Onconephrology: The Significance of Renal Function for the Development, Diagnosis, and Treatment of Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Modern treatment strategies have markedly improved the chances of survival for patients with cancer. As the population ages, cancer is becoming more common, as is chronic kidney disease (CKD). CKD increases the risk of cancer; conversely, cancer treatments can cause CKD. METHODS: This review is based on publications retrieved by a selective literature search concerning the epidemiology and comorbidities of cancer and kidney diseases, the renal side effects of new anticancer drugs, and the need to consider renal function in cancer treatment. RESULTS: The prevalence of severe CKD in Germany is 2.3%. Persons who have CKD, are on dialysis, or have undergone kidney transplantation are 1.2 to 3.5 times more likely to develop cancer than the general population. For patients who have CKD or are dialysis-dependent, the doses of approximately 67% of anticancer drugs need to be adjusted on the basis of their glomerular filtration rate and the renally excreted fraction of the drug. The optimal efficacy of therapeutic drugs, as well as of those used for diagnostic purposes, and the minimization of side effects, depend critically on adapted dosing and on proper timing of administration before or after dialysis. Modern anticancer drugs can also cause acute kidney damage (incidence with checkpoint inhibitors: 2-16%). CONCLUSION: Patients who have CKD, are on dialysis, or have undergone kidney transplantation make up a considerable fraction of persons being treated for cancer, and they need interdisciplinary treatment.

Cabozantinib Plus Nivolumab in Adult Patients with Advanced or Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma: A Retrospective, Non-Interventional Study in a Real-World Cohort/GUARDIANS Project.

INTRODUCTION: Combinations of immune-checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) are the standard of care (SOC) for treatment-naive metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) patients. In this multicenter study, we evaluated the RW safety and efficacy of cabozantinib plus nivolumab in mRCC patients. METHODS: Data were retrospectively collected from twelve cancer centers in Germany, Switzerland, and Austria. Patients with advanced or mRCC were eligible. The investigator-based objective response rate (ORR) and progression free survival (PFS) were calculated from the start of the treatment to progression or death. Descriptive statistics and Kaplan-Meier (KM) plots were utilized where appropriate. RESULTS: In total, 96 eligible patients (66.6% male) with a median age of 66.0 years were included. The most common histology was clear-cell RCC (ccRCC) in 63.4% (n = 61). A prior nephrectomy was performed in 60.4% (n = 58). ECOG 0-1 was 68.8% (n = 66). A partial response was documented in 43.8% of patients (n = 42), a stable disease in 32.3% (n = 31), and a progressive disease in 8.3% (n = 8) as the best overall response. Response data were not evaluable in 13.5% (n = 13). The median follow-up time was 12.7 months (95% CI, 10.0-15.3). The PFS rate at 6 months was 89.8% in the overall population (86.8% for ccRCC; 90.0% for non-ccRCC). Adverse events (AEs) were reported in 82.3% (n = 79) for all grades and 41.7% (n = 40) for grades 3-5. Elevated liver enzymes (34.4%), diarrhea (31.3%), and hand-foot syndrome (29.2%) were the three most frequent AEs of any grade and causality. DISCUSSION/CONCLUSIONS: In this real-world cohort of mRCC patients, the application of cabozantinib plus nivolumab was shown to be safe and feasible. Our data support the use of cabozantinib plus nivolumab as a first-line standard therapy in mRCC patients. Major limitations were the retrospective data capture and short follow-up time of our study.

[Classical chemotherapy, immunotherapy, or adjuvant radiotherapy-how to improve the oncologic outcome of radical cystectomy?] / Klassische Chemotherapie, Immuntherapie oder adjuvante Strahlentherapie ­ Wie können wir die onkologischen Ergebnisse der radikalen Zystektomie verbessern?

According to current guidelines, patients with muscle-invasive urothelial carcinoma (pT2-pt4a pN0) should be offered neoadjuvant cisplatin-containing chemotherapy before radical cystectomy. If not used neoadjuvantly, chemotherapy can be administered in the adjuvant setting (for > pT3 or pN+ disease). Both neoadjuvant and adjuvant therapy lead to improved overall survival. In the adjuvant setting, the checkpoint inhibitor nivolumab has also been approved for treatment of PD-L1-positive tumors (tumor proportion score [TPS] ≥ 1%). On the one hand, real-world evidence shows that cisplatin-fit patients often do not receive chemotherapy and, on the other hand, that a relevant proportion of patients are also not suitable for cisplatin-based chemotherapy. Further multimodal therapeutic strategies are hence urgently needed to improve the prognosis of affected patients. In particular, the use of antibody-drug conjugates and combination strategies involving checkpoint inhibitors are currently being intensively researched.

The Treatment of Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Approximately 15 000 people receive a diagnosis of renal cell carcinoma (RCC) in Germany each year; in 20-30% of cases, metastatic RCC (mRCC) is already present at the time of diagnosis. This disease in the metastatic stage is still mainly treated palliatively, yet the multimodal therapeutic landscape has changed markedly over the past 15 years, with the approval of many new treatments for patients with mRCC. METHODS: This review is based on prospective studies retrieved by a selective search in PubMed and the ASCO and ESMO databases and on the German and European oncological and urological guidelines for RCC. RESULTS: Drugs are the mainstay of treatment. mRCC can be treated with a combination of two immune checkpoint inhibitors (CPIs), a CPI and a tyrosine-kinase inhibitor (TKI) (evidence level IA), or a TKI as monotherapy (evidence level IIC-IC). With prognosis-based sequential drug treatment, a mean progressionfree survival of 12 to 24 months and an overall survival of approximately 50 months can be achieved from the time of initiation of first-line therapy. Aside from pharmacotherapy, the multidisciplinary tumor board should evaluate the indications for local treatments such as cytoreductive nephrectomy, metastasectomy, and radiotherapy, depending on the individual prognostic constellation and the patient's present condition. CONCLUSION: Optimal individualized decisions require a high level of expertise and the collabo - ration of a multidisciplinary tumor board. Older prognostic parameters currently play a leading role in decision-making, while predictive parameters and molecular markers are not yet adequately validated.

Plain language summary of the results from the TALAPRO-2 study: Talazoparib plus enzalutamide versus placebo plus enzalutamide for patients with advanced prostate cancer.

WHAT IS THIS SUMMARY ABOUT?: This summary describes the results from the TALAPRO-2 research study (also known as a clinical trial). The TALAPRO-2 study tested the combination of two medicines called talazoparib plus enzalutamide. This combination of medicines was used as the first treatment for adult patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer. The combination of talazoparib plus enzalutamide was compared with a placebo plus enzalutamide. WHAT IS METASTATIC CASTRATION-RESISTANT PROSTATE CANCER?: Metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer is a type of cancer that starts in the prostate and has spread to other parts of the body. Castration-resistant means that the cancer continues to grow even when testosterone levels in the blood are reduced to very low levels. Taking medicines to lower testosterone levels in the blood is a standard treatment for men with advanced prostate cancer. WHAT ARE THE AIMS OF THE TALAPRO-2 TRIAL?: TALAPRO-2 looked at if combining talazoparib plus enzalutamide would increase the length of time patients lived before their cancer got worse or they died compared with a placebo plus enzalutamide. Researchers looked at how treatment affected the size and number of tumors and the length of time before patients needed to change to a new cancer medicine. Researchers also looked at any side effects patients had during the study. WHAT ARE THE KEY TAKEAWAYS?: A total of 805 patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer took part in the study. Compared with patients who took a placebo plus enzalutamide, the group of patients who took talazoparib plus enzalutamide had a 37% reduced risk of their cancer getting worse or dying. Some patients had tumors that at the start of the study could be measured with scans. Sixty-two percent of patients who took talazoparib plus enzalutamide had their tumors decrease or shrink to the point that they could no longer be seen on scans versus 44% of patients who took a placebo plus enzalutamide. Patients who took talazoparib plus enzalutamide were more likely to have a longer time before they needed to change to a new cancer medicine. The most common side effects of talazoparib plus enzalutamide were low levels of red blood cells (66% of patients) and neutrophils (36% of patients), and excessive tiredness or exhaustion (34% of patients).Clinical Trial Registration: NCT03395197 (TALAPRO-2) (ClinicalTrials.gov).

Electronic health intervention to manage symptoms of immunotherapy in patients with cancer (SOFIA): Results from a randomized controlled pilot trial.

BACKGROUND: For patients receiving immune checkpoint inhibitors, early detection of immune-related adverse events (irAEs) is critical for one's safety. To this end, a smartphone app (SOFIA) was developed that featured the assessment of electronic patient-reported outcomes (ePROs) focusing on irAEs as well as a set of comprehensive supportive information. Its feasibility and preliminary efficacy were evaluated in a randomized controlled trial (RCT). METHODS: Patients who received immune checkpoint inhibition therapy were randomly assigned to an intervention group (IG) or a control group (CG; care as usual). During the 12-week intervention period, IG patients used SOFIA to report twice weekly ePROs and receive cancer- and immunotherapy-relevant contents. Before a patient's next clinical visit, the physician in charge was given the ePRO reports. The primary objective was to test the feasibility of SOFIA. Furthermore, the preliminary efficacy of SOFIA for health-related quality of life (HRQOL), psychosocial outcomes, and medical data was examined. Clinical outcomes were assessed at baseline (T0), post-intervention (T1), and a 3-month follow-up (T2). RESULTS: Seventy-one patients were randomized to the IG (n = 34) or the CG (n = 37). SOFIA showed high feasibility and acceptance. At T1, patients in the IG reported significantly better HRQOL and role functioning and less depression, distress, and appetite loss. No significant differences were revealed regarding medical data, the utilization of supportive care services, or survival. CONCLUSIONS: SOFIA showed high feasibility and acceptance and improved HRQOL and psychosocial outcomes. These results suggest further evaluation of efficacy in a large-scale confirmatory multicenter RCT.

NECTIN4 Amplification Is Frequent in Solid Tumors and Predicts Enfortumab Vedotin Response in Metastatic Urothelial Cancer.

PURPOSE: The anti-NECTIN4 antibody-drug conjugate enfortumab vedotin (EV) is approved for patients with metastatic urothelial cancer (mUC). However, durable benefit is only achieved in a small, yet uncharacterized patient subset. NECTIN4 is located on chromosome 1q23.3, and 1q23.3 gains represent frequent copy number variations (CNVs) in urothelial cancer. Here, we aimed to evaluate NECTIN4 amplifications as a genomic biomarker to predict EV response in patients with mUC. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We established a NECTIN4-specific fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) assay to assess the predictive value of NECTIN4 CNVs in a multicenter EV-treated mUC patient cohort (mUC-EV, n = 108). CNVs were correlated with membranous NECTIN4 protein expression, EV treatment responses, and outcomes. We also assessed the prognostic value of NECTIN4 CNVs measured in metastatic biopsies of non-EV-treated mUC (mUC-non-EV, n = 103). Furthermore, we queried The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) data sets (10,712 patients across 32 cancer types) for NECTIN4 CNVs. RESULTS: NECTIN4 amplifications are frequent genomic events in muscle-invasive bladder cancer (TCGA bladder cancer data set: approximately 17%) and mUC (approximately 26% in our mUC cohorts). In mUC-EV, NECTIN4 amplification represents a stable genomic alteration during metastatic progression and associates with enhanced membranous NECTIN4 protein expression. Ninety-six percent (27 of 28) of patients with NECTIN4 amplifications demonstrated objective responses to EV compared with 32% (24 of 74) in the nonamplified subgroup (P < .001). In multivariable Cox analysis adjusted for age, sex, and Bellmunt risk factors, NECTIN4 amplifications led to a 92% risk reduction for death (hazard ratio, 0.08 [95% CI, 0.02 to 0.34]; P < .001). In the mUC-non-EV, NECTIN4 amplifications were not associated with outcomes. TCGA Pan-Cancer analysis demonstrated that NECTIN4 amplifications occur frequently in other cancers, for example, in 5%-10% of breast and lung cancers. CONCLUSION: NECTIN4 amplifications are genomic predictors of EV responses and long-term survival in patients with mUC.

PD-L1 as a Urine Biomarker in Renal Cell Carcinoma-A Case Series and Proof-of-Concept Study.

BACKGROUND: Renal cell carcinoma (RCC) is among the most lethal urologic malignancies once metastatic. Current treatment approaches for metastatic RCC (mRCC) involve immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) that target the PD-L1/PD-1 axis. High PD-L1 expression in tumor tissue has been identified as a negative prognostic factor in RCC. However, the role of PD-L1 as a liquid biomarker has not yet been fully explored. Herein, we analyze urine levels of PD-L1 in mRCC patients before and after either ICI therapy or surgical intervention, as well as in a series of patients with treatment-naïve RCC. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The mid-stream urine of patients with mRCC (n = 4) or treatment-naïve RCC, i.e., prior to surgery from two centers (cohort I, n = 49: cohort II, n = 29) was analyzed for PD-L1 by ELISA. The results from cohort I were compared to a control group consisting of patients treated for non-malignant urologic diseases (n = 31). In the mRCC group, urine PD-L1 levels were measured before and after tumor nephrectomy (n = 1) or before and after ICI therapy (n = 3). Exosomal PD-L1 in the urine was analyzed in selected patients by immunoblotting. RESULTS: A strong decrease in urine PD-L1 levels was found after tumor nephrectomy or following systemic treatment with ICIs. In patients with treatment-naïve RCC (cohort I), urine PD-L1 levels were significantly elevated in the RCC group in comparison to the control group (median 59 pg/mL vs. 25.7 pg/mL, p = 0.011). PD-L1 urine levels were found to be elevated, in particular, in low-grade RCCs in cohorts I and II. Exosomal PD-L1 was detected in the urine of a subset of patients. CONCLUSION: In this proof-of-concept study, we show that PD-L1 can be detected in the urine of RCC patients. Urine PD-L1 levels were found to correlate with the treatment response in mRCC patients and were significantly elevated in treatment-naïve RCC patients.

First-line talazoparib with enzalutamide in HRR-deficient metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer: the phase 3 TALAPRO-2 trial.

Preclinical evidence has suggested an interplay between the androgen receptor, which largely drives the growth of prostate cancer cells, and poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase. This association provides a rationale for their co-inhibition for the treatment of metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC), an area of unmet medical need. The phase 3 TALAPRO-2 study investigated combining the poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitor talazoparib with enzalutamide versus enzalutamide alone as first-line treatment of mCRPC. Patients were prospectively assessed for tumor alterations in DNA damage response genes involved in homologous recombination repair (HRR). Two cohorts were enrolled sequentially: an all-comers cohort that was enrolled first (cohort 1; N = 805 (169 were HRR-deficient)), followed by an HRR-deficient-only cohort (cohort 2; N = 230). We present results from the alpha-controlled primary analysis for the combined HRR-deficient population (N = 399). Patients were randomized in a 1:1 ratio to talazoparib or placebo, plus enzalutamide. The primary endpoint, radiographic progression-free survival, was met (median not reached at the time of the analysis for the talazoparib group versus 13.8 months for the placebo group; hazard ratio, 0.45; 95% confidence interval, 0.33 to 0.61; P < 0.0001). Data for overall survival, a key secondary endpoint, are immature but favor talazoparib (hazard ratio, 0.69; 95% confidence interval, 0.46 to 1.03; P = 0.07). Common adverse events in the talazoparib group were anemia, fatigue and neutropenia. Combining talazoparib with enzalutamide significantly improved radiographic progression-free survival in patients with mCRPC harboring HRR gene alterations, supporting talazoparib plus enzalutamide as a potential first-line treatment for these patients. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03395197 .

Expression of Nectin-4 in Chromophobe Renal Cell Carcinoma in a multicenter cohort - early prognostic and therapeutic considerations.

INTRODUCTION: Nectin-4 is a member of the nectin family and a calcium-independent immunoglobuline-like transmembrane protein that contributes to tumor growth and angiogenesis in malignant tumors. A Nectin-4 directed antibody drug conjugate, Enfortumab vedotin-ejf, has recently been approved for treatment in urothelial cancer and is currently under investigation in other tumor entities such as breast, lung, and prostate cancer. In non-clear cell renal cell carcinoma (RCC) vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF)-directed tyrosine kinase inhibitors and checkpoint inhibitors are currently treatments of choice. However, due to the rarity of disease treatment recommendations for chromophobe RCC (chRCC) are limited and new therapeutic agents urgently needed. In this study, we investigated the expression and prognostic impact of Nectin-4 in a large cohort of chRCC. METHODS: patients who underwent renal surgery due to chRCC were recruited. Clinical data was retrospectively evaluated. Tumor specimen were analyzed for Nectin-4 expression by immunohistochemistry. RESULTS: 81 chRCC patients were eligible for analysis. In 15 (18.5 %) samples tumors were positive for Nectin-4. No significant associations were found for Nectin-4 expression and clinical attributes in patients with chRCC. Kaplan-Meier analysis disclosed a 5 year- overall survival for Nectin-4-negative and Nectin-4-positive tumors of 91.8% versus 100.0% (p=0.316, log rank). CONCLUSIONS: In chRCC a small subset of tumors expresses Nectin-4 potentially amenable to Nectin-4 directed treatment. Expression of Nectin-4 is not associated with parameters of aggressiveness or survival. Due to the rare incidence of chRCC further studies with larger cohorts are warranted.

Long-Term Survival of Patients with Stage T1N0M1 Renal Cell Carcinoma.

Metastatic renal cell carcinoma (RCC) is among the most lethal urological malignancies. However, small, localized RCCs (≤7 cm, stage T1) have an excellent prognosis. There is a rare patient subgroup diagnosed with synchronous distant metastasis (T1N0M1), of which very little is known in terms of survival outcomes and underlying disease biology. Herein, we examined the long-term survival of 27 patients with clear cell RCC (ccRCC) stage T1N0M1 in comparison to 18 patients without metastases (T1N0M0). Tumor tissue was stained by immunohistochemistry for CD8+ tumor infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs). As expected, patients with stage T1N0M1 showed a significantly worse median cancer specific survival (CSS; 2.8 years) than patients with stage T1N0M0 (17.7 years; HR 0.077; 95% CI, 0.022-0.262). However, eight patients (29.6%) with ccRCC stage T1N0M1 survived over five years, and three of those patients (11.1%) survived over a decade. Some of these patients benefitted from an intensified, multimodal treatment including metastasis-directed therapy. The number of CD8+ TILs was substantially higher in stage T1N0M1 ccRCCs than in stage T1N0M0 ccRCCs, suggesting a more aggressive tumor biology. In conclusion, long-term survival is possible in patients with ccRCC stage T1N0M1, with some patients benefitting from an intensified, multimodal treatment approach.

Digital Spatial Profiling Identifies the Tumor Periphery as a Highly Active Biological Niche in Clear Cell Renal Cell Carcinoma.

Clear cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC) is characterized by a high degree of intratumoral heterogeneity (ITH). Besides genomic ITH, there is considerable functional ITH, which encompasses spatial niches with distinct proliferative and signaling activities. The full extent of functional spatial heterogeneity in ccRCC is incompletely understood. In the present study, a total of 17 ccRCC tissue specimens from different sites (primary tumor, n = 11; local recurrence, n = 1; distant metastasis, n = 5) were analyzed using digital spatial profiling (DSP) of protein expression. A total of 128 regions of interest from the tumor periphery and tumor center were analyzed for the expression of 46 proteins, comprising three major signaling pathways as well as immune cell markers. Results were correlated to clinico-pathological variables. The differential expression of granzyme B was validated using conventional immunohistochemistry and was correlated to the cancer-specific patient survival. We found that a total of 37 proteins were differentially expressed between the tumor periphery and tumor center. Thirty-five of the proteins were upregulated in the tumor periphery compared to the center. These included proteins involved in cell proliferation, MAPK and PI3K/AKT signaling, apoptosis regulation, epithelial-to-mesenchymal transition, as well as immune cell markers. Among the most significantly upregulated proteins in the tumor periphery was granzyme B. Granzyme B upregulation in the tumor periphery correlated with a significantly reduced cancer-specific patient survival. In conclusion, this study highlights the unique cellular contexture of the tumor periphery in ccRCC. The correlation between granzyme B upregulation in the tumor periphery and patient survival suggests local selection pressure for aggressive tumor growth and disease progression. Our results underscore the potential of spatial biology for biomarker discovery in ccRCC and cancer in general.

Nivolumab Switch Maintenance Therapy After Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitor Induction in Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma: A Randomized Clinical Trial by the Interdisciplinary Working Group on Renal Tumors of the German Cancer Society (NIVOSWITCH; AIO-NZK-0116ass).

BACKGROUND: The role of immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) maintenance therapy in metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) is undefined. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether switch maintenance therapy with nivolumab improves clinical outcomes in patients with mRCC with tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) sensitivity. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This open-label phase 2 trial randomized patients with a partial response or stable disease after 10-12-wk TKI induction therapy to either TKI or nivolumab maintenance. Key inclusion criteria were measurable disease, clear cell histology, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (ECOG PS) 0-2, and adequate organ function. INTERVENTION: Intravenous nivolumab 8 × 240 mg every 2 wk, followed by 480 mg every 4 wk or sunitinib 50 mg (4-2 regimen) or pazopanib 800 mg once daily orally. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSES: The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS). Secondary endpoints were the objective response rate (ORR; Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors v1.1), progression-free survival (PFS), safety (Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events v4.03), and patient-reported outcomes (Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy Kidney Symptom Index). The Kaplan-Meier method, two-sided log-rank tests, and Cox regression models were used for statistical analysis. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: Maintenance therapy was nivolumab for 25 patients (51.0%) and TKI for 24 (48.9%). The median age was 65 yr (range 35-79). Nine patients (18.4%) were female, 31 (63.3%) had ECOG PS of 0, and 15 (30.6%) had favorable risk. OS data are immature (17 deaths, 34.7%). The ORR was 20.0% (n = 5) for nivolumab and 52.2% (n = 12) for TKI. PFS was worse with nivolumab (hazard ratio 2.57, 95% confidence interval 1.36-4.89; p = 0.003). Grade ≥3 adverse events occurred in 14 patients (56.0%) with nivolumab and 17 (70.8%) with TKI. A major limitation is early termination of our study. CONCLUSIONS: TKI treatment achieved superior ORR and PFS in comparison to nivolumab maintenance therapy. Our data do not indicate a role for nivolumab switch maintenance in mRCC. PATIENT SUMMARY: Patients with metastatic kidney cancer who experienced a tumor response or disease stabilization after a short period of targeted treatment with a tyrosine kinase inhibitor did not benefit from a switch to the immunotherapy drug nivolumab. Patients who continued their original treatment achieved better responses and a longer time without disease progression. This trial is registered on EudraCT as 2016-002170-13 and on ClinicalTrials.gov as NCT02959554.

Enfortumab Vedotin in Metastatic Urothelial Carcinoma: Survival and Safety in a European Multicenter Real-world Patient Cohort.

Background: Treatment options for patients with urothelial cancer (UC) refractory to platinum and immunotherapy are limited and survival is short. Enfortumab vedotin (EV) is a monoclonal anti-NECTIN4 antibody conjugated to monomethyl auristatin. It was recently approved because of superior survival in comparison to standard-of-care (SOC) chemotherapy. Real-world patients, however, often have worse characteristics than patients included in clinical trials. Objective: To analyze the efficacy and safety of EV in a cohort of real-world patients. Design setting and participants: Retrospective data were collected from 23 hospitals and private practices for patients with metastatic and previously treated UC who received EV either when reimbursed by their insurance company before European Medicines Agency (EMA) approval, within a compassionate use program, or as SOC treatment after EMA approval. Imaging and therapy management were in accordance with local standards. Outcome measurements and statistical analysis: Adverse events (AEs) were reported according to Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) version 5.0 criteria. Objective responses were evaluated according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1. Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Results and limitations: The median age for the 125 eligible patients was 66 yr (range 31-89). The Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (ECOG PS) was 0-1 for 76.0%, 2-4 for 13.6%, and unknown for 10.4% of patients. EV was administered in the fourth or later line for 44.8% of patients. The overall response rate was 41.6% (partial response 39.2%, complete response 2.4%). Median OS was 10.0 months (mo) (95% confidence interval 7.20-12.80) and median PFS was 5.0 mo (95% confidence interval 4.34-5.67). For patients with ECOG PS of 0-1, median OS was 14 mo. Any-grade AEs were observed in 67.2% and CTCAE grade ≥3 AEs in 30.4%. The most common AEs were peripheral sensory neuropathy and skin toxicity. Three fatal events (pneumonia, pneumonitis) occurred. Limitations include the retrospective design and short follow-up. Conclusions: Administration of EV for real-world patients was feasible with an acceptable toxicity profile. No new safety signals were reported. Antitumor activity in our cohort was comparable to data previously reported for trials. In summary, our results support the use of EV in patients with metastatic UC. Patient summary: Enfortumab vedotin is a medication that improved the survival of patients with bladder cancer in comparison to standard chemotherapy in clinical trials. However, patients included in clinical trials are highly selected and results for toxicities and improvements in survival do not always transfer to the real-world setting. We analyzed data for 125 patients who were treated with enfortumab vedotin. Our results are comparable to the outcomes from clinical trials regarding the safety and efficacy of this treatment.

Neurocognitive effects of androgen deprivation therapy and new hormonal agents in a sample of patients with metastatic prostate cancer.

INTRODUCTION: Although the growing treatment landscape for metastatic prostate cancer (mPC) has revealed new opportunities, it has also provided challenges, such as undesirable side effects. The aim of the present study was to provide further data on domain-specific cognitive impairments in mPC patients with androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) and new hormonal agents. METHODS: Fifty-eight patients (71 ± 8 years) with mPC were investigated using a cross-sectional design. All patients had received some form of ADT (93% had received luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone (LHRH) analogs/antagonists), 66% had received chemotherapy, and 84% had received anti-resorptive therapy. We evaluated learning and memory, processing speed, and executive functions, as recommended by the International Cognition and Cancer Task Force, to determine neurocognitive deficits. RESULTS: Patients treated with ADT scored significantly lower on all neurocognitive tests and showed significantly more neurocognitive deficits (38-62%) than age-adjusted reference samples (16%, p < 0.05). Cognitive deficits were mild in most cases and predominantly affected visuomotor processing speed (48%). Moderate and severe deficits were found in 11% and 5% of patients, respectively, with word fluency as the predominant deficit (23%). No associations were found between the type or duration of treatment and the severity of cognitive deficits. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment of mPC with ADT is correlated with neurocognitive deficits in several cognitive domains. Language skills and processing speed were most frequently impaired. However, a consistent pattern of cognitive impairment was not identified. Neurocognitive deficits should be considered in phase III and IV trials. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The study was registered in the German Clinical Trials Registry (DRKS00017727).

Talazoparib plus enzalutamide in men with first-line metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (TALAPRO-2): a randomised, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Co-inhibition of poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) and androgen receptor activity might result in antitumour efficacy irrespective of alterations in DNA damage repair genes involved in homologous recombination repair (HRR). We aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of talazoparib (a PARP inhibitor) plus enzalutamide (an androgen receptor blocker) versus enzalutamide alone in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). METHODS: TALAPRO-2 is a randomised, double-blind, phase 3 trial of talazoparib plus enzalutamide versus placebo plus enzalutamide as first-line therapy in men (age ≥18 years [≥20 years in Japan]) with asymptomatic or mildly symptomatic mCRPC receiving ongoing androgen deprivation therapy. Patients were enrolled from 223 hospitals, cancer centres, and medical centres in 26 countries in North America, Europe, Israel, South America, South Africa, and the Asia-Pacific region. Patients were prospectively assessed for HRR gene alterations in tumour tissue and randomly assigned (1:1) to talazoparib 0·5 mg or placebo, plus enzalutamide 160 mg, administered orally once daily. Randomisation was stratified by HRR gene alteration status (deficient vs non-deficient or unknown) and previous treatment with life-prolonging therapy (docetaxel or abiraterone, or both: yes vs no) in the castration-sensitive setting. The sponsor, patients, and investigators were masked to talazoparib or placebo, while enzalutamide was open-label. The primary endpoint was radiographic progression-free survival (rPFS) by blinded independent central review, evaluated in the intention-to-treat population. Safety was evaluated in all patients who received at least one dose of study drug. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03395197) and is ongoing. FINDINGS: Between Jan 7, 2019, and Sept 17, 2020, 805 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned (402 to the talazoparib group and 403 to the placebo group). Median follow-up for rPFS was 24·9 months (IQR 21·9-30·2) for the talazoparib group and 24·6 months (14·4-30·2) for the placebo group. At the planned primary analysis, median rPFS was not reached (95% CI 27·5 months-not reached) for talazoparib plus enzalutamide and 21·9 months (16·6-25·1) for placebo plus enzalutamide (hazard ratio 0·63; 95% CI 0·51-0·78; p<0·0001). In the talazoparib group, the most common treatment-emergent adverse events were anaemia, neutropenia, and fatigue; the most common grade 3-4 event was anaemia (185 [46%] of 398 patients), which improved after dose reduction, and only 33 (8%) of 398 patients discontinued talazoparib due to anaemia. Treatment-related deaths occurred in no patients in the talazoparib group and two patients (<1%) in the placebo group. INTERPRETATION: Talazoparib plus enzalutamide resulted in clinically meaningful and statistically significant improvement in rPFS versus standard of care enzalutamide as first-line treatment for patients with mCRPC. Final overall survival data and additional long-term safety follow-up will further clarify the clinical benefit of the treatment combination in patients with and without tumour HRR gene alterations. FUNDING: Pfizer.

Evaluation of Gas 6 as a Prognostic Marker in Papillary Renal Cell Carcinoma.

INTRODUCTION: Growth arrest-specific protein 6 (Gas 6) is a ligand that plays a role in proliferation and migration of cells. For several tumor entities, high levels of Gas 6 are associated with poorer survival. We examined the prognostic role of Gas 6 in renal cell carcinoma (RCC), especially in papillary RCC (pRCC), which is still unclear. METHODS: The patients' sample collection is a joint collaboration of the PANZAR consortium. Patients' medical history and tumor specimens were collected from n = 240 and n = 128 patients with type 1 and 2 pRCC, respectively. Expression of Gas 6 was determined by immunohistochemistry. RESULTS: In total, Gas 6 staining was evaluable in 180 of 240 type 1 and 110 of 128 type 2 pRCC cases. Kaplan-Meier analysis disclosed no significant difference in 5-year overall survival for all pRCC nor either subtype. Also, Gas+ and Gas- groups did not significantly differ in any tumor or patient characteristics. CONCLUSION: Gas 6 was not found to be an independent prognostic marker in pRCC. Future studies are warranted to determine if Gas 6 plays a role as prognostic marker or therapeutic target in pRCC.

Immunohistochemical expression of the hepatocyte growth factor in chromophobe renal cell carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: The prognostic value of Hepatocyte growth factor (HGF) in non-clear cell renal cell carcinoma (RCC) is still unclear. The aim of this study is to evaluate the prognostic impact of HGF expression in a large cohort of chromophobe RCC (chRCC). METHODS: Patients who underwent renal surgery due to chRCC were recruited. Clinical data was retrospectively evaluated. Tumor specimen were analyzed for HGF expression by immunohistochemistry. RESULTS: 81 chRCC patients were eligible for analysis, thereof 37 (45.7%) patients were positive for HGF. No significant associations were found for HGF expression and clinical attributes in patients with chRCC. Kaplan-Meier analysis revealed no differences in 5-year overall survival (OS) for patients with HGF- compared to HGF+ tumors (95.0% versus 90.9%; p = 0.410). CONCLUSIONS: In chRCC HGF expression is not associated with parameters of aggressiveness or survival.