Phase II trial of afatinib in patients with advanced urothelial carcinoma with genetic alterations in ERBB1-3 (LUX-Bladder 1).

BACKGROUND: Preclinical and early clinical data suggest that the irreversible ErbB family blocker afatinib may be effective in urothelial cancers harbouring ERBB mutations. METHODS: This open-label, phase II, single-arm trial (LUX-Bladder 1, NCT02780687) assessed the efficacy and safety of second-line afatinib 40 mg/d in patients with metastatic urothelial carcinoma with ERBB1-3 alterations. The primary endpoint was 6-month progression-free survival rate (PFS6) (cohort A); other endpoints included ORR, PFS, OS, DCR and safety (cohorts A and B). Cohort A was planned to have two stages: stage 2 enrolment was based on observed antitumour activity. RESULTS: Thirty-four patients were enroled into cohort A and eight into cohort B. In cohorts A/B, PFS6 was 11.8%/12.5%, ORR was 5.9%/12.5%, DCR was 50.0%/25.0%, median PFS was 9.8/7.8 weeks and median OS was 30.1/29.6 weeks. Three patients (two ERBB2-amplified [cohort A]; one EGFR-amplified [cohort B]) achieved partial responses. Stage 2 for cohort A did not proceed. All patients experienced adverse events (AEs), most commonly (any/grade 3) diarrhoea (76.2%/9.5%). Two patients (4.8%) discontinued due to AEs and one fatal AE was observed (acute coronary syndrome; not considered treatment-related). CONCLUSIONS: An exploratory biomarker analysis suggested that basal-squamous tumours and ERBB2 amplification were associated with superior response to afatinib. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT02780687.

A correlative biomarker study and integrative prognostic model in chemotherapy-naïve metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer treated with enzalutamide.

BACKGROUND: There is a considerable need to incorporate biomarkers of resistance to new antiandrogen agents in the management of castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC). METHODS: We conducted a phase II trial of enzalutamide in first-line chemo-naïve asymptomatic or minimally symptomatic mCRPC and analyzed the prognostic value of TMPRSS2-ERG and other biomarkers, including circulating tumor cells (CTCs), androgen receptor splice variant (AR-V7) in CTCs and plasma Androgen Receptor copy number gain (AR-gain). These biomarkers were correlated with treatment response and survival outcomes and developed a clinical-molecular prognostic model using penalized cox-proportional hazard model. This model was validated in an independent cohort. RESULTS: Ninety-eight patients were included. TMPRSS2-ERG fusion gene was detected in 32 patients with no differences observed in efficacy outcomes. CTC detection was associated with worse outcome and AR-V7 in CTCs was associated with increased rate of progression as best response. Plasma AR gain was strongly associated with an adverse outcome, with worse median prostate specific antigen (PSA)-PFS (4.2 vs. 14.7 m; p < 0.0001), rad-PFS (4.5 vs. 27.6 m; p < 0.0001), and OS (12.7 vs. 38.1 m; p < 0.0001). The clinical prognostic model developed in PREVAIL was validated (C-Index 0.70) and the addition of plasma AR (C-Index 0.79; p < 0.001) increased its prognostic ability. We generated a parsimonious model including alkaline phosphatase (ALP); PSA and AR gain (C-index 0.78) that was validated in an independent cohort. CONCLUSIONS: TMPRSS2-ERG detection did not correlate with differential activity of enzalutamide in first-line mCRPC. However, we observed that CTCs and plasma AR gain were the most relevant biomarkers.

Efficacy and safety of abiraterone acetate plus prednisone vs. cabazitaxel as a subsequent treatment after first-line docetaxel in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer: results from a prospective observational study (CAPRO).

BACKGROUND: To describe the patterns of second-line treatment of patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) after docetaxel treatment in a Spanish population, to identify the factors associated with those patterns, and to compare the efficacy and safety of the treatments most frequently administered. METHODS: Observational, prospective study conducted in patients with histologically or cytologically confirmed prostate adenocarcinoma; documented metastatic castration-resistant disease; progression after first-line, docetaxel-based chemotherapy with or without other agents. RESULTS: Of the 150 patients recruited into the study, 100 patients were prescribed abiraterone acetate plus prednisone (AAP), 44 patients received cabazitaxel plus prednisone (CP), and 6 patients received other treatments. Age (odds ratio [OR] 1.06, 95% [confidence interval] CI 1.01 to 1.11) and not elevated lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) levels (OR 0.33, 95% CI 0.14 to 0.76) were independently associated with the administration of AAP. Treatment with AAP was associated with significantly longer clinical/radiographic progression-free survival (hazard ratio [HR] 0.57, 95% CI 0.38 to 0.85) and overall survival (OS; HR 0.40, 95% CI 0.21 to 0.76) compared to CP, while no significant differences between the treatments were found regarding biochemical progression-free survival (PFS; HR 0.78 [95% CI 0.49 to 1.24]). However, in a post-hoc Cox regression analysis adjusted for potential confounders there were not differences between AAP and CP in any of the time-to-event outcomes, including overall survival. We observed no new safety signals related to either regimen. CONCLUSION: Second-line AAP for patients with mCRPC is the most common treatment strategy after progression with a docetaxel-based regimen. When controlling for potential confounders, patients receiving this treatment showed no differences in PFS and OS in comparison to those receiving CP, although these latter results should be confirmed in randomized controlled trials.

Maintenance therapy with vinflunine plus best supportive care versus best supportive care alone in patients with advanced urothelial carcinoma with a response after first-line chemotherapy (MAJA; SOGUG 2011/02): a multicentre, randomised, controlled, open-label, phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: Maintenance therapy improves outcomes in various tumour types, but cumulative toxic effects limit the choice of drugs. We investigated whether maintenance therapy with vinflunine would delay disease progression in patients with advanced urothelial carcinoma who had achieved disease control with first-line chemotherapy. METHODS: We did a randomised, controlled, open-label, phase 2 trial in 21 Spanish hospitals. Eligible patients had locally advanced, surgically unresectable, or metastatic transitional-cell carcinoma of the urothelial tract, adequate organ function, and disease control after four to six cycles of cisplatin and gemcitabine (carboplatin allowed after cycle four). Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive vinflunine or best supportive care until disease progression. We initially used block randomisation with a block size of six. Four lists were created for the two stratification factors of starting dose of vinflunine and presence of liver metastases. After a protocol amendment, number of cisplatin and gemcitabine cycles was added as a stratification factor, and eight lists were created, still with a block size of six. Finally, we changed to a minimisation procedure to reduce the risk of imbalance between groups. Vinflunine was given every 21 days as a 20 min intravenous infusion at 320 mg/m2 or at 280 mg/m2 in patients with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status score of 1, age 75 years or older, previous pelvic radiotherapy, or creatinine clearance lower than 60 mL/min. The primary endpoint was median progression-free survival longer than 5·3 months in the vinflunine group, assessed by modified intention to treat. Comparison of progression-free survival between treatment groups was a secondary endpoint. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01529411. FINDINGS: Between April 12, 2012, and Jan 29, 2015, we enrolled 88 patients, of whom 45 were assigned to receive vinflunine and 43 to receive best supportive care. One patient from the vinflunine group was lost to follow-up immediately after randomisation and was excluded from the analyses. One patient in the best supportive care group became ineligible for the study and did not receive treatment due to a delay in enrolment, but was included in the intention-to-treat efficacy analysis. After a median follow-up of 15·6 months (IQR 8·5-26·0), 29 (66%) of 44 patients in the vinflunine group had disease progression and 24 (55%) had died, compared with 36 (84%) of 43 patients with disease progression and 32 (74%) deaths in the best supportive care group. Median progression-free survival was 6·5 months (95% CI 2·0-11·1) in the vinflunine group and 4·2 months (2·1-6·3) in the best supportive care group (hazard ratio 0·59, 95% CI 0·37-0·96, p=0·031). The most common grade 3 or 4 adverse events were neutropenia (eight [18%] of 44 in the vinflunine group vs none of 42 in the best supportive care group), asthenia or fatigue (seven [16%] vs one [2%]), and constipation (six [14%] vs none). 18 serious adverse events were reported in the vinflunine group and 14 in the best supportive care group. One patient in the vinflunine group died from pneumonia that was deemed to be treatment related. INTERPRETATION: In patients with disease control after first-line chemotherapy, progression-free survival exceeded the acceptable threshold with vinflunine maintenance therapy. Moreover, progression-free survival was longer with vinflunine maintenance therapy than with best supportive care. Vinflunine maintenance had an acceptable safety profile. Further studies of the role of vinflunine are warranted. FUNDING: Pierre-Fabre Médicament.

Impact on clinical practice of the implementation of guidelines for the toxicity management of targeted therapies in kidney cancer. The protect-2 study.

BACKGROUND: The impact of such recommendations after their implementation of guidelines has not usually been evaluated. Herein, we assessed the impact and compliance with the Spanish Oncology Genitourinary Group (SOGUG) Guidelines for toxicity management of targeted therapies in metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) in daily clinical practice. METHODS: Data on 407 mRCC patients who initiated first-line targeted therapy during the year before and the year after publication and implementation of the SOGUG guideline program were available from 34 Spanish Hospitals. Adherence to SOGUG Guidelines was assessed in every cycle. RESULTS: Adverse event (AE) management was consistent with the Guidelines as a whole for 28.7% out of 966 post-implementation cycles compared with 23.1% out of 892 pre-implementation cycles (p = 0.006). Analysis of adherence by AE in non-compliant cycles showed significant changes in appropriate management of hypertension (33% pre-implementation vs. 44.5% post-implementation cycles; p < 0.0001), diarrhea (74.0% vs. 80.5%; p = 0.011) and dyslipemia (25.0% vs. 44.6%; p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Slight but significant improvements in AE management were detected following the implementation of SOGUG recommendations. However, room for improvement in the management of AEs due to targeted agents still remains and could be the focus for further programs in this direction.

SEOM SOGUG clinical guideline for treatment of kidney cancer (2022).

Renal cancer is the seventh most common cancer in men and the tenth in women. The aim of this article is to review the diagnosis, treatment, and follow-up of renal carcinoma accompanied by recommendations with new evidence and treatment algorithms. A new pathologic classification of RCC by the World Health Organization (WHO) was published in 2022 and this classification would be considered a "bridge" to a future molecular classification. For patients with localized disease, surgery is the treatment of choice with nephron-sparing surgery recommended when feasible. Adjuvant treatment with pembrolizumab is an option for intermediate-or high-risk cases, as well as patients after complete resection of metastatic disease. More data are needed in the future, including positive overall survival data. Clinical prognostic classification, preferably IMDC, should be used for treatment decision making in mRCC. Cytoreductive nephrectomy should not be deemed mandatory in individuals with intermediate-poor IMDC/MSKCC risk who require systemic therapy. Metastasectomy can be contemplated in selected subjects with a limited number of metastases or long metachronous disease-free interval. For the population of patients with metastatic ccRCC as a whole, the combination of pembrolizumab-axitinib, nivolumab-cabozantinib, or pembrolizumab-lenvatinib can be considered as the first option based on the benefit obtained in OS versus sunitinib. In cases that have an intermediate IMDC and poor prognosis, the combination of ipilimumab and nivolumab has demonstrated superior OS compared to sunitinib. As for individuals with advanced RCC previously treated with one or two antiangiogenic tyrosine-kinase inhibitors, nivolumab and cabozantinib are the options of choice. When there is progression following initial immunotherapy-based treatment, we recommend treatment with an antiangiogenic tyrosine-kinase inhibitor. While no clear sequence can be advocated, medical oncologists and patients should be aware of the recent advances and new strategies that improve survival and quality of life in the setting of metastatic RC.

Darolutamide Maintenance in Patients With Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer With Nonprogressive Disease After Taxane Treatment (SAKK 08/16).

PURPOSE: To assess the efficacy and safety of darolutamide maintenance after successful taxane chemotherapy in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Swiss Group for Clinical Cancer Research (SAKK) 08/16 is a randomized phase II study. Patients with mCRPC who received prior androgen-receptor pathway inhibitors (ARPIs) and subsequently had nonprogressive disease on a taxane were randomly assigned to darolutamide 600 mg twice a day or placebo twice a day. The primary end point was radiographic progression-free survival (rPFS) at 12 weeks. Secondary end points were rPFS, event-free survival, overall survival (OS), prostate-specific antigen (PSA) 50% response rate, and adverse events. RESULTS: Overall, 92 patients were recruited by 26 centers. Prior taxane was docetaxel in 93% and cabazitaxel in 7%. Prior ARPI was abiraterone in 60%, enzalutamide in 31%, and both in 9%. rPFS at 12 weeks was significantly improved with darolutamide (64.7% v 52.2%; P = .127). Median rPFS on darolutamide was 5.5 versus 4.5 months on placebo (hazard ratio [HR], 0.54 [95% CI, 0.32 to 0.91]; P = .017), and median event-free survival was 5.4 versus 2.9 months (HR, 0.46 [95% CI, 0.29 to 0.73]; P = .001). PSA 50% response rate was improved (22% v 4%; P = .014). Median OS for darolutamide was 24 versus 21.3 months for placebo (HR, 0.62 [95% CI, 0.3 to 1.26]; P = .181). Treatment-related adverse events were similar in both arms. CONCLUSION: SAKK 08/16 met its primary end point, showing that switch maintenance with darolutamide after prior taxane chemotherapy and at least one ARPI resulted in a statistically significant but clinically modest rPFS prolongation with good tolerability. The median OS with darolutamide maintenance appears promising. Should these findings be confirmed in a larger trial, maintenance treatment could be a novel strategy in managing patients with mCRPC, especially those who responded well to prior ARPI.

Unravelling oligometastatic disease from the perspective of radiation and medical oncology. Part II: prostate cancer and colorectal cancer.

Oligometastatic disease (OMD) defines a status of cancer that is intermediate between localized and widely spread metastatic disease, and can be treated with curative intent. While imaging diagnostic tools have considerably improved in recent years, unidentified micrometastases can still escape from current detection techniques allowing disease to progress. The variety of OMD scenarios are mainly defined by the number of metastases, the biological and molecular tumour profiles, and the timing of the development of metastases. Increasing knowledge has contributed to the earlier and improved detection of OMD, underlining the importance of an early disease control. Based on increasing detection rates of OMD in the current real clinical practice and the lack of standardized evidence-based guidelines to treat this cancer status, a board of experts from the Spanish Societies of Radiation Oncology (SEOR) and Medical Oncology (SEOM) organized a series of sessions to update the current state-of-the-art on OMD from a multidisciplinary perspective, and to discuss how results from clinical studies may translate into promising treatment options. This experts' review series summarizes what is known and what it is pending clarification in the context of OMD in the scenarios of Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer and Breast Cancer (Part I), and Prostate Cancer and Colorectal Cancer (Part II), aiming to offer specialists a pragmatic framework that might contribute to the improved management of patients.

Unravelling oligometastatic disease from the perspective of radiation and medical oncology. Part I: non-small cell lung cancer and breast cancer.

Oligometastatic disease (OMD) defines a cancer status that is intermediate between localized and widely spread metastatic disease, and can be treated with curative intent. While diagnostic imaging tools have considerably improved in recent years, unidentified micrometastases can still evade current detection techniques, allowing the disease to progress. The various OMD scenarios are mainly defined by the number of metastases, the biological and molecular tumour profiles, and the timing of the development of metastases. Increasing knowledge has contributed to the earlier and improved detection of OMD, underlining the importance of early disease control. In view of increasing OMD detection rates in current real-world clinical practice and the lack of standardized evidence-based guidelines to treat this cancer status, a board of experts from the Spanish Societies of Radiation Oncology (SEOR) and Medical Oncology (SEOM) organized a series of sessions to update the current state-of-the-art on OMD from a multidisciplinary perspective, and to discuss how results from clinical studies might translate into promising treatment options. This expert review series summarizes what is known and what it is pending clarification in the context of OMD in the scenarios of non-small cell lung cancer and breast cancer (Part I), and prostate cancer and colorectal cancer (Part II), aiming to offer specialists a pragmatic framework to help improve patient management.

Prospective Assessment of Bone Metabolism Biomarkers and Survival in Metastatic Castration-resistant Prostate Cancer Patients Treated with Radium-223: The PRORADIUM Study.

BACKGROUND: Radium-223 is an active therapy option for bone metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). The lack of adequate biomarkers for patient selection and response assessment are major drawbacks for its use. OBJECTIVE: To assess the prognostic value of bone metabolism biomarkers (BMBs) in ra-223-treated mCRPC patients. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A prospective cohort study of mCRPC patients treated with Ra-223 (PRORADIUM study: NCT02925702) was conducted. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: The main objective of the study was to evaluate the association between high (≥median) baseline values in at least three bone formation (bone alkaline phosphatase [BAP] and C-terminal type-I collagen propeptide) and bone resorption (N-terminal telopeptide and pyridinoline) biomarkers, and survival. The independent prognostic value of each BMB was also assessed. The association with time to radiographic, clinical, and prostate-specific antigen (PSA) progression; time to skeletal-related events; and PSA response were secondary objectives. Multivariable (MV) Cox-regression models were evaluated. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: A total of 169 patients were included. Of the patients, 70.4% received Ra-223 in second/third line; 144 (85.2%) were Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group 0-1, 126 (74.6%) were in pain, and 80 (47.5%) had more than ten bone metastases. Sixty-seven (39.6%) patients had elevation in at least three BMBs. The median overall survival was 12.1 mo (95% confidence interval [CI]: 10-14.7). No association was observed with other treatment-related secondary outcome parameters. Patients with high values in three or more BMBs had significantly worse survival (9.9 vs 15.2 mo; hazard ratio [HR]: 1.8 [95% CI: 1.3-2.5]; p < 0.001) in the univariate analysis, but not independent in the MV analysis (HR: 1.33; 95% CI: 0.89-2; p = 0.181). High baseline BAP was the only biomarker associated with survival in the MV model (HR: 1.89; 95% CI: 1.28-2.79; p = 0.001). Addition of BAP to the MV clinical model increased the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve 2-yr value from 0.667 to 0.755 (p = 0.003). CONCLUSIONS: Biomarkers of bone formation, especially BAP, have prognostic value in mCRPC patients treated with radium-223. Its predictive value remains to be assessed, ideally in prospective, adequately powered, randomised clinical trials. PATIENT SUMMARY: In this study, we evaluate the role of bone metabolism biomarkers to help improve the use of radium-223 as therapy for advanced prostate cancer. We found that bone alkaline phosphatase may be a suitable tool.

Single nucleotide polymorphism associations with response and toxic effects in patients with advanced renal-cell carcinoma treated with first-line sunitinib: a multicentre, observational, prospective study.

BACKGROUND: Sunitinib is a tyrosine kinase inhibitor with proven efficacy in renal-cell carcinoma, but some patients do not respond or need dose reductions due to toxicity. Because there are no validated molecular predictors of response or toxicity to sunitinib, we aimed to identify genetic markers predictive of outcome and toxic effects. METHODS: In our observational, prospective study we enrolled previously untreated adults (≥ 18 years) with clear-cell renal-cell carcinoma at 15 institutions in the Spanish Oncology Genitourinary Group in Spain. Patients received sunitinib according to local practice guidelines. We assessed RECIST response, progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival, and toxicity of sunitinib with 16 key polymorphisms in nine genes: VEGFR2 (rs2305948 and rs1870377), VEGFR3 (rs307826, rs448012, and rs307821), PDGFR-α (rs35597368), VEGF-A (rs2010963, rs699947, and rs1570360), IL8 (rs1126647), CYP3A4 (rs2740574), CYP3A5 (rs776746), ABCB1 (rs1045642, rs1128503, and rs2032582), and ABCB2 (rs2231142). We assessed associations with efficacy and toxicity by use of univariable and multivariable analyses (with clinical factors associated with outcomes as covariates). We adjusted for multiplicity using the Bonferroni method; p values of less than 0·0031 before adjustment were deemed to still be significant after adjustment. FINDINGS: We enrolled 101 patients between Oct 10, 2007, and Dec 13, 2010. 95 of these patients were included in toxicity analyses and 89 in the efficacy analyses. Two VEGFR3 missense polymorphisms were associated with reduced PFS with sunitinib on multivariable analysis: rs307826 (hazard ratio [HR] per allele 3·57, 1·75-7·30; p(unadjusted)=0·00049, p(adjusted)=0·0079) and rs307821 (3·31, 1·64-6·68; p(unadjusted)=0·00085, p(adjusted)=0·014). The CYP3A5*1 (rs776746) high metabolising allele was associated in a multivariable analysis with an increased risk of dose reductions due to toxicity (HR per allele 3·75, 1·67-8·41; p(unadjusted)=0·0014, p(adjusted)=0·022). No other SNPs were associated with sunitinib response or toxicity. INTERPRETATION: Polymorphisms in VEGFR3 and CYP3A5*1 might be able to define a subset of patients with renal-cell carcinoma with decreased sunitinib response and tolerability. If confirmed, these results should promote interventional studies testing alternative therapeutic approaches for patients with such variants. FUNDING: Pfizer.

Bone loss induced by cancer treatments in breast and prostate cancer patients.

Cancer and cancer therapies are a major factor risk for osteoporosis due to bone loss and deterioration of bone microarchitecture. Both factors contribute to a decrease in bone strength and, consequently, increased bone fragility and risk of fracture. Cancer-associated bone loss is a multifactorial process, and optimal interdisciplinary management of skeletal health, accurate assessment of bone density, and early diagnosis are essential when making decisions aimed at reducing bone loss and fracture risk in patients who have received or are receiving treatment for cancer. In this document, a multidisciplinary group of experts collected the latest evidence on the pathophysiology of osteoporosis and its prevention, diagnosis, and treatment with the support of the Spanish scientific society SEOM. The aim was to provide an up-to-date and in-depth view of osteoporotic risk and its consequences, and to present a series of recommendations aimed at optimizing the management of bone health in the context of cancer.

Management of Patients with Metastatic Bladder Cancer in the Real-World Setting from the Multidisciplinary Team: Current Opinion of the SOGUG Multidisciplinary Working Group.

Based on the discussion of current state of research of relevant topics of metastatic bladder cancer (mBC) among a group of experts of a Spanish Oncology Genitourinary (SOGUG) Working Group, a set of recommendations were proposed to overcome the challenges posed by the management of mBC in clinical practice. First-line options in unfit patients for cisplatin are chemotherapy with carboplatin and immunotherapy in PD-L1 positive patients. FDG-PET/CT may be a useful imaging technique in the initial staging or re-staging. In patients with oligometastatic disease, it is important to consider not only the number of metastatic lesions, but also the tumor biology and the clinical course. The combination of stereotactic body radiotherapy and immunotherapy with anti-PD-L1 monoclonal antibodies is under investigation and could improve the results of systemic treatment in patient with oligometastatic disease. Rescue treatment with curative intent could be considered in patients with oligometastatic disease after complete response on FDG-PET/CT. Metastatic disease should be evaluated using the same imaging modality over the course of the disease from diagnosis until rescue treatment. For improving the outcome of patients with mBC, the involvement of a dedicated multidisciplinary team, including urologists, pathologists, oncologists, radiologists and other specialists is of outmost importance in the daily care of these patients.

SEOM-SOGUG clinical guideline for localized muscle invasive and advanced bladder cancer (2021).

Most muscle-invasive bladder cancer (BC) are urothelial carcinomas (UC) of transitional origin, although histological variants of UC have been recognized. Smoking is the most important risk factor in developed countries, and the basis for prevention. UC harbors high number of genomic aberrations that make possible targeted therapies. Based on molecular features, a consensus classification identified six different MIBC subtypes. Hematuria and irritative bladder symptoms, CT scan, cystoscopy and transurethral resection are the basis for diagnosis. Radical cystectomy with pelvic lymphadenectomy is the standard approach for muscle-invasive BC, although bladder preservation is an option for selected patients who wish to avoid or cannot tolerate surgery. Perioperative cisplatin-based neoadjuvant chemotherapy is recommended for cT2-4aN0M0 tumors, or as adjuvant in patients with pT3/4 and or pN + after radical cystectomy. Follow-up is particularly important after the availability of new salvage therapies. It should be individualized and adapted to the risk of recurrence. Cisplatin-gemcitabine is considered the standard first line for metastatic tumors. Carboplatin should replace cisplatin in cisplatin-ineligible patients. According to the EMA label, pembrolizumab or atezolizumab could be an option in cisplatin-ineligible patients with high PD-L1 expression. For patients whose disease respond or did not progress after first-line platinum chemotherapy, maintenance with avelumab prolongs survival with respect to the best supportive care. Pembrolizumab also increases survival versus vinflunine or taxanes in patients with progression after chemotherapy who have not received avelumab, as well as enfortumab vedotin in those progressing to first-line chemotherapy followed by an antiPDL1/PD1. Erdafitinib may be considered in this setting in patients with FGFR alterations. An early onset of supportive and palliative care is always strongly recommended.

Assessing the risk of cardiovascular events in patients receiving immune checkpoint inhibitors.

Background: Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have revolutionized cancer treatment. However, despite their excellent therapeutic effect, these medications typically result in a broad spectrum of toxicity reactions. Immune-related cardiotoxicity is uncommon but can be potentially fatal, and its true incidence is underestimated in clinical trials. The aim of this study is to assess the incidence and identify risk factors for developing a cardiac event in patients treated with ICIs. Methods: We conducted a single-institution retrospective study, including patients treated with ICIs in our center. The main outcomes were cardiac events (CE) and cardiovascular death. Results: A total of 378 patients were analyzed. The incidence of CE was 16.7%, during a median follow-up of 50.5 months. The multivariable analysis showed that age, a history of arrhythmia or ischemic heart disease, and prior immune-related adverse events were significantly associated with CE. Conclusion: CE during ICI treatment are more common than currently appreciated. A complete initial cardiovascular evaluation is recommended, especially in high-risk patients, being necessary a multidisciplinary approach of a specialized cardio-oncology team.

Radium-223 for patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer with asymptomatic bone metastases progressing on first-line abiraterone acetate or enzalutamide: A single-arm phase II trial.

PURPOSE: The paper aims to evaluate the efficacy and safety of 223Ra in patients who progressed after first-line androgen deprivation therapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: EXCAAPE (NCT03002220) was a multicentre, single-arm, open-label, non-controlled phase IIa trial in 52 patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer and asymptomatic bone metastases who have progressed on abiraterone acetate or enzalutamide, up to six doses of 223Ra (55 kBq/kg of body weight per month). The primary end-point was radiographic progression-free survival (rPFS). Secondary end-points included rPFS based on androgen receptor splice variant 7 (AR-V7) expression in circulating tumour cells (CTCs), overall survival, and safety. RESULTS: Median rPFS was 5.5 months (95% CI 5.3-5.5). Median rPFS of patients with AR-V7(-) CTCs was longer than that of patients with AR-V7(+) CTCs (5.5 versus 2.2 months, respectively; P = 0.056). Median overall survival was 14.8 months (95% CI 11.2-not reached) and was significantly greater for AR-V7(-) patients than for AR-V7(+) patients (14.8 months versus 3.5 months, respectively; P < 0.01). 223Ra was well tolerated; anaemia and thrombocytopenia were the most common grade 3/4 adverse events (5.8% and 11.5%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: 223Ra seems to be a reasonable treatment for patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer and asymptomatic bone metastases progressing on novel hormonal therapy and had an acceptable safety profile.

A phase II randomised trial of abiraterone acetate plus prednisone in combination with docetaxel or docetaxel plus prednisone after disease progression to abiraterone acetate plus prednisone in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer: The ABIDO-SOGUG trial.

BACKGROUND: We aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of maintaining or withdrawing abiraterone acetate plus prednisone (AAP) in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer who had experienced cancer progression to this treatment and were beginning a docetaxel-based therapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Phase II, randomised, open-label study conducted in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer who were asymptomatic or mildly symptomatic. After open-label treatment with AAP, patients who had experienced cancer progression to AAP were randomised to 75 mg/m2 of docetaxel plus AAP or to receive 75 mg/m2 of docetaxel plus 10 mg of prednisone orally daily. The primary outcome was the radiographic progression-free survival rate at 12 months as evaluated by the investigators in all randomised patients. RESULTS: A total of 148 patients were included in open-label treatment with AAP, and of them, 94 patients were randomised to receive either docetaxel plus AAP (intervention group; n = 47) or docetaxel plus prednisone (control group; n = 47). The 12-month radiographic progression-free survival rates did not differ between the intervention group (34.9%; 95% CI 20.7-49.2) and the control group (33.9%; 95% CI 19.5-48.3). There were no significant differences in the time to radiographic progression and the overall survival between the intervention and control groups. Grade 3-5 neutropenia with the combination of docetaxel plus prednisone and AA was more frequent than with docetaxel plus prednisone (59.6% versus 27.7%). CONCLUSION: Our results indicate that the therapeutic strategy of maintaining AAP added to docetaxel in chemotherapy-naïve patients who have experienced cancer progression to AAP treatment should not be further evaluated and should be avoided in clinical practice. CLINICAL TRIALS: NCT02036060 https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02036060.

Molecular Biomarkers of Prognosis in Advanced Renal Cell Carcinoma Patients Treated With Pazopanib Plus Interferon Alpha (INF-2A) in a Phase I/II Study by the Spanish Oncology Genitourinary Group.

INTRODUCTION: The therapeutic repertoire available for advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC), including tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) and immunotherapy, required for molecular biomarkers for response. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This was a phase I to II trial on the combination of pazopanib with interferon-alpha (INF-2A) as first-line treatment for advanced RCC. The primary endpoint was recommended phase II dose (RP2D) and efficacy in terms of objective response rate (ORR, RECIST 1.1 criteria). Secondary endpoints included safety and a translational study of molecular biomarkers in serum and exosomes from peripheral blood samples at three-time points: baseline, 8 weeks of treatment, and progression of the disease. RESULTS: Between July 2011 and July 2017, 53 eligible patients were treated and followed up (I, n = 20; II, n = 33). Pazopanib 800 mg + INF-2A 3 MIUs showed a manageable safety profile; therefore, it was selected for dose expansion. Overall, grade 3/4 toxicities were reported in 24 (72.7%) patients. The ORR was 27.2%. The 12-month OS rate was 83.6% (median not reached), and after 30.9 months of follow-up, 24 (72.7%) patients were still alive. CCL2, IL8, TNF-α, and PD-L1 were significantly overexpressed after treatment initiation, while TGF-ß1 and CCL5 were significantly decreased. TNF-α, endoglin, and PD-L1 expression are correlated with the response after treatment initiation. CONCLUSION: The trial did not reach its pre-specified target ORR. However, OS was longer than expected with pazopanib monotherapy. Changes in the molecular profile suggest a crucial role of vascular remodeling and inflammatory-mediated immune cell infiltration in optimal response to pazopanib plus INF-2A.

Measures to evaluate quality of care in renal cancer: results of a Delphi study in Spain.

PURPOSE: To review current measures for renal cancer care and develop a comprehensive and updated list of measures for their practical use in Spain. METHODS: The study was developed by Fundación ECO, a Spanish foundation aiming to improve oncology quality of care. A systematic literature review was carried out to identify measures and knowledge gaps. A scientific committee composed of nine experts reviewed the literature findings and added measures. A preliminary list of 42 measures was evaluated with the Delphi method to gather feedback from 47 medical oncology experts in Spain. Experts scored the appropriateness of the measures and ranked their priority in two consecutive online surveys. The scientific committee reviewed the Delphi results and developed the measures. A technical group from Universidad Francisco de Vitoria conducted and oversaw the Delphi method. RESULTS: The Delphi method led to consensus on all 42 measures. The scientific committee used a prioritisation matrix to select 25 of these measures for evaluating quality of care in renal cancer. These measures regarded structure, process, and outcome and covered general management, diagnosis, treatment, follow-up, and evaluation of health outcomes. Easy-to-use index cards were developed for all 25 measures, including their definition, formula, acceptable level of attainment, and rationale. CONCLUSIONS: This manuscript aims to provide healthcare professionals with expert- and evidence-based measures that are useful for evaluating quality of care in renal cancer in Spain and cover all aspects and stages.

Clinical Factors Associated With Long-Term Benefit in Patients With Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Treated With Axitinib: Real-World AXILONG Study.

BACKGROUND: Axitinib monotherapy obtained approval in pre-treated mRCC patients and recently in combination with pembrolizumab or avelumab in the first-line setting. However, patient profiles that may obtain increased benefit from this drug and its combinations still need to be identified. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Retrospective multicentre analysis describing clinical characteristics associated with axitinib long-responder (LR) population by comparing two extreme-response sub-groups (progression-free survival [PFS] ≥9 months vs. disease progression/refractory patients [RP]). A multivariate logistic-regression model was used to analyse clinical factors. Efficacy and safety were also analysed. RESULTS: In total, 157 patients who received axitinib in second or subsequent line were evaluated (91 LR and 66 RP). Older age at start of axitinib and haemoglobin levels > LLN were independent predictive factors for LR in multivariate analyses. In LR patients, median (m) PFS was 18.1 months, median overall survival was 36.0 months and objective response rate (ORR) was 45.5%. In 59 LR patients receiving axitinib in second-line, mPFS was 18.7 months, mOS was 44.8 months and ORR was 43.9%. mOS was significantly longer in second line compared to subsequent lines (44.8 vs. 26.5 months; P = .009). In LR vs. RP, mPFS with sunitinib in first-line was correlated with mPFS with axitinib in second-line (27.2 vs. 10.9 months P < .001). The safety profile was manageable and consistent with known data. CONCLUSIONS: This study confirms the long-term benefits of axitinib in a selected population, helping clinicians to select the best sequential approach and patients who could obtain a greater benefit from axitinib.