[Collecting duct carcinoma and renal medullary carcinoma in the age of new therapies]. / Tumeurs de Bellini et carcinomes médullaires rénaux à l'ère des nouvelles thérapies.

Collecting duct carcinoma (also known as Bellini tumour) and renal medullary carcinoma are two extremely rare and aggressive renal cancers. They are both less responsive to conventional treatments used in clear cell renal carcinoma. There are very few studies evaluating their optimal management and currently, at the metastatic stage, polychemotherapy based on platinum salts remains the most widely used. The emergence of new treatments such as anti-angiogenic TKIs, immunotherapy or treatments targeting specific genetic abnormalities, opens up a new field of possibilities in the management of these cancers. The evaluation of the response to these treatments is therefore essential. In this article, we will review the status of their management and the various studies that have evaluated recent treatments in these two cancers.

Long-Term Outcomes in Head and Neck Paragangliomas Managed with Intensity-Modulated Radiotherapy.

OBJECTIVES: Head & Neck Paragangliomas have been historically relying on surgery mostly, with worsened quality of life and major sequelae. Conventional external radiation therapy seems to offer an equivalent control rate with a low toxicity profile. The aim of this study was to assess the safety and efficiency of intensity-modulated radiation therapy in Head & Neck paragangliomas. METHODS: This is a retrospective monocentric study conducted in a referral center, including all patients treated with IMRT, whether as an exclusive or post-operative treatment for a tympanic and jugular, carotid, or vagal paraganglioma. Data collection was performed through the manuscript and computerized medical files, including consultation, operative, imaging, pathological analyses, delineation, and treatment planning reports. Success was defined as the complete or partial regression or stabilization without progression, or relapse in accordance with the RECIST criteria. Acute toxicities and long-term sequelae were assessed. RESULTS: Our cohort included 39 patients included between 2011 and 2021: 18 patients treated for a TJ PG (45.9%), 11 patients for a carotid PG (28.4%), and 9 for a vagal PG (23.1%). Twenty-nine patients had IMRT as an exclusive treatment (74.4%), whereas 10 patients had a post-operative complementary treatment (25.6%). Median follow-up in our cohort was 2318 days (average = 2200 days, 237-5690, sd = 1281.9). Among 39 patients, 37 were successfully controlled with IMRT (94.8%), and the toxicity profile was low without any major toxicity. CONCLUSION: IMRT seems an ideal treatment, whether exclusive or post-operative for Head & Neck paragangliomas. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3 Laryngoscope, 133:607-614, 2023.

Brief Report: Severe Sotorasib-Related Hepatotoxicity and Non-Liver Adverse Events Associated With Sequential Anti-Programmed Cell Death (Ligand)1 and Sotorasib Therapy in KRASG12C-Mutant Lung Cancer.

INTRODUCTION: Sequential anti-programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1) or anti-programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) followed by small targeted therapy use is associated with increased prevalence of adverse events (AEs) in NSCLC. KRASG12C inhibitor sotorasib may trigger severe immune-mediated hepatotoxicity when used in sequence or in combination with anti-PD-(L)1. This study was designed to address whether sequential anti-PD-(L)1 and sotorasib therapy increases the risk of hepatotoxicity and other AEs. METHODS: This is a multicenter, retrospective study of consecutive advanced KRASG12C-mutant NSCLC treated with sotorasib outside clinical trials in 16 French medical centers. Patient records were reviewed to identify sotorasib-related AEs (National Cancer Institute Common Classification Criteria for Adverse Events-Version 5.0). Grade 3 and higher AE was considered as severe. Sequence group was defined as patients who received an anti-PD-(L)1 as last line of treatment before sotorasib initiation and control group as patients who did not receive an anti-PD-(L)1 as last line of treatment before sotorasib initiation. RESULTS: We identified 102 patients who received sotorasib, including 48 (47%) in the sequence group and 54 (53%) in the control group. Patients in the control group received an anti-PD-(L)1 followed by at least one treatment regimen before sotorasib in 87% of the cases or did not receive an anti-PD-(L)1 at any time before sotorasib in 13% of the cases. Severe sotorasib-related AEs were significantly more frequent in the sequence group compared with those in the control group (50% versus 13%, p < 0.001). Severe sotorasib-related AEs occurred in 24 patients (24 of 48, 50%) in the sequence group, and among them 16 (67%) experienced a severe sotorasib-related hepatotoxicity. Severe sotorasib-related hepatotoxicity was threefold more frequent in the sequence group compared with that in the control group (33% versus 11%, p = 0.006). No fatal sotorasib-related hepatotoxicity was reported. Non-liver severe sotorasib-related AEs were significantly more frequent in the sequence group (27% versus 4%, p < 0.001). Severe sotorasib-related AEs typically occurred in patients who received last anti-PD-(L)1 infusion within 30 days before sotorasib initiation. CONCLUSIONS: Sequential anti-PD-(L)1 and sotorasib therapy are associated with a significantly increased risk of severe sotorasib-related hepatotoxicity and severe non-liver AEs. We suggest avoiding starting sotorasib within 30 days from the last anti-PD-(L)1 infusion.

Second-line treatment outcomes after progression from first-line chemotherapy plus immunotherapy in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer.

INTRODUCTION: Chemotherapy plus immunotherapy is the standard of care for patients with metastatic NSCLC. No study has evaluated the outcomes of second-line chemotherapy treatments after progression following first-line chemo-immunotherapy. METHOD: This multicenter retrospective study evaluated the efficacy of second line (2L) chemotherapies after progression under first-line (1L) chemo-immunotherapy, measured by overall survival (2L-OS) and progression free survival (2L-PFS). RESULTS: A total of 124 patients were included. The mean age was 63.1 years, 30.6 % of the patients were female, 72.6 % had an adenocarcinoma and 43.5 % had a poor ECOG-performance status prior to 2L initiation. Sixty-four (52.0 %) patients were considered resistant to first line chemo-immunotherapy. (1L-PFS < 6 months). In 2L treatments, 57 (46.0 %) patients received taxane monotherapy, 25 (20.1 %) taxane plus anti-angiogenic, 12 (9.7 %) platinum-based chemotherapy and 30 (24.2 %) other chemotherapy. At a median follow-up of 8.3 months (95 %CI: 7.2-10.2), post initiation of 2L treatment, the median 2L-OS was 8.1 months (95 % CI: 6.4-12.7) and the median 2L-PFS was 2.9 months (95 %CI: 2.4-3.3). Overall, the 2L-objective response and 2L-disease control rates were 16.0 %, and 42.5 %, respectively. Taxane plus anti-angiogenic and platinum rechallenge achieved longest median 2L-OS: not reached (95 %CI: 5.8-NR) and 17.6 months (95 %CI 11.6-NR), respectively (p = 0.05). Patients resistant to the 1L treatment had inferior outcomes (2L-OS 5.1 months, 2L-PFS 2.3 months) compared with 1L responders (2L-OS 12.7 months, 2L-PFS 3.2 months). CONCLUSION: In this real-life cohort, 2L chemotherapy achieved modest activity following progression under chemo-immunotherapy. 1L-resistant patients remained a refractory population, highlighting a need for new 2L strategies.

Future treatment options in metastatic clear cell renal cell carcinoma.

The field of clear cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC) has undergone major changes in the last decade, both in terms of the understanding of the mechanisms of oncogenesis and the role of the tumor microenvironment in anti-tumor immunity, as well as in therapeutic developments. After the era of tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) targeting VEGFR and then the era of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) targeting the PD-1/PD-L1 pathway, we are now entering the era of combination therapy for first-line metastatic cancer (m-ccRCC), such as combinations including a TKI and a PD-1 inhibitor or combinations of PD-1 and CTLA-4 blockers. In this extremely dynamic environment, new molecules with various mechanisms of action will appear in the very near future: immune response modulators (other ICIs, pro-inflammatory cytokines, gut microbiota modulators), new anti-angiogenic agents (new TKIs, anti-HIF-1α antibodies), agents affecting cell metabolism (glutaminase inhibitors, tryptophan regulators or adenosine A2A receptor antagonists) or epigenetic regulators (HDAC inhibitors). In parallel, new strategies are being evaluated that could rapidly change the standards of management of advanced disease, including therapeutic intensification with triple combinations or, conversely, adaptive and/or alternative de-escalation regimens (SURF trial), and biomarker-driven treatments (BIONIKK trial). The main new molecules and strategies currently being evaluated are reviewed in this article.

Human Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor 2 (HER2) in Advanced Gastric Cancer: Current Knowledge and Future Perspectives.

The discovery of human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) overexpression in 15-20% of gastric adenocarcinomas has been a key advance in the global care of this disease. Validated by the ToGA trial in the first-line setting of advanced HER2-positive (+) gastric cancer (GC), trastuzumab, an anti-HER2 monoclonal antibody (mAb), was the first therapeutic agent to significantly improve the prognosis of these patients. Since these results, many attempts have been made to improve the clinical outcomes of patients with HER2+ GC. However, all the other HER2-targeting molecules have failed to show a survival benefit in large phase III studies. The value of continuing trastuzumab after disease progression has been suggested by several retrospective studies. However, recent results of a randomized phase II trial showed no benefit from this strategy. On the other hand, novel therapeutic methods, such as immunotherapy, are emerging as new tools in the strategy of care of advanced GC, even if their benefit in the specific HER2+ population remains undetermined. Furthermore, substantial progress has been made in the understanding of the mechanisms leading to resistance to anti-HER2 therapies, and in the screening methods to detect them, thus opening new perspectives. The aim of this review was firstly to summarize the existing data on the specific strategy of care of HER2+ advanced GC, and secondly, to describe current knowledge regarding the potential mechanisms of resistance to HER2-targeting therapies. Lastly, we report the prospects for overcoming these potential obstacles, from future therapeutic strategies to new detection methods.