Final efficacy and safety results and biomarker analysis of a phase 2 study of cabozantinib in Japanese patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Cabozantinib was established as the standard of care for the treatment of patients with renal cell carcinoma (RCC) whose disease had progressed after vascular endothelial growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitor (VEGFR-TKI) therapy in the global randomized trial METEOR. A phase 2 study was conducted to bridge the findings in METEOR to Japanese patients. Here, we report a biomarker analysis and update the efficacy and safety results of cabozantinib treatment. METHODS: Japanese patients with RCC who received at least one prior VEGFR-TKI were enrolled and received cabozantinib 60 mg orally once daily. The primary endpoint was objective response rate. Secondary endpoints included progression-free survival, overall survival, and safety. Exploratory analyses included the relationship between plasma protein hepatocyte growth factor (HGF) levels and treatment responses. RESULTS: In total, 35 patients were enrolled. The median treatment duration was 58.3 (range 5.1-131.4) weeks. The objective response rate was 25.7% (90% confidence interval [CI] 14.1-40.6). Kaplan-Meier estimate of median progression-free survival was 11.1 months (95% CI 7.4-18.4). The estimated progression-free survival proportion was 73.1% (95% CI 54.6-85.0) at 6 months. Median overall survival was not reached. Adverse events were consistent with those in METEOR and the safety profile was acceptable. Nonresponders to cabozantinib showed relatively higher HGF levels than responders at baseline. CONCLUSIONS: Updated analyses demonstrate the long-term efficacy and safety of cabozantinib in Japanese patients with advanced RCC after at least one VEGFR-TKI therapy. Responders tended to show lower baseline HGF levels ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03339219.

Prognostic value of PD-L1 expression in recurrent renal cell carcinoma after nephrectomy: a secondary analysis of the ARCHERY study.

BACKGROUND: Nephrectomy is a curative treatment for localized renal cell carcinoma (RCC), but patients with poor prognostic features may experience relapse. Understanding the prognostic impact of programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression in patients who underwent nephrectomy for RCC may aid in future development of adjuvant therapy. METHODS: Of 770 surgical specimens collected from Japanese patients enrolled in the ARCHERY study, only samples obtained from patients with recurrent RCC after nephrectomy were examined for this secondary analysis. Patients were categorized into low- and high-risk groups based on clinical stage and Fuhrman grade. Time to recurrence (TTR) and overall survival (OS) were analyzed. RESULTS: Both TTR and OS were shorter in patients with PD-L1-positive than -negative tumors (median TTR 12.1 vs. 21.9 months [HR 1.46, 95% CI 1.17, 1.81]; median OS, 75.8 vs. 97.7 months [HR 1.32, 95% CI 1.00, 1.75]). TTR and OS were shorter in high-risk patients with PD-L1-positive than -negative tumors (median TTR 7.6 vs. 15.3 months [HR 1.49, 95% CI 1.11, 2.00]; median OS, 55.2 vs. 83.5 months [HR 1.53, 95% CI 1.06, 2.21]) but not in low-risk patients. CONCLUSIONS: This ARCHERY secondary analysis suggests that PD-L1 expression may play a role in predicting OS and risk of recurrence in high-risk patients with localized RCC. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: UMIN000034131.

Phase I/II study of multipeptide cancer vaccine IMA901 after single-dose cyclophosphamide in Japanese patients with advanced renal cell cancer with long-term follow up.

BACKGROUND: IMA901 is the first therapeutic vaccine for renal cell cancer (RCC). It contains multiple tumor-associated peptides (TUMAPs) that are naturally present in human cancers. METHODS: In a phase I/II study, we treated a total of 10 Japanese patients with advanced RCC who were human leukocyte antigen A (HLA-A)*02 +. Vaccination involved i.d. injection of GM-CSF (75 µg), followed within 15-30 min by i.d. injection of IMA901 (containing 413 µg of each peptide). No treatment with either anticancer agents or immunosuppressants was allowed within 4 weeks before entering the trial. Patients were scheduled to receive 7 vaccinations during the first 5 weeks of treatment (induction period), followed by 10 further vaccinations at 3-week intervals for up to 30 weeks (maintenance period). The primary endpoints were safety and tolerability, while the secondary endpoints were PFS, OS, and immunogenicity. RESULTS: There were no treatment-related serious adverse events or deaths during the study period. When the response was assessed after 4 months, 10% of patients showed a partial response, 80% had stable disease, and 10% had progressive disease. Among patients in whom the T-cell response was analyzed, five patients showed a vaccine-induced T-cell response against at least one HLA class I-restricted TUMAP and two patients had T-cell responses to multiple TUMAPs. PFS was 5.5 months and OS was 18 months. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrated the safety and tolerability of IMA901 vaccine in Japanese RCC patients, and also showed that vaccination elicited an immune response.

Pembrolizumab plus Axitinib versus Sunitinib for Advanced Renal-Cell Carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: The combination of pembrolizumab and axitinib showed antitumor activity in a phase 1b trial involving patients with previously untreated advanced renal-cell carcinoma. Whether pembrolizumab plus axitinib would result in better outcomes than sunitinib in such patients was unclear. METHODS: In an open-label, phase 3 trial, we randomly assigned 861 patients with previously untreated advanced clear-cell renal-cell carcinoma to receive pembrolizumab (200 mg) intravenously once every 3 weeks plus axitinib (5 mg) orally twice daily (432 patients) or sunitinib (50 mg) orally once daily for the first 4 weeks of each 6-week cycle (429 patients). The primary end points were overall survival and progression-free survival in the intention-to-treat population. The key secondary end point was the objective response rate. All reported results are from the protocol-specified first interim analysis. RESULTS: After a median follow-up of 12.8 months, the estimated percentage of patients who were alive at 12 months was 89.9% in the pembrolizumab-axitinib group and 78.3% in the sunitinib group (hazard ratio for death, 0.53; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.38 to 0.74; P<0.0001). Median progression-free survival was 15.1 months in the pembrolizumab-axitinib group and 11.1 months in the sunitinib group (hazard ratio for disease progression or death, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.57 to 0.84; P<0.001). The objective response rate was 59.3% (95% CI, 54.5 to 63.9) in the pembrolizumab-axitinib group and 35.7% (95% CI, 31.1 to 40.4) in the sunitinib group (P<0.001). The benefit of pembrolizumab plus axitinib was observed across the International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium risk groups (i.e., favorable, intermediate, and poor risk) and regardless of programmed death ligand 1 expression. Grade 3 or higher adverse events of any cause occurred in 75.8% of patients in the pembrolizumab-axitinib group and in 70.6% in the sunitinib group. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with previously untreated advanced renal-cell carcinoma, treatment with pembrolizumab plus axitinib resulted in significantly longer overall survival and progression-free survival, as well as a higher objective response rate, than treatment with sunitinib. (Funded by Merck Sharp & Dohme; KEYNOTE-426 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02853331.).

Pembrolizumab plus axitinib versus sunitinib in metastatic renal cell carcinoma: outcomes of Japanese patients enrolled in the randomized, phase III, open-label KEYNOTE-426 study.

BACKGROUND: In the phase III open-label KEYNOTE-426 (NCT02853331) study, first-line pembrolizumab and axitinib improved overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) versus sunitinib for metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). KEYNOTE-426 evaluated patients enrolled from 25 sites in Japan. METHODS: Patients enrolled in Japan were included in this post hoc subgroup analysis. Adults with clear cell mRCC were randomly assigned 1:1 to receive intravenous pembrolizumab 200 mg every 3 weeks plus oral axitinib 5 mg twice daily or oral sunitinib 50 mg once daily (4 weeks on/2 weeks off). Dual primary endpoints were OS and PFS as assessed by blinded independent central review. Objective response rate (ORR) and safety were secondary endpoints. RESULTS: The Japanese subgroup comprised 94 patients (pembrolizumab-axitinib, n = 44; sunitinib, n = 50; 11% of the intent-to-treat population). Median time from randomization to data cutoff (January 6, 2020) was 29.5 months (range 24.6-37.3). Consistent with the intent-to-treat population, the OS, PFS, and ORR suggested improvement with pembrolizumab-axitinib versus sunitinib in the Japanese subgroup. Grade ≥ 3 treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) occurred in 70% of patients receiving pembrolizumab-axitinib versus 78% receiving sunitinib; 11 (25%) patients receiving pembrolizumab-axitinib and 13 (27%) patients receiving sunitinib discontinued the study medication due to AEs. TRAEs led to the discontinuation of pembrolizumab, axitinib, pembrolizumab-axitinib, or sunitinib in 32%, 34%, 14%, and 20%, respectively. No deaths from TRAEs occurred. CONCLUSIONS: Efficacy outcomes for the Japanese subgroup were consistent with those of the global population. Safety in Japanese patients was consistent with the results from the global population.

Pembrolizumab plus axitinib versus sunitinib monotherapy as first-line treatment of advanced renal cell carcinoma (KEYNOTE-426): extended follow-up from a randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: The first interim analysis of the KEYNOTE-426 study showed superior efficacy of pembrolizumab plus axitinib over sunitinib monotherapy in treatment-naive, advanced renal cell carcinoma. The exploratory analysis with extended follow-up reported here aims to assess long-term efficacy and safety of pembrolizumab plus axitinib versus sunitinib monotherapy in patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma. METHODS: In the ongoing, randomised, open-label, phase 3 KEYNOTE-426 study, adults (≥18 years old) with treatment-naive, advanced renal cell carcinoma with clear cell histology were enrolled in 129 sites (hospitals and cancer centres) across 16 countries. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive 200 mg pembrolizumab intravenously every 3 weeks for up to 35 cycles plus 5 mg axitinib orally twice daily or 50 mg sunitinib monotherapy orally once daily for 4 weeks per 6-week cycle. Randomisation was done using an interactive voice response system or integrated web response system, and was stratified by International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium risk status and geographical region. Primary endpoints were overall survival and progression-free survival in the intention-to-treat population. Since the primary endpoints were met at the first interim analysis, updated data are reported with nominal p values. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02853331. FINDINGS: Between Oct 24, 2016, and Jan 24, 2018, 861 patients were randomly assigned to receive pembrolizumab plus axitinib (n=432) or sunitinib monotherapy (n=429). With a median follow-up of 30·6 months (IQR 27·2-34·2), continued clinical benefit was observed with pembrolizumab plus axitinib over sunitinib in terms of overall survival (median not reached with pembrolizumab and axitinib vs 35·7 months [95% CI 33·3-not reached] with sunitinib); hazard ratio [HR] 0·68 [95% CI 0·55-0·85], p=0·0003) and progression-free survival (median 15·4 months [12·7-18·9] vs 11·1 months [9·1-12·5]; 0·71 [0·60-0·84], p<0·0001). The most frequent (≥10% patients in either group) treatment-related grade 3 or worse adverse events were hypertension (95 [22%] of 429 patients in the pembrolizumab plus axitinib group vs 84 [20%] of 425 patients in the sunitinib group), alanine aminotransferase increase (54 [13%] vs 11 [3%]), and diarrhoea (46 [11%] vs 23 [5%]). No new treatment-related deaths were reported since the first interim analysis. INTERPRETATION: With extended study follow-up, results from KEYNOTE-426 show that pembrolizumab plus axitinib continues to have superior clinical outcomes over sunitinib. These results continue to support the first-line treatment with pembrolizumab plus axitinib as the standard of care of advanced renal cell carcinoma. FUNDING: Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp, a subsidiary of Merck & Co, Inc.

Enzalutamide versus flutamide for castration-resistant prostate cancer after combined androgen blockade therapy with bicalutamide: the OCUU-CRPC study.

BACKGROUND: Before the androgen target therapy era, flutamide was widely used for castration-resistant prostate cancer in Japan. Enzalutamide is currently the recommended treatment; however, the efficacy and safety of enzalutamide and flutamide after combined androgen blockade therapy with bicalutamide, has not been compared. METHODS: Patients with castration-resistant prostate cancer who received combined androgen blockade therapy with bicalutamide were randomly assigned to receive either enzalutamide or flutamide. The primary endpoint for efficacy was the 3-month prostate-specific antigen response rate. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02346578) and the University hospital Medical Information Network (UMIN000016301). RESULTS: Overall, 103 patients were enrolled. The 3- (80.8% vs. 35.3%; p < 0.001) and 6-month (73.1% vs. 31.4%; p < 0.001) prostate-specific antigen response rates were higher in the enzalutamide than in the flutamide group. The 3-month disease progression rates (radiographic or prostate-specific antigen progression) were 6.4% and 38.8% in the enzalutamide and flutamide groups, respectively [hazard ratio (HR): 0.16; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.05-0.47; p < 0.001]; the 6-month rates were 11.4% and 51.1%, respectively (HR 0.22; 95% CI 0.09-0.50; p < 0.001). Enzalutamide provided superior prostate-specific antigen progression-free survival compared with flutamide (HR 0.29; 95% CI 0.15-0.54; p < 0.001). Median time to prostate-specific antigen progression-free survival was not reached and was 6.6 months in the enzalutamide and flutamide groups, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: As an alternative anti-androgen therapy in patients with castration-resistant prostate cancer who fail bicalutamide-combined androgen blockade therapy, enzalutamide provides superior clinical outcomes compared with flutamide. Enzalutamide should be preferred over flutamide in these patients.

Cabozantinib in advanced renal cell carcinoma: A phase II, open-label, single-arm study of Japanese patients.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of cabozantinib, through a bridging study to METEOR, in Japanese patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma who had progressed after prior tyrosine kinase inhibitor therapy. METHODS: This phase II, open-label, single-arm study (ClinicalTrials.gov registration number: NCT03339219) included adult Japanese patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma and measurable disease who had received one or more tyrosine kinase inhibitors. Patients received cabozantinib 60 mg orally once daily while there was clinical benefit, or until unacceptable toxicity or disease progression. The primary end-point was objective response rate per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors Version 1.1. Secondary end-points included clinical benefit rate (complete or partial response, or ≥8-week stable disease), progression-free survival, overall survival and safety. RESULTS: Of the 35 patients enrolled, 68.6%, 22.9% and 8.6% had previously received one, two and three prior tyrosine kinase inhibitors, respectively. The median duration of cabozantinib exposure was 27.0 weeks (range 5.1-43.0 weeks). The objective response rate was 20.0% (90% confidence interval 9.8-34.3%), and the clinical benefit rate was 85.7% (95% confidence interval 69.7-95.2%). The 6-month estimated progression-free survival was 72.3% (95% confidence interval 53.3-84.6%); the median progression-free survival and overall survival were not reached. All patients reported adverse events, which were manageable by supportive treatment or dose modification; two patients (5.7%) discontinued therapy due to adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: The results showed that findings from METEOR can be extrapolated, and that cabozantinib 60 mg/day is a viable treatment option in Japanese patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma who had progressed after prior tyrosine kinase inhibitor therapy.

Enzalutamide versus flutamide for castration-resistant prostate cancer after combined androgen blockade therapy with bicalutamide: study protocol for a multicenter randomized phase II trial (the OCUU-CRPC study).

BACKGROUND: Enzalutamide is an oral androgen receptor targeted agent that has been shown to improve survival in PREVAIL trials and has been approved for patients with chemo-naïve metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC). Meanwhile, flutamide is a non-steroidal oral anti-androgen that was commonly used before the approval of bicalutamide. The objective of the OCUU-CRPC study is to compare the efficacy and safety between second-line hormonal therapy of enzalutamide and flutamide as alternative anti-androgen therapy (AAT) after combined androgen blockade (CAB) therapy that included bicalutamide in patients with CRPC. METHODS: A total of 100 patients with CRPC with or without distant metastases after disease progression who received CAB therapy with bicalutamide were randomly assigned at a 1:1 ratio according to distant metastases to the enzalutamide (160 mg/day, 4 × 40 mg capsules once daily) and flutamide (375 mg/day; 3 × 125 mg tablets thrice daily) groups. The primary endpoint for the drug efficacy is the response rate of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) (i.e., the ratio of patients whose PSA declined by ≥50% from baseline) at 3 months. Meanwhile, the secondary endpoints are PSA progression rate at 3 and 6 months, PSA response rate at 6 months, change in quality of life, PSA progression-free survival, and safety. The patient registration started in January 2015 and will end in March 2018, and the follow-up period is 6 months after the last patient registration. The main result will be reported in March 2019. DISCUSSION: In the OCUU-CRPC study, we compare the efficacy and safety of enzalutamide or alternative AAT with flutamide in participants with CRPC who were previously treated with a CAB therapy with bicalutamide. The expected results of this study will be that enzalutamide is superior to flutamide in terms of PSA response. A longer time to disease progression with enzalutamide over flutamide may translate to better overall survival. However, flutamide may be more accessible for patients owing to its lower cost than enzalutamide. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The OCUU-CRPC study was prospectively registered at clinicaltrials.gov ( NCT02346578 , January 2015) and University Hospital Medical Information Network ( UMIN000016301 , January 2015).

Enzalutamide versus flutamide for castration-resistant prostate cancer after combined androgen blockade therapy with bicalutamide: a retrospective study.

BACKGROUND: Alternative anti-androgen therapy (AAT) with flutamide after combined androgen blockade (CAB) therapy with bicalutamide for metastatic prostate cancer is common. However, no studies have compared enzalutamide without AAT with enzalutamide after AAT with flutamide as treatment for castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC). We aimed to compare the efficacies of flutamide and enzalutamide for CRPC. METHODS: In our hospital, 55 patients were diagnosed with CRPC after CAB therapy and administered flutamide or enzalutamide between May 2014 and December 2017. Patients with flutamide failure were administered enzalutamide. We evaluated the (1) prostate-specific antigen (PSA) best response with initial therapy, (2) PSA progression-free survival with initial therapy (PSA-PFS), (3) PSA best response with enzalutamide therapy, (4) PSA-PFS of enzalutamide therapy, and (5) overall survival (OS). RESULTS: As first-line therapy, patients were administered enzalutamide (n = 29) or flutamide (n = 26). In the flutamide group, 18 patients showed disease progression and were administered enzalutamide. PSA best response was statistically higher in the enzalutamide group. PSA-PFS was significantly longer in the enzalutamide group [hazard ratio (HR) 0.42, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.19-0.92, p = 0.024]. However, there was no significant difference in PSA best response with enzalutamide therapy and PSA-PFS between the first- and second-line enzalutamide therapies (HR 0.80, 95% CI 0.33-1.94, p = 0.62). There was no significant difference in OS between enzalutamide and flutamide groups (HR 1.85, 95% CI 0.53-6.42, p = 0.33). CONCLUSIONS: AAT with subsequent flutamide after CAB therapy with bicalutamide may be suitable for some CRPC patients.

Comparison of efficacy and toxicity of second-line combination chemotherapy regimens in patients with advanced urothelial carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and toxicities of second-line chemotherapy regimens with docetaxel and gemcitabine (GD), or paclitaxel and gemcitabine (GP) for advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma (UC) that did not respond to first-line platinum-based chemotherapy. METHODS: From 2002 to 2017, 78 patients with metastatic UCs that progressed after platinum-based chemotherapy were treated with either GD (n = 41) or GP (n = 37). We compared these two different regimens by analyzing their efficacy and toxicities in a retrospective manner. RESULTS: Of the 78 patients enrolled in this study, it was possible to determine treatment efficacy in 70; the proportion of patients with objective response and disease control were 8.6 (9/70) and 54.3% (38/70), respectively. The median progression-free survival and overall survival in the total population (GP and GD) were 3.5 (95% CI 0.6-53.3) and 9.6 months (95% CI 1.2-53.3), respectively. There was no significant difference between the two regimens (GD or GP) regarding survival outcomes. Treatment-related adverse events were mostly manageable, but one patient died as a result of febrile neutropenia. The presence of liver metastasis and anemia (Hb < 10.0 g/dl) was prognostic factors for worse survival. CONCLUSIONS: Combination chemotherapy with either GP or GD was a favorable and well-tolerated second-line treatment regimen for patients with advanced or metastatic UC following the failure of a platinum-based regimen. Further study using a large prospective cohort is needed to identify patients who will benefit from second-line combination therapy.

Near infrared fluorescence imaging system for laparoscopic partial nephrectomy.

INTRODUCTION: Recently, the use of indocyanine green (ICG) with near infrared fluorescence (NIRF) imaging has emerged as an alternative technique for the real-time delineation of resection margins during partial nephrectomy (PN). We aimed to assess the feasibility of using NIRF imaging with ICG during laparoscopic partial nephrectomy (LPN) to delineate the margin between normal renal parenchyma and renal cortical tumors. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective comparison of real-time tumor margin identification and operative outcomes was conducted for 83 patients who underwent LPN with NIRF imaging (IMAGE1 system) and 74 patients who did not. RESULTS: Tumor margins were identified in 82% of cases in the NIRF group, with a rate of 79% for the clear cell renal carcinoma cases only. Volume of blood loss was higher for the NIRF than normal imaging group (p = 0.015), while the warm ischemia time was significantly shorter (p < 0.01) for the NIRF group. There was no significant difference in the pre to postoperative change in estimated glomerular filtration rate (p = 0.38) or rate of severe complications (Clavien grade ≥ 3; p = 0.88). The rate of positive surgical margins was comparable between the groups (3%; p = 0.91). CONCLUSIONS: NIRF imaging with ICG during LPN was safe and feasible, although the surgical outcomes with NIRF alone was not significantly superior to the ones with conventional methods.

Outcomes of indwelling metallic stents for malignant extrinsic ureteral obstruction.

OBJECTIVES: To report the treatment outcomes of patients with extrinsic ureteral obstruction treated with metallic stents and to identify the factors predicting stent failure. METHODS: A total of 52 patients with extrinsic ureteral obstruction as a result of malignancy (66 ureters) were treated with metallic stents (Resonance® ) and included in the study. The median observation period was 118 days. RESULTS: The median survival time of these patients was 210 days, and the stent patency rate was 86.0% at 6 months and 60.0% at 1 year. Eight (15.4%) patients underwent nephrostomy as a result of stent failure. The occlusion rate of bilateral ureteral obstructed cases was significantly higher than that of unilateral cases. There was no correlation between the preoperative serum creatinine level, causes of ureteral occlusions (compression by tumor, lymph node metastasis, peritoneal dissemination), obstructed site (upper, middle, lower ureter) and stent failure. CONCLUSIONS: Metallic stents are excellent in maintaining patency compared with the conventional stents. Therefore, they can be used as first-line treatment of malignant ureteral obstructions.

Heat shock protein 70 inhibitors suppress androgen receptor expression in LNCaP95 prostate cancer cells.

Androgen deprivation therapy is initially effective for treating patients with advanced prostate cancer; however, the prostate cancer gradually becomes resistant to androgen deprivation therapy, which is termed castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC). Androgen receptor splice variant 7 (AR-V7), one of the causes of CRPC, is correlated with resistance to a new-generation AR antagonist (enzalutamide) and poor prognosis. Heat shock protein 70 (Hsp70) inhibitor is known to decrease the levels of full-length AR (AR-FL), but little is known about its effects against CRPC cells expressing AR-V7. In this study, we investigated the effect of the Hsp70 inhibitors quercetin and VER155008 in the prostate cancer cell line LNCaP95 that expresses AR-V7, and explored the mechanism by which Hsp70 regulates AR-FL and AR-V7 expression. Quercetin and VER155008 decreased cell proliferation, increased the proportion of apoptotic cells, and decreased the protein levels of AR-FL and AR-V7. Furthermore, VER155008 decreased AR-FL and AR-V7 mRNA levels. Immunoprecipitation with Hsp70 antibody and mass spectrometry identified Y-box binding protein 1 (YB-1) as one of the molecules regulating AR-FL and AR-V7 at the transcription level through interaction with Hsp70. VER155008 decreased the phosphorylation of YB-1 and its localization in the nucleus, indicating that the involvement of Hsp70 in AR regulation might be mediated through the activation and nuclear translocation of YB-1. Collectively, these results suggest that Hsp70 inhibitors have potential anti-tumor activity against CRPC by decreasing AR-FL and AR-V7 expression through YB-1 suppression.

Carbonic anhydrase 2 is a novel invasion-associated factor in urinary bladder cancers.

Rat bladder cancer is nearly always papillary non-invasive urothelial carcinoma (UC). To establish an animal model mimicking invasive UC that arises from papillary non-invasive UC in the bladder, male human c-Ha-ras proto-oncogene transgenic rats (Hras128) were treated with 0.05% N-butyl-N-(hydroxybutyl)nitrosameine (BBN) in their drinking water and/or 0.1% phenylethyl isothiocyanate (PEITC) in their diet as follows: BBN (8 weeks)→PEITC (8 weeks); PEITC (8 weeks)→BBN (8 weeks); BBN alone (16 weeks); PEITC alone (16 weeks); and no treatment. At the end of week 16, the highest incidence of invasive UC was observed in the BBN→PEITC group. Therefore, we used Hras128 rats treated with BBN followed by PEITC as a model of invasive bladder cancer to identify invasion-associated proteins. Proteome analysis was performed to compare the protein profiles of invasive and non-invasive UC in Hras128 rats. We identified 49 proteins that were either overexpressed or underexpressed in invasive UC but not in non-invasive UC. Immunohistochemical analysis of carbonic anhydrase 2 (CA2), an overexpressed protein, showed that the relative number of CA2-positive UC was significantly higher for invasive UC compared to non-invasive UC in rats. Moreover, the incidence of CA2-positive cancers was also significantly higher for human muscle-invasive bladder cancer (MIBC) compared to non-MIBC (NMIBC) and was positively associated with the progression of NMIBC. Our findings indicate that CA2 is an invasion-associated factor and suggest that it could serve as a potential therapeutic molecular target for bladder cancers.

Anti-PD-L1 treatment enhances antitumor effect of everolimus in a mouse model of renal cell carcinoma.

Immunotherapy based on blockade of the programmed death-1 (PD-1)/programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) axis has shown promising clinical activity for renal cell carcinoma (RCC) patients; however, the most effective use of these agents in combination with conventional targeted therapy remains to be resolved. Here we evaluated the therapeutic efficacy of the combination of the mTOR inhibitor everolimus (EVE) and anti-PD-L1 using an immunocompetent mouse model of RCC. We first assessed the in vitro effect of EVE on PD-L1 expression in the human 786-O and mouse RENCA RCC cell lines and found that EVE upregulated PD-L1 expression in these RCC cell lines. We then treated RENCA tumor-bearing mice with EVE and found that PD-L1 expression was also increased in tumor cells after EVE treatment. To determine the antitumor effects of EVE alone, anti-PD-L1 alone, and EVE in combination with anti-PD-L1, we evaluated their antitumor effects on RENCA tumor-bearing mice. A significant decrease in the tumor burden was observed in the EVE alone but not in the anti-PD-L1 alone treatment group compared with the control group. Importantly, the combination of EVE with anti-PD-L1 significantly reduced tumor burden compared with the EVE alone treatment, increasing tumor infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs) and the ratio of cytotoxic CD8+ T cells to TILs. The results of the present study demonstrated that anti-PD-L1 treatment enhanced the antitumor effect of EVE in a mouse model, supporting a direct translation of this combination strategy to the clinic for the treatment of RCC.

Add-on anticholinergic therapy for residual nocturia in patients with lower urinary tract symptoms receiving α1-blocker treatment: a multi-centre, prospective, randomised study.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of imidafenacin (IM), a novel short half-life anticholinergic, as add-on therapy for male LUTS with nocturia and nocturnal polyuria. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This multicenter, prospective, randomized, open-labelled study was conducted and involved men who had frequency, urgency, and nocturia despite receiving a stable dose of α1-blocker for ≥1 month. Subjects were randomised to control (α1-blocker alone), IM twice/day (α1-blocker +0.1 mg imidafenacin twice daily), or IM nightly (α1-blocker plus 0.1 mg imidafenacin nightly) group; the treatment period was 8 weeks. Primary endpoints included improvements in night-time frequency and Nocturia Quality of Life Questionnaire (N-QOL) scores. Secondary endpoints included changes from the baseline in frequency volume chart variables, and post-void residual volume. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: Compared with the controls, IM twice/day and IM nightly patients had a significantly lower night-time frequency (changes from baseline: 0.1 ± 0.8 in control, -0.6 ± 0.9 in IM twice/day, and -0.4 ± 1.0 in IM nightly, p = 0.5227, 0.0006 and 0.0143, respectively). The hours of undisturbed sleep and N-QOL score were significantly improved in IM twice/day group, though not IM nightly group. Nocturnal urine volume was significantly reduced in IM nightly group, although total urine volume remained unchanged. CONCLUSIONS: A short half-life anticholinergic is suggested to be safe and effective as an add-on therapy for residual nocturia in patients with male LUTS receiving α1-blocker treatment. Anticholinergic administration nightly could reduce the nocturnal urine volume.

Differences in adverse event profiles between everolimus and temsirolimus and the risk factors for non-infectious pneumonitis in advanced renal cell carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: There have been few reports of the differences in safety between the mammalian target of rapamycin inhibitors, everolimus and temsirolimus. The purpose of this study is to compare the adverse event profiles of both agents and to estimate the risk factors for non-infectious pneumonitis in patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma on the basis of our real-world clinical experience. METHODS: Data from 218 consecutive patients that received either everolimus or temsirolimus for advanced renal cell carcinoma at five Japanese centers were retrospectively analyzed. Chi-squared test and univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were performed to investigate the differences in adverse event profiles and the risk factors associated with non-infectious pneumonitis, respectively. RESULTS: A total of 196 patients were evaluable. In the everolimus group compared with temsirolimus, stomatitis (56 vs 30 %, p < 0.001) and non-infectious pneumonitis (38 vs 22 %, p = 0.018) were more frequently observed, and asthenia (11 vs 23 %, p = 0.027), rash (20 vs 36 %, p = 0.018), and fatigue (33 vs 48 %, p = 0.032) occurred less frequently in all grades. On multivariate analysis, male gender (odds ratio 3.65; 95 % confidence interval 1.44-9.26, p = 0.007) and everolimus treatment (odds ratio 2.00; 95 % confidence interval 1.01-3.96, p = 0.046) were significantly associated with development of non-infectious pneumonitis. CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest that adverse event profiles may differ between everolimus and temsirolimus and that non-infectious pneumonitis may occur more frequently in patients treated with everolimus than temsirolimus. Further investigations are needed to confirm these results.

Prolonging survival in metastatic renal cell carcinoma patients treated with targeted anticancer agents: a single-center experience of treatment strategy modifications.

INTRODUCTION: We investigated therapeutic outcomes in consecutive patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma treated with targeted anticancer agents from 2008 to 2014 in order to determine the efficacy of adverse event management for such agents and the best sequence in which to use them. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We analyzed 132 consecutive patients who had taken targeted anticancer agents for metastatic renal cell carcinoma. Of these, 101 patients received therapy between 2008 and 2011 (pioneer group) and 31 patients received therapy between 2011 and 2014 (contemporary group). Patients of the contemporary group were provided with aggressive adverse event management and education on such management, were treated according to a standard therapeutic strategy, and were able to receive axitinib as a second-line drug. We analyzed the incidence of hand-foot syndrome. Furthermore, we compared relative dose intensity between patients in the pioneer and contemporary groups who took sunitinib as first-line therapy. We also compared overall survival between the two groups to determine whether adverse event management improved prognosis. RESULTS: The incidence of hand-foot syndrome was significantly reduced by aggressive adverse event management. Relative dose intensity was significantly higher in the contemporary group than in the pioneer group. Median survival time was significantly longer in the contemporary group than in the pioneer group. CONCLUSION: Our results suggest that aggressive management of adverse events associated with targeted drugs, the use of sunitinib as a first-line therapy, and the availability of axitinib as a second-line therapy all contribute to prolonged survival for metastatic renal cell carcinoma patients.