Reduced risk of secondary primary extra pulmonary cancer in advanced/metastatic lung cancer patients treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors.

BACKGROUND: Lung cancer survivors are at high risk of developing a second primary cancer (SPC). We explored the Unicancer Epidemiology Strategy Medical-Economics for advanced or metastatic lung cancer (AMLC) database to assess the impact of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) on the risk of SPC in patients with advanced/metastatic lung cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This retrospective study used data from patients with AMLC, with treatment initiated between January 1st 2015 and December 31st 2018. Patients with lung cancer as the second primary cancer were excluded and a 6-months landmark threshold was applied to exclude patients with synchronous SPC, patients dead without SPC or with a follow-up inferior to 6 months. A propensity score (PS) was calculated on the following baseline covariates: Age at locally advanced or metastatic diagnosis, sex, smoking status, metastatic status, performance status and histological type. The inverse probability of treatment weighting approach was used on the analyses aiming to assess the impact of ICI administered for AMLC, on the risk of occurrence of SPC. RESULTS: Among the 10 796 patients, 148 (1.4%) patients had a diagnosis of SPC in a median interval of 22 (min-max: 7-173) months. All the patients (100%) with locally advanced or metastatic LC received at least one systemic treatment including (chemotherapy regimen (n = 9 851, 91.2%); ICI (n = 4 648, 43.0%); targeted treatment (n = 3 500; 32.4%). 40 (0.9%) SPC were reported in the 4 648 patients with metastatic LC treated with ICI vs 108 (1.7%) out of the 6 148 who did not receive immunotherapy (p < 0.0001). The multivariate analysis identified that treatment with ICI in patients with AMLC is associated with a reduced risk of SPC (HR = 0.40, 95% CI 0.27-0.58). CONCLUSION: Treatment with ICI in AMLC patients was associated with a significantly reduced risk of SPC. Prospective studies are required to confirm these results.

Molecular screening program to select molecular-based recommended therapies for metastatic cancer patients: analysis from the ProfiLER trial.

BACKGROUND: Antitumor activity of molecular-targeted agents is guided by the presence of documented genomic alteration in specific histological subtypes. We aim to explore the feasibility, efficacy and therapeutic impact of molecular profiling in routine setting. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This multicentric prospective study enrolled adult or pediatric patients with solid or hematological advanced cancer previously treated in advanced/metastatic setting and noneligible to curative treatment. Each molecular profile was established on tumor, relapse or biopsies, and reviewed by a molecular tumor board (MTB) to identify molecular-based recommended therapies (MBRT). The main outcome was to assess the incidence rate of genomic mutations in routine setting, across specific histological types. Secondary objectives included a description of patients with actionable alterations and for whom MBRT was initiated, and overall response rate. RESULTS: Four centers included 2579 patients from February 2013 to February 2017, and the MTB reviewed the molecular profiles achieved for 1980 (76.8%) patients. The most frequently altered genes were CDKN2A (N = 181, 7%), KRAS (N = 177, 7%), PIK3CA (N = 185, 7%), and CCND1 (N = 104, 4%). An MBRT was recommended for 699/2579 patients (27%), and only 163/2579 patients (6%) received at least one MBRT. Out of the 182 lines of MBRT initiated, 23 (13%) partial responses were observed. However, only 0.9% of the whole cohort experienced an objective response. CONCLUSION: An MBRT was provided for 27% of patients in our study, but only 6% of patients actually received matched therapy with an overall response rate of 0.9%. Molecular screening should not be used at present to guide decision-making in routine clinical practice outside of clinical trials.This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01774409.

Letrozole and palbociclib versus chemotherapy as neoadjuvant therapy of high-risk luminal breast cancer.

Background: Palbociclib is a CDK4/6 inhibitor with demonstrated efficacy and safety in combination with endocrine therapy in advanced luminal breast cancer (LBC). We evaluated the respective efficacy and safety of chemotherapy and letrozole-palbociclib (LETPAL) combination as neoadjuvant treatment in patients with high-risk LBC. Patients and methods: NeoPAL (UCBG10/4, NCT02400567) is a randomised, parallel, non-comparative phase II study. Patients with ER-positive, HER2-negative, Prosigna®-defined luminal B, or luminal A and node-positive, stage II-III breast cancer, not candidate for breast-conserving surgery, were randomly assigned to either letrozole (2.5 mg daily) and palbociclib (125 mg daily, 3 weeks/4) during 19 weeks, or to FEC100 (5FU 500 mg/m2, epirubicin 100 mg/m2, cyclophosphamide 500 mg/m2)×3 21-day courses followed by docetaxel 100 mg/m2×3 21-day courses. Primary end point was residual cancer burden (RCB 0-I rate). Secondary end points included clinical response, proliferation-based markers, and safety. Results: Overall, 106 patients were randomised [median Prosigna® ROR Score 71 (22-93)]. RCB 0-I was observed in four and eight patients in LETPAL [7.7% (95% CI 0.4-14.9)] and chemotherapy [15.7% (95% CI 5.7-25.7)] arms, respectively. Pathological complete response rates were 3.8% and 5.9%. Clinical response (75%) and breast-conserving surgery rates (69%) were similar in both arms. Preoperative Endocrine Prognostic Index 0 scores (breast cancer-specific survival) were observed in 17.6% and 8.0% of patients in LETPAL and chemotherapy arms, respectively. Safety profile was as expected, with 2 versus 17 serious adverse events (including 11 grade 4 serious AEs in the chemotherapy arm). Conclusion: LETPAL combination was associated with poor pathological response but encouraging clinical and biomarker responses in Prosigna®-defined high-risk LBC. Contemporary chemotherapy regimen was associated with poor pathological and biomarker responses, with a much less favourable safety profile. LETPAL combination might represent an alternative to chemotherapy in early high-risk LBC. Clinical Trial Number: NCT02400567.

Ovarian suppression failure during GnRH agonist treatment: A report of three breast cancer patients.

In premenopausal women treated for breast cancer, endocrine therapy combining an aromatase inhibitor (AI) and a gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) agonist (GA) for ovarian suppression may be indicated in high-risk or in metastatic cancer. AIs are effective in premenopausal women only when ovarian estrogen production is suppressed, a state achievable through the use of GAs. However, a complete suppression sometimes proves elusive. We report here three cases of ovarian suppression failure in premenopausal breast cancer patients who received adjuvant AI+GA. Frequency of GA administration, BMI, and young age could affect gonadotropin suppression and may be implied in these failures. Clinical monitoring of these patients is advisable, and hormone assays and pelvic ultrasound should be performed in case of symptoms of estrogen activity.

Genomic alterations and radioresistance in breast cancer: an analysis of the ProfiLER protocol.

BACKGROUND: Breast cancer (BC) patients with comparable prognostic features have heterogeneous outcomes, party related to a possible radiotherapy resistance leading to local-regional recurrences (LRR). The objective of the present study was to identify predictive molecular biomarkers of LRR of BC. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Genetic profile of 146 BC patients' tumours included in the ProfiLER clinical trial (NC01774409) between 2013 and 2016 were analysed using next-generation-sequencing and comparative-genomic-hybridization tests. Patients and tumour characteristics were retrospectively collected and analysed for association with genomic rearrangements (mutations, amplification, deletions). Only gene alterations observed in >3% of the tumours were selected. RESULTS: A total of 193 genomic rearrangements were identified, and 16 were observed in >3% of tumours. One was statistically correlated to the risk of local relapse. A median loco-regional progression-free survival (LRPFS) of 23.6 years was reported for PIK3CA mutation carriers (n = 31, 21.2%) versus 9.9 years for PIK3CA wild-type patients (HR 0.27, 95% CI 0.12-0.65, P = 0.002 in univariate analysis). PIK3CA mutation was identified as an independent protective factor on LRR using multivariate analysis (HR 0.29, 95% CI 0.09-0.99, P = 0.047). All other mutations, amplifications or deletions were not found associated with LRPFS. CONCLUSION: PIK3CA mutation was associated with a lower risk of local relapse in this population of BCs. This is consistent with recent studies suggesting PIK3CA to be part of biological pathways impacting the radiosensitivity.

Phase II study of the PI3K inhibitor BKM120 in patients with advanced or recurrent endometrial carcinoma: a stratified type I-type II study from the GINECO group.

Backround:Patients with metastatic endometrial carcinoma have a poor prognosis and PIK3CA mutations and amplifications are common in these cancers. This study evaluated the efficacy and safety of the pure PI3K inhibitor BKM120 in advanced or recurrent endometrial carcinoma. METHODS: This phase II, multicentre, single-arm, double strata (histological low grade (LG) or high grade (HG)) open-label study enrolled patients with histologically confirmed advanced or recurrent endometrial carcinoma who had received not more than one prior chemotherapy regimen. Patients received initially BKM120 100 mg tablets once daily. Primary end points were proportion of patients free of progression at 2 months (HG strata) or at 3 months (LG strata), objective response rate (ORR), and safety. RESULTS: A total of 40 patients were enrolled, of whom 16 patients had received BKM120 at 100 mg. Because of high toxicities (cutaneous rash (54%), depressive events (47%), and anxiety (40%), the IDMC has proposed to stop recruitment at 100 mg and to continue the clinical trial with a lower dose of 60 mg per day. In addition, 24 patients (median age 67 years old) were newly enrolled (14 in the LG strata and 10 in the HG strata). Rate of nonprogression at 2 months in the HG strata was 70% and at 3 months was 60% in the LG strata. Median progression-free survival (PFS) for all patients is 4.5 months (CI 95% 2.8-6.1), and the median PFS for LG strata is 8.3 months compared with 3.8 months for the HG strata. No response was reported. At 60 mg per day, the most commonly reported treatment-related adverse events (AEs) were hyperglycaemia (58%), cognitive (31%), digestive (28%), hepatic liver functions (26%), and rash (23%). The most commonly reported treatment-related grade ⩾3 AEs were HTA (17%), hyperglycaemia (17%), and increased alanine aminotransferase (24%). Five patients (21%) stopped BKM120 for toxicity. CONCLUSIONS: The BKM120 was associated with an unfavourable safety profile and minimal antitumour activity in monotherapy in advanced or recurrent endometrial carcinoma. The clinical trial was stopped before end of recruitment for toxicity.

Multidisciplinary management of advanced ovarian cancer for an optimal therapeutic strategy.

The management of advanced ovarian cancer generally requires specialist multidisciplinary teamwork to achieve optimum outcomes. Preoperative computed tomography scans are the imaging modality of choice in determining the extent of disease and aiding in surgical planning. Histological classification is crucial to define various subtypes with their different behaviour and prognosis and to plan the best therapeutic strategy. Pathological prognostic factors, such as histological type, degree of differentiation, and FIGO stage must be described. To determine the ability to optimally cytoreduce advanced ovarian cancer, an experienced gynaecological oncologist needs to explore the entire upper abdomen and the pelvic and para-aortic lymph node regions to define the peritoneal cancer index (PCI). The final assessment is the completeness of cytoreduction (CC) score which is important in predicting prognosis and decision of post-surgical surgery. Ovarian cancer is the leading cause of death from gynaecologic cancers. Initial management is best provided by a specialist multidisciplinary team, including a radiologist, a pathologist, a gynaecologic oncologist, and a medical oncologist.

Non-AIDS-related malignancies: expert consensus review and practical applications from the multidisciplinary CANCERVIH Working Group.

Malignancies represent a major cause of morbidity and mortality in human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-infected patients. The introduction of combined antiretroviral therapy has modified the spectrum of malignancies in HIV infection with a decreased incidence of acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (AIDS) malignancies such as Kaposi's sarcoma and non-Hodgkin's lymphoma due to partial immune recovery and an increase in non-AIDS-defining malignancies due to prolonged survival. Management of HIV-infected patients with cancer requires a multidisciplinary approach, involving both oncologists and HIV physicians to optimally manage both diseases and drug interactions between anticancer and anti-HIV drugs. The French CANCERVIH group presents here a review and an experience of managing non-AIDS malignancies in HIV-infected individuals.

ELYPSE-7: a randomized placebo-controlled phase IIa trial with CYT107 exploring the restoration of CD4+ lymphocyte count in lymphopenic metastatic breast cancer patients.

BACKGROUND: Lymphopenia is a predictive factor for hematological toxicity, progression and early death in advanced cancers including metastatic breast cancer (MBC). CYT107 is a recombinant interleukin 7 (IL-7) (Cytheris, now Revimmune), well tolerated and able to expand lymphocyte pool in humans. The aims of this study were to determine the optimal schedule to deliver CYT107 and to assess its effect on clinical end points. PATIENT AND METHODS: This placebo-controlled, double blind, phase IIa was conducted in MBC patients with <1500/µl lymphocytes treated with capecitabine. Using a 2-by-2 factorial design, 20 patients were randomly allocated to four arms to receive (i) before chemotherapy: CYT107 or placebo; then (ii) during chemotherapy: CYT107 or placebo. The primary end point was CD4+ count changes before and during chemotherapy. Secondary end points were hematological toxicity, safety, overall response, progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). Quantification and functional competence of circulating immune cells were also assessed. RESULTS: When administered before chemotherapy, CYT107 induced a significant increase of CD4+ [+148.1% in CYT107 versus +9.9% in placebo groups, (Wilcoxon, P = 0.002)] and CD8+ T-cell counts, including both naïve and memory subsets. When CYT107 was administered during chemotherapy, the magnitude of CD4+ and CD8+ increase was less important. No modulation of immune cell functional competence was observed. CYT107 was well tolerated with no related ≥grade 3 adverse events except 1 fatal suspected unexpected serious adverse reaction (SUSAR) of uncertain relationship. Of the 12 cases evaluable for response, 6 of 7 patients (86%) receiving CYT107 before chemotherapy achieved a response or stabilization, whereas two of five patients (40%) receiving placebo achieved the same result. No significant difference was observed for PFS or OS. CONCLUSION: In lymphopenic MBC, CYT107 increases CD4+ and other T-cell subset counts without altering their function. A larger clinical trial to demonstrate its impact on clinical outcome is warranted. CLINICALTRIALSGOV IDENTIFIER: NCT01362107.