Efficacy and Safety of the MDM2-p53 Antagonist Brigimadlin (BI 907828) in Patients with Advanced Biliary Tract Cancer: A Case Series.

Background: In patients with advanced biliary tract cancer (BTC), first-line chemotherapy plus immunotherapy has improved outcomes; however, second-line options that reflect the disease's molecular heterogeneity are still needed. One emerging target is MDM2, amplified in ~5-8% of BTC cases. Methods: This is a subset analysis of two ongoing Phase Ia/Ib trials assessing patients treated with brigimadlin (BI 907828; a highly potent, oral MDM2-p53 antagonist) ± ezabenlimab (PD-1 inhibitor) ± BI 754111 (anti-LAG-3; n = 1). Results: Results from 12 patients with BTC are shown (monotherapy: n = 6/combination: n = 6). Six patients achieved partial response (monotherapy: n = 2/combination: n = 4), four had stable disease; responses were durable. Brigimadlin had a manageable safety profile. Seven patients had dose reductions due to adverse events, but no treatment-related adverse events led to treatment discontinuation. Conclusion: Brigimadlin demonstrated anti-tumor activity in patients with advanced MDM2-amplified BTC, and warrants further investigation.

Biliary tract carcinoma (BTC) is a cancer that affects the bile ducts which are part of the digestive system. Usually, the first treatment for advanced BTC (ie cannot be removed surgically and/or has spread) is chemotherapy in combination with immunotherapy. However, if chemotherapy does not work, or stops working, there are few treatment options available in second-line. Accordingly, intensive research is ongoing to try and find effective drugs. One potential medicine, called brigimadlin (or BI 907828), is a tablet that activates a molecule in tumor cells called p53. The normal function of p53 is to kill cells when they first start to become cancerous. However, if p53 is turned off by genetic mutations, or other mechanisms, then cancer can develop. Although p53 is rarely mutated in BTC tumors, it is inactivated by another molecule called MDM2 which is usually present at abnormally high levels in BTC. Brigimadlin prevents interaction between MDM2 and p53. This activates p53 and causes the cancer to die. Two clinical trials are currently assessing brigimadlin in a range of cancers, including BTC, with the aim of identifying a safe dose that can be examined in more detail in larger trials. So far, 12 patients with BTC have been treated. The patients' tumors significantly shrank in six of these patients and remained stable in a further four patients. Side effects were as expected and could be tolerated by pausing treatment or lowering the dose. These results show that brigimadlin should be tested further in patients with advanced BTC.

A Relative Bioavailability, Bioequivalence, and Food Effect Study of Niraparib Tablets in Patients with Advanced Solid Tumors.

PURPOSE: The poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitor niraparib is indicated as maintenance treatment in patients with certain subtypes of advanced ovarian cancer, and is being investigated in patients with other solid tumors. Niraparib is available in 100-mg capsules with a starting dosage of 200 or 300 mg/d. This study assessed the relative bioavailability (BA) and bioequivalence (BE) between a 1 × 300-mg tablet relative to 3 × 100-mg niraparib capsules. In addition, the food effect (FE) of a high-fat meal on the pharmacokinetic (PK) properties of tablet-formulated niraparib was investigated. METHODS: This was a US-based, 3-stage, open-label, multicenter, single-crossover, randomized-sequence study. Enrolled patients were 18 years and older, with histologically or cytologically confirmed advanced solid tumors (metastatic or local) and disease progression despite standard therapy. Patients were randomly assigned 1:1 to receive niraparib 1 × 300-mg tablet or 3 × 100-mg capsules in the BA and BE stages or 1 × 300-mg tablet in a fasted or fed (high-fat meal) state in the FE stage. Across all study stages, PK parameters were assessed for 7 days after each dose (tablet or capsule) or prandial state (fasted or fed). In the BA stage, patients crossed over to the other treatment after a 7-day washout period, which was extended to 14 days in the BE and FE stages. Tolerability was assessed for patients who received any amount of niraparib. FINDINGS: The BA-, BE-, and FE-evaluable populations comprised 23, 108, and 19 patients, respectively, who completed both treatment periods in each study stage, had sufficient concentration data to accurately estimate PK parameters without niraparib carryover, and did not experience disqualifying events. PK parameters were similar after dosing with tablet or capsule formulations; the 90% CIs of the geometric least square means for Cmax, AUC0-t, and AUC0-∞ were within the 0.80 to 1.25 BE limits. In the FE stage, Cmax, AUC0-t, and AUC0-∞ were 11%, 32%, and 28% higher, respectively, in the fed versus fasted state. The safety population included 29, 168, and 28 patients in the BA, BE, and FE stages, respectively, who received niraparib. No new safety signals were identified. IMPLICATIONS: Niraparib tablets were found to be bioequivalent to capsules. A modest (≤32%) FE was observed with a high-fat meal, but was not considered to be clinically meaningful, given niraparib's PK variability. CLINICALTRIALS: gov identifier: NCT03329001. (Clin Ther. 2024;46:XXX-XXX) © 2024 Elsevier HS Journals, Inc.

NCI 7977: A Phase I Dose-Escalation Study of Intermittent Oral ABT-888 (Veliparib) plus Intravenous Irinotecan Administered in Patients with Advanced Solid Tumors.

Purpose: Veliparib is a PARP inhibitor (PARPi) with activity in BRCA 1/2/PALB2-deficient tumors. Preclinical observations reveal topoisomerase inhibitors like irinotecan are synergistic with PARPi irrespective of homologous recombination deficiency (HRD), potentially expanding the role for PARPi. Experimental Design: NCI 7977 was a multicohort phase I clinical trial evaluating the safety and efficacy of multiple dose schedules of veliparib with irinotecan for solid tumors. In the intermittent veliparib cohort, escalating doses of veliparib were given twice daily at dose level (DL) 1 (50 mg) and DL 2 (100 mg) days 1-4 and 8-11 with irinotecan 100 mg/m2 days 3 and 10 in 21-day cycles. Results: Fifteen patients enrolled, 8 of 15 (53%) received ≥4 prior systemic treatments. At DL1, 1 of 6 patients experienced a dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) of diarrhea. At DL2, 9 patients were treated, with 3 unevaluable for DLT, and 2 of 6 evaluable patients experienced a DLT of grade 3 neutropenia. Irinotecan 100 mg/m2 and veliparib 50 mg twice daily was the MTD. No objective responses were observed, although 4 patients had progression-free survival >6 months. Conclusions: The MTD of intermittent veliparib is 50 mg twice daily days 1-4 and 8-11 with weekly irinotecan 100 mg/m2 days 3 and 10 every 21 days. Multiple patients experienced prolonged stable disease irrespective of HRD and prior irinotecan. However, due to the toxicities with higher dose intermittent veliparib and irinotecan, this schedule was determined too toxic for further development and the arm was closed prematurely. Significance: The combination of intermittent veliparib with weekly irinotecan was deemed too toxic for further development. Future PARPi combinations should focus on agents with nonoverlapping toxicities to improve tolerability. The treatment combination showed limited efficacy with prolonged stable disease observed in multiple heavily pretreated patients, but no objective responses were seen.

Adagrasib in Advanced Solid Tumors Harboring a KRASG12C Mutation.

PURPOSE: Adagrasib, a KRASG12C inhibitor, has demonstrated clinical activity in patients with KRASG12C-mutated non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and colorectal cancer (CRC). KRASG12C mutations occur rarely in other solid tumor types. We report evaluation of the clinical activity and safety of adagrasib in patients with other solid tumors harboring a KRASG12C mutation. METHODS: In this phase II cohort of the KRYSTAL-1 study (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03785249; phase Ib cohort), we evaluated adagrasib (600 mg orally twice daily) in patients with KRASG12C-mutated advanced solid tumors (excluding NSCLC and CRC). The primary end point was objective response rate. Secondary end points included duration of response, progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival, and safety. RESULTS: As of October 1, 2022, 64 patients with KRASG12C-mutated solid tumors were enrolled and 63 patients treated (median follow-up, 16.8 months). The median number of prior lines of systemic therapy was 2. Among 57 patients with measurable disease at baseline, objective responses were observed in 20 (35.1%) patients (all partial responses), including 7/21 (33.3%) responses in pancreatic and 5/12 (41.7%) in biliary tract cancers. The median duration of response was 5.3 months (95% CI, 2.8 to 7.3) and median PFS was 7.4 months (95% CI, 5.3 to 8.6). Treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) of any grade were observed in 96.8% of patients and grade 3-4 in 27.0%; there were no grade 5 TRAEs. TRAEs did not lead to treatment discontinuation in any patients. CONCLUSION: Adagrasib demonstrates encouraging clinical activity and is well tolerated in this rare cohort of pretreated patients with KRASG12C-mutated solid tumors.

Anti-CSF-1R emactuzumab in combination with anti-PD-L1 atezolizumab in advanced solid tumor patients naïve or experienced for immune checkpoint blockade.

BACKGROUND: This phase 1b study (NCT02323191) evaluated the safety, antitumor activity, pharmacokinetics, and pharmacodynamics of colony-stimulating factor-1 receptor-blocking monoclonal antibody (mAb) emactuzumab in combination with the programmed cell death-1 ligand (PD-L1)-blocking mAb atezolizumab in patients with advanced solid tumors naïve or experienced for immune checkpoint blockers (ICBs). METHODS: Emactuzumab (500-1350 mg flat) and atezolizumab (1200 mg flat) were administered intravenously every 3 weeks. Dose escalation of emactuzumab was conducted using the 3+3 design up to the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) or optimal biological dose (OBD). Extension cohorts to evaluate pharmacodynamics and clinical activity were conducted in metastatic ICB-naive urothelial bladder cancer (UBC) and ICB-pretreated melanoma (MEL), non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and UBC patients. RESULTS: Overall, 221 patients were treated. No MTD was reached and the OBD was determined at 1000 mg of emactuzumab in combination with 1200 mg of atezolizumab. Grade ≥3 treatment-related adverse events occurred in 25 (11.3%) patients of which fatigue and rash were the most common (14 patients (6.3%) each). The confirmed objective response rate (ORR) was 9.8% for ICB-naïve UBC, 12.5% for ICB-experienced NSCLC, 8.3% for ICB-experienced UBC and 5.6% for ICB-experienced MEL patients, respectively. Tumor biopsy analyses demonstrated increased activated CD8 +tumor infiltrating T lymphocytes (TILs) associated with clinical benefit in ICB-naïve UBC patients and less tumor-associated macrophage (TAM) reduction in ICB-experienced compared with ICB-naïve patients. CONCLUSION: Emactuzumab in combination with atezolizumab demonstrated a manageable safety profile with increased fatigue and skin rash over usual atezolizumab monotherapy. A considerable ORR was particularly seen in ICB-experienced NSCLC patients. Increase ofCD8 +TILs under therapy appeared to be associated with persistence of a TAM subpopulation.

Mortality after acute kidney injury and acute interstitial nephritis in patients prescribed immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy.

BACKGROUND: In patients receiving immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) therapy, acute kidney injury (AKI) is common, and can occur either from kidney injury unrelated to ICI use or from immune activation resulting in acute interstitial nephritis (AIN). In this study, we test the hypothesis that occurrence of AIN indicates a favorable treatment response to ICI therapy and therefore among patients who develop AKI while on ICI therapy, those with AIN will demonstrate greater survival compared with others with AKI. METHODS: In this observational cohort study, we included participants initiated on ICI therapy between 2013 and 2019. We tested the independent association of AKI and estimated AIN (eAIN) with mortality up to 1 year after therapy initiation as compared with those without AKI using time-varying Cox proportional hazard models controlling for demographics, comorbidities, cancer type, stage, and therapy, and baseline laboratory values. We defined eAIN as those with a predicted probability of AIN >90th percentile derived from a recently validated diagnostic model. RESULTS: Of 2207 patients initiated on ICIs, 617 (28%) died at 1 year and 549 (25%) developed AKI. AKI was independently associated with higher mortality (adjusted HR, 2.28 (95% CI 1.90 to 2.72)). Those AKI patients with eAIN had more severe AKI as reflected by a higher peak serum creatinine (3.3 (IQR 2.1-6.1) vs 1.4 (1.2-1.9) mg/dL, p<0.001) but exhibited lower mortality than those without eAIN in univariable analysis (HR 0.43 (95% CI 0.21 to 0.89)) and after adjusting for demographics, comorbidities, and cancer type and severity (adjusted HR 0.44 (95% CI 0.21 to 0.93)). CONCLUSION: In patients treated with ICI, mortality was higher in those with AKI unrelated to ICI but lower in those where the underlying etiology was AIN. Future studies could evaluate the association of biopsy-proven or biomarker-proven AIN with mortality in those receiving ICI therapy.

Ceralasertib-Mediated ATR Inhibition Combined With Olaparib in Advanced Cancers Harboring DNA Damage Response and Repair Alterations (Olaparib Combinations).

Poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors have emerged as promising therapy in cancers with homologous recombination repair deficiency. However, efficacy is limited by both intrinsic and acquired resistance. The Olaparib Combinations basket trial explored olaparib alone and in combination with other homologous recombination-directed targeted therapies. Here, we report the results of the arm in which olaparib was combined with the orally bioavailable ataxia telangiectasia and RAD3-related inhibitor ceralasertib in patients with relapsed or refractory cancers harboring DNA damage response and repair alterations, including patients with BRCA-mutated PARP inhibitor-resistant high-grade serous ovarian cancer (HGSOC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Germline and somatic mutations had to be deleterious by COSMIC or ClinVar for eligibility. Olaparib was administered at 300 mg twice daily and ceralasertib at 160 mg daily on days 1-7 in 28-day cycles until progression or unacceptable toxicities. Primary end points were confirmed complete response (CR) or partial response (PR) rates and clinical benefit rate (CBR; CR + PR + stable disease [SD] at 16 weeks). RESULTS: Twenty-five patients were enrolled, with median four prior therapies. Five patients required dose reductions for myelosuppression. Overall response rate was 8.3% and CBR was 62.5% among the entire cohort. Two of five patients with tumor harboring ATM mutation achieved CR or SD ongoing at 24+ months, respectively (CBR 40%). Of seven patients with PARP inhibitor-resistant HGSOC, one achieved PR (-90%) and five had SD ranging 16-72 weeks (CBR 86%). CONCLUSION: Olaparib with ceralasertib demonstrated preliminary activity in ATM-mutated tumors and in PARP inhibitor-resistant BRCA1/2-mutated HGSOC. These data warrant additional studies to further confirm activity in these settings.

Phase I, First-in-Human Study of the Probody Therapeutic CX-2029 in Adults with Advanced Solid Tumor Malignancies.

PURPOSE: PROCLAIM-CX-2029 is a phase I first-in-human study of CX-2029, a Probody-drug conjugate targeting CD71 (transferrin receptor 1) in adults with advanced solid tumors. Although the transferrin receptor is highly expressed across multiple tumor types, it has not been considered a target for antibody-drug conjugates (ADCs) due to its broad expression on normal cells. CX-2029 is a masked form of a proprietary anti-CD71 antibody conjugated to monomethyl auristatin E, designed to be unmasked in the tumor microenvironment by tumor-associated proteases, therefore limiting off-tumor toxicity and creating a therapeutic window for this previously undruggable target. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This was a dose-escalation, multicenter trial to evaluate the safety, pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, and antitumor activity of CX-2029. The primary endpoint was to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) and cycle 1 dose-limiting toxicity (DLT). CX-2029 was administered i.v. every 3 weeks. RESULTS: Forty-five patients were enrolled in eight dose levels. No DLTs were reported in the dose escalation through 4 mg/kg. At 5 mg/kg, there were two DLTs (febrile neutropenia and pancytopenia). Following expansion of the 4 mg/kg dose to six patients, two additional DLTs were observed (infusion-related reaction and neutropenia/anemia). Both the 4 and 5 mg/kg doses were declared above the maximum tolerated dose. The recommended phase II dose is 3 mg/kg. The most common dose-dependent hematologic toxicities were anemia and neutropenia. Confirmed partial responses were observed in three patients, all with squamous histologies. CONCLUSIONS: The Probody therapeutic platform enables targeting CD71, a previously undruggable ADC target, at tolerable doses associated with clinical activity.See related commentary by Oberoi and Garralda, p. 4459.

A phase 1b expansion study of TAS-102 with oxaliplatin for refractory metastatic colorectal cancer.

BACKGROUND: TAS-102, a novel antimetabolite, is approved for treatment of refractory metastatic colorectal cancer (CRC). This study sought to determine whether the addition of TAS-102 to oxaliplatin (TAS-OX) was safe and effective in metastatic CRC previously treated with oxaliplatin. METHODS: This investigator-initiated, open-label, single-arm phase 1b study enrolled patients with metastatic CRC previously treated with 5-fluorouracil, irinotecan, and oxaliplatin. In dose escalation, TAS-102 was given at 3 dose levels: 25, 30, and 35 mg/m2 twice daily on day 1 to day 5 with 85 mg/m2 oxaliplatin on day 1 in 14-day cycles. The primary endpoint of dose escalation was the recommended dose for expansion, and in dose expansion, the primary endpoint was overall response rate (ORR) according to the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST, version 1.1). RESULTS: Forty-one patients were treated with TAS-OX. No dose-limiting toxicities were observed in the 11 patients treated in escalation. The recommended dose for expansion was 35 mg/m2 TAS-102 twice daily on day 1 to day 5 in combination with 85 mg/m2 oxaliplatin on day 1 in 14-day cycles. In the intention-to-treat population, the ORR was 2.4% (95% CI, 0%-12.9%) with 1 of 41 patients having a partial response, although 12 (29%) had tumor shrinkage. The median progression-free survival was 2.7 months (95% CI, 2.4-4.8 months) and median overall survival was 6.8 months (95% CI, 5.7-10 months). CONCLUSIONS: TAS-OX is safe with no unexpected toxicities at standard doses of each agent. The combination did not result in a clinically meaningful ORR, although progression-free survival and overall survival were encouraging in this heavily pretreated population. LAY SUMMARY: For metastatic colorectal cancer, the treatment combination of TAS-102 and oxaliplatin was found to be well-tolerated and revealed no unexpected side effects. Twelve of 41 patients had reductions in the size of their tumor, and the study treatment delayed the time to tumor growth as opposed to what would be expected.

Entinostat plus Pembrolizumab in Patients with Metastatic NSCLC Previously Treated with Anti-PD-(L)1 Therapy.

PURPOSE: New therapies are needed to treat immune checkpoint inhibitor-resistant non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and identify biomarkers to personalize treatment. Epigenetic therapies, including histone deacetylase inhibitors, may synergize with programmed cell death-1 (PD-1) blockade to overcome resistance. We report outcomes in patients with anti-programmed cell death ligand-1 [PD-(L)1]-resistant/refractory NSCLC treated with pembrolizumab plus entinostat in ENCORE 601. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The expansion cohort of ENCORE 601 included patients with NSCLC who previously experienced disease progression with immune checkpoint inhibitors. The primary endpoint for the phase II expansion cohort is overall response rate (ORR); safety, tolerability, and exploratory endpoints are described. RESULTS: Of 76 treated patients, 71 were evaluable for efficacy. immune-regulated RECIST-assessed ORR was 9.2% [95% confidence interval (CI): 3.8-18.1], which did not meet the prespecified threshold for positivity. Median duration of response was 10.1 months (95% CI: 3.9-not estimable), progression-free survival (PFS) at 6 months was 22%, median PFS was 2.8 months (95% CI: 1.5-4.1), and median overall survival was 11.7 months (95% CI: 7.6-13.4). Benefit was enriched among patients with high levels of circulating classical monocytes at baseline. Baseline tumor PD-L1 expression and IFNγ gene expression were not associated with benefit. Treatment-related grade ≥3 adverse events occurred in 41% of patients. CONCLUSIONS: In anti-PD-(L)1-experienced patients with NSCLC, entinostat plus pembrolizumab did not achieve the primary response rate endpoint but provided a clinically meaningful benefit, with objective response in 9% of patients. No new toxicities, including immune-related adverse events, were seen for either drug. Future studies will continue to evaluate the association of monocyte levels and response.

Optimizing Care for Patients With Adverse Events From Immunotherapeutics.

Immune-related adverse events (irAEs) are a common occurrence in patients treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors. Fortunately, the majority of irAEs are mild and easily managed with steroids. As the use of immune checkpoint inhibitors and other immune therapies continues to increase across indications, so too will the need for managing irAEs. Optimal care for irAEs should include surveillance and early detection, guideline-driven management of standard irAEs, multidisciplinary expert involvement in complicated or steroid-refractory cases, and concurrent research to define predictive biomarkers and delineate the populations, which can be safely treated and retreated with immune therapies. In this article, we describe the implementation of a 3-pronged strategy used at our institution consisting of an Immune Wellness Clinic to risk stratify and monitor at-risk patients, an Immuno-Oncology Treatment Monitoring Repository to support translational research, and an Immunotoxicity Tumor Board to manage severe or complicated adverse events.

Novel Therapeutic Interventions Early in the Disease Trajectory: Drug Development Beyond the Refractory Setting.

The 2019 Accelerating Anticancer Agent Development Workshop assembled a panel of experts for an in-depth discussion session to present "novel therapeutic interventions early in the disease trajectory." The panel reviewed the limitations of evaluating investigational cancer therapeutics solely in advanced metastatic and relapsed/refractory disease settings, and recommended strategies for drug evaluation earlier in the disease course, including in the first line in combination with standard chemotherapy, and in the maintenance and neoadjuvant disease settings. Advantages of earlier drug evaluation were discussed, including expanding the population of evaluable patients, earlier response assessment via surrogate endpoints, earlier clinical benefit in the disease course, tailoring of therapies based on response, and furthering our understanding of biomarker-driven therapies.

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.

Oligometastatic Disease and Local Therapies: A Medical Oncology Perspective.

Numerous studies in a variety of solid tumor malignancies have demonstrated prolonged progression-free and overall survival with the addition of definitive local therapies to systemic therapies in patients with a limited number of metastases. A subset of patients with oligometastases (1-5 metastases) may experience long-term disease remission or cure after local therapies such as surgery or stereotactic body radiation therapy to metastatic sites. This article reviews the literature in oligometastatic disease and considers a theoretical rationale for a curative approach in a subset of oligometastatic solid tumor patients. In oligometastatic colorectal cancer patients with liver-only metastases and in non-small cell lung cancer patients with disease control after primary therapy and with limited nodal involvement, aggressive local therapies should be considered. Clinical trials and further biomarker validation across disease types are necessary to clarify which subsets of patients may define a theorized "oligometastatic state" and therefore benefit from aggressive local therapies.

Bullous disorders associated with anti-PD-1 and anti-PD-L1 therapy: A retrospective analysis evaluating the clinical and histopathologic features, frequency, and impact on cancer therapy.

BACKGROUND: Bullous disorders associated with anti-programmed cell death 1 (PD-1)/programmed cell death ligand 1 (PD-L1) therapy are increasingly reported and may pose distinct therapeutic challenges. Their frequency and impact on cancer therapy are not well established. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the clinical and histopathologic findings, frequency, and impact on cancer therapy of bullous eruptions due to anti-PD-1/PD-L1 therapy. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of patients evaluated by the oncodermatology clinic and consultative service of Yale New Haven Hospital from 2016 to 2018. RESULTS: We identified 9 of 853 patients who developed bullous eruptions (∼1%) that were treated with an-PD-1/PD-L1 therapy at our institution during the study period: 7 presented with bullous pemphigoid, 1 presented with bullous lichenoid dermatitis, and 1 presented with linear IgA bullous dermatosis in the context of vancomycin therapy. In all, 8 patients required systemic steroids, 5 required maintenance therapy, and 8 required interruption of immunotherapy. All 9 patients had an initial positive tumor response or stable disease, but 4 went on to develop disease progression. LIMITATIONS: This was a retrospective study from a single tertiary care center. CONCLUSIONS: Bullous disorders developed in approximately 1% of patients treated with anti-PD-1/PD-L1 therapy at our institution and frequently resulted in interruption of immune therapy and management with systemic corticosteroids and occasionally steroid-sparing agents.

Finding the Kool Mixx: how Brown & Williamson used music marketing to sell cigarettes.

OBJECTIVE: To describe the history of Kool's music-themed promotions and analyse the role that music played in the promotion of the brand. METHODS: Analysis of previously secret tobacco industry documents, legal documents, and promotional materials. RESULTS: Brown & Williamson started Kool sponsorship of musical events in 1975 with Kool Jazz concerts. Music was considered to be an effective marketing tool because: (1) music helped consumers make emotional connections with the brand; (2) music concerts were effective for targeted marketing; (3) music tied together an integrated marketing campaign; and (4) music had potential to appeal widely to a young audience. Brown & Williamson's first music campaigns successfully targeted young African-American male audiences. Subsequent campaigns were less effective, exploring different types of music to achieve a broader young adult appeal. CONCLUSIONS: This case study suggests Brown & Williamson used music most successfully for targeted marketing, but they failed to develop a wider audience using music because their attempts lacked consistency with the Kool brand's established identity. The 2004 "Kool Mixx" campaign both returned to Brown & Williamson's historic practice targeting young African-American males, and also exploited a musical genre with much more potential to bring Kool more universal appeal, as hip-hop music is increasingly popular among diverse audiences. Tobacco control efforts led by African-American community activists to oppose these marketing strategies should continue; expanding these coalitions to include the hip-hop community may further increase their effectiveness.