L/upfront: median [m] OS was numerically longer in patients with TMB ≥10 versus TMB <10: mOS 35 versus 26 months (HR = 0.6) and with MSI-H and MSI-S (mOS NR vs. 22 months), though neither association was statistically significant. A statistically significant association was found between TMB (continuous variable) and OS (HR = 0.96, P = .01). For 2 + L: mOS was numerically longer in patients with TMB ≥10 versus TMB <10: (20 vs. 12 months; HR = 0.9); mOS was 12 and 17 months for patients with MSI-H and MSI-S, respectively. Eighty-nine patients received maintenance avelumab (mAV): mOS was longer in patients with TMB ≥10 versus TMB <10: 61 versus 17 months; (HR = 0.2, P = .02) and with MSI-H and MSI-S (NR vs. 24 months). CONCLUSIONS: Although not reaching statistical significance in several subsets, patients with high TMB and MSI-H had numerically longer OS with ICI, especially with mAV. Further validation is needed.

Clinical Outcomes for Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma (mRCC) Patients Ineligible for Front-line Clinical Trials.

Clinical trials for immunotherapy-based regimens in metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) have extensive inclusion and exclusion criteria. We investigated the clinical outcomes in a real-world cohort of patients who would not have met the criteria for inclusion in front-line mRCC trials. Patients treated with ipilimumab/nivolumab and axitinib/pembrolizumab for front-line mRCC were identified and divided into clinical trial eligible (CTE) and clinical trial ineligible (CTI) cohorts based on key inclusion or exclusion criteria from their respective Phase-3 registration trials. Clinical outcomes were compared in CTE and CTI cohorts. A total of 62 patients treated with axitinib/pembrolizumab and 103 treated with ipilimumab/nivolumab were identified. The International Metastatic RCC Database Consortium (IMDC) criteria were similar across CTE and CTI patients in axitinib/pembrolizumab and ipilimumab/nivolumab cohorts. In the axitinib/pembrolizumab cohort (n = 62), 24 (39%) patients were CTI. The major reasons for the ineligibility were lab abnormalities (n = 11), histology (n = 9), and brain metastases (n = 3). There was no significant difference in response rates (P = 0.08). The median progression-free survival (PFS) was numerically longer in CTE patients (28 vs 12 months; P = 0.09). The overall survival (OS) was higher in the CTE patients (P = 0.02). In the ipilimumab/nivolumab cohort (n = 103), 59 (57%) were CTI. The most common reasons for ineligibility were brain metastases (n = 18), lab abnormalities (n = 16), and histology (n = 16). There was no significant difference in response rates (P = 0.22). However, PFS (P = 0.003) and OS (P < 0.0001) were higher in the CTE patients. In conclusion, many real-world patients are ineligible for RCC clinical trials and had worse outcomes when compared to trial-eligible patients. Additional treatment options are needed for these patients, as well as strategies to include them in prospective trials.

Identification and Validation of Prognostic Model for Tumor Microenvironment-Associated Genes in Bladder Cancer Based on Single-Cell RNA Sequencing Data Sets.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to elucidate the relationship between the tumor microenvironment (TME) and cellular diversity in bladder cancer (BLCA) progression, leveraging single-cell RNA sequencing (scRNA-seq) data to identify potential prognostic biomarkers and construct a prognostic model for BLCA. METHODS: We analyzed scRNA-seq data of normal and tumor bladder cells from the Gene Expression Omnibus (GEO) database to uncover crucial markers within the bladder TME. The study compared gene expression in normal versus tumor bladder cells, identifying differentially expressed genes. These genes were subsequently assessed for their prognostic significance using patient follow-up data from The Cancer Genome Atlas. Prognostic models were constructed using Least Absolute Shrinkage and Selection Operator and multivariate Cox regression analyses, focusing on eight genes of interest. The predictive performance of the model was also tested against additional GEO data sets (GSE31684, GSE13507, and GSE32894). RESULTS: The prognostic model demonstrated reliable prediction of patient outcomes. Validation through gene set enrichment analysis and immune cell infiltration assessment supported the model's efficacy. The results from both the univariate and multivariate analyses suggest that the risk score is an independent prognostic factor with a hazard ratio of 2.97 (95% CI, 2.28 to 3.9, P < .001). In the validation cohort, the AUC at 1, 2, and 3 years is 0.74, 0.74, and 0.72, respectively. CONCLUSION: Our findings proposed biomarkers with prognostic potential, laying the groundwork for future in vitro validation and therapeutic exploration. This contributes to a deeper understanding of the genes associated with bladder TME and may improve prognostic precision in BLCA management.

Bladder-sparing Therapy for Bacillus Calmette-Guérin-unresponsive Non-muscle-invasive Bladder Cancer: International Bladder Cancer Group Recommendations for Optimal Sequencing and Patient Selection.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: There has been a recent surge in the development of agents for bacillus Calmette-Guérin-unresponsive (BCG-U) non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC). Critical assessment of these agents and practical recommendations for optimal selection of patients and therapies are urgently needed, especially in the absence of randomized trials on bladder-sparing treatment (BST) options. METHODS: A global committee of bladder cancer experts was assembled to develop recommendations on BST for BCG-U NMIBC. Working groups reviewed the literature and developed draft recommendations, which were then voted on by International Bladder Cancer Group (IBCG) members using a modified Delphi process. During a live meeting in August 2023, voting results and supporting evidence were presented, and recommendations were refined on the basis of meeting discussions. Final recommendations achieved >75% agreement during the meeting, and some were further refined via web conferences and e-mail discussions. KEY FINDINGS AND LIMITATIONS: There is currently no single optimal agent for patients with BCG-U disease who seek to avoid radical cystectomy (RC). BST selection should be personalized, taking into account individual patient characteristics and preferences, tumor attributes, and efficacy/toxicity data for the agents available. For patients with BCG-U carcinoma in situ (CIS), gemcitabine/docetaxel (GEM/DOCE), nadofaragene firadenovec (NFF), and nogapendekin alfa inbakicept-pmln (NAI) + BCG are recommended; because of its systemic toxicity, pembrolizumab should only be offered after other options are exhausted. For patients with BCG-U papillary-only tumors, GEM/DOCE, NFF, NAI + BCG, single-agent chemotherapy, hyperthermic mitomycin C, and pembrolizumab are recommended. Given the modest efficacy of available options, clinical trial participation is encouraged. For unapproved agents with reported data, IBCG recommendations await the final results of pivotal trials. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: The IBCG consensus recommendations provide practical guidance on BST for BCG-U NMIBC.

Phase II Trial of Intermittent Therapy in Patients with Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Treated with Front-line Ipilimumab and Nivolumab.

INTRODUCTION: The combination of ipilimumab/nivolumab is approved for patients with treatment-naïve, intermediate-, and poor-risk metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC), but duration of therapy and safety/efficacy of reinduction at progression is unknown. A phase II trial of intermittent ipilimumab/nivolumab with reinduction at progression was conducted (NCT03126331). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with treatment-naïve mRCC were treated with induction ipilimumab/nivolumab followed by up to 24 weeks of maintenance nivolumab. Patients who achieved a complete response (CR) or partial response (PR) were eligible for inclusion and entered a treatment-free observation period. Patients were restaged every 12 weeks. Patients with no disease progression (PD) remained off therapy. Upon PD, patients were re-challenged with 2 doses of ipilimumab/nivolumab every 3 weeks. Study objectives were to estimate success rate of observation in patients who achieve a CR/PR, and to assess toxicity in patients undergoing reinduction. The study accrued slower than expected and was closed prior to the anticipated accrual goal of 20 patients. RESULTS: Nine patients were included; 89% male, median age 57, 67% clear-cell histology, and 78% intermediate-risk by IMDC criteria. Response to ipilimumab/nivolumab followed by nivolumab maintenance prior to enrollment was 33% CR and 67% PR. Most (78%) patients have remained off therapy, with a median treatment-free interval (TFI) of 34.3 months (range, 8.7-41.8). Two patients had PD off therapy and received 2 cycles of reinduction ipilimumab and nivolumab. No grade 3 or greater toxicities occurred with reinduction. Both patients developed PD at their first scans after reinduction. CONCLUSION: This prospective study demonstrates that patients with a radiographic response to ipilimumab/nivolumab can have prolonged treatment-free intervals. Further studies of de-escalation strategies are warranted. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT03126331 [Date of registration 4/27/2017; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03126331].

A Podcast on Platinum Eligibility and Treatment Sequencing in Platinum-Eligible Patients with Locally Advanced or Metastatic Urothelial Carcinoma.

The treatment landscape for patients with advanced urothelial carcinoma continues to evolve. Enfortumab vedotin plus pembrolizumab has received Food and Drug Administration approval based on recent phase 3 trial data showing superior efficacy compared with first-line platinum-based chemotherapy; however, its distinct toxicity profile may make it less suitable for some patients, and availability in some countries may be limited by cost considerations. Consequently, platinum-based chemotherapy is expected to remain an important first-line treatment option. Choice of platinum regimen (cisplatin- or carboplatin-based) is informed by assessment of clinical characteristics, including performance status, kidney function, and presence of peripheral neuropathy or heart failure. For patients without disease progression after completing platinum-based chemotherapy, avelumab first-line maintenance treatment is recommended by international guidelines. For patients who have disease progression, pembrolizumab is the preferred approach. Additionally, following results from a recent phase 3 trial, nivolumab plus cisplatin-based chemotherapy has also received Food and Drug Administration approval and is an additional first-line treatment option for cisplatin-eligible patients. Later-line options for patients with advanced urothelial carcinoma, depending on prior treatment, may include enfortumab vedotin, erdafitinib (for patients with FGFR2/3 mutations or fusions/rearrangements), sacituzumab govitecan, and platinum rechallenge. For the small proportion of patients ineligible for any platinum-based chemotherapy (i.e., unsuitable for cisplatin or carboplatin), immune checkpoint inhibitor monotherapy with pembrolizumab or atezolizumab is a first-line treatment option, although approved agents vary between countries. In summary, this podcast discusses recent developments in the treatment landscape for advanced urothelial carcinoma, eligibility for platinum-based chemotherapy, potential first-line treatment options, and treatment sequencing. Supplementary file1 (MP4 246907 KB).

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.

Current Status and Challenges in Rare Genitourinary Cancer Research and Future Directions.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: In contemporary urological practice, managing rare genitourinary (GU) malignancies presents significant challenges, necessitating a comprehensive understanding of their unique characteristics and tailored treatment approaches. RECENT FINDINGS: Rare GU malignancies, whether per se, variants of common histologies, or common tumors in uncommon locations, often lack widely available clinical guidelines. Consequently, treatment decisions are frequently based on empirical evidence, risking suboptimal outcomes. However, recent advances in molecular profiling, targeted therapies, and immunotherapy offer promising avenues for improving management strategies and patient outcomes. This review provides a comprehensive overview of some rare GU malignancies encountered in clinical practice, including their distinct pathological features, current management approaches, and ongoing research directions. Understanding the complexities of these rare tumors and implementing multidisciplinary treatment strategies are essential for optimizing patient care and improving survival outcomes.

The spectrum of cutaneous toxicities related to novel genitourinary cancer therapies.

CONTEXT: Genitourinary cancers (GUCs) encompass malignancies affecting the urinary and reproductive systems, including renal cell carcinoma (RCC), urothelial carcinoma (UC), and prostate cancer (PC). With the rapidly evolving therapeutic domain of these cancers, cutaneous adverse events (AEs) remain among the most observed toxicities. OBJECTIVE: To explore the dermatologic AEs linked to novel GUC treatments, their underlying pathophysiology, clinical presentations, and risk factors. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: A narrative review of the literature from PubMed and Embase databases was conducted. The search strategy included dermatologic/cutaneous adverse events, risk factors, and pathophysiology in conjunction with the following classes of therapies; immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs), antiangiogenic therapies, enfortumab vedotin (EV), erdafitinib, and androgen receptor antagonists (ARAs). EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: Maculopapular rash, pruritus, and alopecia are present among the five classes of therapies. ICIs demonstrate the highest incidence of severe drug AEs including Steven Johnson syndrome/toxic epidermal necrolysis. Unique cutaneous AEs present with specific therapies including hand-foot skin reaction and subungual splinter hemorrhage with antiangiogenic drugs, stomatitis/mucositis and onycholysis with erdafitinib. Incidence and type of cutaneous AE also differed within therapies in the same class as seen with apalutamide displaying the highest risk of cutaneous AEs within ARAs. Risk factors for development of cutaneous AEs can be general to therapies, or specific, and include age, immune status, BMI, and gender. CONCLUSIONS: Dermatologic AEs may impact patients' quality of life and increase the tendency to dose reduce, hold or discontinue life-saving therapies, underscoring the need for vigilant monitoring, early recognition, and collaborative management between medical oncologists, pharmacists, dermatologists and other specialists.

Optimizing the Use of Next-Generation Sequencing Assays in Patients With Urothelial Carcinoma: Recommendations by the 2023 San Raffaele Retreat Panel.

BACKGROUND: The application of precision medicine in clinical practice implies a thorough evaluation of actionable genomic alterations to streamline therapeutic decision making. Comprehensive genomic profiling of tumor via next-generation sequencing (NGS) represents a great opportunity but also several challenges. During the 2023 San Raffaele Retreat, we aimed to provide expert recommendations for the optimal use of NGS in urothelial carcinoma (UC). MATERIALS AND METHODS: A modified Delphi method was utilized, involving a panel of 12 experts in UC from European and United States centers, including oncologists, urologists, pathologists, and translational scientists. An initial survey, conducted before the meeting, delivered 15 statements to the panel. A consensus was defined when ≥70% agreement was reached for each statement. Statements not meeting the consensus threshold were discussed during the meeting. RESULTS: Nine of the 15 statements covering patient selection, cancer characteristics, and type of NGS assay, achieved a consensus during the survey. The remaining six statements addressing the optimal timing of NGS use, the ideal source of tumor biospecimen for NGS testing, and the subsequent need to evaluate the germline nature of certain genomic findings were discussed during the meeting, leading to unanimous agreement at the end of the conference. CONCLUSION: This consensus-building effort addressed multiple unanswered questions regarding the use of NGS in UC. The opinion of experts was in favor of broader use of NGS. In a setting where recommendations/guidelines may be limited, these insights may aid clinicians to provide informed counselling and raise the bar of precision and personalized therapy.

NCCN Guidelines® Insights: Prostate Cancer, Version 3.2024.

The NCCN Guidelines for Prostate Cancer include recommendations for staging and risk assessment after a prostate cancer diagnosis and for the care of patients with localized, regional, recurrent, and metastatic disease. These NCCN Guidelines Insights summarize the panel's discussions for the 2024 update to the guidelines with regard to initial risk stratification, initial management of very-low-risk disease, and the treatment of nonmetastatic recurrence.

Effect of Sex on the Oncological Outcomes in Response to Immunotherapy and Antibody-drug Conjugates in Patients with Urothelial and Kidney Cancer: A Systematic Review and a Network Meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) and antibody-drug conjugates (ADCs) herald a transformative era in metastatic renal cell carcinoma (RCC) and transitional cell carcinoma (TCC) treatment, amid acknowledged sex-based disparities in these cancers. We conducted a systematic review and network meta-analysis (NMA) to identify sex-specific differences in the efficacy of ICI/ADC monotherapy or combination therapies for RCC and TCC survival, in metastatic and adjuvant settings. METHODS: A systematic search was conducted up to October 2023 for English articles on ICIs and ADCs as systemic therapies (ICIs in first-line and adjuvant treatment for RCC, ICIs and ADCs in first- and second-line treatment for TCC). Randomised clinical trials were considered. The primary objective was overall survival (OS) of ICIs and ADCs between males and females. The secondary outcomes included progression-free survival, overall response rate, disease-free survival, and recurrence-free survival. Treatment efficacy was evaluated by sex via odds ratios (ORs) and confidence intervals compared with controls. Log ORs were used for creating a frequentist NMA. This meta-analysis was registered on PROSPERO (CRD42023468632). KEY FINDINGS AND LIMITATIONS: Eighteen articles met the inclusion criteria. Females had an advantage for RCC-adjuvant treatment for atezolizumab (log OR [SE] = -0.57 ± 0.25, p = 0.024) in OS. Males showed a survival advantage in TCC second-line treatment for ADC-Nectin 4 (log OR [SE] = 0.65 ± 0.28, p = 0.02). No other significant results were shown. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: The NMA revealed gender-specific variations in ICI and ADC responses for RCC and TCC, offering insights for personalised cancer care and addressing disparities in cancer care and outcomes. PATIENT SUMMARY: In this systematic review, we looked at the sex differences for metastatic renal cell carcinoma (RCC) and transitional cell carcinoma (TCC) for antibody-drug conjugates and immune checkpoint inhibitors. In our analysis, female and male sex has better overall survival for adjuvant and second-line therapies for RCC and TCC, respectively. Urgent research on gender-specific cancer therapies is imperative.

Efficacy of immune checkpoint inhibitors combinations as first-line systemic treatment in patients with advanced urothelial carcinoma: A systematic review and network meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Combinations of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) with platinum-based chemotherapy (PlatinumCT) or with another ICI in the first-line setting for patients with metastatic urothelial carcinoma (mUC) have mixed results. METHODS: Records were searched electronically from January 2019 to January 2024. A meta-analysis was performed to evaluate OS, progression-free survival (PFS), and overall response rate (ORR). RESULTS: Immune-based combinations were associated with an OS (HR: 0.75; 95% CI: 0.61-0.92; p < 0.001; I2= 84.1%) and PFS benefit in the intention-to-treat population (HR: 0.67; 95%CI: 0.51-0.89; p < 0.001; I2 = 89.7%). There was no ORR improvement with immune-based combinations (HR: 1.36; 95% CI:0.84-2.20; p < 0.001; I2 = 92.6%). CONCLUSION: This systematic review and study-level meta-analysis demonstrated that the immune-based combinations in first-line treatment for patients with mUC are associated with survival benefit.

Enfortumab Vedotin and Pembrolizumab in Untreated Advanced Urothelial Cancer.

BACKGROUND: No treatment has surpassed platinum-based chemotherapy in improving overall survival in patients with previously untreated locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma. METHODS: We conducted a phase 3, global, open-label, randomized trial to compare the efficacy and safety of enfortumab vedotin and pembrolizumab with the efficacy and safety of platinum-based chemotherapy in patients with previously untreated locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma. Patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive 3-week cycles of enfortumab vedotin (at a dose of 1.25 mg per kilogram of body weight intravenously on days 1 and 8) and pembrolizumab (at a dose of 200 mg intravenously on day 1) (enfortumab vedotin-pembrolizumab group) or gemcitabine and either cisplatin or carboplatin (determined on the basis of eligibility to receive cisplatin) (chemotherapy group). The primary end points were progression-free survival as assessed by blinded independent central review and overall survival. RESULTS: A total of 886 patients underwent randomization: 442 to the enfortumab vedotin-pembrolizumab group and 444 to the chemotherapy group. As of August 8, 2023, the median duration of follow-up for survival was 17.2 months. Progression-free survival was longer in the enfortumab vedotin-pembrolizumab group than in the chemotherapy group (median, 12.5 months vs. 6.3 months; hazard ratio for disease progression or death, 0.45; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.38 to 0.54; P<0.001), as was overall survival (median, 31.5 months vs. 16.1 months; hazard ratio for death, 0.47; 95% CI, 0.38 to 0.58; P<0.001). The median number of cycles was 12 (range, 1 to 46) in the enfortumab vedotin-pembrolizumab group and 6 (range, 1 to 6) in the chemotherapy group. Treatment-related adverse events of grade 3 or higher occurred in 55.9% of the patients in the enfortumab vedotin-pembrolizumab group and in 69.5% of those in the chemotherapy group. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment with enfortumab vedotin and pembrolizumab resulted in significantly better outcomes than chemotherapy in patients with untreated locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma, with a safety profile consistent with that in previous reports. (Funded by Astellas Pharma US and others; EV-302 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04223856.).

Real-World Overall Survival and Treatment Patterns by PTEN Status in Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer.

PURPOSE: It is estimated that the PTEN tumor suppressor gene is functionally lost in 40%-50% of patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). There is limited information on the prognostic significance of PTEN status identified with genomic testing. This real-world cohort study assessed PTEN as a genetic biomarker using data from US-based oncology practices. METHODS: This retrospective real-world cohort study used a deidentified US-based metastatic prostate cancer clinicogenomic database linked to longitudinal clinical data derived from electronic health records. Patients were aged 18 years and older and diagnosed with mCRPC between January 1, 2018, and June 30, 2021. Comprehensive genomic profiling (CGP) of tumor specimens was performed using next-generation sequencing. First-line (1L) and second-line (2L) treatment patterns were assessed and stratified by PTEN status. Kaplan-Meier methods and a multivariable Cox model were used to compare the real-world overall survival by PTEN status among patients who received 1L novel hormone therapy or taxanes. RESULTS: In patients with mCRPC who underwent CGP, PTEN loss of function (LOF) was associated with decreased survival compared with intact PTEN (hazard ratio, 1.61 [95% CI, 1.07 to 2.42]; P = .024). The results were not influenced by 1L treatment type. 1L treatment patterns were similar between intact PTEN and PTEN LOF subgroups, with abiraterone and enzalutamide being the two most common treatments in both groups. Patients with PTEN LOF were less likely to receive 2L treatments than patients with intact PTEN. CONCLUSION: PTEN LOF, identified with genomic testing, was associated with decreased survival and negative prognoses in patients with mCRPC.

Three- and Seven-month Prostate-specific Antigen Levels as Prognostic Markers for Overall Survival in Metastatic Hormone-sensitive Prostate Cancer: Results from SWOG S1216, a Phase 3 Randomized Trial of Androgen Deprivation Plus Orteronel or Bicalutamide.

BACKGROUND: A robust decrease in prostate-specific antigen (PSA) in response to androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) has been evaluated as a prognostic factor in patients with metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC) since 2006, but the treatment of mHSPC has since evolved to include intensified therapy. OBJECTIVE: We assessed the association of PSA levels at 3 (PSA-3mo) and 7 (PSA-7mo) mo with overall survival (OS) in patients with mHSPC treated with ADT combined with either bicalutamide or orteronel in the S1216 phase 3 clinical trial. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: PSA responses to treatment of patients in the S1216 trial were categorized as: complete response (CR) if PSA was ≤0.2 ng/ml, partial response if PSA was >0.2 and ≤4 ng/ml, and no response (NR) if PSA was >4 ng/ml. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: A Cox analysis (adjusted for treatment arm and three stratification factors: performance status, severity of disease, and early vs late induction) was used for OS association. While PSA-7mo association was a prespecified objective, PSA-3mo association was also evaluated. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: A total of 1251 and 1231 patients from the S1216 study were evaluable for PSA-3mo and PSA-7mo, respectively. A PSA-7mo CR was associated with improved OS compared with NR (HR: 0.20; p < 0.0001). A PSA-3mo CR showed a similar association to NR (HR: 0.34; p < 0.0001). The association of a PSA response with survival did not differ by treatment arm at either time point. CONCLUSIONS: The PSA-3mo and PSA-7mo responses were strongly associated with OS; taken with other emerging prognostic biomarkers, these markers may allow for early identification of patients at the highest risk of death, aid with counseling in clinical practice, and permit design of future clinical trials targeting these patients. PATIENT SUMMARY: A low prostate-specific antigen level at 3 or 7 mo after starting treatment for metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer predicts longer survival regardless of the first treatment given with androgen deprivation therapy.

Markers of bone metabolism and overall survival in men with bone-metastatic hormone sensitive prostate cancer (HSPC): A subset analysis of SWOG S1216, a phase III trial of androgen deprivation with or without orteronel.

BACKGROUND: Circulating biomarkers of bone metabolism are significantly associated with overall survival (OS) in men with advanced prostate cancer. In the SWOG S1216 phase III trial, we showed that elevated bone biomarkers are significantly associated with an increased risk of death in hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (HSPC) regardless of the status of bone metastases, identifying three risk groups with differential OS outcomes based on bone biomarker status. Here we report the association of bone biomarkers with OS in men with HSPC and documented skeletal metastases as part of a planned subset analysis of S1216. METHODS: Bone resorption [C-telopeptide (CTx); Pyridinoline (PYD)] and bone formation markers [C-terminal collagen propeptide (CICP); bone alkaline phosphatase (BAP)] were assessed in blood from men with bone metastatic HSPC. Patients were randomly divided into training (n = 238) and validation (n = 475) sets. In the training set, recursive partitioning that maximizes discrimination of OS was used to identify the dichotomous cut-point for each biomarker and for a combination of biomarker split points to define prognostic groups. In the validation set, Cox proportional hazards models were used to assess the impact of biomarkers on OS, adjusted for patient and tumor characteristics. RESULTS: Of 1279 men, 713 had both baseline bone metastases and evaluable bone biomarkers. Patient characteristics were similar between the overall population and the subset with bone metastases. Elevated levels of CICP, CTX, and PYD were strongly prognostic for OS. Hazard ratios (95% CI) for OS adjusted for treatment arm and baseline clinical variables were: BAP-1.31 (0.93, 1.84), p = 0.12; CICP-1.58 (1.09, 2.29), p < 0.02; CTx - 1.55 (1.12, 2.15), p = 0.008; and PYD-1.66 (1.27, 2.217), p = 0.0002. There was no evidence of interaction between elevated biomarkers and treatment (all p > 0.2). Recursive partitioning algorithms identified four groups of patients with differential OS outcomes based on bone biomarkers, adjusted for baseline clinical variables, with median OS ranging from 2.3 years (highest risk group) to 7.5 years (lowest risk group). CONCLUSIONS: In this planned S1216 subset analysis of men with HSPC and bone metastases, elevated serum markers of bone metabolism were significantly associated with worse OS. Bone biomarker levels alone and in combination with patient and tumor characteristics identify unique subsets of men with differential OS outcomes. GOV IDENTIFIER: NCT01809691.

Immuno-Oncology Advances in Genitourinary Cancers.

Immuno-oncology (IO) has made monumental gains in the past decade in the genitourinary space. In this review, we highlight advances with IO in renal cell carcinoma where it now has become standard-of-care frontline therapy in the metastatic setting but also discuss challenges with the initial approach. In urothelial carcinoma, we discuss the growing use of IO including exciting recent updates with IO-based regimens that may soon become the new standard of care. We further discuss difficulties with IO in prostate cancer, germ cell tumors, and penile squamous cell carcinoma. Finally, we highlight advances in IO approaches beyond checkpoint inhibition including the role of the gut microbiome and T-cell redirecting therapies.