RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Belzutifan, a hypoxia-inducible factor 2α inhibitor, showed clinical activity in clear-cell renal-cell carcinoma in early-phase studies. METHODS: In a phase 3, multicenter, open-label, active-controlled trial, we enrolled participants with advanced clear-cell renal-cell carcinoma who had previously received immune checkpoint and antiangiogenic therapies and randomly assigned them, in a 1:1 ratio, to receive 120 mg of belzutifan or 10 mg of everolimus orally once daily until disease progression or unacceptable toxic effects occurred. The dual primary end points were progression-free survival and overall survival. The key secondary end point was the occurrence of an objective response (a confirmed complete or partial response). RESULTS: A total of 374 participants were assigned to belzutifan, and 372 to everolimus. At the first interim analysis (median follow-up, 18.4 months), the median progression-free survival was 5.6 months in both groups; at 18 months, 24.0% of the participants in the belzutifan group and 8.3% in the everolimus group were alive and free of progression (two-sided P = 0.002, which met the prespecified significance criterion). A confirmed objective response occurred in 21.9% of the participants (95% confidence interval [CI], 17.8 to 26.5) in the belzutifan group and in 3.5% (95% CI, 1.9 to 5.9) in the everolimus group (P<0.001, which met the prespecified significance criterion). At the second interim analysis (median follow-up, 25.7 months), the median overall survival was 21.4 months in the belzutifan group and 18.1 months in the everolimus group; at 18 months, 55.2% and 50.6% of the participants, respectively, were alive (hazard ratio for death, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.73 to 1.07; two-sided P = 0.20, which did not meet the prespecified significance criterion). Grade 3 or higher adverse events of any cause occurred in 61.8% of the participants in the belzutifan group (grade 5 in 3.5%) and in 62.5% in the everolimus group (grade 5 in 5.3%). Adverse events led to discontinuation of treatment in 5.9% and 14.7% of the participants, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Belzutifan showed a significant benefit over everolimus with respect to progression-free survival and objective response in participants with advanced clear-cell renal-cell carcinoma who had previously received immune checkpoint and antiangiogenic therapies. Belzutifan was associated with no new safety signals. (Funded by Merck Sharp and Dohme, a subsidiary of Merck; LITESPARK-005 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04195750.).
Asunto(s)
Antineoplásicos , Carcinoma de Células Renales , Everolimus , Indenos , Neoplasias Renales , Adulto , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Antineoplásicos/uso terapéutico , Antineoplásicos/efectos adversos , Carcinoma de Células Renales/tratamiento farmacológico , Carcinoma de Células Renales/mortalidad , Everolimus/administración & dosificación , Everolimus/efectos adversos , Estimación de Kaplan-Meier , Neoplasias Renales/tratamiento farmacológico , Neoplasias Renales/mortalidad , Supervivencia sin Progresión , Indenos/administración & dosificación , Indenos/efectos adversos , Administración Oral , Factores de Transcripción con Motivo Hélice-Asa-Hélice Básico/antagonistas & inhibidores , Adulto Joven , Resultado del TratamientoRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Tivozanib is an oral vascular endothelial growth factor receptor (VEGFR) tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) with efficacy in advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC). Long-term exploratory analyses from the TIVO-3 trial in relapsed/refractory (R/R) RCC including patients (26%) with prior immuno-oncology (IO) therapy are reported. METHODS: Patients with R/R advanced RCC that progressed with 2 or 3 prior systemic therapies (≥1 VEGFR TKI) were randomized to tivozanib 1.5 mg QD or sorafenib 400 mg BID, stratified by IMDC risk and previous therapy. Safety, investigator-assessed long-term progression-free survival (LT-PFS), and serial overall survival (OS) were assessed. RESULTS: Mean time on treatment was 11.0 months with tivozanib (nâ =â 175) and 6.3 months with sorafenib (nâ =â 175). Fewer gradeâ ≥3 treatment-related adverse events occurred with tivozanib (46%) than sorafenib (55%). Dose modification rates were lower with tivozanib than sorafenib across age/prior IO subgroups; prior IO therapy did not impact dose reductions or discontinuations in either arm. Landmark LT-PFS rates were higher with tivozanib (3 years: 12.3% vs 2.4%; 4 years: 7.6% vs 0%). After 22.8 months mean follow-up, the OS HR was 0.89 (95% CI, 0.70-1.14); when conditioned on 12-month landmark PFS, tivozanib showed significant OS improvement over sorafenib (HR, 0.45; 95% CI, 0.22-0.91; 2-sided Pâ =â .0221). CONCLUSIONS: Tivozanib demonstrated a consistent safety profile and long-term survival benefit in patients with R/R advanced RCC who were alive and progression free at 12 months. These post hoc exploratory analyses of LT-PFS and conditional OS support a clinically meaningful improvement with tivozanib versus sorafenib in this advanced RCC population.
Asunto(s)
Antineoplásicos , Carcinoma de Células Renales , Neoplasias Renales , Quinolinas , Humanos , Antineoplásicos/efectos adversos , Carcinoma de Células Renales/patología , Neoplasias Renales/patología , Compuestos de Fenilurea/efectos adversos , Inhibidores de Proteínas Quinasas/efectos adversos , Receptores de Factores de Crecimiento Endotelial Vascular/uso terapéutico , Sorafenib/efectos adversos , Factor A de Crecimiento Endotelial Vascular , Ensayos Clínicos Fase III como Asunto , Ensayos Clínicos Controlados Aleatorios como AsuntoRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: The efficacy and safety of nivolumab plus cabozantinib as compared with those of sunitinib in the treatment of previously untreated advanced renal-cell carcinoma are not known. METHODS: In this phase 3, randomized, open-label trial, we randomly assigned adults with previously untreated clear-cell, advanced renal-cell carcinoma to receive either nivolumab (240 mg every 2 weeks) plus cabozantinib (40 mg once daily) or sunitinib (50 mg once daily for 4 weeks of each 6-week cycle). The primary end point was progression-free survival, as determined by blinded independent central review. Secondary end points included overall survival, objective response as determined by independent review, and safety. Health-related quality of life was an exploratory end point. RESULTS: Overall, 651 patients were assigned to receive nivolumab plus cabozantinib (323 patients) or sunitinib (328 patients). At a median follow-up of 18.1 months for overall survival, the median progression-free survival was 16.6 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 12.5 to 24.9) with nivolumab plus cabozantinib and 8.3 months (95% CI, 7.0 to 9.7) with sunitinib (hazard ratio for disease progression or death, 0.51; 95% CI, 0.41 to 0.64; P<0.001). The probability of overall survival at 12 months was 85.7% (95% CI, 81.3 to 89.1) with nivolumab plus cabozantinib and 75.6% (95% CI, 70.5 to 80.0) with sunitinib (hazard ratio for death, 0.60; 98.89% CI, 0.40 to 0.89; P = 0.001). An objective response occurred in 55.7% of the patients receiving nivolumab plus cabozantinib and in 27.1% of those receiving sunitinib (P<0.001). Efficacy benefits with nivolumab plus cabozantinib were consistent across subgroups. Adverse events of any cause of grade 3 or higher occurred in 75.3% of the 320 patients receiving nivolumab plus cabozantinib and in 70.6% of the 320 patients receiving sunitinib. Overall, 19.7% of the patients in the combination group discontinued at least one of the trial drugs owing to adverse events, and 5.6% discontinued both. Patients reported better health-related quality of life with nivolumab plus cabozantinib than with sunitinib. CONCLUSIONS: Nivolumab plus cabozantinib had significant benefits over sunitinib with respect to progression-free survival, overall survival, and likelihood of response in patients with previously untreated advanced renal-cell carcinoma. (Funded by Bristol Myers Squibb and others; CheckMate 9ER ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03141177.).
Asunto(s)
Anilidas/administración & dosificación , Antineoplásicos/uso terapéutico , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/uso terapéutico , Carcinoma de Células Renales/tratamiento farmacológico , Neoplasias Renales/tratamiento farmacológico , Nivolumab/administración & dosificación , Piridinas/administración & dosificación , Sunitinib/uso terapéutico , Adulto , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Anilidas/efectos adversos , Antineoplásicos/efectos adversos , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/efectos adversos , Antígeno B7-H1/antagonistas & inhibidores , Carcinoma de Células Renales/mortalidad , Femenino , Humanos , Análisis de Intención de Tratar , Neoplasias Renales/mortalidad , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Nivolumab/efectos adversos , Supervivencia sin Progresión , Modelos de Riesgos Proporcionales , Piridinas/efectos adversos , Calidad de Vida , Proteínas Tirosina Quinasas Receptoras/antagonistas & inhibidores , Sunitinib/efectos adversos , Análisis de SupervivenciaRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Lenvatinib in combination with pembrolizumab or everolimus has activity against advanced renal cell carcinoma. The efficacy of these regimens as compared with that of sunitinib is unclear. METHODS: In this phase 3 trial, we randomly assigned (in a 1:1:1 ratio) patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma and no previous systemic therapy to receive lenvatinib (20 mg orally once daily) plus pembrolizumab (200 mg intravenously once every 3 weeks), lenvatinib (18 mg orally once daily) plus everolimus (5 mg orally once daily), or sunitinib (50 mg orally once daily, alternating 4 weeks receiving treatment and 2 weeks without treatment). The primary end point was progression-free survival, as assessed by an independent review committee in accordance with Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors, version 1.1. Overall survival and safety were also evaluated. RESULTS: A total of 1069 patients were randomly assigned to receive lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab (355 patients), lenvatinib plus everolimus (357), or sunitinib (357). Progression-free survival was longer with lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab than with sunitinib (median, 23.9 vs. 9.2 months; hazard ratio for disease progression or death, 0.39; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.32 to 0.49; P<0.001) and was longer with lenvatinib plus everolimus than with sunitinib (median, 14.7 vs. 9.2 months; hazard ratio, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.53 to 0.80; P<0.001). Overall survival was longer with lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab than with sunitinib (hazard ratio for death, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.49 to 0.88; P = 0.005) but was not longer with lenvatinib plus everolimus than with sunitinib (hazard ratio, 1.15; 95% CI, 0.88 to 1.50; P = 0.30). Grade 3 or higher adverse events emerged or worsened during treatment in 82.4% of the patients who received lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab, 83.1% of those who received lenvatinib plus everolimus, and 71.8% of those who received sunitinib. Grade 3 or higher adverse events occurring in at least 10% of the patients in any group included hypertension, diarrhea, and elevated lipase levels. CONCLUSIONS: Lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab was associated with significantly longer progression-free survival and overall survival than sunitinib. (Funded by Eisai and Merck Sharp and Dohme; CLEAR ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02811861.).
Asunto(s)
Anticuerpos Monoclonales Humanizados/administración & dosificación , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/uso terapéutico , Carcinoma de Células Renales/tratamiento farmacológico , Everolimus/administración & dosificación , Neoplasias Renales/tratamiento farmacológico , Compuestos de Fenilurea/administración & dosificación , Receptor de Muerte Celular Programada 1/antagonistas & inhibidores , Quinolinas/administración & dosificación , Adulto , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Anticuerpos Monoclonales Humanizados/efectos adversos , Antineoplásicos/efectos adversos , Antineoplásicos/uso terapéutico , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/efectos adversos , Carcinoma de Células Renales/mortalidad , Everolimus/efectos adversos , Femenino , Humanos , Neoplasias Renales/mortalidad , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Compuestos de Fenilurea/efectos adversos , Supervivencia sin Progresión , Inhibidores de Proteínas Quinasas/uso terapéutico , Quinolinas/efectos adversos , Sunitinib/efectos adversos , Sunitinib/uso terapéutico , Análisis de SupervivenciaRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: High-grade neuroendocrine neoplasms (NENs) comprise both well-differentiated grade 3 neuroendocrine tumors (G3 NETs) and poorly differentiated neuroendocrine carcinomas (NECs). Mixed neuroendocrine-non-neuroendocrine neoplasms (MiNENs) nearly always include poorly differentiated NEC as the neuroendocrine component. The efficacy and safety of frontline mFOLFIRINOX chemotherapy has never been investigated in patients with high-grade NENs. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We conducted a multi-institutional retrospective analysis of patients with advanced high-grade NEN of the gastroenteropancreatic tract or of unknown origin seen between February 2016 and April 2023 who received treatment with frontline mFOLFIRINOX. RESULTS: A total of 35 patients were included (G3 NETs: n=2; NECs: n=25; MiNENs: n=8; stage III: n=5; stage IV: n=30). The objective response rate was 77% (complete response: 3%; partial response: 74%). Median progression-free survival was 12 months (95% CI, 9.2-16.2 months) and median overall survival was 20.6 months (95% CI, 17.2-30.6 months). No significant differences in efficacy were seen according to primary site, histopathology, and Ki-67 proliferative index. All 5 patients with stage III disease who received mFOLFIRINOX obtained an objective response and underwent radical surgery or definitive radiotherapy with curative intent, with a recurrence rate of 40%. Grade 3 or 4 adverse events were observed in 43% of patients (mainly neutropenia and diarrhea). Females were at significantly increased risk of developing severe toxicities. CONCLUSIONS: mFOLFIRINOX shows antitumor activity against high-grade NENs. Well-designed, prospective clinical trials are needed to assess the efficacy of mFOLFIRINOX in both the neoadjuvant and metastatic settings.
Asunto(s)
Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica , Irinotecán , Clasificación del Tumor , Tumores Neuroendocrinos , Neoplasias Pancreáticas , Humanos , Femenino , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Tumores Neuroendocrinos/tratamiento farmacológico , Tumores Neuroendocrinos/patología , Anciano , Neoplasias Pancreáticas/tratamiento farmacológico , Neoplasias Pancreáticas/patología , Neoplasias Pancreáticas/mortalidad , Estudios Retrospectivos , Adulto , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/uso terapéutico , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/efectos adversos , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/farmacología , Irinotecán/uso terapéutico , Irinotecán/farmacología , Neoplasias Intestinales/tratamiento farmacológico , Neoplasias Intestinales/patología , Neoplasias Intestinales/mortalidad , Oxaliplatino/uso terapéutico , Oxaliplatino/farmacología , Neoplasias Gástricas/tratamiento farmacológico , Neoplasias Gástricas/patología , Fluorouracilo/uso terapéutico , Leucovorina/uso terapéutico , Resultado del TratamientoRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: In the primary analysis of the CLEAR study, lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab significantly improved progression-free survival and overall survival versus sunitinib in patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma (data cutoff Aug 28, 2020). We aimed to assess overall survival based on 7 months of additional follow-up. METHODS: This is a protocol-prespecified updated overall survival analysis (data cutoff March 31, 2021) of the open-label, phase 3, randomised CLEAR trial. Patients with clear-cell advanced renal cell carcinoma who had not received any systemic anticancer therapy for renal cell carcinoma, including anti-vascular endothelial growth factor therapy, or any systemic investigational anticancer drug, were eligible for inclusion from 200 sites (hospitals and cancer centres) across 20 countries. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1:1) to receive lenvatinib (20 mg per day orally in 21-day cycles) plus pembrolizumab (200 mg intravenously every 21 days; lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab group), lenvatinib (18 mg per day orally) plus everolimus (5 mg per day orally; lenvatinib plus everolimus group [not reported in this updated analysis]) in 21-day cycles, or sunitinib (50 mg per day orally, 4 weeks on and 2 weeks off; sunitinib group). Eligible patients were at least 18 years old with a Karnofsky performance status of 70 or higher. A computer-generated randomisation scheme was used, and stratification factors were geographical region and Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center prognostic groups. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival assessed by independent imaging review according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1 (RECIST v1.1). In this Article, extended follow-up analyses for progression-free survival and protocol-specified updated overall survival data are reported for the intention-to-treat population. No safety analyses were done at this follow-up. This study is closed to new participants and is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02811861. FINDINGS: Between Oct 13, 2016, and July 24, 2019, 1417 patients were screened for inclusion in the CLEAR trial, of whom 1069 (75%; 273 [26%] female, 796 [74%] male; median age 62 years [IQR 55-69]) were randomly assigned: 355 (33%) patients (255 [72%] male and 100 [28%] female) to the lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab group, 357 (33%) patients (275 [77%] male and 82 [23%] female) to the sunitinib group, and 357 (33%) patients to the lenvatinib plus everolimus group (not reported in this updated analysis). Median follow-up for progression-free survival was 27·8 months (IQR 20·3-33·8) in the lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab group and 19·4 months (5·5-32·5) in the sunitinib group. Median progression-free survival was 23·3 months (95% CI 20·8-27·7) in the lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab group and 9·2 months (6·0-11·0) in the sunitinib group (stratified hazard ratio [HR] 0·42 [95% CI 0·34-0·52]). Median overall survival follow-up was 33·7 months (IQR 27·4-36·9) in the lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab group and 33·4 months (26·7-36·8) in the sunitinib group. Overall survival was improved with lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab (median not reached [95% CI 41·5-not estimable]) versus sunitinib (median not reached [38·4-not estimable]; HR 0·72 [95% CI 0·55-0·93]). INTERPRETATION: Efficacy benefits of lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab over sunitinib were durable and clinically meaningful with extended follow-up. These results support the use of lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab as a first-line therapy for patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma. FUNDING: Eisai and Merck Sharp & Dohme.
Asunto(s)
Carcinoma de Células Renales , Neoplasias Renales , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Everolimus , Estudios de Seguimiento , SunitinibRESUMEN
Phosphoinositide 3-kinases (PI3Ks) play a central role in tumourigenesis with recurrent activating mutations of its p110α subunit (PIK3CA) identified in several tumours. Although several PI3K inhibitors are approved for haematological malignancies, only alpelisib was approved in solid tumours and for the treatment of PIK3CA-related overgrowth spectrum (PROS) syndrome. Traditional PI3K inhibitors inhibit both wild-type and mutant PI3K with almost equal potency, thus limiting their efficacy due to on-target toxicity. Since the initiation of phase I clinical trials investigating next generation allosteric mutant and isoform selective PIK3CA inhibitors, there has been a surge in interest in PIK3CA targeting in solid tumours. Preclinical characterisation of these compounds showed that maximal mutant protein inhibition fails to elicit metabolic and glucose homoeostasis dysregulation, one of the dose limiting toxicities of both selective and pan PI3K inhibitors. While extreme selectivity can be hypothesised to grant activity and safety advantage to these novel agents, on the other hand reduced benefit can be speculated for patients harbouring multiple or rare PIK3CA mutations. This review summarises the current understanding of PI3K alterations and the state-of-the-art treatment strategies in PI3K driven solid tumours, while also exploring the potential intrinsic and acquired resistance mechanisms to these agents, and the emerging role of mutant selective PIK3CA inhibitors.
Asunto(s)
Neoplasias , Fosfatidilinositol 3-Quinasas , Humanos , Fosfatidilinositol 3-Quinasas/metabolismo , Neoplasias/tratamiento farmacológico , Neoplasias/genética , Fosfatidilinositol 3-Quinasa Clase I/genética , Fosfatidilinositol 3-Quinasa Clase I/metabolismo , Inhibidores de las Quinasa Fosfoinosítidos-3 , MutaciónRESUMEN
Historically, kidney cancer was approached in a siloed single-speciality way, with urological surgeons managing the localised stages of the disease and medical oncologists caring for patients if metastases developed. However, improvements in the management of localised kidney cancer have occurred rapidly over the past two decades with greater understanding of the disease biology, diagnostic options, and innovations in curative treatments. These developments are favourable for patients but provide a substantially more complex landscape for patients and clinicians to navigate, with associated challenging decisions about who to treat, how, and when. As such, the skill sets needed to manage the various aspects of the disease and guide patients appropriately outstrips the capabilities of one particular specialist, and the evolution of a multispeciality approach to the management of kidney cancer is now essential. In this Review, we summarise the current best multispeciality practice for the management of localised kidney cancer and the areas in need of further research and development.
Asunto(s)
Neoplasias Renales , Humanos , Neoplasias Renales/diagnóstico , Neoplasias Renales/cirugíaRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: In phase III TIVO-3 trial, tivozanib improved progression-free survival (PFS) compared to sorafenib for patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). However, the effectiveness of this drug after exposure to other selective VEGFR agents has not yet been defined. Herein, we characterize the clinical efficacy of tivozanib in patients with mRCC previously treated with axitinib. METHODS: We identified patients from the intention to treat (ITT) population, in the TIVO-3 trial, who received treatment with axitinib before enrolment in the study and evaluated PFS, response rate (RR), and safety. RESULTS: Out of 350 patients, 172 (83:89, tivozanib:sorafenib) had received prior treatment with axitinib in TIVO-3. In this subgroup, PFS was 5.5 months with tivozanib and 3.7 months with sorafenib (HR 0.68). RR was 13% and 8% favoring tivozanib. CONCLUSIONS: Tivozanib is active in the treatment of patients with mRCC who have progressed on prior therapies, including axitinib.
Asunto(s)
Antineoplásicos , Carcinoma de Células Renales , Neoplasias Renales , Humanos , Antineoplásicos/uso terapéutico , Axitinib/uso terapéutico , Carcinoma de Células Renales/patología , Neoplasias Renales/patología , Compuestos de Fenilurea/efectos adversos , Sorafenib/uso terapéuticoRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Despite 4 approved combination regimens in the first-line setting for advanced renal cell carcinoma (aRCC), adverse event (AE) costs data are lacking. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A descriptive analysis on 2 AE cost comparisons was conducted using patient-level data for the nivolumab-based therapies and published data for the pembrolizumab-based therapies. First, grade 3/4 AE costs were compared between nivolumabâ +â ipilimumab vs. nivolumabâ +â cabozantinib vs. pembrolizumabâ +â axitinib using data from the CheckMate 214 (median follow-up [mFU]: 13.1 months), CheckMate 9ER (mFU: 12.8 months), and KEYNOTE-426 (mFU: 12.8 months) trials, respectively. Second, grade 3/4 AE costs were compared between nivolumabâ +â ipilimumab vs. nivolumabâ +â cabozantinib vs. pembrolizumabâ +â lenvatinib using data from the CheckMate 214 (mFU: 26.7 months), CheckMate 9ER (mFU: 23.5 months), and KEYNOTE-581 (mFU: 26.6 months) trials, respectively. Per-patient costs for all-cause and treatment-related grade 3/4 AEs with corresponding any-grade AE ratesâ ≥â 20% were calculated based on the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project database and inflated to 2020 US dollars. RESULTS: Per-patient all-cause grade 3/4 AE costs for nivolumabâ +â ipilimumab vs. nivolumabâ +â cabozantinib vs. pembrolizumabâ +â axitinib were $2703 vs. $4508 vs. $5772, and treatment-related grade 3/4 AE costs were $741 vs. $2722 vs. $4440 over ~12.8 months of FU. For nivolumabâ +â ipilimumab vs. nivolumabâ +â cabozantinib vs. pembrolizumabâ +â lenvatinib, per-patient all-cause grade 3/4 AE costs were $3120 vs. $5800 vs. $9285, while treatment-related grade 3/4 AE costs were $863 vs. $3162 vs. $5030 over ~26.6 months of FU. CONCLUSION: Patients with aRCC treated with first-line nivolumab-based therapies had lower grade 3/4 all-cause and treatment-related AE costs than pembrolizumab-based therapies, suggesting a more favorable cost-benefit profile.
Asunto(s)
Carcinoma de Células Renales , Neoplasias Renales , Humanos , Carcinoma de Células Renales/tratamiento farmacológico , Carcinoma de Células Renales/patología , Nivolumab/efectos adversos , Axitinib/uso terapéutico , Neoplasias Renales/tratamiento farmacológico , Neoplasias Renales/patología , Ipilimumab/efectos adversos , Sunitinib/uso terapéutico , Costos y Análisis de Costo , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/efectos adversosRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: The advent of immune-checkpoint inhibitors has challenged previous treatment paradigms for advanced urothelial carcinoma (UC) in the post-platinum setting as well as in the first-line setting for cisplatin-ineligible patients. In this study, we investigated the effectiveness of pembrolizumab as first-line treatment for cisplatin-ineligible UC. METHODS: Data from patients aged ≥ 18 years with cisplatin-ineligible UC and receiving first-line pembrolizumab from January 1st 2017 to September 1st 2022 were collected. Cisplatin ineligibility was defined according to the Galsky criteria. Thirty-three Institutions from 18 countries were involved in the ARON-2 study. RESULTS: Our analysis included 162 patients. The median follow-up time was 18.9 months (95%CI 15.3-76.9). In the overall study population, the median OS was 15.8 months (95%CI 11.3-32.4). The median OS was significantly longer in males versus females while no statistically significant differences were observed between patients aged < 65y versus ≥ 65y and between smokers and non-smokers. According to Recist 1.1 criteria, 26 patients (16%) experienced CR, 32 (20%) PR, 39 (24%) SD and 55 (34%) PD. CONCLUSIONS: Our data confirm the role of pembrolizumab as first-line therapy for cisplatin-unfit patients. Further studies investigating the biological and immunological characteristics of UC patients are warranted in order to optimize the outcome of patients receiving immunotherapy in this setting.
Asunto(s)
Carcinoma de Células Transicionales , Neoplasias de la Vejiga Urinaria , Masculino , Femenino , Humanos , Carcinoma de Células Transicionales/patología , Cisplatino/uso terapéutico , Neoplasias de la Vejiga Urinaria/tratamiento farmacológico , Neoplasias de la Vejiga Urinaria/patología , Anticuerpos Monoclonales Humanizados/farmacología , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada AntineoplásicaRESUMEN
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Summarize the writings published in the last years on the management and novel therapies of mucosal melanoma (MM). RECENT FINDINGS: New research has demonstrated a difference between MM and cutaneous melanoma (CM) in their genomic and molecular landscapes, explaining the response's heterogeneity. Immunotherapy and targeted therapy have limited benefit, but novel therapies are rapidly expanding. MM is aggressive cancer occurring in gastrointestinal, respiratory, or urogenital mucosa; whose incidence is greater in the Asian population. The etiology and pathogenesis remain unclear since UV exposure is not a proven risk factor as in cutaneous melanoma. In contrast to CM, lesions on the mucosal surface are less likely to be recognized early; therefore, the disease is diagnosed in an advanced stage. Clinical manifestations, such as bleeding or pain, can help to detect this tumor, although the prognosis remains unfavorable with an overall 5-year survival rate of less than 20%. The mutational landscape of MM includes mutations of BRAF and NRAS, as well as mutations in the c-KIT/CD117 gene (in 50% of patients), thus limiting therapeutic interventions to immunotherapy. However, clinical studies show less responsiveness to immunotherapy compared to CM, therefore novel therapeutic strategies targeting new molecules are needed to improve the survival of patients with MM.
Asunto(s)
Melanoma , Neoplasias Cutáneas , Humanos , Melanoma/diagnóstico , Melanoma/epidemiología , Melanoma/genética , Neoplasias Cutáneas/terapia , Pronóstico , Mutación , Proteínas Proto-Oncogénicas B-raf/genética , Melanoma Cutáneo MalignoRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Results from the phase 3 CLEAR study showed that lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab improved progression-free survival and overall survival compared with sunitinib in patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma. We aimed to assess the health-related quality-of-life (HRQOL) outcomes from the CLEAR study. METHODS: This open-label, randomised, phase 3 study was done across 200 hospitals and cancer centres in 20 countries. Patients were required to be 18 years or older, with advanced clear-cell renal cell carcinoma, and a Karnofsky performance status of 70% or higher. Patients who had received previous systemic anticancer therapy for renal cell carcinoma were not eligible. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1:1) to lenvatinib (oral 20 mg per day) plus pembrolizumab (intravenous 200 mg every 21 days), lenvatinib (oral 18 mg per day) plus everolimus (oral 5 mg per day) in 21-day cycles, or sunitinib (oral 50 mg per day, 4 weeks on followed by 2 weeks off). Patients were assigned to treatments with a computer-generated randomisation scheme and were stratified by geographical region and Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center prognostic groups. The primary endpoint, previously reported, was progression-free survival, and HRQOL was a secondary endpoint. Most HRQOL analyses were done in patients who underwent randomisation, received at least one dose of study treatment, and had any HRQOL data. Completion and compliance analyses were done in the full analysis set. Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy Kidney Symptom Index-Disease-Related Symptoms (FKSI-DRS), European Organisation for the Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire-Core 30 (EORTC QLQ-C30), and the EQ-5D-3 Level (EQ-5D-3L) preference questionnaire were administered at baseline and on day 1 of each subsequent 21-day cycle. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02811861, and is closed to new participants. FINDINGS: Between Oct 13, 2016, and July 24, 2019, 355 patients were randomly assigned to the lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab group, 357 to the lenvatinib plus everolimus group, and 357 to the sunitinib group. Median follow-up for HRQOL analyses was 12·9 months (IQR 5·6-22·3). Because of the promising efficacy and safety results of lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab in the first-line setting, we focus the HRQOL results in this report on that combination versus sunitinib. Mean change from baseline in the lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab group compared with the sunitinib group was -1·75 (SE 0·59) versus -2·19 (0·66) for FKSI-DRS, -5·93 (0·86) versus -6·73 (0·94) for EORTC QLQ-C30 global health status/quality of life (GHS/QOL), and -4·96 (0·85) versus -6·64 (0·94) for the EQ-5D visual analogue scale (VAS). Median time to first deterioration in the lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab group compared with the sunitinib group was 9·14 weeks (95% CI 6·43-12·14) versus 12·14 weeks (9·14-15·29; HR 1·13 [95% CI 0·94-1·35], log-rank p=0·20) for FKSI-DRS, 12·00 weeks (7·29-15·14) versus 9·14 weeks (6·29-12·14; 0·88 [0·74-1·05], log-rank p=0·17) for EORTC QLQ-C30 GHS/QOL, and 9·43 weeks (6·43-12·29) versus 9·14 weeks (6·29-12·00; 0·83 [0·70-0·99], log-rank p=0·041) for the EQ-5D VAS. Median time to definitive deterioration in the lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab group compared with the sunitinib group was 134·14 weeks (95% CI 120·00-not estimable) versus 117·43 weeks (90·14-131·29; HR 0·70 [95% CI 0·53-0·92], log-rank p=0·0081) for FKSI-DRS, 114·29 weeks (102·14-153·29) versus 75·14 weeks (57·29-105·14; 0·60 [0·47-0·77], log-rank p<0·0001) for EORTC QLQ-C30 GHS/QOL, and 124·86 weeks (94·71-134·57) versus 74·86 weeks (54·14-96·00; 0·67 [0·53-0·85], log-rank p=0·0012) for the EQ-5D VAS. No outcomes on any of the instruments significantly favoured sunitinib over lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab. Most HRQOL comparisons of lenvatinib plus everolimus versus sunitinib were similar or favoured sunitinib. INTERPRETATION: These HRQOL results demonstrate that patients given lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab treatment had similar or favourable scores compared with patients given sunitinib, particularly with respect to time to definitive deterioration. These results support the efficacy and safety profile of lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab as first-line therapy for patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma. FUNDING: Eisai (Nutley, NJ, USA) and Merck Sharp & Dohme, a subsidiary of Merck & Co (Kenilworth, NJ, USA).
Asunto(s)
Carcinoma de Células Renales , Anticuerpos Monoclonales Humanizados , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/efectos adversos , Everolimus , Humanos , Compuestos de Fenilurea , Calidad de Vida , Quinolinas , SunitinibRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: In the primary analysis of CheckMate 9ER, nivolumab plus cabozantinib showed superior progression-free survival, overall survival, and objective response over sunitinib in patients with previously untreated advanced renal cell carcinoma (median follow-up of 18·1 months). Here, we report extended follow-up of overall survival and updated efficacy and safety. METHODS: This open-label, randomised, phase 3 trial was done in 125 hospitals and cancer centres across 18 countries. We included patients aged 18 years or older with previously untreated advanced or metastatic clear-cell renal cell carcinoma, a Karnofsky performance status of 70% or higher, measurable disease according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1 assessed by the investigator, any International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium (IMDC) prognostic risk category, and available tumour tissue for PD-L1 testing. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to nivolumab (240 mg) intravenously every 2 weeks plus cabozantinib (40 mg) orally once daily or sunitinib (50 mg orally) once daily (4 weeks per 6-week cycle). Randomisation, stratified by IMDC risk status, tumour PD-L1 expression, and geographical region, was done by permuted block within each stratum using a block size of four, via an interactive response system. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival by blinded independent central review. Overall survival was a secondary endpoint (reported here as the preplanned final analysis according to the protocol). Efficacy was assessed in all randomly assigned patients; safety was assessed in all patients who received at least one dose of any study drug. This ongoing study, closed to recruitment, is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03141177. FINDINGS: Between Sept 11, 2017, and May 14, 2019, 323 patients were randomly assigned to the nivolumab plus cabozantinib group and 328 to the sunitinib group. With an extended follow-up (data cutoff of June 24, 2021; median 32·9 months [IQR 30·4-35·9]), median overall survival was 37·7 months (95% CI 35·5-not estimable) in the nivolumab plus cabozantinib group and 34·3 months (29·0-not estimable) in the sunitinib group (hazard ratio [HR] 0·70 [95% CI 0·55-0·90], p=0·0043) and updated median progression-free survival was 16·6 months (12·8-19·8) versus 8·3 months (7·0-9·7; HR 0·56 [95% CI 0·46-0·68], p<0·0001). Grade 3-4 treatment-related adverse events occurred in 208 (65%) of 320 patients with nivolumab plus cabozantinib versus 172 (54%) of 320 with sunitinib. The most common grade 3-4 treatment-related adverse events were hypertension (40 [13%] of 320 patients in the nivolumab plus cabozantinib group vs 39 [12%] of 320 in the sunitinib group), palmar-plantar erythrodysaesthesia (25 [8%] vs 26 [8%]), and diarrhoea (22 [7%] vs 15 [5%]). Grade 3-4 treatment-related serious adverse events occurred in 70 (22%) of 320 patients in the nivolumab plus cabozantinib group and 31 (10%) of 320 in the cabozantinib group. One additional treatment-related death occurred with sunitinib (sudden death). INTERPRETATION: With extended follow-up and preplanned final overall survival analysis per protocol, nivolumab plus cabozantinib demonstrated improved efficacy versus sunitinib, further supporting the combination in the first-line treatment of advanced renal cell carcinoma. FUNDING: Bristol Myers Squibb and Ono Pharmaceutical.
Asunto(s)
Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica , Carcinoma de Células Renales , Neoplasias Renales , Anilidas , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/efectos adversos , Antígeno B7-H1 , Carcinoma de Células Renales/tratamiento farmacológico , Carcinoma de Células Renales/patología , Estudios de Seguimiento , Humanos , Neoplasias Renales/tratamiento farmacológico , Neoplasias Renales/patología , Nivolumab/uso terapéutico , Piridinas , Sunitinib/uso terapéuticoRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Conditional survival estimates provide critical prognostic information for patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma (aRCC). Efficacy, safety, and conditional survival outcomes were assessed in CheckMate 214 (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT02231749) with a minimum follow-up of 5 years. METHODS: Patients with untreated aRCC were randomized to receive nivolumab (NIVO) (3 mg/kg) plus ipilimumab (IPI) (1 mg/kg) every 3 weeks for 4 cycles, then either NIVO monotherapy or sunitinib (SUN) (50 mg) daily (four 6-week cycles). Efficacy was assessed in intent-to-treat, International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium intermediate-risk/poor-risk, and favorable-risk populations. Conditional survival outcomes (the probability of remaining alive, progression free, or in response 2 years beyond a specified landmark) were analyzed. RESULTS: The median follow-up was 67.7 months; overall survival (median, 55.7 vs 38.4 months; hazard ratio, 0.72), progression-free survival (median, 12.3 vs 12.3 months; hazard ratio, 0.86), and objective response (39.3% vs 32.4%) benefits were maintained with NIVO+IPI versus SUN, respectively, in intent-to-treat patients (N = 550 vs 546). Point estimates for 2-year conditional overall survival beyond the 3-year landmark were higher with NIVO+IPI versus SUN (intent-to-treat patients, 81% vs 72%; intermediate-risk/poor-risk patients, 79% vs 72%; favorable-risk patients, 85% vs 72%). Conditional progression-free survival and response point estimates were also higher beyond 3 years with NIVO+IPI. Point estimates for conditional overall survival were higher or remained steady at each subsequent year of survival with NIVO+IPI in patients stratified by tumor programmed death ligand 1 expression, grade ≥3 immune-mediated adverse event experience, body mass index, and age. CONCLUSIONS: Durable clinical benefits were observed with NIVO+IPI versus SUN at 5 years, the longest phase 3 follow-up for a first-line checkpoint inhibitor-based combination in patients with aRCC. Conditional estimates indicate that most patients who remained alive or in response with NIVO+IPI at 3 years remained so at 5 years.
Asunto(s)
Carcinoma de Células Renales , Neoplasias Renales , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/efectos adversos , Carcinoma de Células Renales/tratamiento farmacológico , Carcinoma de Células Renales/patología , Femenino , Humanos , Ipilimumab , Neoplasias Renales/tratamiento farmacológico , Neoplasias Renales/patología , Masculino , Nivolumab/uso terapéutico , SunitinibRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Bone is the most frequent site of metastases from breast cancer (BC), but no biomarkers are yet available to predict skeletal dissemination. METHODS: We attempted to identify a gene signature correlated with bone metastasis (BM) onset in circulating tumour cells (CTCs), isolated by a DEPArray-based protocol from 40 metastatic BC patients and grouped according to metastasis sites, namely "BM" (bone-only), "ES" (extra-skeletal) or BM + ES (bone + extra-skeletal). RESULTS: A 134-gene panel was first validated through targeted RNA sequencing (RNAseq) on sub-clones of the MDA-MB-231 BC cell line with variable organotropism, which successfully shaped their clustering. The panel was then applied to CTC groups and, in particular, the "BM" vs "ES" CTC comparison revealed 31 differentially expressed genes, including MAF, CAPG, GIPC1 and IL1B, playing key prognostic roles in BC. CONCLUSION: Such evidence confirms that CTCs are suitable biological sources for organotropism investigation through targeted RNAseq and might deserve future applications in wide-scale prospective studies.
Asunto(s)
Biomarcadores de Tumor/genética , Neoplasias Óseas/secundario , Neoplasias de la Mama/patología , Células Neoplásicas Circulantes/patología , Análisis de Secuencia de ARN/métodos , Transcriptoma , Adulto , Anciano , Neoplasias Óseas/sangre , Neoplasias Óseas/genética , Neoplasias de la Mama/sangre , Neoplasias de la Mama/genética , Femenino , Humanos , Persona de Mediana Edad , Células Neoplásicas Circulantes/metabolismo , Estudios Prospectivos , Tasa de SupervivenciaRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Sapanisertib, a dual mTORC1/2 inhibitor, may offer more complete inhibition of the PI3K/AKT/mTOR pathway than mTORC1 inhibitors, such as everolimus. This phase II study evaluated the efficacy and safety of single-agent sapanisertib and sapanisertib plus the PI3Kα inhibitor TAK-117, vs. everolimus in patients with advanced clear cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC) that had progressed on or after VEGF-targeted therapy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients with histologically confirmed, advanced ccRCC were randomized 1:1:1 to receive single-agent everolimus 10 mg once daily, single-agent sapanisertib 30 mg once weekly, or sapanisertib 4 mg plus TAK-117 200 mg, both once daily for 3 days/week, in 28-day cycles. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS). RESULTS: Ninety-five patients were treated with everolimus or sapanisertib (n = 32 each), or sapanisertib plus TAK-117 (n = 31). There were no significant differences in PFS among the 3 groups or across any subgroups. Median PFS was 3.8 months with everolimus vs. 3.6 months with sapanisertib (HR, 1.33; 95% CI, 0.75-2.36), and 3.1 months with sapanisertib plus TAK-117 (HR, 1.37; 95% CI, 0.75-2.52). No significant differences in overall survival were seen among groups. Overall response rate was 16.7%, 0%, and 7.1%, respectively. Discontinuations due to treatment-emergent adverse events were 15.6%, 28.1%, and 29.0%. CONCLUSION: Sapanisertib with or without TAK-117 was less tolerable and did not improve efficacy vs. everolimus in patients with advanced ccRCC who had relapsed after or were refractory to VEGF-targeted therapies. Dual mTORC1/2 inhibition may not be an effective therapeutic approach for these patients.
Asunto(s)
Carcinoma de Células Renales , Humanos , Carcinoma de Células Renales/tratamiento farmacológico , Everolimus/efectos adversos , Factor A de Crecimiento Endotelial Vascular , Fosfatidilinositol 3-QuinasasRESUMEN
In this commentary, using existing clinical trial data and FDA approvals we propose that there is currently a critical need for an appropriate balancing between the financial impact of new cancer drugs and their actual benefit for patients. By adopting "pleural mesothelioma" as our clinical model we summarize the most relevant pertinent and available literature on this topic, and use an analysis of the reliability of the trials submitted for registration and/or recently published as a case in point to raise concerns with respect to appropriate trial design, biomarker based stratification and to highlight the ongoing need for balancing the benefit/cost ratio for both patients and healthcare providers.
Asunto(s)
Neoplasias Pulmonares , Mesotelioma Maligno , Mesotelioma , Neoplasias Pleurales , Humanos , Reproducibilidad de los Resultados , Mesotelioma/patología , Neoplasias Pleurales/tratamiento farmacológico , Neoplasias Pulmonares/patologíaRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Despite the increasing number of treatment options, reliable prognostic/predictive biomarkers are still missing for patients affected by metastatic clear cell renal cell carcinoma (mccRCC). METHODS: Patients with mccRCC undergoing standard first line treatment were enrolled. Blood (12 ml) was drawn at treatment baseline and circulating free DNA (cfDNA) was extracted from plasma. Next-generation sequencing (NGS) was performed on cfDNA using the Oncomine Pan-Cancer Cell-Free Assay and clinical outcomes were correlated with liquid biopsy findings. RESULTS: A total of 48 patients were enrolled, 12 received immunotherapy and 36 received a vascular endothelial growth factor receptor (VEGFR) tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI). A cfDNA cut-off of 0.883 ng/µl stratified patients based on progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) (p = 0.001 and p = 0.008, respectively). cfDNA amount was also correlated with best response (p = 0.006). Additional cfDNA cut-points divided patients into short, intermediate and long responders, with PFS of 4.87 vs 9.13 vs 23.1 months, respectively (p < 0.001). PFS resulted to be significantly shorter in carriers of mutant TP53 compared to not carriers (p = 0.04). Patients with high cfDNA levels and mutant TP53 have the worst PFS, while patients with low cfDNA amounts and no mutations in TP53 displayed the longest PFS (p = 0.004). CONCLUSIONS: The present study demonstrates that cfDNA and TP53 are potential predictive biomarkers of response in mccRCC to be further explored in larger and/or prospective studies.
Asunto(s)
Ácidos Nucleicos Libres de Células , Neoplasias Renales , Biomarcadores de Tumor/genética , Carcinoma de Células Renales , Ácidos Nucleicos Libres de Células/genética , ADN , Humanos , Inmunoterapia , Neoplasias Renales/tratamiento farmacológico , Neoplasias Renales/genética , Biopsia Líquida , Estudios Prospectivos , Inhibidores de Proteínas Quinasas/farmacología , Inhibidores de Proteínas Quinasas/uso terapéutico , Receptores de Factores de Crecimiento Endotelial Vascular , Proteína p53 Supresora de Tumor/genética , Factor A de Crecimiento Endotelial VascularRESUMEN
Renal-cell carcinoma (RCC) is responsible for the majority of tumors arising from the kidney parenchyma. Although a progressive improvement in median overall survival has been observed after the introduction of anti-PD-1 therapy, many patients do not benefit from this treatment. Therefore, we have investigated T cell dynamics to find immune modification induced by anti-PD-1 therapy. Here, we show that, after therapy, RCC patients (5 responders and 14 nonresponders) are characterized by a redistribution of different subsets across the memory T cell compartment.