Nivolumab plus ipilimumab versus sunitinib for first-line treatment of advanced renal cell carcinoma: extended 8-year follow-up results of efficacy and safety from the phase III CheckMate 214 trial.

BACKGROUND: Nivolumab plus ipilimumab (NIVO+IPI) has demonstrated superior overall survival (OS) and durable response benefits versus sunitinib (SUN) with long-term follow-up in patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma (aRCC). We report updated analyses with 8 years of median follow-up from CheckMate 214. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with aRCC (N = 1096) were randomized to NIVO 3 mg/kg plus IPI 1 mg/kg Q3W × four doses, followed by NIVO (3 mg/kg or 240 mg Q2W or 480 mg Q4W); or SUN (50 mg) once daily for 4 weeks on, 2 weeks off. The endpoints included OS, independent radiology review committee (IRRC)-assessed progression-free survival (PFS), and IRRC-assessed objective response rate (ORR) in intermediate/poor-risk (I/P; primary), intent-to-treat (ITT; secondary), and favorable-risk (FAV; exploratory) patients. RESULTS: With 8 years (99.1 months) of median follow-up, the hazard ratio [HR; 95% confidence interval (CI)] for OS with NIVO+IPI versus SUN was 0.72 (0.62-0.83) in ITT patients, 0.69 (0.59-0.81) in I/P patients, and 0.82 (0.60-1.13) in FAV patients. PFS probabilities at 90 months were 22.8% versus 10.8% (ITT), 25.4% versus 8.5% (I/P), and 12.7% versus 17.0% (FAV), respectively. ORR with NIVO+IPI versus SUN was 39.5% versus 33.0% (ITT), 42.4% versus 27.5% (I/P), and 29.6% versus 51.6% (FAV). Rates of complete response were higher with NIVO+IPI versus SUN in all International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium (IMDC) risk groups (ITT, 12.0% versus 3.5%; I/P, 11.8% versus 2.6%; FAV, 12.8% versus 6.5%). The median duration of response (95% CI) with NIVO+IPI versus SUN was 76.2 versus 25.1 months [59.1 months-not estimable (NE) versus 19.8-33.2 months] in ITT patients, 82.8 versus 19.8 months (54.1 months-NE versus 16.4-26.4 months) in I/P patients, and 61.5 versus 33.2 months (27.8 months-NE versus 24.8-51.4 months) in FAV patients. The incidence of treatment-related adverse events was consistent with previous reports. Exploratory post hoc analyses are reported for FAV patients, those receiving subsequent therapy based on their response status, clinical subpopulations, and adverse events over time. CONCLUSIONS: Superior survival, durable response benefits, and a manageable safety profile were maintained with NIVO+IPI versus SUN at 8 years, the longest phase III follow-up for a first-line checkpoint inhibitor combination therapy in aRCC.

EV-301 long-term outcomes: 24-month findings from the phase III trial of enfortumab vedotin versus chemotherapy in patients with previously treated advanced urothelial carcinoma.

INTRODUCTION: This exploratory analysis evaluated efficacy and safety data for enfortumab vedotin versus chemotherapy over a median follow-up of ∼2 years from EV-301. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients with locally advanced/metastatic urothelial carcinoma with prior platinum-containing chemotherapy and disease progression during/after programmed cell death protein 1/ligand 1 inhibitor treatment were randomized to enfortumab vedotin or chemotherapy (docetaxel, paclitaxel, vinflunine). Endpoints were overall survival (primary), progression-free survival (PFS), objective response, and safety. RESULTS: In total, 608 patients were included (enfortumab vedotin, n = 301; chemotherapy, n = 307). With a median follow-up of 23.75 months, 444 deaths had occurred (enfortumab vedotin, n = 207; chemotherapy, n = 237). Risk of death was reduced by 30% with enfortumab vedotin versus chemotherapy [hazard ratio (HR) 0.70 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.58-0.85); one-sided, log-rank P = 0.00015]; PFS improved with enfortumab vedotin [HR 0.63 (95% CI 0.53-0.76); one-sided, log-rank P < 0.00001]. Treatment-related adverse event rates were 93.9% for enfortumab vedotin and 91.8% for chemotherapy; grade ≥ 3 event rates were 52.4% and 50.5%, respectively. Grade ≥ 3 treatment-related decreased neutrophil count (14.1% versus 6.1%), decreased white blood cell count (7.2% versus 1.4%), and anemia (7.9% versus 2.7%) were more common with chemotherapy versus enfortumab vedotin; maculopapular rash (7.4% versus 0%), fatigue (6.8% versus 4.5%), and peripheral sensory neuropathy (5.1% versus 2.1%) were more common with enfortumab vedotin. Of special interest adverse events, treatment-related skin reactions occurred in 47.3% of patients receiving enfortumab vedotin and 15.8% of patients receiving chemotherapy; peripheral neuropathy occurred in 48.0% versus 31.6%, respectively, and hyperglycemia in 6.8% versus 0.3%. CONCLUSIONS: After a median follow-up of ∼2 years, enfortumab vedotin maintained clinically meaningful overall survival benefit versus chemotherapy, consistent with findings from the EV-301 primary analysis; PFS and overall response benefit remained consistent. Adverse events were manageable; no new safety signals were observed.

Efficacy and safety of pembrolizumab in metastatic urothelial carcinoma: results from KEYNOTE-045 and KEYNOTE-052 after up to 5 years of follow-up.

BACKGROUND: Immune checkpoint inhibitors are a standard therapy in metastatic urothelial carcinoma (UC). Long-term follow-up is necessary to confirm durability of response and identify further safety concerns. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In KEYNOTE-045, patients with metastatic UC that progressed on platinum-containing chemotherapy were randomly assigned 1:1 to receive pembrolizumab or investigator's choice of paclitaxel, docetaxel, or vinflunine. Primary endpoints were progression-free survival per RECIST version 1.1 by blinded independent central review (BICR) and overall survival. In KEYNOTE-052, cisplatin-ineligible patients with metastatic UC received first-line pembrolizumab. The primary endpoint was objective response rate per RECIST version 1.1 by BICR. RESULTS: A total of 542 patients (pembrolizumab, n = 270; chemotherapy, n = 272) were randomly assigned in KEYNOTE-045. The median follow-up was 62.9 months (range 58.6-70.9 months; data cut-off 1 October 2020). At 48 months, overall survival rates were 16.7% for pembrolizumab and 10.1% for chemotherapy; progression-free survival rates were 9.5% and 2.7%, respectively. The median duration of response (DOR) was 29.7 months (range 1.6+ to 60.5+ months) for pembrolizumab and 4.4 months (range 1.4+ to 63.1+ months) for chemotherapy; 36-month DOR rates were 44.4% and 28.3%, respectively. A total of 370 patients were enrolled in KEYNOTE-052. The median follow-up was 56.3 months (range 51.2-65.3 months; data cut-off 26 September 2020). The confirmed objective response rate was 28.9% (95% confidence interval 24.3-33.8), and the median DOR was 33.4 months (range 1.4+ to 60.7+ months); the 36-month DOR rate was 44.8%. Most treatment-related adverse events for pembrolizumab in either study were grade 1 or 2 and manageable, which is consistent with prior reports. CONCLUSION: With ∼5 years of follow-up, pembrolizumab monotherapy continued to demonstrate durable efficacy with no new safety signals in patients with platinum-resistant metastatic UC and as first-line therapy in cisplatin-ineligible patients. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRY AND ID: With ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02256436 (KEYNOTE-045); https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02256436 and NCT02335424 (KEYNOTE-052); https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02335424.

EAU-ESMO consensus statements on the management of advanced and variant bladder cancer-an international collaborative multi-stakeholder effort: under the auspices of the EAU and ESMO Guidelines Committees†.

BACKGROUND: Although guidelines exist for advanced and variant bladder cancer management, evidence is limited/conflicting in some areas and the optimal approach remains controversial. OBJECTIVE: To bring together a large multidisciplinary group of experts to develop consensus statements on controversial topics in bladder cancer management. DESIGN: A steering committee compiled proposed statements regarding advanced and variant bladder cancer management which were assessed by 113 experts in a Delphi survey. Statements not reaching consensus were reviewed; those prioritised were revised by a panel of 45 experts before voting during a consensus conference. SETTING: Online Delphi survey and consensus conference. PARTICIPANTS: The European Association of Urology (EAU), the European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO), experts in bladder cancer management. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Statements were ranked by experts according to their level of agreement: 1-3 (disagree), 4-6 (equivocal), 7-9 (agree). A priori (level 1) consensus was defined as ≥70% agreement and ≤15% disagreement, or vice versa. In the Delphi survey, a second analysis was restricted to stakeholder group(s) considered to have adequate expertise relating to each statement (to achieve level 2 consensus). RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: Overall, 116 statements were included in the Delphi survey. Of these, 33 (28%) statements achieved level 1 consensus and 49 (42%) statements achieved level 1 or 2 consensus. At the consensus conference, 22 of 27 (81%) statements achieved consensus. These consensus statements provide further guidance across a broad range of topics, including the management of variant histologies, the role/limitations of prognostic biomarkers in clinical decision making, bladder preservation strategies, modern radiotherapy techniques, the management of oligometastatic disease and the evolving role of checkpoint inhibitor therapy in metastatic disease. CONCLUSIONS: These consensus statements provide further guidance on controversial topics in advanced and variant bladder cancer management until a time where further evidence is available to guide our approach.

Borealis-1: a randomized, first-line, placebo-controlled, phase II study evaluating apatorsen and chemotherapy for patients with advanced urothelial cancer.

BACKGROUND: Five-year survival of patients with inoperable, advanced urothelial carcinoma treated with the first-line chemotherapy is 5%-15%. We assessed whether the Hsp27 inhibitor apatorsen combined with gemcitabine plus cisplatin (GC) could improve overall survival (OS) in these patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This placebo-controlled, double-blind, phase II trial randomized 183 untreated urothelial carcinoma patients (North America and Europe) to receive GC plus either placebo (N = 62), 600 mg apatorsen (N = 60), or 1000 mg apatorsen (N = 61). In the experimental arm, treatment included loading doses of apatorsen followed by up to six cycles of apatorsen plus GC. Patients receiving at least four cycles could continue apatorsen monotherapy as maintenance until progression or unacceptable toxicity. The primary end point was OS. RESULTS: OS was not significantly improved in the single or combined 600- or 1000-mg apatorsen arms versus placebo [hazard ratio (HR), 0.86 and 0.90, respectively]. Exploratory study of specific statistical modeling showed a trend for improved survival in patients with baseline poor prognostic features treated with 600 mg apatorsen compared with placebo (HR = 0.72). Landmark analysis of serum Hsp27 (sHsp27) levels showed a trend toward survival benefit for poor-prognosis patients in 600- and 1000-mg apatorsen arms who achieved lower area under the curve sHsp27 levels, compared with the placebo arm (HR = 0.45 and 0.62, respectively). Higher baseline circulating tumor cells (≥5 cells/7.5 ml) was observed in patients with poor prognosis in correlation with poor survival. Treatment-emergent adverse events were manageable and more common in both apatorsen-treatment arms. CONCLUSIONS: Even though apatorsen combined with standard chemotherapy did not demonstrate a survival benefit in the overall study population, patients with poor prognostic features might benefit from this combination. Serum Hsp27 levels may act as a biomarker to predict treatment outcome. Further exploration of apatorsen in poor-risk patients is warranted.

Sunitinib in pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors: updated progression-free survival and final overall survival from a phase III randomized study.

BACKGROUND: In a phase III trial in patients with advanced, well-differentiated, progressive pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors, sunitinib 37.5 mg/day improved investigator-assessed progression-free survival (PFS) versus placebo (11.4 versus 5.5 months; HR, 0.42; P < 0.001). Here, we present PFS using retrospective blinded independent central review (BICR) and final median overall survival (OS), including an assessment highlighting the impact of patient crossover from placebo to sunitinib. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In this randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study, cross-sectional imaging from patients was evaluated retrospectively by blinded third-party radiologists using a two-reader, two-time-point lock, followed by a sequential locked-read, batch-mode paradigm. OS was summarized using the Kaplan-Meier method and Cox proportional hazards model. Crossover-adjusted OS effect was derived using rank-preserving structural failure time (RPSFT) analyses. RESULTS: Of 171 randomized patients (sunitinib, n = 86; placebo, n = 85), 160 (94%) had complete scan sets/time points. By BICR, median (95% confidence interval [CI]) PFS was 12.6 (11.1-20.6) months for sunitinib and 5.8 (3.8-7.2) months for placebo (HR, 0.32; 95% CI 0.18-0.55; P = 0.000015). Five years after study closure, median (95% CI) OS was 38.6 (25.6-56.4) months for sunitinib and 29.1 (16.4-36.8) months for placebo (HR, 0.73; 95% CI 0.50-1.06; P = 0.094), with 69% of placebo patients having crossed over to sunitinib. RPSFT analysis confirmed an OS benefit for sunitinib. CONCLUSIONS: BICR confirmed the doubling of PFS with sunitinib compared with placebo. Although the observed median OS improved by nearly 10 months, the effect estimate did not reach statistical significance, potentially due to crossover from placebo to sunitinib. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT00428597.

Androgen receptor gene status in plasma DNA associates with worse outcome on enzalutamide or abiraterone for castration-resistant prostate cancer: a multi-institution correlative biomarker study.

BACKGROUND: There is an urgent need to identify biomarkers to guide personalized therapy in castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC). We aimed to clinically qualify androgen receptor (AR) gene status measurement in plasma DNA using multiplex droplet digital PCR (ddPCR) in pre- and post-chemotherapy CRPC. METHODS: We optimized ddPCR assays for AR copy number and mutations and retrospectively analyzed plasma DNA from patients recruited to one of the three biomarker protocols with prospectively collected clinical data. We evaluated associations between plasma AR and overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) in 73 chemotherapy-naïve and 98 post-docetaxel CRPC patients treated with enzalutamide or abiraterone (Primary cohort) and 94 chemotherapy-naïve patients treated with enzalutamide (Secondary cohort; PREMIERE trial). RESULTS: In the primary cohort, AR gain was observed in 10 (14%) chemotherapy-naïve and 33 (34%) post-docetaxel patients and associated with worse OS [hazard ratio (HR), 3.98; 95% CI 1.74-9.10; P < 0.001 and HR 3.81; 95% CI 2.28-6.37; P < 0.001, respectively], PFS (HR 2.18; 95% CI 1.08-4.39; P = 0.03, and HR 1.95; 95% CI 1.23-3.11; P = 0.01, respectively) and rate of PSA decline ≥50% [odds ratio (OR), 4.7; 95% CI 1.17-19.17; P = 0.035 and OR, 5.0; 95% CI 1.70-14.91; P = 0.003, respectively]. AR mutations [2105T>A (p.L702H) and 2632A>G (p.T878A)] were observed in eight (11%) post-docetaxel but no chemotherapy-naïve abiraterone-treated patients and were also associated with worse OS (HR 3.26; 95% CI 1.47-not reached; P = 0.004). There was no interaction between AR and docetaxel status (P = 0.83 for OS, P = 0.99 for PFS). In the PREMIERE trial, 11 patients (12%) with AR gain had worse PSA-PFS (sPFS) (HR 4.33; 95% CI 1.94-9.68; P < 0.001), radiographic-PFS (rPFS) (HR 8.06; 95% CI 3.26-19.93; P < 0.001) and OS (HR 11.08; 95% CI 2.16-56.95; P = 0.004). Plasma AR was an independent predictor of outcome on multivariable analyses in both cohorts. CONCLUSION: Plasma AR status assessment using ddPCR identifies CRPC with worse outcome to enzalutamide or abiraterone. Prospective evaluation of treatment decisions based on plasma AR is now required. CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER: NCT02288936 (PREMIERE trial).

Sunitinib-induced hypertension in CYP3A4 rs4646437 A-allele carriers with metastatic renal cell carcinoma.

The single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) rs4646437G>A in CYP3A4 was suggested to be related to sunitinib toxicity. Our objective was to perform an in-depth investigation of the association between this SNP and sunitinib toxicity and efficacy using a large cohort of metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) patients. We collected DNA and clinical information of mRCC patients treated with sunitinib. SNP rs4646437 in CYP3A4 was tested for associations with toxicity using logistic regression. Cox regression modeling was used for association analysis of rs4646437 with progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). In a total of 287 patients, the A-allele of CYP3A4 rs4646437 was associated with an increased risk for hypertension (odds ratio=2.4, 95% confidence interval: 1.1-5.2, P=0.021) and showed no significant association with PFS or OS. In conclusion, hypertension is more likely to occur in A-allele carriers of the CYP3A4 rs4646437 variant in our cohort of mRCC patients treated with sunitinib.

DNA sequence diversity and the efficiency of natural selection in animal mitochondrial DNA.

Selection is expected to be more efficient in species that are more diverse because both the efficiency of natural selection and DNA sequence diversity are expected to depend upon the effective population size. We explore this relationship across a data set of 751 mammal species for which we have mitochondrial polymorphism data. We introduce a method by which we can examine the relationship between our measure of the efficiency of natural selection, the nonsynonymous relative to the synonymous nucleotide site diversity (πN/πS), and synonymous nucleotide diversity (πS), avoiding the statistical non-independence between the two quantities. We show that these two variables are strongly negatively and linearly correlated on a log scale. The slope is such that as πS doubles, πN/πS is reduced by 34%. We show that the slope of this relationship differs between the two phylogenetic groups for which we have the most data, rodents and bats, and that it also differs between species with high and low body mass, and between those with high and low mass-specific metabolic rate.

Clinicopathological differences between familial colorectal cancer type X and sporadic cancer in an isolated area of spain.

AIM: Very few studies have compared the epidemiological characteristics of patients with familial colorectal cancer Type X (FCCTX) with those of sporadic colorectal cancer (S-CRC). The aim of this study was to compare clinicopathological characteristics and survival between FCCTX and S-CRC in patients from a historically isolated geographical region. METHOD: A retrospective study was carried out of patients with S-CRC and FCCTX treated in the Canary Islands. Family and personal history of colorectal cancer (CRC) were recorded, together with genetic (microsatellite instability), immunohistochemical and clinical variables. RESULTS: Forty-eight (10.6%) of 451 patients were classified as FCCTX and the remaining 403 (89.4%) as S-CRC. Age at the diagnosis of tumour was significantly lower in FCCTX than in S-CRC (64.06 ± 12.65 years vs 69.13 ± 10.80 years; P = 0.01; Z = -2.48). Patients with FCCTX had a larger number of synchronous tumours (P = 0.09). Recurrence was significantly higher in FCCTX than in S-CRC (18.7% vs 8.6%; P = 0.01). Survival correlated significantly with the number of first-degree and second-degree relatives with CRC (P = 0.04; OR: 1.368, 95% CI: 1.01-1.84, and P = 0.04; OR: 1.363, 95% CI: 1.08-1.65) and with the total number of cases of CRC in the immediate family (P < 0.01; OR: 1.377, 95% CI: 1.17-1.61). Recurrence-free time was significantly lower in patients with FCCTX (log-rank = 0.01). CONCLUSION: Significant differences were found in several demographic and clinicopathological variables between patients with FCCTX and patients with S-CRC. These included increased tumour presentation under the age of 50 years and a higher recurrence rate in patients with FCCTX, suggesting an increased risk of CRC in this group.

Pancreatic NETs: where do we stand now?

The systemic management of patients with pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors includes chemotherapy and targeted agents such as everolimus and sunitinib. Which treatment to favor in a particular patient is not known. The most commonly used chemotherapy agents are streptozocin and temozolamide, often prescribed in combination with fluoropyrimidines. A potential biomarker for selection of temozolomide-based chemotherapy is O-6-methylguanine-DNA-methyltrasferase expression. Chemotherapy yields higher response rates and may be preferable in patients with higher-grade tumors and those who are symptomatic. The mammalian target of rapamycin inhibitor everolimus has shown improvement in progression-free survival (PFS) in a robust, well-conducted phase III study. Everolimus, however, can induce limiting toxicities that may result in treatment discontinuation and does not improve survival. However, the objective response rate is very low. Sunitinib, likewise, increases PFS but the data comes from a smaller trial which was terminated early. Sunitinib displays a different toxicity profile and is associated with a trend towards improved overall survival. It is clear that biomarkers to properly select the most effective agents in an individual patient are needed.

Final results from the large sunitinib global expanded-access trial in metastatic renal cell carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: We report final results with extended follow-up from a global, expanded-access trial that pre-regulatory approval provided sunitinib to metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) patients, ineligible for registration-directed trials. METHODS: Patients ⩾18 years received oral sunitinib 50 mg per day on a 4-weeks-on-2-weeks-off schedule. Safety was assessed regularly. Tumour measurements were scheduled per local practice. RESULTS: A total of 4543 patients received sunitinib. Median treatment duration and follow-up were 7.5 and 13.6 months. Objective response rate was 16% (95% confidence interval (CI): 15-17). Median progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were 9.4 months (95% CI: 8.8-10.0) and 18.7 months (95% CI: 17.5-19.5). Median PFS in subgroups of interest: aged ⩾65 years (33%), 10.1 months; Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status ⩾2 (14%), 3.5 months; non-clear cell histology (12%), 6.0 months; and brain metastases (7%), 5.3 months. OS was strongly associated with the International Metastatic Renal-Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium prognostic model (n=4065). The most common grade 3/4 treatment-related adverse events were thrombocytopenia (10%), fatigue (9%), and asthenia, neutropenia, and hand-foot syndrome (each 7%). CONCLUSION: Final analysis of the sunitinib expanded-access trial provided a good opportunity to evaluate the long-term side effects of a tyrosine kinase inhibitor used worldwide in mRCC. Efficacy and safety findings were consistent with previous results.

Pazopanib in pretreated advanced neuroendocrine tumors: a phase II, open-label trial of the Spanish Task Force Group for Neuroendocrine Tumors (GETNE).

BACKGROUND: The management of advanced neuroendocrine tumors (NETs) has recently changed. We assessed the activity of pazopanib after failure of other systemic treatments in advanced NETs. METHODS: This was a multicenter, open-label, phase II study evaluating pazopanib as a single agent in advanced NETs (PAZONET study). The clinical benefit rate (CBR) at 6 months was the primary end point. Translational correlation of radiological response and progression-free survival (PFS) with circulating and tissue biomarkers was also evaluated. RESULTS: A total of 44 patients were enrolled. Twenty-five patients (59.5%) were progression-free at 6 months (4 partial responses, 21 stable diseases) with a median PFS of 9.5 months [95% confidence interval (CI) 4.8-14.1]. The CBR varied according to prior therapy received, with 73%, 60% and 25% in patients treated with prior multitarget inhibitors, prior mTOR inhibitors and both agents, respectively. A nonsignificant increase in PFS was observed in patients presenting lower baseline circulating tumor cell (CTC) counts (9.1 versus 5.8 months; P = 0.22) and in those with decreased levels of soluble-vascular endothelial growth factor receptor-2 (sVEGFR-2) (12.6 versus 9.1 months; P = 0.067). A trend toward reduced survival was documented in patients with VEGFR3 rs307821 and rs307826 missense polymorphisms [hazard ratio (HR): 12.3; 95% CI 1.09-139.2; P = 0.042 and HR: 6.9; 95% CI 0.96-49.9; P = 0.055, respectively]. CONCLUSIONS: Pazopanib showed clinical activity in patients with advanced NETs regardless of previous treatments. Additionally, CTCs, soluble-s VEFGR-2 and VEGFR3 gene polymorphisms constitute potential biomarkers for selecting patients for pazopanib (NCT01280201). CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER: NCT01280201.

Prognostic factors for relapse in stage I seminoma: a new nomogram derived from three consecutive, risk-adapted studies from the Spanish Germ Cell Cancer Group (SGCCG).

BACKGROUND: We aimed to analyze prognostic factors for relapse in stage I seminoma managed by either active surveillance or adjuvant chemotherapy, and to describe the long-term patterns of recurrence in both groups. PATIENTS AND METHODS: From 1994 to 2008, 744 patients were included in three consecutive, prospective risk-adapted studies by the Spanish Germ Cell Cancer Group. Low-risk patients were managed by surveillance and high-risk patients were given two courses of adjuvant carboplatin. Relapses were treated mainly with chemotherapy. Patient age, tumor size, histological variant, pT staging, rete testis invasion, and preoperative serum BHCG levels were assessed for prediction of disease-free survival (DFS). RESULTS: After a median follow-up of 80 months, 63 patients (11.1%) have relapsed: 51/396 (14.8%) on surveillance and 12/348 (3.2%) following adjuvant carboplatin. Actuarial overall 5-year DFS was 92.3% (88.3% for surveillance versus 96.8% for chemotherapy, P = 0.0001). Median time to relapse was 14 months. Most recurrences were located at retroperitoneum (86%), with a median tumor size of 26 mm. All patients were rendered disease-free with chemotherapy (92%), radiotherapy (5%), or surgery followed by chemotherapy (3%). A nomogram was developed from surveillance patients that includes two independent, predictive factors for relapse: rete testis invasion and tumor size (as a continuous variable). CONCLUSION: Long-term follow-up confirms the risk-adapted approach as an effective option for patients with stage I seminoma. The pattern of relapses after adjuvant chemotherapy is similar to that observed following surveillance. A new nomogram for prediction of DFS among patients on surveillance is proposed. Rete testis invasion and tumor size should be taken into account when considering the administration of adjuvant carboplatin. Prospective validation is warranted.

Induction avelumab followed by chemoimmunotherapy and maintenance versus chemotherapy alone as first-line therapy in cis-ineligible metastatic urothelial carcinoma (INDUCOMAIN): a randomized phase II study.

BACKGROUND: Platinum-based chemotherapy (ChT) has been the standard first-line treatment for metastatic urothelial carcinoma (mUC). The purpose of this study was to evaluate the use of induction avelumab followed by avelumab in combination with carboplatin-gemcitabine (carbo/gem) followed by avelumab maintenance. We tested the hypothesis that induction immunotherapy (IO) could enhance the response to ChT and prevent its detrimental effect on immune cells. MATERIALS AND METHODS: INDUCOMAIN is a multicenter, randomized, investigator-initiated, open-label phase II study evaluating the safety and efficacy of induction avelumab before carboplatin-gemcitabine-avelumab, followed by avelumab maintenance (arm A), compared to carbo/gem (arm B). Eligibility criteria included patients with mUC, no prior systemic therapy, and ineligibility for cisplatin by Galsky criteria. Patients were stratified by the presence/absence of visceral metastasis and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0-1 versus 2. The primary endpoint was objective response rate (ORR). Secondary endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and safety. RESULTS: Eighty-five patients were included and randomized to arm A (n = 42) and arm B (n = 43), respectively. ORR was similar between treatment arms: 59.5% in arm A and 53.5% in arm B (P = 0.57). Fourteen patients (33%) in arm A early progressed/died before or at first response assessment, compared to three patients (7%) in arm B. Median OS was 11.1 months in arm A and 13.2 months in arm B [hazard ratio (HR) 0.91, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.57-1.46, P = 0.69]. Median PFS was 6.9 months in arm A versus 7.4 months in arm B (HR 0.99, 95% CI 0.61-1.60, P = 0.95). Treatment-related adverse events of grade 3-4 occurred in 70.7% of patients in arm A and in 72.1% in arm B. No predictive role of programmed death-ligand 1 expression was found. CONCLUSIONS: The hypothesis that induction avelumab could enhance the efficacy of subsequent ChT was not proven. Administering IO alone as induction before ChT is not an adequate strategy.

Prospective study assessing hypoxia-related proteins as markers for the outcome of treatment with sunitinib in advanced clear-cell renal cell carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Previous studies suggest that expression of hypoxia markers may be associated with response to antiangiogenic drugs. Thus, we aimed to identify predictors of sunitinib outcome in clear-cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: The expression of eight key proteins related to hypoxia (CAIX, HIF1A, HIF2A, VEGFA, VEGFR1, VEGFR2, VEGFR3 and PDGFRB) and P-glycoprotein were assessed by immunohistochemistry in 67 primary ccRCC samples from prospectively recruited patients treated with first-line sunitinib. The proteins expression, VHL inactivation and EGLN3 mRNA content were compared with the patients' response to sunitinib. RESULTS: High expression of HIF2A and PDGFRB was associated with better sunitinib RECIST objective response (P = 0.024 and P = 0.026; respectively) and increased VEGFR3 expression was associated with longer progression-free survival (P = 0.012). VEGFR3 overexpression showed a negative correlation with VEGFR3 polymorphism rs307826 (P = 0.002), a sunitinib resistance predictor. With respect to overall survival (OS), high VEGFA was associated with short (P = 0.009) and HIF2A with long (P = 0.048) survival times. High EGLN3 mRNA content was associated with shorter OS (P = 0.023). CONCLUSIONS: We found an association between several proteins involved in hypoxia and sunitinib efficacy. In addition, low VEGFR3 expression was associated with worse outcome and with VEGFR3 rs307826 variant allele, reinforcing VEGFR3 as a marker of sunitinib resistance.

Lurbinectedin, a selective inhibitor of oncogenic transcription, in patients with pretreated germline BRCA1/2 metastatic breast cancer: results from a phase II basket study.

BACKGROUND: Lurbinectedin, a selective inhibitor of oncogenic transcription, has shown preclinical antitumor activity against homologous recombination repair-deficient models and preliminary clinical activity in BRCA1/2 breast cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This phase II basket multitumor trial (NCT02454972) evaluated lurbinectedin 3.2 mg/m2 1-h intravenous infusion every 3 weeks in a cohort of 21 patients with pretreated germline BRCA1/2 breast cancer. Patients with any hormone receptor and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 status were enrolled. The primary efficacy endpoint was overall response rate (ORR) according to RECIST v1.1. Secondary endpoints included duration of response (DoR), progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS) and safety. RESULTS: Confirmed partial response (PR) was observed in six patients [ORR = 28.6%; 95% confidence interval (CI) 11.3% to 52.2%] who had received a median of two prior advanced chemotherapy lines. Lurbinectedin was active in both BRCA mutations: four PRs in 11 patients (36.4%) with BRCA2 and two PRs in 10 patients (20.0%) with BRCA1. Median DoR was 8.6 months, median PFS was 4.1 months and median OS was 16.1 months. Stable disease (SD) was observed in 10 patients (47.6%), including 3 with unconfirmed response in a subsequent tumor assessment [ORR unconfirmed = 42.9% (95% CI 21.8% to 66.0%)]. Clinical benefit rate (PR + SD ≥ 4 months) was 76.2% (95% CI 52.8% to 91.8%). No objective response was observed among patients who had received prior poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitors. The most common treatment-related adverse events (AEs) were nausea (61.9%), fatigue (38.1%) and vomiting (23.8%). These AEs were mostly grade 1/2. The most common grade 3/4 toxicity was neutropenia (42.9%: grade 4, 23.8%: with no febrile neutropenia). CONCLUSIONS: This phase II study met its primary endpoint and showed activity of lurbinectedin in germline BRCA1/2 breast cancer. Lurbinectedin showed a predictable and manageable safety profile. Considering the exploratory aim of this trial as well as previous results in other phase II studies, further development of lurbinectedin in this indication is warranted.

Results from the INMUNOSUN-SOGUG trial: a prospective phase II study of sunitinib as a second-line therapy in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma after immune checkpoint-based combination therapy.

BACKGROUND: The INMUNOSUN trial had the objective of prospectively evaluating the efficacy and safety of sunitinib as a pure second-line treatment in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) who have progressed to first-line immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI)-based therapies. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A multicenter, phase II, single-arm, open-label study was carried out in patients with a histologically confirmed diagnosis of mRCC with a clear-cell component who had progressed to a first-line regimen of ICI-based therapies. All patients received sunitinib 50 mg once daily orally for 4 weeks, followed by a 2-week rest period following package insert instructions. The primary outcome was the objective response rate. RESULTS: Twenty-one assessable patients were included in the efficacy and safety analyses. Four patients [19.0%, 95% confidence interval (CI) 2.3% to 35.8%] showed an objective response (OR), and all of them had partial responses. Additionally, 14 (67%) patients showed a stable response, leading to clinical benefit in 18 patients (85.7%, 95% CI 70.7% to 100%). Among the four assessable patients who showed an OR, the median duration of the response was 7.1 months (interquartile range 4.2-12.0 months). The median progression-free survival (PFS) was 5.6 months (95% CI 3.1-8.0 months). The median overall survival (OS) was 23.5 months (95% CI 6.3-40.7 months). Patients who had better antitumor response to first-line ICI-based treatment showed a longer PFS and OS with sunitinib. The most frequent treatment-emergent adverse events were diarrhea (n = 11, 52%), dysgeusia (n = 8, 38%), palmar-plantar erythrodysesthesia (n = 8, 38%), and hypertension (n = 8, 38%). There was 1 patient who exhibited grade 5 pancytopenia, and 11 patients experienced grade 3 adverse events. Eight (38%) patients had serious adverse events, four of which were considered to be related to sunitinib. CONCLUSION: Although the INMUNOSUN trial did not reach the pre-specified endpoint, it demonstrated that sunitinib is active and can be safely used as a second-line option in patients with mRCC who progress to new standard ICI-based regimens.

Phase II study of sunitinib as first-line treatment of urothelial cancer patients ineligible to receive cisplatin-based chemotherapy: baseline interleukin-8 and tumor contrast enhancement as potential predictive factors of activity.

BACKGROUND: A strong rationale supports the role of antiangiogenic drugs in urothelial cancer. This trial was designed to assess the activity of sunitinib as first-line treatment in patients with metastatic urothelial cancer ineligible for cisplatin and to explore molecular and imaging variables predictive of clinical benefit. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This was a multicenter phase II trial with sunitinib 50 mg daily in 4/2-week schedule. Eligibility criteria were as follows: creatinine clearance 30-60 ml/min, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Pperformance Sstatus of one or less, and adequate hepatic and hematologic function. Twelve circulating cytokines were evaluated at baseline and sequentially using Luminex xMAP(®) (Austin, TX). Baseline and treatment-related changes in perfusion were evaluated in a patient subgroup using contrast-enhanced computed tomography. RESULTS: On intention-to-treat analysis, 38 patients showed 3 (8%) partial responses (PRs) and 19 (50%) presented with stable disease (SD), 17 (45%) of them ≥3 months. Clinical benefit (PR + SD) was 58%. Median time to progression (TTP) was 4.8 months and median overall survival 8.1 months. Toxicity was consistent with previous reports for sunitinib. Low interleukin-8 (IL-8) baseline levels were significantly associated with increased TTP. Baseline tumor contrast enhancement with >40 Hounsfield units was associated with clinical benefit. CONCLUSIONS: This study highlights the potential role of the angiogenic pathway as a therapy target in urothelial cancer. Baseline IL-8 serum levels and contrast enhancement of lesions warrant further study.

Pneumatosis intestinalis in a radioactive iodine-refractory metastasic thyroid papillary carcinoma with BRAFV600E mutation treated with dabrafenib-trametinib: a case report.

BACKGROUND: Pneumatosis intestinalis (PI) is a rare entity which refers to the presence of gas within the wall of the small bowel or colon which is a radiographic sign. The etiology and clinical presentation are variable. Patients with PI may present either with chronic mild non-specific symptoms or with acute abdominal pain with peritonitis. Some cases of intestinal pneumatosis have been reported as adverse events of new oncological treatments such as targeted therapies that are widely used in multiple tumors. CASE PRESENTATION: A 59-year-old caucasian female with radioactive iodine-refractory metastatic thyroid papillary carcinoma with BRAFV600E mutation was treated with dabrafenib and trametinib as a compassionate use. After 4 months treatment, positron emission tomography-computed tomography (PET-CT) showed PI. At the time of diagnosis, the patient was asymptomatic without signs of peritonitis. The initial treatment was conservative and no specific treatment for PI was needed. Unfortunately, after dabrafenib-trametinib withdrawal, the patient developed tumor progression with significant clinical worsening. CONCLUSIONS: This case report is, in our knowledge, the first description of PI in a patient treated with dabrafenib-trametinib. Conservative treatment is feasible if there are no abdominal symptoms.