Differences in Tumor Microenvironment Dictate T Helper Lineage Polarization and Response to Immune Checkpoint Therapy.

Immune checkpoint therapy (ICT) shows encouraging results in a subset of patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) but still elicits a sub-optimal response among those with bone metastases. Analysis of patients' bone marrow samples revealed increased Th17 instead of Th1 subsets after ICT. To further evaluate the different tumor microenvironments, we injected mice with prostate tumor cells either subcutaneously or intraosseously. ICT in the subcutaneous CRPC model significantly increases intra-tumoral Th1 subsets and improves survival. However, ICT fails to elicit an anti-tumor response in the bone CRPC model despite an increase in the intra-tumoral CD4 T cells, which are polarized to Th17 rather than Th1 lineage. Mechanistically, tumors in the bone promote osteoclast-mediated bone resorption that releases TGF-ß, which restrains Th1 lineage development. Blocking TGF-ß along with ICT increases Th1 subsets and promotes clonal expansion of CD8 T cells and subsequent regression of bone CRPC and improves survival.

Aging-associated and CD4 T-cell-dependent ectopic CXCL13 activation predisposes to anti-PD-1 therapy-induced adverse events.

Clinical success of immune-checkpoint blockade (ICB) cancer immunotherapy is compromised by increased risk of immune-related adverse events (irAEs). However, mechanistic action(s) of immune responses underlying development of irAE remain not fully explored. Here, we found that in tumor-bearing aged, but not young, mice, antiprogrammed death receptor (PD)-1 therapy elicited irAE-like multiorgan dysfunctions with ectopic accumulation of T and B cells in damaged organs. In this preclinical model, the organ toxicities were mediated by immunoglobulin G (IgG) deposition because administration of IG from ICB-treated aged mice induced the pathogenicity specifically in naïve aged hosts. Mechanistically, CD4 T-cell-derived interleukin (IL)-21 upregulated B-cell-homing chemokine, CXCL13, preferentially in irAE organs from aged mice treated with anti-PD-1 therapy. The ICB-induced pathogenicity was alleviated by B-cell depletion or by blockade of IL-21 or CXCL13 activity. These results suggest that age-associated immune regulatory milieu contributes to the formation of tertiary lymphoid structure-like lymphocytic aggregates in irAE organs and irAE-related toxicity employing IL-21-CXCL13-auto-antibody axis. Supporting this, a systemic increase in CXCL13 and Il21 expression in CD4 T cells correlated with irAE incidence in ICB-treated patients. These findings provide rationale for therapeutic usefulness of CXCL13 in irAE management.

Questionnaire survey of healthcare professionals on taxane-induced nail change in Japan.

PURPOSE: Taxanes are widely used chemotherapeutic agents that frequently cause nail changes and have a significant impact on patients' quality of life. Despite the prevalence of taxane-induced nail toxicity, limited data are available regarding evidence-based management strategies for the prevention or treatment of taxane-induced nail changes. Therefore, we aimed to gain insights into the prevention, treatment, and evaluation of nail changes in patients with cancer in Japan by conducting a questionnaire survey of physicians, pharmacists, and nurses involved in oncology treatment. METHODS: The questions addressed prophylactic methods, evaluation practices, and treatment approaches for various nail disorders. The questionnaires were distributed on March 1, 2022, with a response deadline of December 1, 2022. RESULTS: Of the 120 questionnaires distributed, 88 (73.3%) were returned, and all of them were analyzed. The respondents included 69 physicians (32 oncologists, 26 breast surgeons, 6 dermatologists, 3 obstetricians/gynecologists, 1 gastroenterological surgeon, and 1 urologist), 9 pharmacists, and 10 nurses. Prophylactic measures included moisturizing (58.0%), protection (42.0%), cooling therapy (37.5%), and cleanliness (33.0%). Approximately 70% of the respondents used the Common Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE), while approximately 30% did not use a specific evaluation method. Opinions regarding treatment with antimicrobial or corticosteroid ointments varied; however, all severe cases were referred by dermatologists. CONCLUSION: Our survey revealed that the management of chemotherapy-induced nail changes varies in clinical practice in Japan. These findings emphasize the need for standardized management strategies and further research.

Simultaneous Tumor Shrinkage and Bronchial Perforation Induced by Nivolumab plus Cabozantinib Combination Therapy in a Patient with Collecting Duct Carcinoma.

Vascular endothelial growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitors are known to cause perforation as one of their severe side effects, and postoperative and postradiation therapy are known risk factors. However, there are few studies on perforation following tumor shrinkage. A 78-year-old woman with postoperative recurring left collecting duct carcinoma of the right hilar lymph nodes and mediastinum underwent eight courses of nivolumab plus cabozantinib, resulting in tumor shrinkage. Three days after the last administration, she developed fever and cough and was hospitalized for right lobar pneumonia. The patient received long-term antibiotics for bronchial fistula with the destruction of the bronchial wall and secondary lung abscess. When using nivolumab plus cabozantinib combination therapy for a tumor with bronchial invasion, physicians should be aware of bronchial perforation as the tumor shrinks.

Prognostic significance of inflammatory markers in patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma receiving nivolumab plus ipilimumab.

BACKGROUND: A useful biomarker for the efficacy of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) in advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC) has not yet been established. This study aims to investigate whether inflammatory markers are associated with the efficacy of nivolumab plus ipilimumab therapy before and during treatment. METHODS: Data from patients with advanced clear cell RCC who received a combination treatment of nivolumab plus ipilimumab were retrospectively analyzed. The neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR), monocyte-to-lymphocyte ratio (MLR), platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio (PLR), and C-reactive protein (CRP) levels were assessed at baseline and 3, 6, and 9 weeks after treatment initiation. The correlation between these inflammatory markers and the patient's prognosis was investigated. RESULTS: Eighty-four patients were identified. The multivariate analysis identified NLR at week 3, CRP at week 6, and NLR and CRP at week 9 as the consistent predictor associated with poor overall survival (OS) at each time point. The survival analysis and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis revealed that an NLR of ≥ 2.4 at week 3, CRP of ≥ 1.4 mg/dL at week 6, and NLR of ≥ 4.8 and CRP of ≥ 1.0 mg/dL at week 9 were associated with worse OS (hazard ratios (HR) = 5.70, P = 0.008, HR = 3.23, P = 0.004, HR = 7.38, P < 0.001 and HR = 3.55, P = 0.002). CONCLUSIONS: Both NLR and CRP were considered useful biomarkers for understanding the prognosis during nivolumab plus ipilimumab therapy. Furthermore, an NLR of ≥ 4.8 and CRP of ≥ 1.0 mg/dL at week 9 are helpful in reconsidering treatment continuation.

Phase 3 THOR Japanese subgroup analysis: erdafitinib in advanced or metastatic urothelial cancer and fibroblast growth factor receptor alterations.

BACKGROUND: In the THOR trial (NCT03390504) Cohort 1, erdafitinib demonstrated significantly prolonged overall survival (OS) (median 12.1 versus 7.8 months) and reduced risk of death by 36% (hazard ratio 0.64, P = 0.005) compared with chemotherapy in metastatic urothelial carcinoma (mUC) patients with FGFR alterations who progressed after ≥ 1 prior treatments, including anti-PD-(L)1. There have been no reports of the Japanese subgroup results yet. METHODS: THOR Cohort 1 randomized patients to erdafitinib once daily or docetaxel/vinflunine once every 3 weeks. Primary endpoint was OS. Secondary endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS) and objective response rate (ORR). No specific statistical power was set for this Japanese subgroup analysis. RESULTS: Of 266 patients randomized, 27 (14 erdafitinib; 13 chemotherapy) were Japanese. Baseline characteristics were generally similar between treatments and to the overall population, except for more males, lower body weight, and more upper tract primary tumors among Japanese patients. Compared with chemotherapy, erdafitinib showed improved OS (median 25.4 versus 12.4 months), PFS (median 8.4 versus 2.9 months) and ORR (57.1% versus 15.4%). Any grade treatment-related adverse events (AEs) occurred in all patients from both arms but Grade 3/4 AEs and AEs leading to discontinuation were lower in the erdafitinib arm. No new safety signals were observed in the Japanese subgroup. CONCLUSION: In the Japanese subgroup, erdafitinib showed improved survival and response compared to chemotherapy, with no new safety concerns. These results support erdafitinib as a treatment option for Japanese mUC patients with FGFR alterations, and early FGFR testing after diagnosis of mUC should be considered.

Primary prophylaxis with G-CSF for patients with non-round cell soft tissue sarcomas: a systematic review for the Clinical Practice Guidelines for the Use of G-CSF 2022 of the Japan Society of Clinical Oncology.

BACKGROUND: Granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) is an essential supportive agent for chemotherapy-induced severe myelosuppression. We proposed two clinical questions (CQ): CQ #1, "Does primary prophylaxis with G-CSF benefit chemotherapy for non-round cell soft tissue sarcoma (NRC-STS)?" and CQ #2, "Does G-CSF-based intensified chemotherapy improve NRC-STS treatment outcomes?" for the Clinical Practice Guidelines for the Use of G-CSF 2022 of the Japan Society of Clinical Oncology. METHODS: A literature search was performed on the primary prophylactic use of G-CSF for NRC-STSs. Two reviewers assessed the extracted papers and analyzed overall survival, incidence of febrile neutropenia, infection-related mortality, quality of life, and pain. RESULTS: Eighty-one and 154 articles were extracted from the literature search for CQs #1 and #2, respectively. After the first and second screening, one and two articles were included in the final evaluation, respectively. Only some studies have addressed these two clinical questions through a literature review. CONCLUSION: The clinical questions were converted to future research questions because of insufficient available data. The statements were proposed: "The benefit of primary G-CSF prophylaxis is not clear in NRC-STS" and "The benefit of intensified chemotherapy with primary G-CSF prophylaxis is not clear in NRC-STSs." G-CSF is often administered as primary prophylaxis when chemotherapy with severe myelosuppression is administered. However, its effectiveness and safety are yet to be scientifically proven.

Effectiveness and safety of primary prophylaxis with G-CSF during chemotherapy for invasive breast cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis from Clinical Practice Guidelines for the Use of G-CSF 2022.

INTRODUCTION: Chemotherapy for breast cancer can cause neutropenia, increasing the risk of febrile neutropenia (FN) and serious infections. The use of granulocyte colony-stimulating factors (G-CSF) as primary prophylaxis has been explored to mitigate these risks. To evaluate the efficacy and safety of primary G-CSF prophylaxis in patients with invasive breast cancer undergoing chemotherapy. METHODS: A systematic literature review was conducted according to the "Minds Handbook for Clinical Practice Guideline Development" using PubMed, Ichushi-Web, and the Cochrane Library databases. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and cohort studies assessing using G-CSF as primary prophylaxis in invasive breast cancer were included. The primary outcomes were overall survival (OS) and FN incidence. Meta-analyses were performed for outcomes with sufficient data. RESULTS: Eight RCTs were included in the qualitative analysis, and five RCTs were meta-analyzed for FN incidence. The meta-analysis showed a significant reduction in FN incidence with primary G-CSF prophylaxis (risk difference [RD] = 0.22, 95% CI: 0.01-0.43, p = 0.04). Evidence for improvement in OS with G-CSF was inconclusive. Four RCTs suggested a tendency for increased pain with G-CSF, but statistical significance was not reported. CONCLUSIONS: Primary prophylactic use of G-CSF is strongly recommended for breast cancer patients undergoing chemotherapy, as it has been shown to reduce the incidence of FN. While the impact on OS is unclear, the benefits of reducing FN are considered to outweigh the potential harm of increased pain.

Comparison between a single dose of PEG G-CSF and multiple doses of non-PEG G-CSF: a systematic review and meta-analysis from Clinical Practice Guidelines for the use of G-CSF 2022.

BACKGROUD: Granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) is widely used for the primary prophylaxis of febrile neutropenia (FN). Two types of G-CSF are available in Japan, namely G-CSF chemically bound to polyethylene glycol (PEG G-CSF), which provides long-lasting effects with a single dose, and non-polyethylene glycol-bound G-CSF (non-PEG G-CSF), which must be sequentially administrated for several days. METHODS: This current study investigated the utility of these treatments for the primary prophylaxis of FN through a systematic review of the literature. A detailed literature search for related studies was performed using PubMed, Ichushi-Web, and the Cochrane Library. Data were independently extracted and assessed by two reviewers. A qualitative analysis or meta-analysis was conducted to evaluate six outcomes. RESULTS: Through the first and second screenings, 23 and 18 articles were extracted for qualitative synthesis and meta-analysis, respectively. The incidence of FN was significantly lower in the PEG G-CSF group than in the non-PEG G-CSF group with a strong quality/certainty of evidence. The differences in other outcomes, such as overall survival, infection-related mortality, the duration of neutropenia (less than 500/µL), quality of life, and pain, were not apparent. CONCLUSIONS: A single dose of PEG G-CSF is strongly recommended over multiple-dose non-PEG G-CSF therapy for the primary prophylaxis of FN.

Therapeutic use of granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) in patients with febrile neutropenia: a comprehensive systematic review for clinical practice guidelines for the use of G-CSF 2022 from the Japan Society of Clinical Oncology.

BACKGROUND: Febrile neutropenia represents a critical oncologic emergency, and its management is pivotal in cancer therapy. In several guidelines, the use of granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) in patients with chemotherapy-induced febrile neutropenia is not routinely recommended except in high-risk cases. The Japan Society of Clinical Oncology has updated its clinical practice guidelines for the use of G-CSF, incorporating a systematic review to address this clinical question. METHODS: The systematic review was conducted by performing a comprehensive literature search across PubMed, the Cochrane Library, and Ichushi-Web, focusing on publications from January 1990 to December 2019. Selected studies included randomized controlled trials (RCTs), non-RCTs, and cohort and case-control studies. Evaluated outcomes included overall survival, infection-related mortality, hospitalization duration, quality of life, and pain. RESULTS: The initial search yielded 332 records. Following two rounds of screening, two records were selected for both qualitative and quantitative synthesis including meta-analysis. Regarding infection-related mortality, the event to case ratio was 5:134 (3.73%) in the G-CSF group versus 6:129 (4.65%) in the non-G-CSF group, resulting in a relative risk of 0.83 (95% confidence interval, 0.27-2.58; p = 0.54), which was not statistically significant. Only median values for hospitalization duration were available from the two RCTs, precluding a meta-analysis. For overall survival, quality of life, and pain, no suitable studies were found for analysis, rendering their assessment unfeasible. CONCLUSION: A weak recommendation is made that G-CSF treatment not be administered to patients with febrile neutropenia during cancer chemotherapy. G-CSF treatment can be considered for patients at high risk.

Effectiveness and safety of primary prophylaxis with G-CSF for patients with Ewing sarcomas: a systematic review for the Clinical Practice Guidelines for the Use of G-CSF 2022 of the Japan Society of Clinical Oncology.

BACKGROUND: Multidrug chemotherapy for Ewing sarcoma can lead to severe myelosuppression. We proposed two clinical questions (CQ): CQ #1, "Does primary prophylaxis with G-CSF benefit chemotherapy for Ewing sarcoma?" and CQ #2, "Does G-CSF-based intensified chemotherapy improve Ewing sarcoma treatment outcomes?". METHODS: A comprehensive literature search was conducted in PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Ichushi web databases, including English and Japanese articles published from 1990 to 2019. Two reviewers assessed the extracted papers and analyzed overall survival (OS), febrile neutropenia (FN) incidence, infection-related mortality, quality of life (QOL), and pain. RESULTS: Twenty-five English and five Japanese articles were identified for CQ #1. After screening, a cohort study of vincristine, ifosfamide, doxorubicin, and etoposide chemotherapy with 851 patients was selected. Incidence of FN was 60.8% with G-CSF and 65.8% without; statistical tests were not conducted. Data on OS, infection-related mortality, QOL, or pain was unavailable. Consequently, CQ #1 was redefined as a future research question. As for CQ #2, we found two English and five Japanese papers, of which one high-quality randomized controlled trial on G-CSF use in intensified chemotherapy was included. This trial showed trends toward lower mortality and a significant increase in event-free survival for 2-week interval regimen with the G-CSF primary prophylactic use compared with 3-week interval. CONCLUSION: This review indicated that G-CSF's efficacy as primary prophylaxis in Ewing sarcoma, except in children, is uncertain despite its common use. This review tentatively endorses intensified chemotherapy with G-CSF primary prophylaxis for Ewing sarcoma.

Effectiveness of G-CSF in chemotherapy for digestive system tumors: a systematic review of the Clinical Practice Guidelines for the Use of G-CSF 2022 delineated by the Japan Society of Clinical Oncology.

BACKGROUND: Granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) reportedly reduces the risk of neutropenia and subsequent infections caused by cancer chemotherapy. Although several guidelines recommend using G-CSF in primary prophylaxis according to the incidence rate of chemotherapy-induced febrile neutropenia (FN), the effectiveness of G-CSF in digestive system tumor chemotherapy remains unclear. To address these clinical questions, we conducted a systematic review as part of revising the Clinical Practice Guidelines for the Use of G-CSF 2022 published by the Japan Society of Clinical Oncology. METHODS: This systematic review addressed two main clinical questions (CQ): CQ1: "Is primary prophylaxis with G-CSF effective in chemotherapy?", and CQ2: "Is increasing the intensity of chemotherapy with G-CSF effective?" We reviewed different types of digestive system tumors, including esophageal, gastric, pancreatic, biliary tract, colorectal, and neuroendocrine carcinomas. PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Ichushi-Web databases were searched for information sources. Independent systematic reviewers conducted two rounds of screening and selected relevant records for each CQ. Finally, the working group members synthesized the strength of evidence and recommendations. RESULTS: After two rounds of screening, 5/0/3/0/2/0 records were extracted for CQ1 of esophageal/gastric/pancreatic/biliary tract/colorectal/ and neuroendocrine carcinoma, respectively. Additionally, a total of 2/6/1 records were extracted for CQ2 of esophageal/pancreatic/colorectal cancer, respectively. The strength of evidence and recommendations were evaluated for CQ1 of colorectal cancer; however, we could not synthesize recommendations for other CQs owing to the lack of records. CONCLUSION: The use of G-CSF for primary prophylaxis in chemotherapy for colorectal cancer is inappropriate.

Effectiveness and safety of primary prophylaxis with G-CSF for lung cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis to develop clinical practice guidelines for the use of G-CSF 2022.

BACKGROUND: Granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) is commonly administered to cancer patients undergoing myelosuppressive chemotherapy, especially when incidence rate of febrile neutropenia (FN) surpasses 20%. While primary prophylaxis with G-CSF has been proven effective in preventing FN in patients with cancer, there is limited evidence regarding its efficacy in specifically, lung cancer. Our systematic review focused on the efficacy of G-CSF primary prophylaxis in lung cancer. METHODS: We extracted studies on non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and small-cell lung cancer (SCLC) using the PubMed, Ichushi Web, and Cochrane Library databases. Two reviewers assessed the extracted studies for each type of lung cancer and conducted quantitative and meta-analyses of preplanned outcomes, including overall survival, FN incidence, infection-related mortality, quality of life, and musculoskeletal pain. RESULTS: A limited number of studies were extracted: two on NSCLC and six on SCLC. A meta-analysis was not conducted owing to insufficient data on NSCLC. Two case-control studies explored the efficacy of primary prophylaxis with G-CSF in patients with NSCLC (on docetaxel and ramucirumab therapy) and indicated a lower FN frequency with G-CSF. For SCLC, meta-analysis of five studies showed no significant reduction in FN incidence, with an odds ratio of 0.38 (95% confidence interval 0.03-5.56, P = 0.48). Outcomes other than FN incidence could not be evaluated due to low data availability. CONCLUSION: Limited data are available on G-CSF prophylaxis in lung cancer. Primary prophylaxis with G-CSF may be weakly recommended in Japanese patients with NSCLC undergoing docetaxel and ramucirumab combination therapy.

Effectiveness and safety of primary prophylaxis of granulocyte colony-stimulating factor during dose-dense chemotherapy for urothelial cancer: Clinical Practice Guidelines for the Use of G-CSF 2022.

Granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) decreases the incidence, duration, and severity of febrile neutropenia (FN); however, dose reduction or withdrawal is often preferred in the management of adverse events in the treatment of urothelial cancer. It is also important to maintain therapeutic intensity in order to control disease progression and thereby relieve symptoms, such as hematuria, infection, bleeding, and pain, as well as to prolong the survival. In this clinical question, we compared treatment with primary prophylactic administration of G-CSF to maintain therapeutic intensity with conventional standard therapy without G-CSF and examined the benefits and risks as major outcomes. A detailed literature search for relevant studies was performed using PubMed, Ichu-shi Web, and Cochrane Library. Data were extracted and evaluated independently by two reviewers. A qualitative analysis of the pooled data was performed, and the risk ratios with corresponding confidence intervals were calculated and summarized in a meta-analysis. Seven studies were included in the qualitative analysis, two of which were reviewed in the meta-analysis of dose-dense methotrexate, vinblastine, doxorubicin, and cisplatin (MVAC) therapy, and one randomized controlled study showed a reduction in the incidence of FN. Primary prophylactic administration of G-CSF may be beneficial, as shown in a randomized controlled study of dose-dense MVAC therapy. However, there are no studies on other regimens, and we made a "weak recommendation to perform" with an annotation of the relevant regimen (dose-dense MVAC).

Optimal timing of prophylactic pegylated G-CSF after chemotherapy administration for patients with cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis from Clinical Practice Guidelines for the use of G-CSF 2022.

INTRODUCTION: The timing of prophylactic pegylated granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) administration during cancer chemotherapy varies, with Day 2 and Days 3-5 being the most common schedules. Optimal timing remains uncertain, affecting efficacy and adverse events. This systematic review sought to evaluate the available evidence on the timing of prophylactic pegylated G-CSF administration. METHODS: Based on the Minds Handbook for Clinical Practice Guideline Development, we searched the PubMed, Ichushi-Web, and Cochrane Library databases for literature published from January 1990 to December 2019. The inclusion criteria included studies among the adult population using pegfilgrastim. The search strategy focused on timing-related keywords. Two reviewers independently extracted and assessed the data. RESULTS: Among 300 initial search results, only four articles met the inclusion criteria. A meta-analysis for febrile neutropenia incidence suggested a potential higher incidence when pegylated G-CSF was administered on Days 3-5 than on Day 2 (odds ratio: 1.27, 95% CI 0.66-2.46, p = 0.47), with a moderate certainty of evidence. No significant difference in overall survival or mortality due to infections was observed. The trend of severe adverse events was lower on Days 3-5, without statistical significance (odds ratio: 0.72, 95% CI 0.14-3.67, p = 0.69) and with a moderate certainty of evidence. Data on pain were inconclusive. CONCLUSIONS: Both Day 2 and Days 3-5 were weakly recommended for pegylated G-CSF administration post-chemotherapy in patients with cancer. The limited evidence highlights the need for further research to refine recommendations.

Effectiveness and safety of primary prophylaxis of G-CSF during chemotherapy for prostate cancer, Japanese clinical guideline for appropriate use of G-CSF: clinical practice guidelines for the use of G-CSF 2022.

BACKGROUND: Docetaxel (DTX) is commonly used as a primary chemotherapy, and cabazitaxel (CBZ) has shown efficacy in patients who are DTX resistant. Primary prophylactic granulocyte colony stimulating factor (G-CSF) therapy is currently used with CBZ treatment in routine clinical care in Japan. METHODS: In this study, we performed a systematic review following the Minds guidelines to investigate the effectiveness and safety of primary prophylaxis with G-CSF during chemotherapy for prostate cancer and to construct G-CSF guidelines for primary prophylaxis use during chemotherapy. A comprehensive literature search of various electronic databases (PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Ichushi) was performed on January 10, 2020, to identify studies published between January 1990 and December 31, 2019 that investigate the impact of primary prophylaxis with G-CSF during CBZ administration on clinical outcomes. RESULTS: Ultimately, nine articles were included in the qualitative systematic review. Primary G-CSF prophylaxis during CBZ administration for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer was difficult to assess in terms of correlation with overall survival, mortality from infection, and patients' quality of life. These difficulties were owing to the lack of randomized controlled trials comparing patients with and without primary prophylaxis of G-CSF during CBZ administration. However, some retrospective studies have suggested that it may reduce the incidence of febrile neutropenia. CONCLUSION: G-CSF may be beneficial as primary prophylaxis during CBZ administration for metastatic castration resistant prostate cancer, and we made a "weak recommendation to perform" with an annotation of the relevant regimen.

Clinical utility of Todai OncoPanel in the setting of approved comprehensive cancer genomic profiling tests in Japan.

Comprehensive cancer genome profiling (CGP) has been nationally reimbursed in Japan since June 2019. Less than 10% of the patients have been reported to undergo recommended treatment. Todai OncoPanel (TOP) is a dual DNA-RNA panel as well as a paired tumor-normal matched test. Two hundred patients underwent TOP as part of Advanced Medical Care B with approval from the Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare between September 2018 and December 2019. Tests were carried out in patients with cancers without standard treatment or when patients had already undergone standard treatment. Data from DNA and RNA panels were analyzed in 198 and 191 patients, respectively. The percentage of patients who were given therapeutic or diagnostic recommendations was 61% (120/198). One hundred and four samples (53%) harbored gene alterations that were detected with the DNA panel and had potential treatment implications, and 14 samples (7%) had a high tumor mutational burden. Twenty-two samples (11.1%) harbored 30 fusion transcripts or MET exon 14 skipping that were detected by the RNA panel. Of those 30 transcripts, 6 had treatment implications and 4 had diagnostic implications. Thirteen patients (7%) were found to have pathogenic or likely pathogenic germline variants and genetic counseling was recommended. Overall, 12 patients (6%) received recommended treatment. In summary, patients benefited from both TOP DNA and RNA panels while following the same indication as the approved CGP tests. (UMIN000033647).

Predictive value of CXCL10 for the occurrence of immune-related adverse events in patient with renal cell carcinoma.

Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have recently improved the prognosis of various cancers. By contrast, some immune-related adverse events (irAEs) caused by ICIs are fatal and have become problematic. The pathogenesis of irAEs remains unknown and must be elucidated to establish biomarkers. This study investigated plasma cytokine, chemokine, and anti-CD74 autoantibody levels in patients with renal cell carcinoma (RCC) and analyzed their association with irAEs. In a discovery cohort of 13 patients, plasma levels of chemokine (C-X-C motif) ligand (CXCL) 1, IL-17A, IL-1ß, IL-6, IL-8, CXCL10, MCP-1, and TNFα were measured at baseline and post-dose 1. Only CXCL10, at post-dose 1 but not at baseline, was significantly associated with grade 2 or higher irAEs (P = 0.0413). Plasma CXCL10 levels were then measured at baseline and post-dose 1 in an extended cohort of 43 patients with RCC who received ICI-based treatment. Higher plasma CXCL10 levels both at baseline and post-dose1 were significantly associated with the occurrence of grade 2 or higher irAEs (P = 0.0246 and 0.0137, respectively). Plasma CXCL13 levels, which we measured in a previous study, were significantly higher in patients with grade 2 or higher irAEs at baseline but not at post-dose 1 (P = 0.0037 and 0.052, respectively). No significant association between plasma anti-CD74 autoantibody level and both irAE pneumonitis and any grade 2 or higher irAE was observed. In conclusion, plasma CXCL10 is significantly associated with the occurrence of irAEs in patients with RCC treated with ICIs. CXCL10 is a potential predictive and on-treatment biomarker for irAEs.

Pattern of disease progression during third-line or later chemotherapy with nivolumab associated with poor prognosis in advanced gastric cancer: a multicenter retrospective study in Japan.

BACKGROUND: Accelerated tumor growth during immunotherapy in pre-existing measurable lesions, hyperprogressive disease (HPD), has been reported. However, progression of non-measurable lesions and new lesions are frequently observed in patients with advanced gastric cancer (AGC). METHODS: This retrospective study involved AGC patients at 24 Japanese institutions who had measurable lesions and received nivolumab after ≥ 2 lines of chemotherapy. HPD was defined as a ≥ two-fold increase in the tumor growth rate of measurable lesions. The pattern of disease progression was classified according to new lesions in different organs and ascites appeared/increase of ascites. RESULTS: Of 245 patients, 147 (60.0%) showed progressive disease (PD) as the best response and 41 (16.7%) showed HPD during nivolumab monotherapy. There was no significant difference in overall survival (OS) between patients with HPD and those with PD other than HPD (median OS 5.0 vs 4.8 months; hazard ratio [HR] 1.0, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.6-1.5; p = 1.0). Fifty-three patients developed new lesions in different organs and 58 had appearance/increase of ascites; these patients showed shorter OS than those without each of these features (median OS 3.3 vs 7.1 months, HR 1.8, 95% CI 1.2-2.7, p = 0.0031 for new lesions, and 3.0 vs 7.8 months, HR 2.6, 95% CI 1.8-3.8, p < 0.0001 for ascites). Thirty-one patients who had both features showed the worst prognosis (median OS 2.6 months). CONCLUSIONS: New lesions in different organs and appearance/increase of ascites, rather than the original definition of HPD, are the patterns of disease progression associated with poor prognosis in AGC patients receiving nivolumab whose best response was PD.

Anticancer drug therapy for patients with renal dysfunction.

Anticancer drug therapy for cancer is developing rapidly, including molecular-targeted drugs and immune checkpoint inhibitors that are used in clinical settings in addition to conventional cytotoxic drugs. In daily clinical practice, clinicians sometimes encounter situations in which the effects of these chemotherapeutic agents are considered unacceptable in high-risk patients with liver or renal dysfunction, those undergoing dialysis and older adults. There is no clear evidence regarding anticancer drugs administration to patients with renal dysfunction. However, there are indications for dose setting based on the theory of the renal function responsible for drug excretion and past administration experience. This review outlines anticancer drugs' administration in patients with renal dysfunction.