Erdafitinib or Chemotherapy in Advanced or Metastatic Urothelial Carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Erdafitinib is a pan-fibroblast growth factor receptor (FGFR) inhibitor approved for the treatment of locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma in adults with susceptible FGFR3/2 alterations who have progression after platinum-containing chemotherapy. The effects of erdafitinib in patients with FGFR-altered metastatic urothelial carcinoma who have progression during or after treatment with checkpoint inhibitors (anti-programmed cell death protein 1 [PD-1] or anti-programmed death ligand 1 [PD-L1] agents) are unclear. METHODS: We conducted a global phase 3 trial of erdafitinib as compared with chemotherapy in patients with metastatic urothelial carcinoma with susceptible FGFR3/2 alterations who had progression after one or two previous treatments that included an anti-PD-1 or anti-PD-L1. Patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive erdafitinib or the investigator's choice of chemotherapy (docetaxel or vinflunine). The primary end point was overall survival. RESULTS: A total of 266 patients underwent randomization: 136 to the erdafitinib group and 130 to the chemotherapy group. The median follow-up was 15.9 months. The median overall survival was significantly longer with erdafitinib than with chemotherapy (12.1 months vs. 7.8 months; hazard ratio for death, 0.64; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.47 to 0.88; P = 0.005). The median progression-free survival was also longer with erdafitinib than with chemotherapy (5.6 months vs. 2.7 months; hazard ratio for progression or death, 0.58; 95% CI, 0.44 to 0.78; P<0.001). The incidence of grade 3 or 4 treatment-related adverse events was similar in the two groups (45.9% in the erdafitinib group and 46.4% in the chemotherapy group). Treatment-related adverse events that led to death were less common with erdafitinib than with chemotherapy (in 0.7% vs. 5.4% of patients). CONCLUSIONS: Erdafitinib therapy resulted in significantly longer overall survival than chemotherapy among patients with metastatic urothelial carcinoma and FGFR alterations after previous anti-PD-1 or anti-PD-L1 treatment. (Funded by Janssen Research and Development; THOR ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03390504.).

Efficacy and safety of erdafitinib in patients with locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma: long-term follow-up of a phase 2 study.

BACKGROUND: Erdafitinib, a pan-fibroblast growth factor receptor (FGFR) tyrosine kinase inhibitor, was shown to be clinically active and tolerable in patients with advanced urothelial carcinoma and prespecified FGFR alterations in the primary analysis of the BLC2001 study at median 11 months of follow-up. We aimed to assess the long-term efficacy and safety of the selected regimen of erdafitinib determined in the initial part of the study. METHODS: The open-label, non-comparator, phase 2, BLC2001 study was done at 126 medical centres in 14 countries across Asia, Europe, and North America. Eligible patients were aged 18 years or older with locally advanced and unresectable or metastatic urothelial carcinoma, at least one prespecified FGFR alteration, an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-2, and progressive disease after receiving at least one systemic chemotherapy or within 12 months of neoadjuvant or adjuvant chemotherapy or were ineligible for cisplatin. The selected regimen determined in the initial part of the study was continuous once daily 8 mg/day oral erdafitinib in 28-day cycles, with provision for pharmacodynamically guided uptitration to 9 mg/day (8 mg/day UpT). The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed confirmed objective response rate according to Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors version 1.1. Efficacy and safety were analysed in all treated patients who received at least one dose of erdafitinib. This is the final analysis of this study. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02365597. FINDINGS: Between May 25, 2015, and Aug 9, 2018, 2328 patients were screened, of whom 212 were enrolled and 101 were treated with the selected erdafitinib 8 mg/day UpT regimen. The data cutoff date for this analysis was Aug 9, 2019. Median efficacy follow-up was 24·0 months (IQR 22·7-26·6). The investigator-assessed objective response rate for patients treated with the selected erdafitinib regimen was 40 (40%; 95% CI 30-49) of 101 patients. The safety profile remained similar to that in the primary analysis, with no new safety signals reported with longer follow-up. Grade 3-4 treatment-emergent adverse events of any causality occurred in 72 (71%) of 101 patients. The most common grade 3-4 treatment-emergent adverse events of any cause were stomatitis (in 14 [14%] of 101 patients) and hyponatraemia (in 11 [11%]). There were no treatment-related deaths. INTERPRETATION: With longer follow-up, treatment with the selected regimen of erdafitinib showed consistent activity and a manageable safety profile in patients with locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma and prespecified FGFR alterations. FUNDING: Janssen Research & Development.

Multi-institutional Analysis of the Clinical and Genomic Characteristics of Black Patients with Metastatic Hormone-Sensitive Prostate Cancer.

BACKGROUND: The outcomes of metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC) have significantly improved through treatment intensification, yet Black representation in those studies is suboptimal. METHODS: A multi-institutional, retrospective analysis of Black men with mHSPC was conducted, focusing on baseline demographics, treatment patterns, genomic profiles, clinical outcomes including prostate-specific antigen response, time to castrate-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC), and subsequent treatments. RESULTS: A total of 107 patients, median age 64 years, 62% with de novo metastases at diagnosis and 64% with high-volume disease, were included. Twenty-nine patients (27%) were treated with androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) with and without first generation anti-androgens, while 20%, 38% and 5% received chemotherapy, abiraterone, and enzalutamide, respectively. At time of data cut-off, 57 (54%) patients had developed CRPC, with a median time to CRPC of 25.4 months (95% CI 20.3-30.4). The median time to CRPC was 46.3 months (18.9-73.7) and 23.4 months (18.6-28.2) for patients who received ADT with or without first-generation anti-androgens and treatment intensification, respectively. The 2-year survival rate was 93.3%, and estimated median overall survival of was 74.9 months (95% CI, 68.7-81.0). Most patients (90%) underwent germline testing; the most frequent known alterations were found within the DNA repair group of genes. Somatic testing revealed pathogenic alterations of interest, notably TP53 (24%) and CDK12 (12%). CONCLUSION: In our cohort, Black men with mHSPC presented with a high proportion of de novo metastases and high-volume disease. Treatment outcomes were very favorable with ADT-based regimens. The genomic landscape suggests different molecular profile relative to White patients with potential therapeutic implications.

Erdafitinib in Locally Advanced or Metastatic Urothelial Carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Alterations in the gene encoding fibroblast growth factor receptor (FGFR) are common in urothelial carcinoma and may be associated with lower sensitivity to immune interventions. Erdafitinib, a tyrosine kinase inhibitor of FGFR1-4, has shown antitumor activity in preclinical models and in a phase 1 study involving patients with FGFR alterations. METHODS: In this open-label, phase 2 study, we enrolled patients who had locally advanced and unresectable or metastatic urothelial carcinoma with prespecified FGFR alterations. All the patients had a history of disease progression during or after at least one course of chemotherapy or within 12 months after neoadjuvant or adjuvant chemotherapy. Prior immunotherapy was allowed. We initially randomly assigned the patients to receive erdafitinib in either an intermittent or a continuous regimen in the dose-selection phase of the study. On the basis of an interim analysis, the starting dose was set at 8 mg per day in a continuous regimen (selected-regimen group), with provision for a pharmacodynamically guided dose escalation to 9 mg. The primary end point was the objective response rate. Key secondary end points included progression-free survival, duration of response, and overall survival. RESULTS: A total of 99 patients in the selected-regimen group received a median of five cycles of erdafitinib. Of these patients, 43% had received at least two previous courses of treatment, 79% had visceral metastases, and 53% had a creatinine clearance of less than 60 ml per minute. The rate of confirmed response to erdafitinib therapy was 40% (3% with a complete response and 37% with a partial response). Among the 22 patients who had undergone previous immunotherapy, the confirmed response rate was 59%. The median duration of progression-free survival was 5.5 months, and the median duration of overall survival was 13.8 months. Treatment-related adverse events of grade 3 or higher, which were managed mainly by dose adjustments, were reported in 46% of the patients; 13% of the patients discontinued treatment because of adverse events. There were no treatment-related deaths. CONCLUSIONS: The use of erdafitinib was associated with an objective tumor response in 40% of previously treated patients who had locally advanced and unresectable or metastatic urothelial carcinoma with FGFR alterations. Treatment-related grade 3 or higher adverse events were reported in nearly half the patients. (Funded by Janssen Research and Development; BLC2001 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02365597.).

Comparison of germline mutations in African American and Caucasian men with metastatic prostate cancer.

BACKGROUND: The goal of this study is to evaluate germline genetic variants in African American men with metastatic prostate cancer as compared to those in Caucasian men with metastatic prostate cancer in an effort to understand the role of genetic factors in these populations. METHODS: African American and Caucasian men with metastatic prostate cancer who had germline testing using multigene panels were used to generate comparisons. Germline genetic results, clinical parameters, and family histories between the two populations were analyzed. RESULTS: A total of 867 patients were included in this retrospective study, including 188 African American and 669 Caucasian patients. There was no significant difference in the likelihood of a pathogenic or likely-pathogenic variants (PV/LPVs) between African American and Caucasian patients (p = .09). African American patients were more likely to have a variant of unknown significance than Caucasians (odds ratio [OR] = 1.95; p < .0001). BRCA1 PV/LPVs were higher in African Americans (OR = 4.86; p = .04). African American patients were less likely to have a PV/LPV in non-BRCA DNA repair genes (OR = 0.30; p = .008). Family history of breast (OR = 2.09; p = .002) or ovarian cancer (OR = 2.33; p = .04) predicted PV/LPVs in Caucasians but not African-Americans. This underscores the limitations of family history in AA men and the importance of personal history to guide germline testing in AA men. CONCLUSIONS: In metastatic prostate cancer patients, PV/LPVs of tested genes did not vary by race, BRCA1 PV/LPVs were more common in the African American subset. However, PV/LPVs in non-BRCA DNA repair genes were less likely to be encountered in African Americans. Family history associated with genetic testing results in Caucasians only.

Racial Disparities in Prostate Specific Antigen Screening and Referral to Urology in a Large, Integrated Health Care System: A Retrospective Cohort Study.

PURPOSE: Contemporary trends and racial disparities in prostate cancer screening and referral to urology for prostate cancer risk are not well characterized, despite consensus that Black men are at higher risk for poor prostate cancer outcomes. The objective of this study was to characterize current racial disparities in prostate cancer screening and referral from primary care to urology for prostate cancer concern within our large, integrated health care system. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This retrospective cohort study used data from Atrium Health's enterprise data warehouse, which includes patient information from more than 900 care locations across North Carolina, South Carolina and Georgia. We included all men seen in the ambulatory or outpatient setting between 2014 and 2019 who were ≥40 years old. Clinical and demographic data were collected for all men, including age and race. Racial outcomes were reported for all groups with >2% representation in the population. Between-group comparisons were determined using chi-squared analysis, Wilcoxon rank sum testing and multivariable logistic regression, with significance defined as p <0.05. RESULTS: We observed a significant decrease in prostate specific antigen testing across all age and racial groups in a cohort of 606,985 men at Atrium Health, including 87,189 Black men, with an overall relative decline of 56%. As compared to White men, Black men were more likely to undergo prostate specific antigen testing (adjusted OR 1.24, 95% CI 1.22-1.26) and be referred to urology for prostate cancer (adjusted OR 1.94, 95% CI 1.75-2.16). CONCLUSIONS: There was a continued significant decline in prostate cancer screening between 2014 and 2019. Despite having modestly elevated odds of being screened for prostate cancer compared to White men, Black men are relatively underscreened when considering that those who undergo prostate specific antigen screening are more likely to be referred by primary care to urology for additional prostate cancer diagnostic evaluation.

A phase 2, randomized trial evaluating the combination of dalantercept plus axitinib in patients with advanced clear cell renal cell carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: In a prior open-label study, the combination of dalantercept, a novel antiangiogenic targeting activin receptor-like kinase 1 (ALK1), plus axitinib was deemed safe and tolerable with a promising efficacy signal in patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC). METHODS: In the current phase 2, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study, patients with clear cell RCC previously treated with 1 prior angiogenesis inhibitor were randomized 1:1 to receive axitinib plus dalantercept versus axitinib plus placebo. Randomization was stratified by the type of prior therapy. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS). Secondary endpoints were PFS in patients with ≥2 prior lines of anticancer therapy, overall survival, and the objective response rate. RESULTS: Between June 10, 2014, and February 23, 2017, a total of 124 patients were randomly assigned to receive axitinib plus dalantercept (59 patients) or placebo (65 patients). The median PFS was not found to be significantly different between the treatment groups (median, 6.8 months vs 5.6 months; hazard ratio, 1.11 [95% CI, 0.71-1.73; P = .670]). Neither group reached the median overall survival (hazard ratio, 1.39 [95% CI, 0.70-2.77; P = .349]). The objective response rate was 19.0% (11 of 58 patients; 95% CI, 9.9%-31.4%) in the dalantercept plus axitinib group and 24.6% (15 of 61 patients; 95% CI, 14.5%-37.3%) in the placebo plus axitinib group. At least 1 treatment-emergent adverse event of ≥grade 3 was observed in 59% of patients (34 of 58 patients) in the dalantercept group and 64% of patients (39 of 61 patients) in the placebo group. One treatment-related death occurred in the placebo plus axitinib group. CONCLUSIONS: Although well tolerated, the addition of dalantercept to axitinib did not appear to improve treatment-related outcomes in previously treated patients with advanced RCC.

Thrombosis Rates and Genetic Thrombophilia Risk Among Patients With Advanced Germ Cell Tumors Treated With Chemotherapy.

INTRODUCTION: Men with advanced germ cell tumors (GCT) treated with chemotherapy are at high risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE). Predictors of VTE may identify patients who would benefit from prophylactic anticoagulation. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Men with advanced GCT (Stage IS, II, III) treated with chemotherapy were identified at 2 centers. High genomic risk was defined from a 5 single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) germline panel. Logistic regression was used to evaluate the impact of genomic risk on VTE within 6 months of chemotherapy initiation. Orthogonal Projection to Latent Structures Discriminant Analysis (OPLS-DA) was used to build models to predict VTE based on clinical variables and an 86 SNP panel. RESULTS: This 123-patient cohort experienced a VTE rate of 26% with an incidence of high genomic risk of 21%. Men with high genomic risk did not have a significantly higher VTE rate (31%, 8/26) than men with low genomic risk (25%, 24/97), unadjusted OR 1.4 (95% CI 0.5-3.5, P = .54). Incorporation of clinical variables (Khorana score, N3 status and elevated LDH) resulted in adjusted OR 2.1 (95% CI 0.7-6.5, P = .18). A combined model using clinical variables and 86 SNPs performed similarly (AUC 0.77) compared to clinical variables alone (AUC 0.72). CONCLUSIONS: A previously established 5-SNP panel was not associated with VTE among patients with GCT receiving chemotherapy. However, multivariable models based on clinical variables alone warrant further validation to inform prophylactic anticoagulation strategies.

Renal cell carcinoma histologic subtypes exhibit distinct transcriptional profiles.

Molecular profiling of clear cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC) tumors of patients in a clinical trial has identified distinct transcriptomic signatures with predictive value, yet data in non-clear cell variants (nccRCC) are lacking. We examined the transcriptional profiles of RCC tumors representing key molecular pathways, from a multi-institutional, real-world patient cohort, including ccRCC and centrally reviewed nccRCC samples. ccRCC had increased angiogenesis signature scores compared with the heterogeneous group of nccRCC tumors, while cell cycle, fatty acid oxidation/AMPK signaling, and fatty acid synthesis/pentose phosphate signature scores were increased in one or more nccRCC subtypes. Among both ccRCC and nccRCC tumors, T effector scores statistically correlated with increased immune cell infiltration and were more commonly associated with immunotherapy-related markers (PD-L1+/TMBhi/MSIhi). In conclusion, this study provides evidence of differential gene transcriptional profiles among ccRCC versus nccRCC tumors, providing insights for optimizing personalized and histology-specific therapeutic strategies for patients with advanced RCC.

Low co-expression of PD-L1 and oncogenic receptor tyrosine kinases HER2 and cMET in urothelial carcinoma is associated with discordant expression between primary and metastatic sites.

OBJECTIVES: Novel regimens targeting immune checkpoints and the cMET or HER2 pathways are under investigation in metastatic urothelial carcinoma (mUC) though co-expression of these molecular targets has not been defined. We sought to characterize the protein co-expression rates of PD-L1, cMET and HER2 in primary and metastatic mUC lesions and agreement rates in paired biopsies. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We assessed PD-L1, cMET and HER2 protein expression by immunohistochemistry (IHC) in archival mUC samples identified from an institutional database (n = 143). Correlation of expression between primary and metastatic biopsies was performed in patients with available paired biopsies (n = 79). Protein expression levels by predefined thresholds were measured, and Cohen's kappa statistics (κ) were utilized to assess the agreement in expression between paired primary and metastatic samples. RESULTS: In primary tumors (n = 85), high expression of PD-L1, cMET, and HER2 was observed in 14.1%, 34.1%, and 12.9%, respectively. In metastatic samples (n = 143), high expression of PD-L1, cMET and HER2 was detected in 9.8%, 41.3%, and 9.8%, respectively. Expression agreement rates between paired specimens (n = 79) were PD-L1: 79.7% (κ = 0.09), cMET: 69.6% (κ = 0.35), HER2: 84.8% (κ = 0.17). High PD-L1/cMET co-expression was observed in only 5.1% (n = 4) of primary and 4.9% (n = 7) of metastatic specimens. High co-expression of PD-L1/HER2 occurred in 3.8% (n = 3) of primary samples and no metastatic samples. The overall co-expression agreement between paired samples was 55.7% (κ = 0.22) for PD-L1/cMET and 67.1% (κ = 0.06) for PD-L1/HER2, but agreement for high co-expression between paired samples was very low (2.5% for PD-L1/cMET and 0% for PD-L1/HER2). CONCLUSIONS: Tumor co-expression of high cMET or HER2 and PD-L1 is low in this cohort. Agreement of high co-expression between primary and metastatic sites is rare. Biomarker-based strategies used in selection of patients for contemporary trials testing combinations of immune checkpoint inhibitors with either cMET or HER2-targeted agents should account for discordant biomarker expression between primary and metastatic sites.

RNA-Based Homologous Recombination Deficiency Signature Detects Homologous Recombination Deficiency-RNA+ Patients With and Without Homologous Recombination Repair Gene Pathogenic Alterations in Men With Prostate Cancer.

PURPOSE: Homologous recombination deficiency (HRD) is a well-described phenotype of some prostate cancers; however, current biomarkers for HRD are imperfect and rely on detection of single gene alterations in the homologous recombination repair (HRR) pathway, which may not capture the complexity of HRD biology. RNA signature-based methods of HRD identification present a potentially dynamic assessment of the HRD phenotype; however, its relationship with HRR gene alterations is not well characterized in prostate cancer. METHODS: A HRD assay on the basis of an RNA signature associated with biallelic BRCA1/2 loss was applied to a retrospective cohort study of 985 men with prostate cancer analyzed on the Tempus xT platform. HRD status was defined by a binary threshold on a continuous scale. RESULTS: In this cohort, of the 126 (13%) patients found to be HRD+ by RNA signature (HRD-RNA+), 100 (79%) had no coexisting HRR gene alteration. Among samples with biallelic BRCA1/2 loss, 78% (7/9) were classified as HRD-RNA+, while 8% (2/25) of samples with BRCA1/2 monoallelic loss were HRD-RNA+. Biallelic and monoallelic ATM loss exhibited HRD-RNA+ at a lower prevalence: 6.7% (1/15) and 7.1% (1/14), respectively, compared with HRD-RNA+ prevalence among samples without any HRR gene loss (13%; 100/782). HRD-RNA+ was associated with a significantly higher prevalence of TP53 and AR gene alterations relative to HRD-RNA- after correction for multiple comparisons, 59% versus 39% (q = 0.003) and 23% versus 12% (q = 0.024), respectively. CONCLUSION: Use of an RNA-based HRD signature significantly expands the fraction of patients with prostate cancer who may derive benefit from poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitors (PARPis) compared with using HRR gene mutations alone. Further studies are needed to evaluate functional HRD significance and inform future usage as a predictive biomarker for PARPi selection.

Olaparib in Patients With Metastatic Prostate Cancer With BRCA1/2 Mutation: Results From the TAPUR Study.

PURPOSE: The TAPUR Study is a phase II basket trial that aims to evaluate activity of approved targeted agents in patients with advanced cancers with potentially actionable genomic variants. Data from a cohort of patients with metastatic castrate-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) and BRCA1/2 mutations treated with olaparib are reported. METHODS: Eligible patients with measurable mCRPC were matched to treatment according to protocol-specified genomic matching rules. Patients had no remaining standard treatment options, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0-2, and adequate organ function. Simon's two-stage design was used with a primary end point of disease control, defined as objective response or stable disease of at least 16-week duration. Secondary end points include radiographic progression-free survival, overall survival, duration of response, duration of stable disease, and safety. RESULTS: Thirty patients with mCRPC with BRCA1/2 mutations were treated with olaparib. The disease control rate was 69% (95% CI, 51 to 81), and the objective response rate was 58% (95% CI, 37 to 77). The median radiographic progression-free survival and the median overall survival were 38.4 (95% CI, 16.3 to 52.1) weeks and 76.4 (95% CI, 49.3 to 106.0) weeks, respectively. Six of 30 (20%) patients experienced grade 3-4 adverse or serious adverse events including anemia, aspiration, decreased WBC count, and fatigue. CONCLUSION: Olaparib has antitumor activity in patients with mCRPC with BRCA1/2 mutations and warrants further study to determine how to best integrate it into the standard treatment of patients with BRCA1/2-mutated prostate cancer.

Outcomes of Patients with Advanced Urothelial Carcinoma after Anti-programmed Death-(ligand) 1 Therapy by Fibroblast Growth Factor Receptor Gene Alteration Status: An Observational Study.

Background: Clinical outcomes of anti-programmed death­(ligand) 1 (anti-PD-[L]1) therapy in patients with locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma (mUC) and fibroblast growth factor receptor alterations (FGFRa+) remain unclear; recent studies have reported either comparable or poorer outcomes versus patients without FGFR alterations (FGFRa-). Objective: To analyze the outcomes of patients with mUC and any FGFRa (mutations or fusions) who received anti-PD-(L)1 therapy. Design setting and participants: In this noninterventional, retrospective, multicenter study, clinical practice data were collected from FGFRa+/- patients who received prior immunotherapy between May 2018 and July 2019. Outcome measurements and statistical analysis: Investigator­determined overall response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR), and overall survival (OS) were assessed in multivariate and unadjusted analyses. Results and limitations: Ninety-four patients (66% men; median age, 63 yr) with mUC and known FGFR status were included; 38 (40%) were FGFRa+ and 56 (60%) were FGFRa-. In FGFRa+ versus FGFRa- patients who received any line of anti-PD-(L)1 therapy (n = 92), ORR, DCR, and OS were 16% versus 26%, 29% versus 52% (relative risk: 1.14 [95% confidence interval {CI}, 0.92-1.40]; p = 0.3), and 8.57 versus 13.2 mo (hazard ratio [HR]: 1.33 [95% CI, 0.77-2.30]; p = 0.3), respectively. A multivariate analysis provided some evidence supporting shorter OS in FGFRa+ versus FGFRa- (any line of anti-PD-L[1] therapy; HR: 1.81 [95% CI, 0.99-3.31]; p = 0.054). Limitations include this study's retrospective nature and a potential selection bias from small sample size. Conclusions: Some evidence of lower response rates and shortened OS following anti-PD-(L)1 therapy was observed in FGFRa+ patients. The phase 3 THOR study (NCT03390504) will prospectively compare FGFRa+ patients with advanced mUC treated with erdafitinib versus pembrolizumab. Patient summary: Patients with metastatic urothelial carcinoma and prespecified fibroblast growth factor receptor alterations (FGFRa) potentially have worse clinical outcomes when treated with anti-PD-(L)1 therapy than those without FGFRa.

Prognostic value of galectin-1 and galectin-3 expression in localized urothelial bladder cancer.

Background: Galectin-1 (Gal-1) and Galectin-3 (Gal-3) are carbohydrate binding proteins with a wide range of biological activity, including regulation of cellular adhesion, proliferation, and apoptosis in solid tumors. Prior small studies have reported that Gal-3 expression is associated with progression of disease in urothelial carcinoma (UC), from non-muscle invasive UC progression to muscle invasive UC. We assessed Gal-1 and Gal-3 protein expression H-score utilizing a tissue microarray (TMA) created from 301 cystectomy specimens. Methods: Immunohistochemistry for Gal-1 and Gal-3 was performed on TMA generated from tumor blocks from chemotherapy naïve cystectomy specimens. The variable of interest, H-score, was defined as the product of the percentage of cells staining positive (0-100) and intensity score (0-3) scored by a single pathologist. Survival end points were analyzed using Kaplan-Meier and Cox Proportional Hazards methods. Clinical data including Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI), pathologic tumor (T) stage, tumor size, node stage, and surgical margins, were included in multivariable analysis. Results: We found that Gal-1 and Gal-3 expression correlated with intratumoral T stage (median Gal-1 H-score was 0 across non-invasive tissue types and 200 in invasive, P<0.01 and median Gal-3 score was 270 across non-invasive tissue types and 70 in invasive, P<0.01). However, the highest intratumoral H-score per cystectomy core did not independently predict for recurrence-free survival (RFS) (Gal-1: HR =1.02, P=0.44, Gal-3: HR =1.01, P=0.65) or OS (Gal-1: HR =1.02, P=0.44, Gal-3: HR =1.01, P=0.72) in this cohort. Significant intratumoral heterogeneity was present for both Gal-1 and Gal-3, with an average difference between the highest and lowest H score was 95 for Gal-1 and 109 for Gal-3 for cystectomy specimens with more than one biopsy. Conclusions: Gal-1 and Gal-3 H-score per bladder did not independently predict for RFS or OS. Intra-tumoral Gal-1/Gal-3 heterogeneity complicates the use of Gal-1 and Gal-3 expression as a prognostic biomarker. Future studies should consider the evaluation of serum and urinary galectins as an approach to mitigate tumor heterogeneity.

EphrinB2 Inhibition and Pembrolizumab in Metastatic Urothelial Carcinoma.

PURPOSE: Patients with metastatic urothelial carcinoma have poor prognosis after failure of standard first-line chemotherapy. Immune check point programmed death 1-programmed death ligand 1 antibodies have low response rates and thus there exists a major unmet need. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this phase II trial, patients with metastatic urothelial carcinoma that recurred or progressed after platinum-based chemotherapy received soluble EphB4-human serum albumin (sEphB4-HSA) in combination with pembrolizumab. The primary end points were tolerability and overall survival (OS). The secondary end points were progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate (ORR), duration of response, and toxicity. The expression of sEphB4-HSA target EphrinB2 was correlated with outcomes. RESULTS: Seventy patients were enrolled. The median follow up was 22.9 months (range, 1.3-54.7). The regimen had acceptable toxicity. In the intent-to-treat analysis (N = 70), the median OS was 14.6 months (95% CI, 9.2 to 21.5). Twenty-six (37%) patients had an objective response (95% CI, 26 to 48). The median PFS was 4.1 (95% CI, 1.5 to 5.7) months. Forty-six (66%) patients expressed EphrinB2, and among them, the median OS was 21.5 months (95% CI, 12.4 to not reached), the ORR was 52% (95% CI, 37 to 67), including a complete response rate of 24% (11 of 46; 95% CI, 12 to 36). The median PFS was 5.7 (95% CI, 2.7 to 27.9) months. Response was maintained at 6, 12, and 24 months in 88%, 74%, and 69% of the patients, respectively. CONCLUSION: The combination of sEphB4-HSA and pembrolizumab appears synergistic with improved OS and ORR compared with historical data for programmed death 1/programmed death ligand 1 monotherapy.

Management of Fibroblast Growth Factor Inhibitor Treatment-emergent Adverse Events of Interest in Patients with Locally Advanced or Metastatic Urothelial Carcinoma.

Background: Erdafitinib is indicated for the treatment of adults with locally advanced/metastatic urothelial carcinoma and susceptible FGFR3/2 alterations progressing on/after one or more lines of prior platinum-based chemotherapy. Objective: To better understand the frequency and management of select treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) to enable optimal fibroblast growth factor receptor inhibitor (FGFRi) treatment. Design setting and participants: Longer-term efficacy and safety results of the BLC2001 (NCT02365597) trial in patients with locally advanced and unresectable or metastatic urothelial carcinoma were studied. Intervention: Erdafitinib schedule of 8 mg/d continuous in 28-d cycles, with uptitration to 9 mg/d if serum phosphate level was <5.5 mg/dl and no significant TEAEs occurred. Outcome measurements and statistical analysis: Adverse events were graded using National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 4.0. The Kaplan-Meier methodology was used for the cumulative incidence of the first onset of TEAEs by grade. Time to resolution of TEAEs was summarized descriptively. Results and limitations: At data cutoff, the median treatment duration was 5.4 mo among 101 patients receiving erdafitinib. Select TEAEs (total; grade 3) were hyperphosphatemia (78%; 2.0%), stomatitis (59%; 14%), nail events (59%; 15%), non-central serous retinopathy (non-CSR) eye disorders (56%; 5.0%), skin events (55%; 7.9%), diarrhea (55%; 4.0%), and CSR (27%; 4.0%). Select TEAEs were mostly of grade 1 or 2, and were managed effectively with dose modifications, including dose reductions or interruptions, and/or supportive concomitant therapies, resulting in few events leading to treatment discontinuation. Further work is needed to determine whether management is generalizable to the nonprotocol/general population. Conclusions: Identification of select TEAEs and appropriate management with dose modification and/or concomitant therapies resulted in improvement or resolution of most TEAEs in patients, allowing for continuation of FGFRi treatment to ensure maximum benefit. Patient summary: Early identification and proactive management are warranted to mitigate or possibly prevent erdafitinib side effects to allow for maximum drug benefit in patients with locally advanced or metastatic bladder cancer.

COVID-19 vaccine uptake trends in SARS-CoV-2 previously infected cancer patients.

Purpose: Cancer patients are at high risk of developing severe illness from SARS-CoV-2 infection, but risk is lowered with receipt of COVID-19 vaccine. COVID-19 vaccination uptake among previously infected cancer patients may be influenced by an assumption of natural immunity, predicted weak immune response, or concerns about vaccine safety. The objective of this study was to evaluate COVID-19 vaccine uptake trends in cancer patients previously infected with SARS-CoV-2. Materials and Methods: Medical records of 579 sequential cancer patients undergoing active treatment at Levine Cancer Institute who tested positive for COVID-19 between January 2020 and January 2021 were evaluated. Patients who died prior to vaccine eligibility were excluded from the analysis. Demographic, clinical, and COVID-19 related characteristics were analyzed to identify prognostic factors for COVID-19 vaccine uptake as this information could be important for health policy design for future pandemics. Results: Eighty-one patients died prior to the availability of COVID-19 vaccines. The acceptance rate of COVID-19 vaccination among 498 previously infected cancer patients was 54.6%. Of the patients with known vaccination dates, 76.8% received their first vaccine by April 17th, 2021. As of November 30, 2021, 23.7.% of eligible patients were boosted. In univariate models, older age, female sex, higher income, solid tumor cancer type, and hormone therapy were significantly associated with higher vaccine uptake, while Hispanic/Latino ethnicity was significantly associated with lower vaccine uptake. In a multivariable model, age (OR 1.18, 95% CI 1.10-1.28; p < 0.001), female sex (OR 1.80, 95% CI 1.22-2.66; p = 0.003), and higher income (OR 1.11, 95% CI 1.01-1.22; p = 0.032), were predictive of COVID-19 vaccine uptake. Conclusions: Overall, vaccine uptake was low among our cohort of previously infected cancer patients. Older age, female sex, and higher income were the only variables associated with COVID-19 vaccine uptake within this vulnerable patient population.

Enfortumab Vedotin With or Without Pembrolizumab in Cisplatin-Ineligible Patients With Previously Untreated Locally Advanced or Metastatic Urothelial Cancer.

PURPOSE: Patients with locally advanced or metastatic urothelial cancer (la/mUC) who are ineligible for cisplatin-based therapy have limited first-line (1L) treatment options and significant need for improved therapies. Enfortumab vedotin (EV) and pembrolizumab (Pembro) individually have shown a survival benefit in urothelial cancer in second-line + la/mUC settings. Here, we present data from the pivotal trial of EV plus Pembro (EV + Pembro) in the 1L setting. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In Cohort K of the EV-103 phase Ib/II study, cisplatin-ineligible patients with previously untreated la/mUC were randomly assigned 1:1 to receive EV as monotherapy or in combination with Pembro. The primary end point was confirmed objective response rate (cORR) per blinded independent central review. Secondary end points included duration of response (DOR) and safety. There were no formal statistical comparisons between treatment arms. RESULTS: The cORR was 64.5% (95% CI, 52.7 to 75.1) and 45.2% (95% CI, 33.5 to 57.3) for patients treated with EV + Pembro (N = 76) and EV monotherapy (N = 73), respectively. The median DOR was not reached for the combination and was 13.2 months for monotherapy; 65.4% and 56.3% of patients who responded to the combination and monotherapy, respectively, maintained a response at 12 months. The most common grade 3 or higher treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) in patients treated with the combination were maculopapular rash (17.1%), fatigue (9.2%), and neutropenia (9.2%). EV TRAEs of special interest (any grade) in the combination arm included skin reactions (67.1%) and peripheral neuropathy (60.5%). CONCLUSION: EV + Pembro showed a high cORR with durable responses as 1L treatment in cisplatin-ineligible patients with la/mUC. Patients who received EV monotherapy had a response and safety profile consistent with previous studies. Adverse events for EV + Pembro were manageable, with no new safety signals observed.

Prostate cancer: what did we learn from the 2012 Annual Scientific Meeting of ASCO?

In recent years, management of prostate cancer has benefited from an expanding array of new pharmacological options that are the result, in part, of an increased understanding of, and ability to target, androgen signaling. Further characterization of additional molecular pathways relevant to prostate cancer tumorigenesis has identified new molecular targets in prostate cancer that may be amenable to therapeutic intervention with novel agents. In addition, novel radioisotope therapies and cytotoxic agents have shown significant anticancer efficacy with manageable patterns of toxicity, and will eventually have to be integrated into our algorithms of therapy. This review summarizes recent findings in clinical prostate cancer research reported at the 2012 Annual Scientific Meeting of the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) and addresses their relevance to clinical practice.

Clinical outcomes associated with expression of aurora kinase and p53 family members in muscle-invasive bladder cancer.

Biomarkers are needed in muscle-invasive bladder cancer (MIBC). We previously reported that high tumor aurora kinase (AURK) A expression identifies patients with MIBC with poor prognosis. Aberrant p53 expression has also been associated with poor outcomes in MIBC, though to the best of our knowledge, co-expression rates of p53 and aurora kinases have not been previously described in MIBC. As aurora kinase and p53 family members may co-regulate each other, the present study investigated whether tumor p53 or p63 protein expression influenced the prognostic value of AURKA in a pilot study of 50 patients with MIBC treated with curative intent. Immunohistochemistry for AURKA, AURKB, p53 and p63 were performed on archival pre-treatment tumor specimens and correlated with clinical outcomes in patients with MIBC who received neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) prior to cystectomy. Baseline p53 [hazard ratio (HR) 1.46; 95% confidence interval (CI)=0.55-3.9; P=0.448) and p63 (HR 2.02; 95% CI=0.51-8.1; P=0.313) protein expression did not predict for overall survival (OS). Low p53 protein expression did not correlate with high AURKA (φ=0.190) or AURKB (φ=0.075) expression. However, in tumors with low p53 expression (n=17), the presence of either high AURKA or AURKB expression levels predicted an increased risk for relapse (HR 27.1; 95% CI=2.7-270.1; P=0.005) and mortality (HR 14.9; 95% CI=2.3-95.6; P=0.004) compared to tumors with both low AURKA and AURKB levels. The relationship between p63 and AURKA/B expression levels was not tested due to the prevalence (80%) of high p63 expression in the present cohort. In tumors with low AURKA expression, p53 status did not predict for OS (HR 0.62; 95% CI 0.2-3.2; P=0.572). In multivariable analysis, only high baseline AURKA expression predicted for inferior OS (HR 4.9; 95% CI 1.7-14.1; P=0.003). To the best of our knowledge, the present study was the first to report co-expression of p53 and aurora kinase family members in MIBC, and although wild-type p53 may regulate the aurora kinases in preclinical models, the adverse prognostic value of tumor AURKA overexpression was independent from baseline tumor p53 protein expression in the present cohort. AURKA remains an important prognostic biomarker in patients with MIBC and warrants further evaluation in prospective studies to validate whether baseline AURKA can identify patients that are unlikely to benefit from standard of care with NAC.