C-reactive protein (CRP) as a prognostic biomarker in patients with urothelial carcinoma: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

C-reactive protein (CRP) may reflect a pro-inflammatory tumor microenvironment and could represent a biomarker to select patients with urothelial carcinoma more likely to benefit from therapies directed at modulating tumor-promoting inflammation. We performed a systematic review to evaluate survival outcomes based on pre-treatment CRP values in urothelial carcinoma. The hazard ratios (HRs) of survival such as overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) between groups with high versus low CRP values were pooled by the random-effect model meta-analyses. Overall, 28 studies comprising 6789 patients were identified for meta-analyses. High CRP levels were associated with shorter OS (HR=1.96 [95% CI: 1.64-2.33], p < 0.01), particularly in advanced disease treated with immune checkpoint blockade (ICB, HR=1.78 [1.47-2.15], p < 0.01). Similar findings were observed in ICB-treated patients with PFS. These findings suggest that CRP could be an attractive biomarker to select patients with urothelial carcinoma for strategies seeking to modulate tumor-promoting inflammation.

An IL-4 signalling axis in bone marrow drives pro-tumorigenic myelopoiesis.

Myeloid cells are known to suppress antitumour immunity1. However, the molecular drivers of immunosuppressive myeloid cell states are not well defined. Here we used single-cell RNA sequencing of human and mouse non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) lesions, and found that in both species the type 2 cytokine interleukin-4 (IL-4) was predicted to be the primary driver of the tumour-infiltrating monocyte-derived macrophage phenotype. Using a panel of conditional knockout mice, we found that only deletion of the IL-4 receptor IL-4Rα in early myeloid progenitors in bone marrow reduced tumour burden, whereas deletion of IL-4Rα in downstream mature myeloid cells had no effect. Mechanistically, IL-4 derived from bone marrow basophils and eosinophils acted on granulocyte-monocyte progenitors to transcriptionally programme the development of immunosuppressive tumour-promoting myeloid cells. Consequentially, depletion of basophils profoundly reduced tumour burden and normalized myelopoiesis. We subsequently initiated a clinical trial of the IL-4Rα blocking antibody dupilumab2-5 given in conjunction with PD-1/PD-L1 checkpoint blockade in patients with relapsed or refractory NSCLC who had progressed on PD-1/PD-L1 blockade alone (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT05013450 ). Dupilumab supplementation reduced circulating monocytes, expanded tumour-infiltrating CD8 T cells, and in one out of six patients, drove a near-complete clinical response two months after treatment. Our study defines a central role for IL-4 in controlling immunosuppressive myelopoiesis in cancer, identifies a novel combination therapy for immune checkpoint blockade in humans, and highlights cancer as a systemic malady that requires therapeutic strategies beyond the primary disease site.

Systemic Anticancer Therapy and Thromboembolic Outcomes in Hospitalized Patients With Cancer and COVID-19.

Importance: Systematic data on the association between anticancer therapies and thromboembolic events (TEEs) in patients with COVID-19 are lacking. Objective: To assess the association between anticancer therapy exposure within 3 months prior to COVID-19 and TEEs following COVID-19 diagnosis in patients with cancer. Design, Setting, and Participants: This registry-based retrospective cohort study included patients who were hospitalized and had active cancer and laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection. Data were accrued from March 2020 to December 2021 and analyzed from December 2021 to October 2022. Exposure: Treatments of interest (TOIs) (endocrine therapy, vascular endothelial growth factor inhibitors/tyrosine kinase inhibitors [VEGFis/TKIs], immunomodulators [IMiDs], immune checkpoint inhibitors [ICIs], chemotherapy) vs reference (no systemic therapy) in 3 months prior to COVID-19. Main Outcomes and Measures: Main outcomes were (1) venous thromboembolism (VTE) and (2) arterial thromboembolism (ATE). Secondary outcome was severity of COVID-19 (rates of intensive care unit admission, mechanical ventilation, 30-day all-cause mortality following TEEs in TOI vs reference group) at 30-day follow-up. Results: Of 4988 hospitalized patients with cancer (median [IQR] age, 69 [59-78] years; 2608 [52%] male), 1869 had received 1 or more TOIs. Incidence of VTE was higher in all TOI groups: endocrine therapy, 7%; VEGFis/TKIs, 10%; IMiDs, 8%; ICIs, 12%; and chemotherapy, 10%, compared with patients not receiving systemic therapies (6%). In multivariable log-binomial regression analyses, relative risk of VTE (adjusted risk ratio [aRR], 1.33; 95% CI, 1.04-1.69) but not ATE (aRR, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.56-1.16) was significantly higher in those exposed to all TOIs pooled together vs those with no exposure. Among individual drugs, ICIs were significantly associated with VTE (aRR, 1.45; 95% CI, 1.01-2.07). Also noted were significant associations between VTE and active and progressing cancer (aRR, 1.43; 95% CI, 1.01-2.03), history of VTE (aRR, 3.10; 95% CI, 2.38-4.04), and high-risk site of cancer (aRR, 1.42; 95% CI, 1.14-1.75). Black patients had a higher risk of TEEs (aRR, 1.24; 95% CI, 1.03-1.50) than White patients. Patients with TEEs had high intensive care unit admission (46%) and mechanical ventilation (31%) rates. Relative risk of death in patients with TEEs was higher in those exposed to TOIs vs not (aRR, 1.12; 95% CI, 0.91-1.38) and was significantly associated with poor performance status (aRR, 1.77; 95% CI, 1.30-2.40) and active/progressing cancer (aRR, 1.55; 95% CI, 1.13-2.13). Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study, relative risk of developing VTE was high among patients receiving TOIs and varied by the type of therapy, underlying risk factors, and demographics, such as race and ethnicity. These findings highlight the need for close monitoring and perhaps personalized thromboprophylaxis to prevent morbidity and mortality associated with COVID-19-related thromboembolism in patients with cancer.

Phase II Trial of Olaparib in Patients With Metastatic Urothelial Cancer Harboring DNA Damage Response Gene Alterations.

PURPOSE: Poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors have demonstrated clinical benefit for patients with solid tumors bearing germline or somatic alterations in DNA damage response (DDR) genes. Somatic alterations in DDR genes are common in advanced urothelial cancer, raising the possibility that PARP inhibition may confer therapeutic benefit in a molecularly selected subgroup of patients with metastatic urothelial cancer (mUC). METHODS: This single-arm, open-label, multi-institutional, investigator-initiated phase II study evaluated the antitumor activity of olaparib 300 mg twice a day in participants with mUC harboring somatic DDR alterations. Patients had progressed despite previous platinum-based chemotherapy, or were cisplatin-ineligible, and harbored somatic alterations in at least one of a prespecified list of DDR genes. The primary end point was objective response rate; secondary end points were safety, progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: Overall, 19 patients with mUC were enrolled and received olaparib; the trial closed early before slow accrual. The median age was 66 years (range, 45-82). Nine patients (47.4%) had received previous cisplatin chemotherapy. Ten patients (52.6%) had alterations in homologous recombination (HR) genes: eight patients (42.1%) had pathogenic BRCA2 mutations and two patients carried alterations in other HR genes. No patients achieved a partial response although six patients achieved stable disease lasting 2.13-16.1 months (median, 7.69). The median PFS was 1.9 months (range, 0.8-16.1), and the median OS was 9.5 months (range, 1.5-22.1). CONCLUSION: Single-agent olaparib showed limited antitumor activity in patients with mUC and DDR alterations, which may be related to poorly characterized functional implications of particular DDR alterations and/or cross-resistance with platinum-based chemotherapy in a disease where such therapy represents standard first-line treatment.

The room where it happens: addressing diversity, equity, and inclusion in National Clinical Trials Network clinical trial leadership.

Many multicenter randomized clinical trials in oncology are conducted through the National Clinical Trials Network (NCTN), an organization consisting of 5 cooperative groups. These groups are made up of multidisciplinary investigators who work collaboratively to conduct trials that test novel therapies and establish best practice for cancer care. Unfortunately, disparities in clinical trial leadership are evident. To examine the current state of diversity, equity, and inclusion across the NCTN, an independent NCTN Task Force for Diversity in Gastrointestinal Oncology was established in 2021, the efforts of which serve as the platform for this commentary. The task force sought to assess existing data on demographics and policies across NCTN groups. Differences in infrastructure and policies were identified across groups as well as a general lack of data regarding the composition of group membership and leadership. In the context of growing momentum around diversity, equity, and inclusion in cancer research, the National Cancer Institute established the Equity and Inclusion Program, which is working to establish benchmark data regarding diversity of representation within the NCTN groups. Pending these data, additional efforts are recommended to address diversity within the NCTN, including standardizing membership, leadership, and publication processes; ensuring diversity of representation across scientific and steering committees; and providing mentorship and training opportunities for women and individuals from underrepresented groups. Intentional and focused efforts are necessary to ensure diversity in clinical trial leadership and to encourage design of trials that are inclusive and representative of the broad population of patients with cancer in the United States.

Mitotic Checkpoints and the Role of WEE1 Inhibition in Head and Neck Squamous Cell Carcinoma.

ABSTRACT: The WEE1 kinase family plays a crucial role in cell cycle regulation and DNA damage response pathways in malignant cells. Inhibition of WEE1 effectively overrides G2 cell cycle arrest and results in the accumulation of extensive DNA damage within dividing cells, potentiating mitotic catastrophe and cell death. As such, the development of WEE1 inhibitors as antineoplastic therapeutics has gained increasing interest in recent years. In particular, the role of WEE1 inhibitors for treatment of head and neck squamous cell carcinomas remains an area of active research with both preclinical and clinical studies investigating their use as both single-agent therapy and chemosensitizers when used in tandem with traditional chemotherapy, particularly in the context of TP53-mutant tumors. Here, we review the relevant available preclinical and clinical data on hand investigating the efficacy of WEE1 inhibitors for the treatment of head and neck cancers.

Care disruptions among patients with lung cancer: A COVID-19 and cancer outcomes study.

INTRODUCTION: Patients with lung cancer (LC) are susceptible to severe outcomes from COVID-19. This study evaluated disruption to care of patients with LC during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: The COVID-19 and Cancer Outcomes Study (CCOS) is a prospective cohort study comprised of patients with a current or past history of hematological or solid malignancies with outpatient visits between March 2 and March 6, 2020, at two academic cancer centers in the Northeastern United States (US). Data was collected for the three months prior to the index week (baseline period) and the following three months (pandemic period). RESULTS: 313 of 2365 patients had LC, 1578 had other solid tumors, and 474 had hematological malignancies. Patients with LC were not at increased risk of COVID-19 diagnosis compared to patients with other solid or hematological malignancies. When comparing data from the pandemic period to the baseline period, patients with LC were more likely to have a decrease in in-person visits compared to patients with other solid tumors (aOR 1.94; 95% CI, 1.46-2.58), but without an increase in telehealth visits (aOR 1.13; 95% CI 0.85-1.50). Patients with LC were more likely to experience pandemic-related treatment delays than patients with other solid tumors (aOR 1.80; 95% CI 1.13-2.80) and were more likely to experience imaging/diagnostic procedure delays than patients with other solid tumors (aOR 2.59; 95% CI, 1.46-4.47) and hematological malignancies (aOR 2.01; 95% CI, 1.02-3.93). Among patients on systemic therapy, patients with LC were also at increased risk for decreased in-person visits and increased treatment delays compared to those with other solid tumors. DISCUSSION: Patients with LC experienced increased cancer care disruption compared to patients with other malignancies during the early phase of the COVID-19 pandemic. Focused efforts to ensure continuity of care for this patient population are warranted.

Programmed Death-Ligand 1 Tumor Proportion Score and Overall Survival From First-Line Pembrolizumab in Patients With Nonsquamous Versus Squamous NSCLC.

INTRODUCTION: For patients with NSCLC receiving immune checkpoint inhibitors, programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) tumor proportion score (TPS) has been validated as a predictive biomarker for improved overall survival (OS). Nevertheless, its histology-specific predictive value in patients with advanced squamous versus nonsquamous cancers remains unclear. To evaluate the differential value of PD-L1 TPS as a predictive biomarker for OS after first-line pembrolizumab in patients with squamous versus nonsquamous NSCLC. METHODS: Retrospective, observational study of patients diagnosed with having advanced NSCLC who were treated between October 2015 and April 2019 at community oncology clinics and academic medical centers in a deidentified electronic health record-derived database. Included patients were diagnosed with having advanced or metastatic NSCLC, received treatment with first-line, single-agent pembrolizumab, and had documentation of PD-L1 testing with a numeric result. Exclusion criteria included alterations in EGFR, ALK, and ROS1. The primary end point was OS from start of first-line pembrolizumab therapy by squamous or nonsquamous histology and PD-1 expression level measured by TPS (low, <50% or high, ≥50%). RESULTS: The cohort of 1460 patients with NSCLC who received pembrolizumab as a first-line therapy had a mean age of 72 years. Histology was 28% squamous and 72% nonsquamous. PD-L1 expression was low in 13% and high in 87%. No meaningful differences in age, sex, or smoking history were observed by PD-L1 TPS or histology type. A generalized gamma model adjusting for sex and stage at diagnosis found that for patients with nonsquamous histology, high PD-L1 TPS was significantly associated with improved OS by a median OS difference of 8.4 months (p < 0.001). In contrast, for patients with squamous histology, there was no evidence of association between PD-L1 expression level and OS (p = 0.283). PD-L1-related incremental differences in median OS between the patients with squamous and nonsquamous tumors were significantly different (p = 0.034). CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with NSCLC treated with first-line pembrolizumab, high PD-L1 TPS is associated with OS among patients with nonsquamous NSCLC, but not among patients with squamous NSCLC.

Clinical Efficacy of Olaparib in IDH1/IDH2-Mutant Mesenchymal Sarcomas.

PURPOSE: Tumors with neomorphic mutations in IDH1/2 have defective homologous recombination repair, resulting in sensitivity to poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibition. The Olaparib Combination trial is a phase II, open-label study in which patients with solid tumors harboring IDH1/2 mutations were treated with olaparib as monotherapy, with objective response and clinical benefit rates as the primary end points. METHODS: Ten patients with IDH1/2-mutant tumors by next-generation sequencing were treated with olaparib 300 mg twice daily. RESULTS: Three of five patients with chondrosarcomas had clinical benefit, including one patient with a partial response and two with stable disease lasting > 7 months. A patient with pulmonary epithelioid hemangioendothelioma had stable disease lasting 11 months. In contrast, clinical benefit was not observed among four patients with cholangiocarcinoma. CONCLUSION: These results indicate preliminary activity of PARP inhibition in patients with IDH1/2-mutant chondrosarcoma and pulmonary epithelioid hemangioendothelioma. Further studies of PARP inhibitors alone and in combination in this patient population are warranted.

Survey of the Impact of COVID-19 on Oncologists' Decision Making in Cancer.

PURPOSE: To understand readiness measures taken by oncologists to protect patients and health care workers from the novel coronavirus (COVID-19) and how their clinical decision making was influenced by the pandemic. METHODS: An online survey was conducted between March 24 and April 29, 2020. RESULTS: A total of 343 oncologists from 28 countries participated. The median age was 43 years (range, 29-68 years), and the majority were male (62%). At the time of the survey, nearly all participants self-reported an outbreak in their country (99.7%). Personal protective equipment was available to all participants, of which surgical mask was the most common (n = 308; 90%). Telemedicine, in the form of phone or video encounters, was common and implemented by 80% (n = 273). Testing patients with cancer for COVID-19 via reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction before systemic treatment was not routinely implemented: 58% reported no routine testing, 39% performed testing in selected patients, and 3% performed systematic testing in all patients. The most significant factors influencing an oncologist's decision making regarding choice of systemic therapy included patient age and comorbidities (81% and 92%, respectively). Although hormonal treatments and tyrosine kinase inhibitors were considered to be relatively safe, cytotoxic chemotherapy and immune therapies were perceived as being less safe or unsafe by participants. The vast majority of participants stated that during the pandemic they would use less chemotherapy, immune checkpoint inhibitors, and steroids. Although treatment in neoadjuvant, adjuvant, and first-line metastatic disease was less affected, most of the participants stated that they would be more hesitant to recommend second- or third-line therapies in metastatic disease. CONCLUSION: Decision making by oncologists has been significantly influenced by the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic.

Utilization of COVID-19 Treatments and Clinical Outcomes among Patients with Cancer: A COVID-19 and Cancer Consortium (CCC19) Cohort Study.

Among 2,186 U.S. adults with invasive cancer and laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection, we examined the association of COVID-19 treatments with 30-day all-cause mortality and factors associated with treatment. Logistic regression with multiple adjustments (e.g., comorbidities, cancer status, baseline COVID-19 severity) was performed. Hydroxychloroquine with any other drug was associated with increased mortality versus treatment with any COVID-19 treatment other than hydroxychloroquine or untreated controls; this association was not present with hydroxychloroquine alone. Remdesivir had numerically reduced mortality versus untreated controls that did not reach statistical significance. Baseline COVID-19 severity was strongly associated with receipt of any treatment. Black patients were approximately half as likely to receive remdesivir as white patients. Although observational studies can be limited by potential unmeasured confounding, our findings add to the emerging understanding of patterns of care for patients with cancer and COVID-19 and support evaluation of emerging treatments through inclusive prospective controlled trials. SIGNIFICANCE: Evaluating the potential role of COVID-19 treatments in patients with cancer in a large observational study, there was no statistically significant 30-day all-cause mortality benefit with hydroxychloroquine or high-dose corticosteroids alone or in combination; remdesivir showed potential benefit. Treatment receipt reflects clinical decision-making and suggests disparities in medication access.This article is highlighted in the In This Issue feature, p. 1426.

Clinical impact of COVID-19 on patients with cancer (CCC19): a cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Data on patients with COVID-19 who have cancer are lacking. Here we characterise the outcomes of a cohort of patients with cancer and COVID-19 and identify potential prognostic factors for mortality and severe illness. METHODS: In this cohort study, we collected de-identified data on patients with active or previous malignancy, aged 18 years and older, with confirmed severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection from the USA, Canada, and Spain from the COVID-19 and Cancer Consortium (CCC19) database for whom baseline data were added between March 17 and April 16, 2020. We collected data on baseline clinical conditions, medications, cancer diagnosis and treatment, and COVID-19 disease course. The primary endpoint was all-cause mortality within 30 days of diagnosis of COVID-19. We assessed the association between the outcome and potential prognostic variables using logistic regression analyses, partially adjusted for age, sex, smoking status, and obesity. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04354701, and is ongoing. FINDINGS: Of 1035 records entered into the CCC19 database during the study period, 928 patients met inclusion criteria for our analysis. Median age was 66 years (IQR 57-76), 279 (30%) were aged 75 years or older, and 468 (50%) patients were male. The most prevalent malignancies were breast (191 [21%]) and prostate (152 [16%]). 366 (39%) patients were on active anticancer treatment, and 396 (43%) had active (measurable) cancer. At analysis (May 7, 2020), 121 (13%) patients had died. In logistic regression analysis, independent factors associated with increased 30-day mortality, after partial adjustment, were: increased age (per 10 years; partially adjusted odds ratio 1·84, 95% CI 1·53-2·21), male sex (1·63, 1·07-2·48), smoking status (former smoker vs never smoked: 1·60, 1·03-2·47), number of comorbidities (two vs none: 4·50, 1·33-15·28), Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 2 or higher (status of 2 vs 0 or 1: 3·89, 2·11-7·18), active cancer (progressing vs remission: 5·20, 2·77-9·77), and receipt of azithromycin plus hydroxychloroquine (vs treatment with neither: 2·93, 1·79-4·79; confounding by indication cannot be excluded). Compared with residence in the US-Northeast, residence in Canada (0·24, 0·07-0·84) or the US-Midwest (0·50, 0·28-0·90) were associated with decreased 30-day all-cause mortality. Race and ethnicity, obesity status, cancer type, type of anticancer therapy, and recent surgery were not associated with mortality. INTERPRETATION: Among patients with cancer and COVID-19, 30-day all-cause mortality was high and associated with general risk factors and risk factors unique to patients with cancer. Longer follow-up is needed to better understand the effect of COVID-19 on outcomes in patients with cancer, including the ability to continue specific cancer treatments. FUNDING: American Cancer Society, National Institutes of Health, and Hope Foundation for Cancer Research.

Genomics and the History of Precision Oncology.

Progress toward the implementation of a molecular characterization paradigm in cancer drug development over the past 20 years has markedly enhanced our capability to select patients who are more likely to benefit from cancer therapy. Improvements in genomic and related diagnostic testing platforms have permitted evaluation of the efficacy of treatment assignment based on predefined biologic features of a patient's tumor or germline using master protocols that may include many malignancies and their molecularly characterized subsets. With this approach, a wide range of new targeted and immunologic treatment approaches have been defined for patients who, heretofore, lacked effective therapeutic options.

From the Broad Phase II Trial to Precision Oncology: A Perspective on the Origins of Basket and Umbrella Clinical Trial Designs in Cancer Drug Development.

Oncologic phase II trials that evaluate the activity of new therapeutic agents have evolved dramatically over the past 50 years. The standard approach beginning in the late 1960s focused on individual studies that evaluated new anticancer agents against a wide range of both solid and hematopoietic malignancies often in a single "broad phase II trial" that included hundreds of patients; such studies efficiently established the landscape for subsequent development of a specific drug with respect to likely disease focus, toxicity, dose, and schedule. In the 1980s and 1990s, emphasis on histological context drove an explosion in the number of individual phase II trials conducted; despite this increase in trial activity, investigations based on histology per se failed to improve the success rate of new agents brought to the clinic. Over the past 20 years, evolution toward a molecular drug development paradigm has demonstrably improved our ability to select patients more likely to benefit from systemic treatment; simultaneously, technological advances have permitted initial attempts at the rapid assignment of therapy based on predefined molecular characteristics of tumor or germline in broad-based master protocols that are inclusive of many diseases and molecularly characterized disease subsets, akin to but much more sophisticated scientifically than the broad phase II platforms of the past.

Immunotherapy in Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: Facts and Hopes.

Immune-checkpoint inhibitors (ICI), particularly inhibitors of the PD-1 axis, have altered the management of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) over the last 10 years. First demonstrated to improve outcomes in second-line or later therapy of advanced disease, ICIs were shown to improve overall survival compared with chemotherapy in first-line therapy for patients whose tumors express PD-L1 on at least 50% of cells. More recently, combining ICIs with chemotherapy has been shown to improve survival in patients with both squamous and nonsquamous NSCLC, regardless of PD-L1 expression. However, PD-L1 and, more recently, tumor mutational burden have not proven to be straightforward indicative biomarkers. We describe the advances to date in utilizing these biomarkers, as well as novel markers of tumor inflammation, to ascertain which patients are most likely to benefit from ICIs. Ongoing translational work promises to improve the proportion of patients who benefit from these agents.

Trastuzumab emtansine: determining its role in management of HER2+ breast cancer.

Trastuzumab emtansine is an antibody-drug conjugate comprised of the anti-HER2 monoclonal antibody trastuzumab linked to DM1 (emtansine), a potent cytotoxic maytansinoid derivative, by a stable linker. This structure results in improved tumor-directed cytotoxicity in HER2+ breast cancer with reduced systemic toxicities, particularly the cardiac toxicities associated with single agent trastuzumab. Phase III trials have demonstrated improved progression-free and overall survival in heavily pretreated patients with advanced HER2+ breast cancer, with an acceptable toxicity profile. However, its role in first-line treatment is less clear. Ongoing studies continue to evaluate its role in neoadjuvant and adjuvant management of HER2+ breast cancer.