Phase II trial of afatinib in patients with advanced urothelial carcinoma with genetic alterations in ERBB1-3 (LUX-Bladder 1).

BACKGROUND: Preclinical and early clinical data suggest that the irreversible ErbB family blocker afatinib may be effective in urothelial cancers harbouring ERBB mutations. METHODS: This open-label, phase II, single-arm trial (LUX-Bladder 1, NCT02780687) assessed the efficacy and safety of second-line afatinib 40 mg/d in patients with metastatic urothelial carcinoma with ERBB1-3 alterations. The primary endpoint was 6-month progression-free survival rate (PFS6) (cohort A); other endpoints included ORR, PFS, OS, DCR and safety (cohorts A and B). Cohort A was planned to have two stages: stage 2 enrolment was based on observed antitumour activity. RESULTS: Thirty-four patients were enroled into cohort A and eight into cohort B. In cohorts A/B, PFS6 was 11.8%/12.5%, ORR was 5.9%/12.5%, DCR was 50.0%/25.0%, median PFS was 9.8/7.8 weeks and median OS was 30.1/29.6 weeks. Three patients (two ERBB2-amplified [cohort A]; one EGFR-amplified [cohort B]) achieved partial responses. Stage 2 for cohort A did not proceed. All patients experienced adverse events (AEs), most commonly (any/grade 3) diarrhoea (76.2%/9.5%). Two patients (4.8%) discontinued due to AEs and one fatal AE was observed (acute coronary syndrome; not considered treatment-related). CONCLUSIONS: An exploratory biomarker analysis suggested that basal-squamous tumours and ERBB2 amplification were associated with superior response to afatinib. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT02780687.

Association of prior local therapy and outcomes with programmed-death ligand-1 inhibitors in advanced urothelial cancer.

OBJECTIVES: To compare clinical outcomes with programmed-death ligand-1 immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) in patients with advanced urothelial carcinoma (aUC) who have vs have not undergone radical surgery (RS) or radiation therapy (RT) prior to developing metastatic disease. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We performed a retrospective cohort study collecting clinicopathological, treatment and outcomes data for patients with aUC receiving ICIs across 25 institutions. We compared outcomes (observed response rate [ORR], progression-free survival [PFS], overall survival [OS]) between patients with vs without prior RS, and by type of prior locoregional treatment (RS vs RT vs no locoregional treatment). Patients with de novo advanced disease were excluded. Analysis was stratified by treatment line (first-line and second-line or greater [second-plus line]). Logistic regression was used to compare ORR, while Kaplan-Meier analysis and Cox regression were used for PFS and OS. Multivariable models were adjusted for known prognostic factors. RESULTS: We included 562 patients (first-line: 342 and second-plus line: 220). There was no difference in outcomes based on prior locoregional treatment among those treated with first-line ICIs. In the second-plus-line setting, prior RS was associated with higher ORR (adjusted odds ratio 2.61, 95% confidence interval [CI]1.19-5.74]), longer OS (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 0.61, 95% CI 0.42-0.88) and PFS (aHR 0.63, 95% CI 0.45-0.89) vs no prior RS. This association remained significant when type of prior locoregional treatment (RS and RT) was modelled separately. CONCLUSION: Prior RS before developing advanced disease was associated with better outcomes in patients with aUC treated with ICIs in the second-plus-line but not in the first-line setting. While further validation is needed, our findings could have implications for prognostic estimates in clinical discussions and benchmarking for clinical trials. Limitations include the study's retrospective nature, lack of randomization, and possible selection and confounding biases.

Pembrolizumab alone or combined with chemotherapy versus chemotherapy as first-line therapy for advanced urothelial carcinoma (KEYNOTE-361): a randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: PD-1 and PD-L1 inhibitors are active in metastatic urothelial carcinoma, but positive randomised data supporting their use as a first-line treatment are lacking. In this study we assessed outcomes with first-line pembrolizumab alone or combined with chemotherapy versus chemotherapy for patients with previously untreated advanced urothelial carcinoma. METHODS: KEYNOTE-361 is a randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial of patients aged at least 18 years, with untreated, locally advanced, unresectable, or metastatic urothelial carcinoma, with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of up to 2. Eligible patients were enrolled from 201 medical centres in 21 countries and randomly allocated (1:1:1) via an interactive voice-web response system to intravenous pembrolizumab 200 mg every 3 weeks for a maximum of 35 cycles plus intravenous chemotherapy (gemcitabine [1000 mg/m2] on days 1 and 8 and investigator's choice of cisplatin [70 mg/m2] or carboplatin [area under the curve 5] on day 1 of every 3-week cycle) for a maximum of six cycles, pembrolizumab alone, or chemotherapy alone, stratified by choice of platinum therapy and PD-L1 combined positive score (CPS). Neither patients nor investigators were masked to the treatment assignment or CPS. At protocol-specified final analysis, sequential hypothesis testing began with superiority of pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy versus chemotherapy alone in the total population (all patients randomly allocated to a treatment) for the dual primary endpoints of progression-free survival (p value boundary 0·0019), assessed by masked, independent central review, and overall survival (p value boundary 0·0142), followed by non-inferiority and superiority of overall survival for pembrolizumab versus chemotherapy in the patient population with CPS of at least 10 and in the total population (also a primary endpoint). Safety was assessed in the as-treated population (all patients who received at least one dose of study treatment). This study is completed and is no longer enrolling patients, and is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02853305. FINDINGS: Between Oct 19, 2016 and June 29, 2018, 1010 patients were enrolled and allocated to receive pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy (n=351), pembrolizumab monotherapy (n=307), or chemotherapy alone (n=352). Median follow-up was 31·7 months (IQR 27·7-36·0). Pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy versus chemotherapy did not significantly improve progression-free survival, with a median progression-free survival of 8·3 months (95% CI 7·5-8·5) in the pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy group versus 7·1 months (6·4-7·9) in the chemotherapy group (hazard ratio [HR] 0·78, 95% CI 0·65-0·93; p=0·0033), or overall survival, with a median overall survival of 17·0 months (14·5-19·5) in the pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy group versus 14·3 months (12·3-16·7) in the chemotherapy group (0·86, 0·72-1·02; p=0·0407). No further formal statistical hypothesis testing was done. In analyses of overall survival with pembrolizumab versus chemotherapy (now exploratory based on hierarchical statistical testing), overall survival was similar between these treatment groups, both in the total population (15·6 months [95% CI 12·1-17·9] with pembrolizumab vs 14·3 months [12·3-16·7] with chemotherapy; HR 0·92, 95% CI 0·77-1·11) and the population with CPS of at least 10 (16·1 months [13·6-19·9] with pembrolizumab vs 15·2 months [11·6-23·3] with chemotherapy; 1·01, 0·77-1·32). The most common grade 3 or 4 adverse event attributed to study treatment was anaemia with pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy (104 [30%] of 349 patients) or chemotherapy alone (112 [33%] of 342 patients), and diarrhoea, fatigue, and hyponatraemia (each affecting four [1%] of 302 patients) with pembrolizumab alone. Six (1%) of 1010 patients died due to an adverse event attributed to study treatment; two patients in each treatment group. One each occurred due to cardiac arrest and device-related sepsis in the pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy group, one each due to cardiac failure and malignant neoplasm progression in the pembrolizumab group, and one each due to myocardial infarction and ischaemic colitis in the chemotherapy group. INTERPRETATION: The addition of pembrolizumab to first-line platinum-based chemotherapy did not significantly improve efficacy and should not be widely adopted for treatment of advanced urothelial carcinoma. FUNDING: Merck Sharp and Dohme, a subsidiary of Merck, Kenilworth, NJ, USA.

Telomerase-based GX301 cancer vaccine in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer: a randomized phase II trial.

Debate is around the optimal immunization regimen for cancer vaccines since too intense vaccination schedules may exhaust reactive lymphocytes. GX301 is a telomerase-based cancer vaccine whose safety and immunological effects were tested in a phase I trial applying an eight administrations schedule. Main objective of this study was to comparatively analyse safety and immunological response to three GX301 regimens in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer patients with response/disease stability after docetaxel chemotherapy. This was a multicentre, randomized, parallel-group, open-label trial registered with EudraCT (2014-000095-26) and ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02293707, 2014). Ninety-eight patients were randomized to receive either eight (regimen 1), four (regimen 2) or two (regimen 3) vaccine administrations. Sixty-three patients were assessable for the primary immunological end-point. Vaccine-specific immune responses were evaluated by intracellular staining for IFN, elispot and cytotoxic assay at 90 and 180 days from baseline. No major side effects were recorded. A 54% overall immune responder rate was observed with 95% of patients showing at least one vaccine-specific immune response. Rate of immunological responders and number of immunizations were proportionally related, suggesting superiority of regimens 1 and 2 over regimen 3. Overall survival did not differ among regimens in both immunological responders and non-responders and was inversely associated (P = 0.002) with increase in the number of circulating CD8 + T regulatory cells at 180 days. These data indicate that GX301 cancer vaccine is safe and immunogenic in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer patients. Schedules with high number of administrations should be preferred in future studies due to their better immunological outcome.

A CT-based Radiomics Signature Is Associated with Response to Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors in Advanced Solid Tumors.

Background Reliable predictive imaging markers of response to immune checkpoint inhibitors are needed. Purpose To develop and validate a pretreatment CT-based radiomics signature to predict response to immune checkpoint inhibitors in advanced solid tumors. Materials and Methods In this retrospective study, a radiomics signature was developed in patients with advanced solid tumors (including breast, cervix, gastrointestinal) treated with anti-programmed cell death-1 or programmed cell death ligand-1 monotherapy from August 2012 to May 2018 (cohort 1). This was tested in patients with bladder and lung cancer (cohorts 2 and 3). Radiomics variables were extracted from all metastases delineated at pretreatment CT and selected by using an elastic-net model. A regression model combined radiomics and clinical variables with response as the end point. Biologic validation of the radiomics score with RNA profiling of cytotoxic cells (cohort 4) was assessed with Mann-Whitney analysis. Results The radiomics signature was developed in 85 patients (cohort 1: mean age, 58 years ± 13 [standard deviation]; 43 men) and tested on 46 patients (cohort 2: mean age, 70 years ± 12; 37 men) and 47 patients (cohort 3: mean age, 64 years ± 11; 40 men). Biologic validation was performed in a further cohort of 20 patients (cohort 4: mean age, 60 years ± 13; 14 men). The radiomics signature was associated with clinical response to immune checkpoint inhibitors (area under the curve [AUC], 0.70; 95% CI: 0.64, 0.77; P < .001). In cohorts 2 and 3, the AUC was 0.67 (95% CI: 0.58, 0.76) and 0.67 (95% CI: 0.56, 0.77; P < .001), respectively. A radiomics-clinical signature (including baseline albumin level and lymphocyte count) improved on radiomics-only performance (AUC, 0.74 [95% CI: 0.63, 0.84; P < .001]; Akaike information criterion, 107.00 and 109.90, respectively). Conclusion A pretreatment CT-based radiomics signature is associated with response to immune checkpoint inhibitors, likely reflecting the tumor immunophenotype. © RSNA, 2021 Online supplemental material is available for this article. See also the editorial by Summers in this issue.

Immune checkpoint inhibitors in advanced upper and lower tract urothelial carcinoma: a comparison of outcomes.

OBJECTIVES: To compare clinical outcomes between patients with locally advanced (unresectable) or metastatic urothelial carcinoma (aUC) in the upper and lower urinary tract receiving immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs). PATIENTS AND METHODS: We performed a retrospective cohort study collecting clinicopathological, treatment, and outcome data for patients with aUC receiving ICIs from 2013 to 2020 across 24 institutions. We compared the objective response rate (ORR), overall survival (OS), and progression-free survival (PFS) between patients with upper and lower tract UC (UTUC, LTUC). Uni- and multivariable logistic and Cox regression were used to assess the effect of UTUC on ORR, OS, and PFS. Subgroup analyses were performed stratified based on histology (pure, mixed) and line of treatment (first line, subsequent line). RESULTS: Out of a total of 746 eligible patients, 707, 717, and 738 were included in the ORR, OS, and PFS analyses, respectively. Our results did not contradict the hypothesis that patients with UTUC and LTUC had similar ORRs (24% vs 28%; adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 0.73, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.43-1.24), OS (median 9.8 vs 9.6 months; adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 0.93, 95% CI 0.73-1.19), and PFS (median 4.3 vs 4.1 months; aHR 1.01, 95% CI 0.81-1.27). Patients with mixed-histology UTUC had a significantly lower ORR and shorter PFS vs mixed-histology LTUC (aOR 0.20, 95% CI 0.05-0.91 and aHR 1.66, 95% CI 1.06-2.59), respectively). CONCLUSION: Overall, patients with UTUC and LTUC receiving ICIs have comparable treatment response and outcomes. Subgroup analyses based on histology showed that those with mixed-histology UTUC had a lower ORR and shorter PFS compared to mixed-histology LTUC. Further studies and evaluation of molecular biomarkers can help refine patient selection for immunotherapy.

Metastatic nonclear renal cell carcinoma current review in evolving treatment strategies.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Renal cell carcinoma (RCC) is the 6th most often diagnosed cancer in men and the 10th in women. Nearly 75% of the renal cancer cases are clear cell histologic subtype, whereas nonclear cell histologies represent the remaining 25%. Treatment options for clear renal type are well established. However, as nonclear RCC represents a heterogenous and less frequent group. Current treatment options for these tumors are limited and mostly based on evidence derived from small phase II clinical trials. The present review aims to provide an update of the available treatment options for nonclear RCC. RECENT FINDINGS: In the past decade, the vascular endothelial growth factor tyrosine kinase inhibitor, sunitinib, and mammalian target of rapamycin inhibitors, everolimus, and temsirolimus, have demonstrated limited efficacy in nonclear RCC. Recent studies with MET inhibitors and immunotherapy-based combinations have proven promising activity, especially in certain subgroups of patients, such as patients with MET-driven disease or patients with sarcomatoid features RCC. SUMMARY: Here, we report currently available data about biology and treatment of nonclear cell RCC.

Impact of performance status on treatment outcomes: A real-world study of advanced urothelial cancer treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors.

BACKGROUND: Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) represent an appealing treatment for patients with advanced urothelial cancer (aUC) and a poor performance status (PS). However, the benefit of ICIs for patients with a poor PS remains unknown. It was hypothesized that a poor Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) PS (≥2 vs 0-1) would correlate with shorter overall survival (OS) in patients receiving ICIs. METHODS: In this retrospective cohort study, clinicopathologic, treatment, and outcome data were collected for patients with aUC who were treated with ICIs at 18 institutions (2013-2019). The overall response rate (ORR) and OS were compared for patients with an ECOG PS of 0 to 1 and patients with an ECOG PS ≥ 2 at ICI initiation. The association between a new ICI in the last 30 and 90 days of life (DOL) and death location was also tested. RESULTS: Of the 519 patients treated with ICIs, 395 and 384 were included in OS and ORR analyses, respectively, with 26% and 24% having a PS ≥ 2. OS was higher in those with a PS of 0 to 1 than those with a PS ≥ 2 who were treated in the first line (median, 15.2 vs 7.2 months; hazard ratio [HR], 0.62; P = .01) but not in subsequent lines (median, 9.8 vs 8.2 months; HR, 0.78; P = .27). ORRs were similar for patients with a PS of 0 to 1 and patients with a PS ≥ 2 in both lines. Of the 288 patients who died, 10% and 32% started ICIs in the last 30 and 90 DOL, respectively. ICI initiation in the last 30 DOL was associated with increased odds of death in a hospital (odds ratio, 2.89; P = .04). CONCLUSIONS: Despite comparable ORRs, ICIs may not overcome the negative prognostic role of a poor PS, particularly in the first-line setting, and the initiation of ICIs in the last 30 DOL was associated with hospital death location.

Histological Subtypes and Response to PD-1/PD-L1 Blockade in Advanced Urothelial Cancer: A Retrospective Study.

PURPOSE: Urinary tract cancer can be pure urothelial carcinoma, pure nonurothelial carcinoma or variant urothelial carcinoma (defined here as mixed urothelial carcinoma). Little is known regarding outcomes for patients with variant urothelial carcinoma receiving immune checkpoint inhibitors. We hypothesized that variant urothelial carcinoma does not compromise immune checkpoint inhibitor efficacy in patients with advanced urothelial carcinoma. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We performed a retrospective cohort study across 18 institutions. Demographic, clinicopathological, treatment and outcomes data were collected for patients with advanced urothelial carcinoma who received immune checkpoint inhibitors. Patients were divided into pure vs variant urothelial carcinoma subgroups, with variant urothelial carcinoma further divided by type of variant (ie squamous, neuroendocrine etc). We compared overall response rate using univariate and multivariate logistic regression and progression-free survival and overall survival using Kaplan-Meier and univariate and multivariate Cox proportional hazards. RESULTS: Overall 519 patients were identified, with 395, 406 and 403 included in overall response rate, overall survival and progression-free survival analyses, respectively. Overall response rate to immune checkpoint inhibitors between patients with pure vs variant urothelial carcinoma was comparable (28% vs 29%, p=0.90) without significant differences for individual subtypes vs pure urothelial carcinoma. Median overall survival for patients with pure urothelial carcinoma was 11.0 months vs 10.1 months for variant urothelial carcinoma (p=0.60), but only 4.6 months for patients with neuroendocrine features (9 patients, HR 2.75, 95% CI 1.40-5.40 vs pure urothelial carcinoma, p=0.003). Median progression-free survival was 4.1 months for pure vs 5.2 months for variant urothelial carcinoma (p=0.43) and 3.7 months for neuroendocrine features (HR 1.87, 95% CI 0.92-3.79 vs pure urothelial carcinoma, p=0.09). CONCLUSIONS: Overall response rate to immune checkpoint inhibitors was comparable across histological types. However, overall survival was worse for patients with tumors containing neuroendocrine features. Variant urothelial carcinoma should not exclude patients from receiving immune checkpoint inhibitors.

Targeting DNA Repair Defects for Precision Medicine in Prostate Cancer.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Genomic studies of localized and metastatic prostate cancer have identified a high prevalence of clinically actionable alterations including mutations in DNA repair genes. In this manuscript, we review the current knowledge on DNA repair defects in prostate cancer and provide an overview of how these alterations can be targeted towards a personalized prostate cancer management. RECENT FINDINGS: Twenty to 25% of metastatic prostate cancers harbor defects in DNA repair genes, most commonly in the homologous recombination genes. These defects confer increased sensitivity to platinum chemotherapy or poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors. Recent trials also support a synergistic effect of combining these therapies with androgen receptor-targeting agents. Identification of mismatch-repair defects could result in defining a prostate cancer population who may benefit from immune checkpoint inhibitors. These data have implications for family testing and early diagnosis, as many of these mutations are linked to inherited risk of prostate cancer. The DNA damage repair pathways are clinically relevant in prostate cancer, being a target for precision medicine; combination with standard-of-care androgen receptor (AR)-targeting agents may be synergistic.

Maintenance therapy with vinflunine plus best supportive care versus best supportive care alone in patients with advanced urothelial carcinoma with a response after first-line chemotherapy (MAJA; SOGUG 2011/02): a multicentre, randomised, controlled, open-label, phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: Maintenance therapy improves outcomes in various tumour types, but cumulative toxic effects limit the choice of drugs. We investigated whether maintenance therapy with vinflunine would delay disease progression in patients with advanced urothelial carcinoma who had achieved disease control with first-line chemotherapy. METHODS: We did a randomised, controlled, open-label, phase 2 trial in 21 Spanish hospitals. Eligible patients had locally advanced, surgically unresectable, or metastatic transitional-cell carcinoma of the urothelial tract, adequate organ function, and disease control after four to six cycles of cisplatin and gemcitabine (carboplatin allowed after cycle four). Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive vinflunine or best supportive care until disease progression. We initially used block randomisation with a block size of six. Four lists were created for the two stratification factors of starting dose of vinflunine and presence of liver metastases. After a protocol amendment, number of cisplatin and gemcitabine cycles was added as a stratification factor, and eight lists were created, still with a block size of six. Finally, we changed to a minimisation procedure to reduce the risk of imbalance between groups. Vinflunine was given every 21 days as a 20 min intravenous infusion at 320 mg/m2 or at 280 mg/m2 in patients with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status score of 1, age 75 years or older, previous pelvic radiotherapy, or creatinine clearance lower than 60 mL/min. The primary endpoint was median progression-free survival longer than 5·3 months in the vinflunine group, assessed by modified intention to treat. Comparison of progression-free survival between treatment groups was a secondary endpoint. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01529411. FINDINGS: Between April 12, 2012, and Jan 29, 2015, we enrolled 88 patients, of whom 45 were assigned to receive vinflunine and 43 to receive best supportive care. One patient from the vinflunine group was lost to follow-up immediately after randomisation and was excluded from the analyses. One patient in the best supportive care group became ineligible for the study and did not receive treatment due to a delay in enrolment, but was included in the intention-to-treat efficacy analysis. After a median follow-up of 15·6 months (IQR 8·5-26·0), 29 (66%) of 44 patients in the vinflunine group had disease progression and 24 (55%) had died, compared with 36 (84%) of 43 patients with disease progression and 32 (74%) deaths in the best supportive care group. Median progression-free survival was 6·5 months (95% CI 2·0-11·1) in the vinflunine group and 4·2 months (2·1-6·3) in the best supportive care group (hazard ratio 0·59, 95% CI 0·37-0·96, p=0·031). The most common grade 3 or 4 adverse events were neutropenia (eight [18%] of 44 in the vinflunine group vs none of 42 in the best supportive care group), asthenia or fatigue (seven [16%] vs one [2%]), and constipation (six [14%] vs none). 18 serious adverse events were reported in the vinflunine group and 14 in the best supportive care group. One patient in the vinflunine group died from pneumonia that was deemed to be treatment related. INTERPRETATION: In patients with disease control after first-line chemotherapy, progression-free survival exceeded the acceptable threshold with vinflunine maintenance therapy. Moreover, progression-free survival was longer with vinflunine maintenance therapy than with best supportive care. Vinflunine maintenance had an acceptable safety profile. Further studies of the role of vinflunine are warranted. FUNDING: Pierre-Fabre Médicament.

Role of immunotherapy in castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC).

Initial therapy for metastatic prostate cancer consists of androgenic suppression. However, this is only a palliative treatment with an effective duration that usually lasts 12-24 months. Historically, castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC) had been considered a chemoresistant tumour. In 2004, docetaxel received USA Food and Drug Administration approval as a first-line treatment for metastatic prostate cancer, after two independent phase III trials showed an increased survival benefit. Recently, five new drugs have shown increased survival in CRPC: sipuleucel-T (assymptomatic or minimally symptomatic), abiraterone acetate (before and after docetaxel), cabazitaxel (after docetaxel), MDV3100 (after docetaxel) and radium-223 (not suitable for docetaxel or after docetaxel). The identification of antigens in normal prostate tissue or prostate cancer that are recognised by immune effectors cells has resulted in several new studies based on immunotherapy. Prostate cancer disease provides a test system to determine the efficacy of vaccines for different reasons. This cancer is a tumour that grows relatively slowly. Recurrence is often diagnosed early (with many patients presenting only with biochemical progression), there is a biological marker that can predict prognosis and outcome (PSA doubling time), various specific antigens have been identified and characterised, and vaccines can be used with a good safety profile combined with anti-androgen therapy, chemotherapy, or radiotherapy. Here we provide a review of the main important immune treatments in CRPC.

Prevalence of immune-related adverse events and anti-tumor efficacy in advanced/metastatic urothelial carcinoma following immune-checkpoint inhibitor treatment.

PURPOSE: We evaluated the prevalence of immune-related adverse events and anti-tumor efficacy in advanced/metastatic urothelial carcinoma following immune-checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) treatment. METHODS: We conducted a multicenter retrospective study of patients with advanced/metastatic urothelial carcinoma treated with ICIs in four Spanish institutions. irAEs were classified using Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Event (CTCAE) v.5.0 guidelines. The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS). Other endpoints were overall response rate (ORR) and progression-free survival (PFS). irAEs were evaluated as a time-dependent covariate to avoid immortal time bias. RESULTS: A total of 114 patients were treated with ICIs between May 2013 and May 2019, 105 (92%) of whom received ICIs as monotherapy. irAEs of any grade were experienced in 56 (49%) patients and 21 (18%) patients had grade ≥ 3 toxicity. The most frequent irAEs were gastrointestinal and dermatological toxicities, reported in 25 (22%) and 20 (17%) patients, respectively. Patients with grade 1-2 irAEs had significantly longer OS compared to those without grade 1-2 irAEs (median 18.2 vs. 8.7 months, HR = 0.61 [95% CI 0.39-0.95], p = 0.03). No association with efficacy was observed for patients with grade ≥ 3 irAEs. No difference in PFS was observed after adjusting for the immortal time bias. ORR was higher in patients who developed irAEs (48% vs 17%, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that development of irAEs was associated with higher ORR, and patients who developed grade 1-2 irAEs had longer OS. Prospective studies are necessary to confirm our findings.

Results from a Phase 1b/2 Study of Ibrutinib Combination Therapy in Advanced Urothelial Carcinoma.

Ibrutinib is a first-in-class Bruton's tyrosine kinase inhibitor approved for the treatment of various B-cell malignancies and chronic graft-versus-host disease. We evaluated the safety and efficacy of ibrutinib, alone or combined with standard-of-care regimens, in adults with advanced urothelial carcinoma (UC). Once-daily ibrutinib was administered orally at 840 mg (single-agent or with paclitaxel) or at 560 mg (with pembrolizumab). Phase 1b determined the recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D) of ibrutinib, and phase 2 assessed progression-free survival (PFS), overall response rate (ORR), and safety. Thirty-five, eighteen, and fifty-nine patients received ibrutinib, ibrutinib plus pembrolizumab, and ibrutinib plus paclitaxel at the RP2D, respectively. Safety profiles were consistent with those of the individual agents. The best-confirmed ORRs were 7% (two partial responses) with single-agent ibrutinib and 36% (five partial responses) with ibrutinib plus pembrolizumab. Median PFS was 4.1 months (range, 1.0-37.4+) with ibrutinib plus paclitaxel. The best-confirmed ORR was 26% (two complete responses). In previously treated patients with UC, ORR was higher with ibrutinib plus pembrolizumab than with either agent alone (historical data in the intent-to-treat population). ORR with ibrutinib plus paclitaxel was greater than historical values for single-agent paclitaxel or ibrutinib. These data warrant further evaluation of ibrutinib combinations in UC.

Atezolizumab plus Magrolimab, Niraparib, or Tocilizumab versus Atezolizumab Monotherapy in Platinum-Refractory Metastatic Urothelial Carcinoma: A Phase Ib/II Open-Label, Multicenter, Randomized Umbrella Study (MORPHEUS Urothelial Carcinoma).

PURPOSE: The MORPHEUS platform was designed to identify early efficacy signals and evaluate the safety of novel immunotherapy combinations across cancer types. The phase Ib/II MORPHEUS-UC trial (NCT03869190) is evaluating atezolizumab plus magrolimab, niraparib, or tocilizumab in platinum-refractory locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma (mUC). Additional treatment combinations were evaluated and will be reported separately. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients had locally advanced or mUC that progressed during or following treatment with a platinum-containing regimen. The primary efficacy endpoint was investigator-assessed objective response rate (ORR). Key secondary endpoints included investigator-assessed progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). Safety and exploratory biomarker analyses were also conducted. RESULTS: Seventy-six patients were randomized to receive either atezolizumab plus magrolimab (n = 16), atezolizumab plus niraparib (n = 15), atezolizumab plus tocilizumab (n = 15), or atezolizumab monotherapy (control; n = 30). No additive benefit in ORR, PFS, or OS was seen in the treatment arms versus the control. The best confirmed ORR was 26.7% with atezolizumab plus magrolimab, 6.7% with atezolizumab plus niraparib, 20.0% with atezolizumab plus tocilizumab, and 27.6% with atezolizumab monotherapy. Overall, the treatment combinations were tolerable, and adverse events were consistent with each agent's known safety profile. Trends were observed for shrinkage of programmed death-ligand 1-positive tumors (atezolizumab, atezolizumab plus magrolimab, atezolizumab plus tocilizumab), inflamed tumors, or tumors with high mutational burden (atezolizumab), and immune excluded tumors (atezolizumab plus magrolimab). CONCLUSIONS: The evaluated regimens in MORPHEUS-UC were tolerable. However, response rates for the combinations did not meet the criteria for further development in platinum-experienced locally advanced or mUC.

Prospective Assessment of Bone Metabolism Biomarkers and Survival in Metastatic Castration-resistant Prostate Cancer Patients Treated with Radium-223: The PRORADIUM Study.

BACKGROUND: Radium-223 is an active therapy option for bone metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). The lack of adequate biomarkers for patient selection and response assessment are major drawbacks for its use. OBJECTIVE: To assess the prognostic value of bone metabolism biomarkers (BMBs) in ra-223-treated mCRPC patients. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A prospective cohort study of mCRPC patients treated with Ra-223 (PRORADIUM study: NCT02925702) was conducted. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: The main objective of the study was to evaluate the association between high (≥median) baseline values in at least three bone formation (bone alkaline phosphatase [BAP] and C-terminal type-I collagen propeptide) and bone resorption (N-terminal telopeptide and pyridinoline) biomarkers, and survival. The independent prognostic value of each BMB was also assessed. The association with time to radiographic, clinical, and prostate-specific antigen (PSA) progression; time to skeletal-related events; and PSA response were secondary objectives. Multivariable (MV) Cox-regression models were evaluated. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: A total of 169 patients were included. Of the patients, 70.4% received Ra-223 in second/third line; 144 (85.2%) were Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group 0-1, 126 (74.6%) were in pain, and 80 (47.5%) had more than ten bone metastases. Sixty-seven (39.6%) patients had elevation in at least three BMBs. The median overall survival was 12.1 mo (95% confidence interval [CI]: 10-14.7). No association was observed with other treatment-related secondary outcome parameters. Patients with high values in three or more BMBs had significantly worse survival (9.9 vs 15.2 mo; hazard ratio [HR]: 1.8 [95% CI: 1.3-2.5]; p < 0.001) in the univariate analysis, but not independent in the MV analysis (HR: 1.33; 95% CI: 0.89-2; p = 0.181). High baseline BAP was the only biomarker associated with survival in the MV model (HR: 1.89; 95% CI: 1.28-2.79; p = 0.001). Addition of BAP to the MV clinical model increased the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve 2-yr value from 0.667 to 0.755 (p = 0.003). CONCLUSIONS: Biomarkers of bone formation, especially BAP, have prognostic value in mCRPC patients treated with radium-223. Its predictive value remains to be assessed, ideally in prospective, adequately powered, randomised clinical trials. PATIENT SUMMARY: In this study, we evaluate the role of bone metabolism biomarkers to help improve the use of radium-223 as therapy for advanced prostate cancer. We found that bone alkaline phosphatase may be a suitable tool.

Update in collecting duct carcinoma: Current aspects of the clinical and molecular characterization of an orphan disease.

Collecting duct renal cell carcinoma (cdRCC), which until recently was thought to arise from the collecting ducts of Bellini in the renal medulla, is a rare and aggressive type of non-clear renal cell carcinoma (ncRCC), accounting for 1% of all renal tumors and with nearly 50% of patients being diagnosed with Stage IV disease. The median overall survival in this setting is less than 12 months. Several regimens of chemotherapies had been used based on morphologic and cytogenetic similarities with urothelial cell carcinoma described previously, although the prognosis still remains poor. The use of targeted therapies also did not result in favorable outcomes. Recent works using NGS have highlighted genomic alterations in SETD2, CDKN2A, SMARCB1, and NF2. Moreover, transcriptomic studies have confirmed the differences between urothelial carcinoma and cdRCC, the possible true origin of this disease in the distal convoluted tubule (DCT), differentiating from other RCC (e.g., clear cell and papillary) that derive from the proximal convoluted tubule (PCT), and enrichment in immune cells that may harbor insights in novel treatment strategies with immunotherapy and target agents. In this review, we update the current aspects of the clinical, molecular characterization, and new targeted therapeutic options for Collecting duct carcinoma and highlight the future perspectives of treatment in this setting.

SEOM-SOGUG clinical guideline for localized muscle invasive and advanced bladder cancer (2021).

Most muscle-invasive bladder cancer (BC) are urothelial carcinomas (UC) of transitional origin, although histological variants of UC have been recognized. Smoking is the most important risk factor in developed countries, and the basis for prevention. UC harbors high number of genomic aberrations that make possible targeted therapies. Based on molecular features, a consensus classification identified six different MIBC subtypes. Hematuria and irritative bladder symptoms, CT scan, cystoscopy and transurethral resection are the basis for diagnosis. Radical cystectomy with pelvic lymphadenectomy is the standard approach for muscle-invasive BC, although bladder preservation is an option for selected patients who wish to avoid or cannot tolerate surgery. Perioperative cisplatin-based neoadjuvant chemotherapy is recommended for cT2-4aN0M0 tumors, or as adjuvant in patients with pT3/4 and or pN + after radical cystectomy. Follow-up is particularly important after the availability of new salvage therapies. It should be individualized and adapted to the risk of recurrence. Cisplatin-gemcitabine is considered the standard first line for metastatic tumors. Carboplatin should replace cisplatin in cisplatin-ineligible patients. According to the EMA label, pembrolizumab or atezolizumab could be an option in cisplatin-ineligible patients with high PD-L1 expression. For patients whose disease respond or did not progress after first-line platinum chemotherapy, maintenance with avelumab prolongs survival with respect to the best supportive care. Pembrolizumab also increases survival versus vinflunine or taxanes in patients with progression after chemotherapy who have not received avelumab, as well as enfortumab vedotin in those progressing to first-line chemotherapy followed by an antiPDL1/PD1. Erdafitinib may be considered in this setting in patients with FGFR alterations. An early onset of supportive and palliative care is always strongly recommended.

Radium-223 for patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer with asymptomatic bone metastases progressing on first-line abiraterone acetate or enzalutamide: A single-arm phase II trial.

PURPOSE: The paper aims to evaluate the efficacy and safety of 223Ra in patients who progressed after first-line androgen deprivation therapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: EXCAAPE (NCT03002220) was a multicentre, single-arm, open-label, non-controlled phase IIa trial in 52 patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer and asymptomatic bone metastases who have progressed on abiraterone acetate or enzalutamide, up to six doses of 223Ra (55 kBq/kg of body weight per month). The primary end-point was radiographic progression-free survival (rPFS). Secondary end-points included rPFS based on androgen receptor splice variant 7 (AR-V7) expression in circulating tumour cells (CTCs), overall survival, and safety. RESULTS: Median rPFS was 5.5 months (95% CI 5.3-5.5). Median rPFS of patients with AR-V7(-) CTCs was longer than that of patients with AR-V7(+) CTCs (5.5 versus 2.2 months, respectively; P = 0.056). Median overall survival was 14.8 months (95% CI 11.2-not reached) and was significantly greater for AR-V7(-) patients than for AR-V7(+) patients (14.8 months versus 3.5 months, respectively; P < 0.01). 223Ra was well tolerated; anaemia and thrombocytopenia were the most common grade 3/4 adverse events (5.8% and 11.5%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: 223Ra seems to be a reasonable treatment for patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer and asymptomatic bone metastases progressing on novel hormonal therapy and had an acceptable safety profile.

Incidence and characteristics of adverse drug reactions in a cohort of patients treated with PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors in real-world practice.

Background: Data related to adverse drug reactions (ADRs), specifically immune-related adverse events (irAEs), in long-term treatment with immunotherapy in real-world practice is scarce, as is general information regarding the management of ADRs. Objectives: To characterize and describe the incidence of ADRs in patients who began immunotherapy treatment in clinical practice. Methods: In a prospective observational study cancer patients ≥18 years of age who were treated with a monotherapy regime of PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors were evaluated. The study period was from November 2017 to June 2019 and patients were followed up until June 2021. Patients were contacted monthly by telephone and their electronic health records were reviewed. Each ADR was graded according to the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE 5.0). Results: Out of 99 patients, 86 met the inclusion criteria. Most were male (67.4%), with a median age of 66 (interquartile range, IQR: 59-76). The most frequent cancer was non-small cellular lung cancer (46 cases, 53.5%), followed by melanoma (22, 25.6%). A total of 74 patients (86%) were treated with anti-PD-1 drugs and 12 (14%) were treated with anti-PD-L1 drugs. The median treatment durations were 4.9 (IQR: 1.9-17.0) and 5.9 months (IQR: 1.2-12.3), respectively. Sixty-three patients (73%) developed from a total of 156 (44% of the total number of ADR) irADRs, wherein the most frequent were skin disorders (50 cases, 32%, incidence = 30.5 irADRs/100 patients per year [p-y]), gastrointestinal disorders (29, 19%, 17.7 irADRs/100 p-y), musculoskeletal disorders (17, 11%, 10.4 irADRs/100 p-y), and endocrine disorders (14, 9%, 8.6 irADRs/100 p-y). A total of 22 irADRs (14%) had a latency period of ≥12 months. Twelve irADRs (7.7%) were categorized as grade 3-4, and while 2 (1.3%) were categorized as grade 5 (death). Sixty-one irADRs (39.1%) in 36 patients required pharmacological treatment and 47 irADRs (30.1%) in 22 patients required treatment with corticosteriods. Conclusion: The majority of patients treated with anti-PD1/PDL1-based immunotherapy experienced adverse reactions. Although most of these reactions were mild, 11.5% were categorized as grade 3 or above. A high percentage of the reactions were immune-related and occurred throughout the treatment, thereby indicating that early identification and close monitoring is essential.