Overcoming sociodemographic factors in the care of patients with testicular cancer at a safety net hospital.

BACKGROUND: The objective of this study was to determine whether standardized treatment of germ cell tumors (GCTs) could overcome sociodemographic factors limiting patient care. METHODS: The records of all patients undergoing primary treatment for GCTs at both a public safety net hospital and an academic tertiary care center in the same metropolitan area were analyzed. Both institutions were managed by the same group of physicians in the context of multidisciplinary cancer care. Patients were grouped by care center; clinicopathologic features and outcomes were analyzed. RESULTS: Between 2006 and 2018, 106 and 95 patients underwent initial treatment for GCTs at the safety net hospital and the tertiary care center, respectively. Safety net patients were younger (29 vs 33 years; P = .005) and were more likely to be Hispanic (79% vs 11%), to be uninsured (80% vs 12%; P < .001), to present via the emergency department (76% vs 8%; P < .001), and to have metastatic (stage II/III) disease (42% vs 26%; P = .025). In a multivariable analysis, an absence of lymphovascular invasion (odds ratio [OR], 0.30; P = .008) and an embryonal carcinoma component (OR, 0.36; P = .02) were associated with decreased use of adjuvant treatment for stage I patients; hospital setting was not (OR, 0.67; P = .55). For patients with stage II/III nonseminomatous GCTs, there was no difference in the performance of postchemotherapy retroperitoneal lymph node dissection between the safety net hospital and the tertiary care center (52% vs 64%; P = .53). No difference in recurrence rates was observed between the cohorts (5% vs 6%; P = .76). CONCLUSIONS: Sociodemographic factors are often associated with adverse clinical outcomes in the treatment of GCTs; they may be overcome with integrated, standardized management of testicular cancer.

Cabozantinib in advanced non-clear-cell renal cell carcinoma: a multicentre, retrospective, cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Cabozantinib is approved for patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma on the basis of studies done in clear-cell histology. The activity of cabozantinib in patients with non-clear-cell renal cell carcinoma is poorly characterised. We sought to analyse the antitumour activity and toxicity of cabozantinib in advanced non-clear-cell renal cell carcinoma. METHODS: We did a multicentre, international, retrospective cohort study of patients with metastatic non-clear-cell renal cell carcinoma treated with oral cabozantinib during any treatment line at 22 centres: 21 in the USA and one in Belgium. Eligibility required patients with histologically confirmed non-clear-cell renal cell carcinoma who received cabozantinib for metastatic disease during any treatment line roughly between 2015 and 2018. Mixed tumours with a clear-cell histology component were excluded. No other restrictive inclusion criteria were applied. Data were obtained from retrospective chart review by investigators at each institution. Demographic, surgical, pathological, and systemic therapy data were captured with uniform database templates to ensure consistent data collection. The main objectives were to estimate the proportion of patients who achieved an objective response, time to treatment failure, and overall survival after treatment. FINDINGS: Of 112 identified patients with non-clear-cell renal cell carcinoma treated at the participating centres, 66 (59%) had papillary histology, 17 (15%) had Xp11.2 translocation histology, 15 (13%) had unclassified histology, ten (9%) had chromophobe histology, and four (4%) had collecting duct histology. The proportion of patients who achieved an objective response across all histologies was 30 (27%, 95% CI 19-36) of 112 patients. At a median follow-up of 11 months (IQR 6-18), median time to treatment failure was 6·7 months (95% CI 5·5-8·6), median progression-free survival was 7·0 months (5·7-9·0), and median overall survival was 12·0 months (9·2-17·0). The most common adverse events of any grade were fatigue (58 [52%]), and diarrhoea (38 [34%]). The most common grade 3 events were skin toxicity (rash and palmar-plantar erythrodysesthesia; five [4%]) and hypertension (four [4%]). No treatment-related deaths were observed. Across 54 patients with available next-generation sequencing data, the most frequently altered somatic genes were CDKN2A (12 [22%]) and MET (11 [20%]) with responses seen irrespective of mutational status. INTERPRETATION: While we await results from prospective studies, this real-world study provides evidence supporting the antitumour activity and safety of cabozantinib across non-clear-cell renal cell carcinomas. Continued support of international collaborations and prospective ongoing studies targeting non-clear-cell renal cell carcinoma subtypes and specific molecular alterations are warranted to improve outcomes across these rare diseases with few evidence-based treatment options. FUNDING: None.

Managing potential adverse events during treatment with enfortumab vedotin + pembrolizumab in patients with advanced urothelial cancer.

Cisplatin-based chemotherapy has been the standard of care for patients with locally advanced or metastatic urothelial cancer (la/mUC). Enfortumab vedotin, an antibody-drug conjugate directed to Nectin-4, and pembrolizumab, an immune checkpoint inhibitor, are two therapies that have individually provided a survival benefit in patients with la/mUC. The combination regimen of enfortumab vedotin plus pembrolizumab was evaluated in EV-302 (KEYNOTE-A39; NCT0422385), a phase 3 study that showed statistically significant and clinically meaningful improvement in overall survival, progression-free survival, and a key secondary endpoint of overall response rate versus chemotherapy. Based on these results and those from the EV-103 (KEYNOTE-869; NCT03288545) Dose Escalation cohort, Cohort A, and Cohort K, enfortumab vedotin plus pembrolizumab was granted approval from the US Food and Drug Administration for the treatment of adults with la/mUC. While guidelines and recommendations for the management of adverse events (AEs) have been developed for immune checkpoint inhibitor monotherapy and enfortumab vedotin monotherapy, additional guidance is needed for managing AEs that occur with enfortumab vedotin plus pembrolizumab. As monotherapies, enfortumab vedotin and pembrolizumab are both associated with some of the AEs observed with the combination, such as skin reactions, pneumonitis, and diarrhea, which may confound the attribution of the AE to a specific agent and thereby complicate clinical management. In this manuscript, we aim to provide recommendations for best practice for patient care and the management of AEs of clinical interest for patients with la/mUC receiving enfortumab vedotin plus pembrolizumab, including skin reactions, peripheral neuropathy, hyperglycemia, and pneumonitis. These recommendations were developed based on published guidelines, expert opinions, and the clinical experience of the authors, which include oncologist, advanced practice provider, nursing, and pharmacy perspectives. In addition, guidance on patient education and communication is provided. With vigilant monitoring, early detection, and prompt intervention of treatment-emergent AEs based on recommended approaches described herein, it is the authors' experience that most AEs can be managed with supportive therapy and dose modification/interruptions, allowing patients to continue treatment.

ImmunoPET Imaging with 89Zr-Labeled Atezolizumab Enables In Vivo Evaluation of PD-L1 in Tumorgraft Models of Renal Cell Carcinoma.

PURPOSE: Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) targeting the programmed cell death protein 1 and its ligand (PD-1/PD-L1) have transformed the treatment paradigm for metastatic renal cell carcinoma (RCC). However, response rates to ICIs as single agents or in combination vary widely and predictive biomarkers are lacking. Possibly related to the heterogeneity and dynamic nature of PD-L1 expression, tissue-based methods have shown limited value. Immuno-positron emission tomography (immunoPET) may enable noninvasive, comprehensive, and real-time PD-L1 detection. Herein, we systematically examined the performance of immunoPET for PD-L1 detection relative to IHC in an RCC patient-derived tumorgraft (TG) platform. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: Eight independent RCC TGs with a wide range of PD-L1 expression (0%-85%) were evaluated by immunoPET. Uptake of 89Zr-labeled atezolizumab ([89Zr]Zr-DFO-ATZ) was compared with PD-L1 expression in tumors by IHC through double-blind analyses. Clinical outcomes of ICI-treated patients whose TGs were examined were analyzed to evaluate the clinical role of immunoPET in RCC. RESULTS: ImmunoPET with [89Zr]Zr-DFO-ATZ (day 6/7 postinjection) revealed a statistically significant association with PD-L1 IHC assays (P = 0.0014; correlation ρXY = 0.78). Furthermore, immunoPET can be used to assess the heterogeneous distribution of PD-L1 expression. Finally, studies in the corresponding patients (n = 4) suggest that PD-L1 signal may influence ICI responsiveness. CONCLUSIONS: ImmunoPET with [89Zr]Zr-DFO-ATZ may enable a thorough and dynamic assessment of PD-L1 across sites of disease. The power of immunoPET to predict ICI response in RCC is being explored in an ongoing clinical trial (NCT04006522).

Disparities in Pre-Orchiectomy Sperm Cryopreservation Among Testicular Cancer Patients at a Public Safety Net Hospital and a Private Tertiary Care Center.

OBJECTIVE: To compare pre-orchiectomy sperm cryopreservation use in testicular cancer patients at a private tertiary care academic center and an affiliated public safety-net hospital. METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study of patients who underwent radical orchiectomy for testicular cancer at a private tertiary-care hospital, which cared primarily for patients with private health insurance, and at a public "safety-net" facility, which cared for patients regardless of insurance status. Clinical and demographic predictors of cryopreservation use prior to orchiectomy were determined by chart review. RESULTS: A total of 201 patients formed the study cohort, 106 (53%) at the safety-net hospital and 95 (47%) at the private hospital. Safety net patients were more likely to be non-White (82% vs 15%, P < 0.001), uninsured (80% vs 12%, P < 0.001), Spanish speaking (38% vs 5.6%, P < 0.001), and to reside in areas in the bottom quartile of income (41% vs 5.6%, P < 0.001). On multivariable analysis, treatment at the private tertiary care center was strongly associated with use of cryopreservation (OR 5.60, 95% CI 1.74 - 20.4, P = 0.005, though the effects of specific demographic factors could not be elucidated due to collinearity. CONCLUSION: Among patients with testicular cancer, disparities exist in use of sperm cryopreservation between the private and safety-net settings. Barriers to the use of cryopreservation in the safety-net population should be sought and addressed.

Molecular Genetic Determinants of Shorter Time on Active Surveillance in a Prospective Phase 2 Clinical Trial in Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma.

Active surveillance (AS) may be used in the management of metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC), but consensus regarding its application is lacking. We report an exploratory analysis of prospectively collected specimens prespecified in the only modern clinical trial evaluating AS in mRCC. Whole-exome and RNA sequencing were performed for patients providing consent to identify putative biomarkers associated with time on AS (TAS), the primary endpoint. Log-rank tests and multivariable Cox proportional-hazards models were used for analyses. Patients with mutations in either TP53 or SMARCA4 tumor suppressor genes had shorter TAS (7.5 vs 14.2 mo; log-rank p = 0.004). While these patients exhibited features of aggressive disease clinically, the two-gene model was independently predictive in multivariable analyses (hazard ratio 3.30, 95% confidence interval 1.07-10.18; p = 0.038). In conclusion, insight into the underlying RCC biology improves patient selection for AS. If validated, this two-gene model could help in stratifying patients with mRCC and identifying those who are poor candidates for AS. PATIENT SUMMARY: In this study, we analyzed tumors from patients with metastatic kidney cancer enrolled in a clinical trial of imaging surveillance. We found that tumors with mutations in either the TP53 or SMARCA4 gene progressed faster than tumors without these mutations. Thus, patients harboring mutations in these genes may not be good candidates for AS.

Clinical Activity and Safety of Cabozantinib for Brain Metastases in Patients With Renal Cell Carcinoma.

IMPORTANCE: Patients with brain metastases from renal cell carcinoma (RCC) have been underrepresented in clinical trials, and effective systemic therapy is lacking. Cabozantinib shows robust clinical activity in metastatic RCC, but its effect on brain metastases remains unclear. OBJECTIVE: To assess the clinical activity and toxic effects of cabozantinib to treat brain metastases in patients with metastatic RCC. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This retrospective cohort study included patients with metastatic RCC and brain metastases treated in 15 international institutions (US, Belgium, France, and Spain) between January 2014 and October 2020. Cohort A comprised patients with progressing brain metastases without concomitant brain-directed local therapy, and cohort B comprised patients with stable or progressing brain metastases concomitantly treated by brain-directed local therapy. EXPOSURES: Receipt of cabozantinib monotherapy at any line of treatment. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Intracranial radiological response rate by modified Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors, version 1.1, and toxic effects of cabozantinib. RESULTS: Of the 88 patients with brain metastases from RCC included in the study, 33 (38%) were in cohort A and 55 (62%) were in cohort B; the majority of patients were men (n = 69; 78%), and the median age at cabozantinib initiation was 61 years (range, 34-81 years). Median follow-up was 17 months (range, 2-74 months). The intracranial response rate was 55% (95% CI, 36%-73%) and 47% (95% CI, 33%-61%) in cohorts A and B, respectively. In cohort A, the extracranial response rate was 48% (95% CI, 31%-66%), median time to treatment failure was 8.9 months (95% CI, 5.9-12.3 months), and median overall survival was 15 months (95% CI, 9.0-30.0 months). In cohort B, the extracranial response rate was 38% (95% CI, 25%-52%), time to treatment failure was 9.7 months (95% CI, 6.0-13.2 months), and median overall survival was 16 months (95% CI, 12.0-21.9 months). Cabozantinib was well tolerated, with no unexpected toxic effects or neurological adverse events reported. No treatment-related deaths were observed. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: In this cohort study, cabozantinib showed considerable intracranial activity and an acceptable safety profile in patients with RCC and brain metastases. Support of prospective studies evaluating the efficacy of cabozantinib for brain metastases in patients with RCC is critical.

Improved Survival Outcomes for Kidney Cancer Patients With Brain Metastases.

BACKGROUND: Brain metastases (BM) occur frequently in patients with metastatic kidney cancer and are a significant source of morbidity and mortality. Although historically associated with a poor prognosis, survival outcomes for patients in the modern era are incompletely characterized. In particular, outcomes after adjusting for systemic therapy administration and International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium (IMDC) risk factors are not well-known. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A retrospective database of patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (RCC) treated at University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center between 2006 and 2015 was created. Data relevant to their diagnosis, treatment course, and outcomes were systematically collected. Survival was analyzed by the Kaplan-Meier method. Patients with BM were compared with patients without BM after adjusting for the timing of BM diagnosis, either prior to or during first-line systemic therapy. The impact of stratification according to IMDC risk group was assessed. RESULTS: A total of 56 (28.4%) of 268 patients with metastatic RCC were diagnosed with BM prior to or during first-line systemic therapy. Median overall survival (OS) for systemic therapy-naive patients with BM compared with matched patients without BM was 19.5 versus 28.7 months (P = .0117). When analyzed according to IMDC risk group, the median OS for patients with BM was similar for favorable- and intermediate-risk patients (not reached vs. not reached; and 29.0 vs. 36.7 months; P = .5254), and inferior for poor-risk patients (3.5 vs. 9.4 months; P = .0462). For patients developing BM while on first-line systemic therapy, survival from the time of progression did not significantly differ by presence or absence of BM (11.8 vs. 17.8 months; P = .6658). CONCLUSIONS: Survival rates for patients with BM are significantly better than historical reports. After adjusting for systemic therapy, the survival rates of patients with BM in favorable- and intermediate-risk groups were remarkably better than expected and not statistically different from patients without BM, though this represents a single institution experience, and numbers are modest.

Cytoreductive Nephrectomy in Metastatic Papillary Renal Cell Carcinoma: Results from the International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium.

BACKGROUND: There is evidence that cytoreductive nephrectomy (CN) may be beneficial in metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). This has been studied predominantly in clear-cell RCC, with more limited data on the role of CN in patients with papillary histology. OBJECTIVE: To determine the benefit of CN in synchronous metastatic papillary RCC. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Using the International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium (IMDC) database, a retrospective analysis was performed for patients with papillary mRCC treated with or without CN. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Median overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were determined for both patient groups. Cox regression analysis was performed to control for imbalances in individual IMDC risk factors. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: In total, 647 patients with papillary mRCC were identified, of whom 353 had synchronous metastatic disease. Of these, 109 patients were treated with CN and 244 were not. The median follow-up was 57.1mo (95% confidence interval [CI] 32.9-77.8) and the OS from the start of first-line targeted therapy for the entire cohort was 13.2mo (95% CI 12.0-16.1). Median OS for patients with CN was 16.3mo, compared to 8.6mo (p<0.0001) in the no-CN group. When adjusted for individual IMDC risk factors, the hazard ratio (HR) of death for CN was 0.62 (95% CI 0.45-0.85; p=0.0031). Limitations include the retrospective nature of the analysis. CONCLUSIONS: The use of CN in patients with mRCC and papillary histology appears to be associated with better survival compared to no CN after adjustment for risk criteria. Selection of appropriate candidates for CN is crucial. A clinical trial in this rare population may not be possible. PATIENT SUMMARY: In a population of patients with advanced papillary kidney cancer, we found that surgical removal of the primary kidney tumor was associated with better overall survival.

ROS1 Gene Rearrangements Are Associated With an Elevated Risk of Peridiagnosis Thromboembolic Events.

INTRODUCTION: This study aims to determine whether advanced ROS1 gene-rearranged NSCLC (ROS1+ NSCLC) has a higher than expected thromboembolic event (TEE) rate. METHODS: Venous and arterial TEEs within ±365 days of diagnosis of ROS1+, ALK+, EGFR+, or KRAS+ advanced NSCLC at five academic centers in the United States and China were captured (October 2002-April 2018). The primary endpoint was incidence of TEE in ROS1+ compared to anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK)+, EGFR+, and KRAS+ NSCLC within ±90 days of diagnosis. Logistic regression was used to assess if the odds of TEE differed among oncogene drivers. RESULTS: Eligible data from 95 ROS1+, 193 ALK+, 300 EGFR+, and 152 KRAS+ NSCLC patients were analyzed. The incidence rate of TEE was 34.7% (n = 33), 22.3% (n = 43), 13.7% (n = 41), and 18.4% (n = 28), respectively. In univariate analysis, the odds of a TEE in ROS1+ NSCLC were higher than ALK+, EGFR+, and KRAS+ cohorts. In multivariable analysis, the odds of a TEE were significantly higher for ROS1+ compared to EGFR+ and KRAS+ cohorts, the odds ratio (OR) was 2.44, with a 95% confidence interval of 1.31-4.57 (p = 0.005), and OR: 2.62, with a 95% confidence interval of 1.26-5.46 (p = 0.01), respectively. Although numerically superior, the odds for a TEE with ROS1+ compared to ALK+ was not statistically significant (OR: 1.45, p = 0.229). Overall survival was not significantly different in patients with or without TEE within ±90 days of diagnosis in the overall study cohort or within each molecular group. CONCLUSIONS: The risk of peridiagnostic TEEs is significantly elevated in patients with advanced ROS+ NSCLC compared to EGFR+ and KRAS+ cases. TEE risk may be similarly elevated in ALK+ NSCLC.