Narrative review of value frameworks in urothelial carcinoma and positioning of enfortumab vedotin.

AIMS: Evaluate existing oncology value frameworks in terms of their methodology, structure, characteristics, and functionality using the example of enfortumab vedotin, an approved therapy for urothelial carcinoma. METHODS: A search of PubMed, grey literature, and official websites of relevant international organizations was performed from January 2022 to March 2023. RESULTS: Six frameworks were identified and analyzed, including the American Society of Clinical Oncology's assessment framework, European Society for Medical Oncology's Magnitude of Clinical Benefit Scale, the National Comprehensive Cancer Network's Evidence Blocks, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center's DrugAbacus, Institute for Clinical and Economic Review's assessment framework, and the Drug Assessment Framework. Comparisons across frameworks were challenging, owing to differing approaches, objectives, perspectives, methodology, and criteria. Based on the results of the EV-301 study (NCT03474107), the European Society for Medical Oncology's Magnitude of Clinical Benefit Scale assigned a score of 4 out of 5 to enfortumab vedotin administered after chemotherapy and immunotherapy. The National Comprehensive Cancer Network's Evidence Blocks enabled assessment of enfortumab vedotin compared with other treatments for locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma, resulting in the positioning of enfortumab vedotin as a preferred regimen after chemotherapy and immunotherapy. CONCLUSIONS: Application of value frameworks in oncology can contribute to informed value-based decision-making. However, comparisons across frameworks should be made with caution and limited to the same lines of treatment. Enfortumab vedotin may contribute to optimizing outcomes in patients previously treated with chemotherapy and immunotherapy for locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma.

Efficacy and safety of utidelone for the treatment of patients with locally advanced or metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer who have failed standard second-line treatment: A phase 2 clinical trial (BG01-1801).

Background: Chemotherapy remains the standard-of-care for many patients with locally advanced or metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), but acquired resistance presents challenges. The aim of this open-label, multicenter phase 2 clinical trial was to determine the efficacy and safety of utidelone, a novel genetically engineered epothilone analog and microtubule-stabilizing agent, as a third- or later-line treatment for locally advanced or metastatic NSCLC. Methods: Patients who had failed standard second-line treatment (including platinum-containing chemotherapy or targeted therapy) received utidelone (40 mg/m2 via intravenous injection daily, day 1-5) every 21 days. The primary endpoint was the objective response rate (ORR). Secondary endpoints were the duration of response (DoR), progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and safety. Results: From March 12, 2019 to January 18, 2021, 26 pretreated patients with locally advanced or metastatic NSCLC (100% of patients had received prior platinum and 65.4% patients had received prior taxane treatment) were enrolled (80.8% of patients had adenocarcinoma). At baseline, nine (34.6%) patients had received second-line treatment, 10 (38.5%) patients had received third-line treatment, and seven (26.9%) patients had received fourth- or later-line treatment. By the data cut-off date of August 10, 2021, the median follow-up was 7.49 months (range, 1.4-26.7 months). The ORR was 15.4% (95% confidence interval [CI], 4.4%-34.9%) in the intention-to-treat (ITT) cohort (N = 26) and 19.0% (95% CI, 5.4%-41.9%) in the per-protocol (PP) cohort (N = 21). The disease control rate was 69.2% (95% CI, 48.2%-85.7%) and 81.0% (95% CI, 58.1%-94.6%) in the ITT and PP cohorts, respectively. The median DoR was 4.1 months (95% CI, 3.1-5.1 months) in the ITT cohort. The median PFS was 4.37 months (95% CI, 2.50-5.29 months) in the ITT cohort and 4.37 months (95% CI, 2.50-9.76 months) in the PP cohort. The median OS was not reached, and the 12-month OS rate was 69% (95% CI, 45.1%-84.1%). Grade 3/4 treatment-emergent adverse events occurred in 38.5% of patients, and the most common was peripheral neuropathy (23.1%, all Grade 3), which was manageable with dose modifications. Conclusions: In this clinical trial, utidelone showed promising efficacy and had a manageable safety profile. Further clinical studies are warranted to confirm its role in NSCLC treatment. Trial registration: No.NCT03693547; https://classic.clinicaltrials.gov.

Avelumab as First-Line Maintenance Treatment in Locally Advanced or Metastatic Urothelial Carcinoma.

This work provides a summary of guideline recommendations and an expert position on the use of maintenance avelumab therapy based on a review of current international clinical practice guidelines for locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma (UC). A PubMed literature search was conducted in March 2022 (updated in July 2023) to identify guidelines for locally advanced or metastatic UC. An expert panel (four oncologists and one urologist) reviewed the guidelines and clinical evidence, and discussed practical questions regarding the use of avelumab maintenance therapy in this clinical setting. The National Comprehensive Cancer Network, European Association of Urology and European Society for Medical Oncology guidelines recommend first-line cisplatin-containing chemotherapy for cisplatin-eligible patients, carboplatin-gemcitabine for cisplatin-ineligible patients who are fit for carboplatin, or immunotherapy with programmed death ligand-1 (PD-L1) inhibitors (e.g. atezolizumab) in platinum-ineligible patients. Maintenance avelumab is recommended in patients with response/stable disease following chemotherapy (regardless of PD-L1 status). In patients who relapse after/during chemotherapy, options include immunotherapy, erdafitinib [in those with fibroblast growth factor receptor (FGFR) mutations], enfortumab vedotin or further chemotherapy. The expert panel provided the following practical guidance: (1) consider maintenance avelumab in all eligible patients; (2) continue avelumab until disease progression/unacceptable toxicity; (3) ideally, administer six cycles of platinum-based chemotherapy prior to maintenance avelumab; (4) perform radiological evaluation after four chemotherapy cycles and prior to maintenance avelumab; (5) carboplatin-gemcitabine followed by maintenance avelumab is preferred in cisplatin-ineligible patients (regardless of PD-L1 expression), but consider first-line immunotherapy in PD-L1-positive patients and platinum-ineligible patients (regardless of PD-L1 status); and (6) for patients who relapse on avelumab, second-line options include enfortumab vedotin, FGFR inhibitors (in those with FGFR mutations) or clinical trial inclusion. In conclusion, avelumab maintenance therapy is recommended following platinum-based chemotherapy in all eligible patients with locally advanced or metastatic UC, continued until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity.

Real-world treatment patterns and clinical outcomes with first-line therapy in patients with locally advanced/metastatic urothelial carcinoma by cisplatin-eligibility.

INTRODUCTION: Patients with locally advanced/metastatic urothelial carcinoma (la/mUC) have a poor prognosis. With recent therapeutic advances, data on real-world treatment patterns and overall survival (OS) in patients with la/mUC treated with first-line therapy are limited, particularly when comparing patients who are cisplatin-ineligible versus cisplatin-eligible. METHODS: This was a retrospective observational study of real-world first-line treatment patterns and OS in patients with la/mUC stratified by cisplatin-eligibility and treatment. Data were from a nationwide electronic health record-derived de-identified database. Eligible patients were adults diagnosed with la/mUC from May 2016 to April 2021 and followed until death or end of data availability in January 2022. OS stratified by first-line treatment and cisplatin eligibility was estimated using Kaplan-Meier methods and compared via multivariable Cox proportional-hazard models adjusted for clinical covariates. RESULTS: Of 4,757 patients with la/mUC, 3,632 (76.4%) received first-line treatment, with 2,029 (55.9%) cisplatin-ineligible and 1,603 (44.1%) cisplatin-eligible. Patients who were cisplatin-ineligible were older (mean age, 74.9 vs. 68.8 years) and had lower CrCl (median, 46.4 vs. 87.0 ml/min). Only 43.8% of patients receiving first-line treatment (37.6% cisplatin-ineligible vs. 51.6% cisplatin-eligible) received second-line therapy. Median OS in all patients receiving first-line treatment was 10.8 (95% CI, 10.2-11.3) months and was shorter in patients who were cisplatin-ineligible than cisplatin-eligible (8.5 [95% CI, 7.8-9.0] vs. 14.4 [13.3-16.1]; hazard ratio [HR], 0.9 [0.7-1.1]). Cisplatin-based therapy was associated with longer OS (17.6 [15.1-20.4] months) than other first-line treatments (the shortest OS was with PD-1/L1 inhibitor monotherapy; 7.7 [6.8-8.8] months), including among patients who were classified as cisplatin-ineligible. CONCLUSIONS: Outcomes for patients with newly diagnosed la/mUC are poor, particularly for patients who are cisplatin-ineligible and/or do not receive cisplatin-based therapy. Many patients with la/mUC did not receive first-line treatment and among those who did, fewer than half received second-line therapy. These data highlight the need for more effective first-line therapies for all patients with la/mUC.

Treatment Patterns and Health Resource Utilization in Patients With HR+/ HER2- Locally Advanced or Metastatic Breast Cancer in a Real-World Setting in Taiwan.

OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to understand current treatment patterns and healthcare resource utilization (HRU) of women with locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer (advanced breast cancer [ABC]) in Taiwan overall and within the subgroup of patients who were postmenopausal women with no previous systemic therapy in the ABC setting. METHODS: A chart review of anonymized data on patient characteristics, treatment patterns, and HRU was conducted via an online physician survey including 118 patient charts from women ≥ 18 years old with hormone receptor positive/human epidermal growth receptor negative ABC, diagnosed between 2015 and 2017. RESULTS: The mean age of all patients was 56.6 years (range 29-83). Among the 118 patients, the most common first-line systemic therapy group after diagnosis of ABC was endocrine-based therapy (39.0%) or endocrine therapy (ET) plus chemotherapy (ChT) combinations (38.1%). In the postmenopausal subgroup (n = 56), ET-based therapy was the most common (44.6%). Oncologist visits, at annual rate of 9.20 (95% confidence interval 8.81-9.60), and hospitalizations, at annual rate of 1.08 (95% confidence interval 0.96-1.22), were key drivers of HRU. Of the 118 patients, the 72 with at least one ChT agent in their first-line regimen had an annual hospitalization rate of 1.4 versus 0.45 admissions compared with the 46 patients on first-line ET-based therapy. CONCLUSIONS: Current treatment patterns suggest an unmet need for new medications that lead to reduction in high rate of ChT use. Results can inform future evaluations of new ABC treatments that estimate the health economic impact of their adoption in Taiwan.

Associations of tissue tumor mutational burden and mutational status with clinical outcomes in KEYNOTE-042: pembrolizumab versus chemotherapy for advanced PD-L1-positive NSCLC.

BACKGROUND: We evaluated whether tissue tumor mutational burden (tTMB) and STK11, KEAP1, and KRAS mutations have clinical utility as biomarkers for pembrolizumab monotherapy versus platinum-based chemotherapy in patients with programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1)-positive (tumor proportion score ≥1%) advanced/metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) without EGFR/ALK alterations in the phase III KEYNOTE-042 trial. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This retrospective exploratory analysis assessed prevalence of tTMB and STK11, KEAP1, and KRAS mutations determined by whole-exome sequencing of tumor tissue and matched normal DNA and their associations with outcomes in KEYNOTE-042. Clinical utility of tTMB was assessed using a prespecified cut point of 175 mutations/exome. RESULTS: Of 793 patients, 345 (43.5%) had tTMB ≥175 mutations/exome and 448 (56.5%) had tTMB <175 mutations/exome. No association was observed between PD-L1 expression and tTMB. Continuous tTMB score was associated with improved overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival among patients receiving pembrolizumab (Wald test, one-sided P < 0.001) but not those receiving chemotherapy (Wald test, two-sided P > 0.05). tTMB ≥175 mutations/exome was associated with improved outcomes for pembrolizumab versus chemotherapy, whereas tTMB <175 mutations/exome was not {OS: hazard ratio, 0.62 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.48-0.80] and 1.09 (95% CI 0.88-1.36); progression-free survival: 0.75 (0.59-0.95) and 1.27 (1.04-1.55), respectively}. Improved OS [hazard ratio (95% CI)] for pembrolizumab versus chemotherapy was observed regardless of STK11 [STK11 mutant (n = 33): 0.37 (0.16-0.86), STK11 wild-type (n = 396): 0.83 (0.65-1.05)]; KEAP1 [KEAP1 mutant (n = 64): 0.75 (0.42-1.35), KEAP1 wild-type (n = 365): 0.78 (0.61-0.99)], or KRAS [KRAS mutant (n = 69): 0.42 (0.22-0.81); KRAS wild-type (n = 232): 0.86 (0.63-1.18)] mutation status. CONCLUSION: tTMB with a cut point of ≥175 mutations/exome is a potential predictive biomarker for pembrolizumab monotherapy for advanced/metastatic PD-L1 tumor proportion score ≥1% NSCLC. Pembrolizumab is a standard first-line treatment in this setting regardless of STK11, KEAP1, or KRAS mutation status.

Tislelizumab in combination with gemcitabine plus cisplatin chemotherapy as first-line adjuvant treatment for locally advanced or metastatic bladder cancer: a retrospective study.

BACKGROUND: Combining immune checkpoint inhibitors with chemotherapy can synergistically improve antitumor activity and are generally well tolerated. Recently, the efficacy and safety of combination therapy has been demonstrated for many cancers, including urothelial carcinomas. The aim of this retrospective pilot study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of tislelizumab plus chemotherapy as first-line adjuvant treatment for locally advanced or metastatic bladder cancer. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective analysis of 31 patients with locally advanced or metastatic bladder cancer from December 2020 to January 2022 with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0/1. Of the 31 patients, 14 patients received tislelizumab (200 mg i.v. every 3 weeks, Q3W) plus 21 days cycles of chemotherapy (gemcitabine, 1000 mg/m2 i.v. on days 1 and 8 of each cycle + cisplatin, 70 mg/m2 i.v. on day 2 of each cycle) (TGC) treatment and 17 patients received gemcitabine plus cisplatin chemotherapy (GC) treatment. All patients treated with bladder cytoreductive surgery and were treated for four 21 days cycles until disease progression or intolerable treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs). The objective progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), overall response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR), clinical benefit rate (CBR) and TRAEs were recorded and reviewed. RESULTS: As of the cut-off date (March 25, 2022), PFS, OS, ORR, DCR, CBR and TRAEs were evaluated in 14 patients receiving combination therapy and 17 patients in the chemotherapy alone group. The median PFS was 36.0 [95% confidence interval (CI) 33.1-38.9] weeks in the TGC group and 29.0 (95% CI 25.4-32.6) weeks in the GC group [hazard ratio (HR) 0.15 (95% CI 0.04-0.55)]. In the GC group, the median OS was 48.0 (95% CI 39.7-56.3) weeks; the median OS was not yet mature for the TGC group [HR 0.26 (95% CI 0.07-0.94)]. Treatment with TGC resulted in improved DCR (TGC 71.4%; GC 65.0%) and CBR (TGC 64.3%; GC 52.9%) compared with GC. However, although higher incidences of grade ≥ 3 TRAEs were observed with TGC compared with GC (35.7% vs 23.5%), the difference was not statistically significant (p = 0.47). CONCLUSION: This study suggested that TGC provided survivors of locally advanced or metastatic bladder cancer with encouraging antitumor activity and was generally well tolerated.

Real world evidence study on treatment patterns and health resource utilization in patients with HR+/HER2- locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer in Korea.

Objective: To understand current treatment patterns and health care resource utilization (HRU) of women with locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer (advanced breast cancer; ABC) in Korea overall and within patients who had progressed with prior endocrine therapy (as first-line treatment for metastatic disease) and patients with no prior systemic treatment (for advanced disease). Methods: A chart review was conducted in 109 patients (women ≥ 18 years old with HR+/HER2- ABC diagnosed between 2015 and 2017) from 11 hospitals. Anonymized data on patient characteristics, treatment patterns and HRU was abstracted. Results: Mean (range) age of all patients was 57.5 (40-81) years. Overall, the most common first-, second- and third-line systemic therapy after diagnosis of ABC were letrozole ± palbociclib (51%), endocrine therapy (ET)±everolimus (42%) or chemotherapy (ChT) (39%), and ChT (68%), respectively. In patients progressed with ET (n = 33) and those with no prior systemic treatment (n = 52), the most common first-line treatments were letrozole (82%) and letrozole + palbociclib (42%), respectively. The percentage of patients with at least one grade 3 or higher adverse event during first-line therapy was 93.1% vs 39.2% in patients on a ChT based regimen (N = 29) vs. ET (N = 74). Overall, oncologist visits, at an annual rate of 9.27 (95% CI: 8.87, 9.69) visits per month, and hospitalizations, with an annual rate of 0.44 (95% CI: 0.36, 0.54), and mean (SD) length of stay of 14.3 (10.32) days, were the key drivers of HRU. Conclusions: These findings on real world HRU reflected clinical guidelines and severity of ABC. Results can inform future evaluations of new ABC treatments that estimate the health economic impact of their adoption in Korea.

Treatment with opioids in patients with locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma and matched non-cancer controls.

BACKGROUND: Locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma (la/mUC) is an aggressive disease with a poor long-term survival. While patients frequently report pain, there are limited data on the patient experience with pain and pain medication use. This study used real-world data to quantify treatment with opioids, as a proxy for pain, in patients with la/mUC compared with matched non-cancer controls. METHODS: This was a retrospective claims analysis, using the IBM® MarketScan® databases, of adults diagnosed with urothelial carcinoma and initiating ≥1 la/mUC therapy between May 2016 and June 2019. Index date was date of first systemic therapy claim for la/mUC; baseline was the 6 months pre-index; follow-up was from index until disenrollment or study end. Proportion with treatment with opioids, number of opioid prescriptions, and daily morphine-equivalent dose (MEQ; in morphine milligram equivalents/day) in patients with la/mUC and matched non-cancer controls from the same databases were assessed. RESULTS: We identified 1293 patients with la/mUC and matched 1:3 with 3862 non-cancer controls. Mean (SD) follow-up was 1.26 (0.74) years in patients with la/mUC and 1.29 (0.72) years in controls. A greater proportion of patients with la/mUC, compared with controls, used opioids during both baseline (63.6% vs. 19.4%) and follow-up (61.4% vs. 27.9%). Among those who used opioids, mean monthly prescriptions (number of medications claims/patient/month) were 0.55 both in patients with la/mUC and controls during baseline, and 0.49 and 0.39, respectively, at follow-up. Daily MEQ among those who used opioids was 53.6 and 45.7 during baseline, and 74.7 and 40.8 at follow-up, in patients with la/mUC and controls, respectively. In patients with la/mUC, mean opioid prescriptions and daily MEQ increased during later lines of therapy. CONCLUSION: In patients with la/mUC, pain requiring opioids is common at diagnosis, worsens as the patient progresses, and is consistently higher than in matched controls. Improvement in disease control with more effective therapies may reduce cancer pain in this population.

Long-term efficacy update of crizotinib in patients with advanced, inoperable inflammatory myofibroblastic tumour from EORTC trial 90101 CREATE.

PURPOSE: European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) 90101 (CREATE) was a prospective, multicentric, non-randomised, open-label phase II basket trial to assess the efficacy and safety of crizotinib in patients with different types of cancers, including advanced inflammatory myofibroblastic tumour (IMT) with or without anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) rearrangements. Here, we report updated results with long-term follow-up. PATIENTS/METHODS: After central reference pathology, eligible ALK-positive and ALK-negative patients with advanced/metastatic IMT deemed incurable with surgery, radiotherapy or systemic therapy received oral crizotinib 250 mg twice daily. The ALK status was assessed centrally using immunohistochemistry and fluorescence in situ hybridisation. The primary end-point was the proportion of patients who achieved an objective response (i.e. complete or partial response). If ≥6 ALK-positive patients achieved a confirmed response, the trial would be deemed successful. RESULTS: At data cut-off on 28th January 2021, we performed the final analysis of this trial. Of the 20 eligible and treated patients (19 of whom were evaluable for efficacy), with a median follow-up of 50 months, five were still on crizotinib treatment (4/12 ALK-positive and 1/8 ALK-negative patients). The updated objective response rate (ORR) was 66.7% (95% confidence interval [CI] 34.9-90.1%) in ALK-positive patients and 14.3% (95% CI 0.0-57.9%) in ALK-negative patients. In the ALK-positive and ALK-negative patients, the median progression-free survival was 18.0 months (95% CI 4.0-NE) and 14.3 months (95% CI 1.2-31.1), respectively; 3-year overall survival rates were 83.3% (95% CI 48.2-95.6) and 34.3% (95% CI 4.8-68.5). Safety results were consistent with previously reported data. CONCLUSION: These updated results confirm previous findings that crizotinib is effective, with durable responses, in patients with locally advanced or metastatic ALK-positive IMT. With further follow-up after the original primary analysis, the ORR increased, as patients derived long-term benefit and some responses converted from stable disease to partial responses. CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER: EORTC 90101, NCT01524926.

Donafenib in Progressive Locally Advanced or Metastatic Radioactive Iodine-Refractory Differentiated Thyroid Cancer: Results of a Randomized, Multicenter Phase II Trial.

Background: An unmet need for more effective and affordable kinase inhibitors remains in patients with progressive radioactive iodine-refractory differentiated thyroid cancer (RAIR-DTC) in China, where only sorafenib is approved for this indication. This study evaluated the 24-week objective response rate (ORR) to donafenib-a new, domestic multikinase inhibitor-in the treatment of locally advanced or metastatic RAIR-DTC in patients with measurable lesions. Two dose regimens (300 mg twice daily vs. 200 mg twice daily) were used to determine its optimal dosage and safety for further phase III studies. Methods: This study was a randomized, open-label, multicenter phase II trial. Thirty-five adult RAIR-DTC patients with at least one measurable targeted lesion according to RECIST 1.1 were enrolled from 12 centers in China and randomized to receive either 200 mg (17 patients) or 300 mg (18 patients) of donafenib orally twice daily for 24 weeks. The primary endpoint was ORR, and the secondary endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS) among others. Additionally, biochemical (serum thyroglobulin) and structural (total tumor diameter [TTD]) responses were assessed, change (ΔTTD) rates were calculated, and safety was evaluated. Results: The ORRs for the 200- and 300-mg arms were 12.5% and 13.33% (p = 1.000), respectively. The 300-mg arm had a nonsignificant, longer median PFS than the 200-mg arm (14.98 months vs. 9.44 months) (p = 0.351). There was a trend toward more tumor shrinkage in the 300-mg arm compared with the 200-mg arm (average ΔTTD rate -0.52 ± 0.71 vs. -0.04 ± 1.55 mm/month, p = 0.103). Most treatment-related adverse events (AEs) in both arms were grades 1-2. The most common grade 3 treatment-related AEs in both arms were palmar-plantar erythrodysesthesia and hypertension; the sum occurrence rates of these two AEs in the 200-mg and 300-mg arms were 11.43% and 22.86%, respectively. Conclusions: Donafenib was generally well tolerated. Both donafenib regimens demonstrated similar efficacy in terms of the ORR in locally advanced or metastatic RAIR-DTC. The results warrant further studies on donafenib as a new, feasible treatment option for RAIR-DTC patients. Clinical Trials.gov IDs: NCT02870569; CTR20160220.

FDA Approval Summary: Atezolizumab or Pembrolizumab for the Treatment of Patients with Advanced Urothelial Carcinoma Ineligible for Cisplatin-Containing Chemotherapy.

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) granted accelerated approval to atezolizumab and pembrolizumab in April and May 2017, respectively, for the treatment of patients with locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma who are not eligible for cisplatin-containing chemotherapy. These approvals were based on efficacy and safety data demonstrated in the two single-arm trials, IMvigor210 (atezolizumab) and KEYNOTE-052 (pembrolizumab). The primary endpoint, confirmed objective response rate, was 23.5% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 16.2%-32.2%) in patients receiving atezolizumab and 28.6% (95% CI: 24.1%-33.5%) in patients receiving pembrolizumab. The median duration of response was not reached in either study and responses were seen regardless of PD-L1 status. The safety profiles of both drugs were generally consistent with approved agents targeting PD-1/PD-L1. Two ongoing trials (IMvigor130 and KEYNOTE-361) are verifying benefit of these drugs. Based on concerning preliminary reports from these trials, FDA revised the indications for both agents in cisplatin-ineligible patients. Both drugs are now indicated for patients not eligible for any platinum-containing chemotherapy or not eligible for cisplatin-containing chemotherapy and whose tumors/infiltrating immune cells express a high level of PD-L1. The indications for atezolizumab and pembrolizumab in patients who have received prior platinum-based therapy have not been changed. This article summarizes the FDA thought process and data supporting the accelerated approval of both agents and the subsequent revision of the indications. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: The accelerated approvals of atezolizumab and pembrolizumab for cisplatin-ineligible patients with advanced urothelial carcinoma represent the first approved therapies for this patient population. These approvals were based on single-arm trials demonstrating reasonable objective response rates and favorable durations of response with an acceptable toxicity profile compared with available non-cisplatin-containing chemotherapy regimens. However, based on concerning preliminary reports from two ongoing phase III trials, the FDA revised the indication for both agents in cisplatin-ineligible patients. Both are now indicated either for patients not eligible for any platinum-containing chemotherapy or not eligible for cisplatin-containing chemotherapy and whose tumors have high expression of PD-L1.

Health-related quality of life from the FALCON phase III randomised trial of fulvestrant 500 mg versus anastrozole for hormone receptor-positive advanced breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: The phase III randomised FALCON trial (NCT01602380) demonstrated improved progression-free survival with fulvestrant 500 mg versus anastrozole 1 mg in endocrine therapy-naïve postmenopausal women with hormone receptor-positive (HR+) locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer (LA/MBC). Furthermore, overall health-related quality of life (HRQoL) was maintained and comparable for fulvestrant and anastrozole. Here, we present additional analyses of patient-reported HRQoL outcomes from FALCON. METHODS: Women with endocrine therapy-naïve HR+ LA/MBC were randomised 1:1 to fulvestrant (days 0, 14, 28, then every 28 d) or anastrozole (daily) until disease progression or discontinuation. HRQoL was assessed by FACT-B questionnaire (TOI and FACT-B total score) at randomisation and every 12 weeks during treatment. HRQoL data post-treatment (with or without progression) were also collected. RESULTS: In total, 462 patients were randomised (fulvestrant, n = 230; anastrozole, n = 232). Compliance to FACT-B overall ranged from 60.0 to 97.4%. Mean change from baseline in TOI and FACT-B total score remained broadly stable (approximately ± 3 points to week 132) and was similar between arms during treatment. HRQoL was also maintained in FACT-B subscales. Approximately one-third of patients had improved TOI (≥+6 points) and FACT-B (≥+8 points) total scores from baseline up to week 120 and 132, respectively, of treatment with fulvestrant (ranges 26.4-45.0% and 22.4-35.8%, respectively) and anastrozole (ranges 18.6-32.9%, and 22.7-37.9%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Mean change from baseline in TOI and FACT-B total score was maintained for fulvestrant and anastrozole; similar proportions of patients in both arms had improved TOI and FACT-B total scores. CLINICALTRIALS. GOV IDENTIFIER: NCT01602380.

FDA Approval Summary: Atezolizumab for the Treatment of Patients with Progressive Advanced Urothelial Carcinoma after Platinum-Containing Chemotherapy.

Until recently in the United States, no products were approved for second-line treatment of advanced urothelial carcinoma. On May 18, 2016, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration approved atezolizumab for the treatment of patients with locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma whose disease progressed during or following platinum-containing chemotherapy or within 12 months of neoadjuvant or adjuvant treatment with platinum-containing chemotherapy. Atezolizumab is a programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) blocking antibody and represents the first approved product directed against PD-L1. This accelerated approval was based on results of a single-arm trial in 310 patients with locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma who had disease progression after prior platinum-containing chemotherapy. Patients received atezolizumab 1,200 mg intravenously every 3 weeks until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Key efficacy measures were objective response rate (ORR), as assessed by Independent Review per RECIST 1.1, and duration of response (DoR). With a median follow-up of 14.4 months, confirmed ORR was 14.8% (95% CI: 11.1, 19.3) in all treated patients. Median DoR was not reached and response durations ranged from 2.1+ to 13.8+ months. Of the 46 responders, 37 patients had an ongoing response for ≥ 6 months. The most common adverse reactions (≥20%) were fatigue, decreased appetite, nausea, urinary tract infection, pyrexia, and constipation. Infection and immune-related adverse events also occurred, including pneumonitis, hepatitis, colitis, endocrine disorders, and rashes. Overall, the benefit-risk assessment was favorable to support accelerated approval. The observed clinical benefits need to be verified in confirmatory trial(s). IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: This accelerated approval of atezolizumab for second-line use in advanced urothelial carcinoma provides patients with an effective, novel treatment option for the management of their disease. This represents the first immunotherapy approved in this disease setting.

Long-lasting control with erlotinib in advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). / Erlotinib no controlo tumoral prolongado do carcinoma do pulmão de não pequenas células avançado (CPNPC).

The authors present a clinical case of a caucasian male patient, 59 years-old, non-smoker, with an advanced non-small cell lung carcinoma (NSCLC), with 3 years of follow-up, received erlotinib for 18 months, after failure of more than one chemotherapy schedule, without evidence of oncologic progression. The patient evidences excellent quality of life, controlled sintomatology, recovery of the capacity of tolerance to the effort and it maintains his professional activities. The treatment with erlotinib has been well tolerated, although exhibiting grade 1 cutaneous toxicity. Rev Port Pneumol 2008; XIV (Supl 3): S9-S15.