Myositis/Myasthenia after Pembrolizumab in a Bladder Cancer Patient with an Autoimmunity-Associated HLA: Immune-Biological Evaluation and Case Report.

Pembrolizumab (mAb to PD-1) has been recently approved for the therapy of pretreated urothelial cancer. Despite the efficacy, it is often accompanied by unpredictable and sometime severe immune-related (ir) adverse events (AEs). Here, we report the clinical and immune-biological characterization of a patient with a metastatic bladder cancer who developed myositis signs (M) and a myasthenia-like syndrome (MLS) during treatment with pembrolizumab. The patient presented an autoimmunity-associated HLA haplotype (HLA-A*02/HLA-B*08/HLA-C*07/HLA-DRB1*03) and experienced an increase in activated CD8 T-cells along the treatment. The symptomatology regressed after pembrolizumab discontinuation and a pyridostigmine and steroids-based therapy. This is the first report of concurrent M and MLS appearance in cancer patients receiving pembrolizumab. More efforts are needed to define early the risk and the clinical meaning of irAEs in this setting.

Everolimus Plus Exemestane in Advanced Breast Cancer: Safety Results of the BALLET Study on Patients Previously Treated Without and with Chemotherapy in the Metastatic Setting.

BACKGROUND: The BALLET study was an open-label, multicenter, expanded access study designed to allow treatment with everolimus plus exemestane in postmenopausal women with hormone receptor-positive metastatic breast cancer progressed following prior endocrine therapy. A post hoc analysis to evaluate if previous chemotherapy in the metastatic setting affects the safety profile of the combination regimen of everolimus and exemestane was conducted on the Italian subset, as it represented the major part of the patients enrolled (54%). PATIENTS AND METHODS: One thousand one hundred and fifty-one Italian patients were included in the present post hoc analysis, which focused on two sets of patients: patients who never received chemotherapy in the metastatic setting (36.1%) and patients who received at least one chemotherapy treatment in the metastatic setting (63.9%). RESULTS: One thousand one hundred and sixteen patients (97.0%) prematurely discontinued the study drug, and the main reasons reported were disease progression (39.1%), local reimbursement of everolimus (31.1%), and adverse events (AEs) (16.1%). The median duration of study treatment exposure was 139.5 days for exemestane and 135.0 days for everolimus. At least one AE was experienced by 92.5% of patients. The incidence of everolimus-related AEs was higher (83.9%) when compared with those that occurred with exemestane (29.1%), and the most commonly reported everolimus-related AE was stomatitis (51.3%). However, no significant difference in terms of safety related to the combination occurred between patients without and with chemotherapy in the metastatic setting. CONCLUSION: Real-life data of the Italian patients BALLET-related cohort were an adequate setting to state that previous chemotherapy did not affect the safety profile of the combination regimen of everolimus and exemestane. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: With the advent of new targeted agents for advanced or metastatic breast cancer, multiple lines of therapy may be possible, and components of the combined regimens can overlap from one line to another. Thus, it is important to assess even the potential of cumulative and additive toxic effects among the drugs. Previous chemotherapy did not affect the safety profile of the combination regimen of everolimus and exemestane. The continuous monitoring of the safety signals of this drug combination from general clinical practice is important, in particular for stomatitis.

Oral sucrosomial iron versus intravenous iron in anemic cancer patients without iron deficiency receiving darbepoetin alfa: a pilot study.

PURPOSE: Erythropoiesis-stimulating agents (ESAs) are often used in treatment of patients with chemotherapy-induced anemia. Many studies have demonstrated an improved hemoglobin (Hb) response when ESA is combined with intravenous iron supplementation and a higher effectiveness of intravenous iron over traditional oral iron formulations. A new formulation of oral sucrosomial iron featuring an increased bioavailability compared to traditional oral formulations has recently become available and could provide a valid alternative to those by intravenous (IV) route. Our study evaluated the performance of sucrosomial iron versus intravenous iron in increasing hemoglobin in anemic cancer patients receiving chemotherapy and darbepoetin alfa, as well as safety, need of transfusion, and quality of life (QoL). MATERIALS AND METHODS: The present study considered a cohort of 64 patients with chemotherapy-related anemia (Hb >8 g/dL <10 g/dL) and no absolute or functional iron deficiency, scheduled to receive chemotherapy and darbepoetin. All patients received darbepoetin alfa 500 mcg once every 3 weeks and were randomly assigned to receive 8 weeks of IV ferric gluconate 125 mg weekly or oral sucrosomial iron 30 mg daily. The primary endpoint was to demonstrate the performance of oral sucrosomial iron in improving Hb response, compared to intravenous iron. The Hb response was defined as the Hb increase ≥2 g/dL from baseline or the attainment Hb ≥ 12 g/dL. RESULTS: There was no difference in the Hb response rate between the two treatment arms. Seventy one percent of patients treated with IV iron achieved an erythropoietic response, compared to 70% of patients treated with oral iron. By conventional criteria, this difference is considered to be not statistically significant. There were also no differences in the proportion of patients requiring red blood cell transfusions and changes in QoL. Sucrosomial oral iron was better tolerated. CONCLUSION: In cancer patients with chemotherapy-related anemia receiving darbepoetin alfa, sucrosomial oral iron provides similar increase in Hb levels and Hb response, with higher tolerability without the risks or side effects of IV iron.

Mitomycin C plus capecitabine (mixe) in anthracycline- and taxane-pretreated metastatic breast cancer. A multicenter phase II study.

BACKGROUND: Capecitabine is considered the treatment of choice for anthracycline- and taxane-pretreated metastatic breast cancer. Mitomycin C seems to improve the activity of capecitabine by up-regulation of thymidine phosphorylase. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Fifty-five women with metastatic breast cancer previously treated with anthracyclinetaxane were treated with mitomycin C 10 mg/m2 on day 1 every six weeks and capecitabine 1000 mg/m2 on days 2-15 every three weeks. RESULTS: An overall response rate of 38% was found, consisting of 3 (5%) complete responses (CR) and 18 (33%) partial responses (PR); 8 patients (14%) had a stable disease (SD) for more than 4 months. The combination was well-tolerated, with the main toxicities being neutropenia, diarrhea and fatigue; other toxicities were of mild to moderate intensity without impairment in the quality of life of the patients. CONCLUSION: Capecitabine is confirmed as the drug of choice in the treatment of anthracycline- and taxane-pretreated metastatic breast cancer and its combination with mitomycin appears to improve its efficacy.

Mitomycin C and capecitabine combination (MiXe) in heavily pretreated metastatic breast cancer patients. A dose-finding study.

BACKGROUND: No standard chemotherapy has been defined for metastatic breast cancer patients pretreated with anthracyclines and taxanes. In preclinical studies, mitomycin C (MMC) and capecitabine showed a synergistic effect by up-regulation of thymidine phosphorylase, and both drugs were active against breast cancer with a lack of overlapping toxicity, making their combination a well-tolerated regimen. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A dose-finding study was carried out in order to determine the maximum tolerable dose of MMC combined with fixed-dose capecitabine and to describe the dose-limiting toxicities. RESULTS: Twenty-one patients were enrolled, with metastatic breast cancer pretreated at least with anthracyclines and taxanes (3 at dose level I, 15 at dose level II, 3 at dose level III). At dose level III (MMC 12 mg/m2 and capecitabine 1000 mg/m2 days 2-15) dose-limiting toxicities were recorded in 2 patients (G4 thrombocytopenia, neutropenic fever, G4 neutropenia); dose level II (MMC 10 mg/m2 and capecitabine 1000 mg/m2 days 2-15) was extended for a better safety evaluation. No severe toxicity was noted at this dose level, and therefore this dose was recommend for the phase II study. With regard to activity, 4 partial responses and 2 stable diseases (28%) were recorded. CONCLUSION: Our data show that the combination is feasible, well tolerated and active in this set of patients.