Autophagy suppresses tumorigenesis through elimination of p62.

Allelic loss of the essential autophagy gene beclin1 occurs in human cancers and renders mice tumor-prone suggesting that autophagy is a tumor-suppression mechanism. While tumor cells utilize autophagy to survive metabolic stress, autophagy also mitigates the resulting cellular damage that may limit tumorigenesis. In response to stress, autophagy-defective tumor cells preferentially accumulated p62/SQSTM1 (p62), endoplasmic reticulum (ER) chaperones, damaged mitochondria, reactive oxygen species (ROS), and genome damage. Moreover, suppressing ROS or p62 accumulation prevented damage resulting from autophagy defects indicating that failure to regulate p62 caused oxidative stress. Importantly, sustained p62 expression resulting from autophagy defects was sufficient to alter NF-kappaB regulation and gene expression and to promote tumorigenesis. Thus, defective autophagy is a mechanism for p62 upregulation commonly observed in human tumors that contributes directly to tumorigenesis likely by perturbing the signal transduction adaptor function of p62-controlling pathways critical for oncogenesis.

Atg7 cooperates with Pten loss to drive prostate cancer tumor growth.

Understanding new therapeutic paradigms for both castrate-sensitive and more aggressive castrate-resistant prostate cancer is essential to improve clinical outcomes. As a critically important cellular process, autophagy promotes stress tolerance by recycling intracellular components to sustain metabolism important for tumor survival. To assess the importance of autophagy in prostate cancer, we generated a new autochthonous genetically engineered mouse model (GEMM) with inducible prostate-specific deficiency in the Pten tumor suppressor and autophagy-related-7 (Atg7) genes. Atg7 deficiency produced an autophagy-deficient phenotype and delayed Pten-deficient prostate tumor progression in both castrate-naïve and castrate-resistant cancers. Atg7-deficient tumors display evidence of endoplasmic reticulum (ER) stress, suggesting that autophagy may promote prostate tumorigenesis through management of protein homeostasis. Taken together, these data support the importance of autophagy for both castrate-naïve and castrate-resistant growth in a newly developed GEMM, suggesting a new paradigm and model to study approaches to inhibit autophagy in combination with known and new therapies for advanced prostate cancer.

Cardiovascular Implications of Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor Inhibition Among Adolescents/Young Adults in ECOG-ACRIN E2805.

BACKGROUND: Cardiovascular disease (CVD) is a leading cause of morbidity and mortality among adolescents and young adults (AYAs) diagnosed with cancer. The aim of this study was to assess the incidence and predictors of left ventricular systolic dysfunction (LVSD) and hypertension among AYAs receiving VEGF inhibition compared with non-AYAs. METHODS: This retrospective analysis used data from the ASSURE trial (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00326898), in which participants with nonmetastatic, high-risk, renal cell cancer were randomized to sunitinib, sorafenib, or placebo. The incidence of LVSD (left ventricular ejection fraction decrease >15%) and hypertension (blood pressure ≥140/90 mm Hg) were compared using nonparametric tests. Multivariable logistic regression examined the association between AYA status, LVSD, and hypertension while adjusting for clinical factors. RESULTS: AYAs represented 7% (103/1,572) of the population. Over a study treatment period of 54 weeks, the incidence of LVSD was not significantly different among AYAs (3%; 95% CI, 0.6%-8.3%) versus non-AYAs (2%; 95% CI, 1.2%-2.7%). The incidence of hypertension was significantly lower among AYAs (18%; 95% CI, 7.5%-33.5%) compared with non-AYAs (46%; 95% CI, 41.9%-50.4%) in the placebo arm. In the sunitinib and sorafenib groups, the incidence of hypertension for AYAs compared with non-AYAs was 29% (95% CI, 15.1%-47.5%) versus 47% (95% CI, 42.3%-51.7%), and 54% (95% CI, 33.9%-72.5%) versus 63% (95% CI, 58.6%-67.7%), respectively. AYA status (odds ratio, 0.48; 95% CI, 0.31-0.75) and female sex (odds ratio, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.59-0.92) were each associated with a lower risk of hypertension. CONCLUSIONS: LVSD and hypertension were prevalent among AYAs. CVD among AYAs is only partially explained by cancer therapy. Understanding CVD risk among AYA cancer survivors is important for promoting cardiovascular health in this growing population.

Association between baseline body mass index and survival in men with metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer: ECOG-ACRIN CHAARTED E3805.

BACKGROUND: E3805 (CHAARTED) is a phase 3 trial demonstrating improved survival for men with metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC) randomized to treatment with docetaxel (D) and androgen-deprivation therapy (ADT) versus ADT alone. We assessed the association of baseline body mass index (BMI) and metformin exposure with quality of life (QOL) and prostate cancer outcomes including survival in patients enrolled in the CHAARTED study. METHODS: We performed a posthoc exploratory analysis of the CHAARTED trial of men with mHSPC randomized to treatment with ADT with or without D between 2006 and 2012. Cox proportional hazards models and Kruskal-Wallis test were used to evaluate the association between BMI with QOL and prostate cancer outcomes and between metformin exposure and survival. RESULTS: In 788 of 790 enrolled patients with prospectively recorded baseline BMI and metformin exposure status, lower BMI was not associated with survival, but was associated with high volume disease (p < 0.0001) and poorer baseline QOL on functional assessment of cancer therapy-prostate (p = 0.008). Only 68 patients had prevalent metformin exposure at baseline in the CHAARTED trial. Four groups were identified: ADT + D + metformin (n = 39); ADT + D (n = 357); ADT + metformin (n = 29); and ADT alone (n = 363). Baseline clinicopathologic characteristics were similar between groups. In this small exploratory multivariable analysis, metformin exposure was not associated with survival (hazard ratio: 1.15; 95% confidence interval: 0.81-1.63, p = 0.44). CONCLUSIONS: There was no link between baseline BMI and survival, but lower baseline BMI was associated with features of greater cancer burden and poorer QOL.

Adjuvant therapy in patients with sarcomatoid renal cell carcinoma: post hoc analysis from Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group-American College of Radiology Imaging Network (ECOG-ACRIN) E2805.

OBJECTIVES: To study the effects of adjuvant therapy in patients with sarcomatoid renal cell carcinoma (sRCC) enrolled in the randomised phase III clinical trial E2805. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The original trial (E2805) was a randomised, double-blinded phase III clinical trial comparing outcomes in 1943 patients with RCC accrued between 2006 and 2010 and treated with up to 1 year of adjuvant placebo, sunitinib, or sorafenib. The present study analyses the cohort of patients with sRCC that participated in E2805. RESULTS: A total of 171 patients (8.8%) had sarcomatoid features. Of these, 52 patients received sunitinib, 58 received sorafenib, and 61 received placebo. Most patients were pT3-4 (71.1%, 63.7%, and 70.5%, respectively); 17.3%, 19.0%, and 27.9% had pathologically positive lymph nodes; and 59.6%, 62.1%, and 62.3% of the patients were University of California Los Angeles (UCLA) Integrated Staging System (UISS) very-high risk. In 49% of patients with subsequent development of metastatic disease, recurrence occurred in the lung, followed by 30% in the lymph nodes, and 13% in the liver. There was a high local recurrence rate in the renal bed (16%, 29%, and 18%, respectively). The 5-year disease-free survival (DFS) rates were 33.6%, 36.0%, and 27.8%, for sunitinib, sorafenib and placebo, respectively (hazard ratio [HR] 0.74, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.45-1.20 for sunitinib vs placebo, and HR 0.82, 95% CI 0.53-1.28 for sorafenib vs placebo). CONCLUSIONS: Adjuvant therapy with sunitinib or sorafenib did not show an improvement in DFS or OS in patients with sRCC.

Autophagy suppresses progression of K-ras-induced lung tumors to oncocytomas and maintains lipid homeostasis.

Macroautophagy (autophagy hereafter) degrades and recycles proteins and organelles to support metabolism and survival in starvation. Oncogenic Ras up-regulates autophagy, and Ras-transformed cell lines require autophagy for mitochondrial function, stress survival, and engrafted tumor growth. Here, the essential autophagy gene autophagy-related-7 (atg7) was deleted concurrently with K-ras(G12D) activation in mouse models for non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). atg7-deficient tumors accumulated dysfunctional mitochondria and prematurely induced p53 and proliferative arrest, which reduced tumor burden that was partly relieved by p53 deletion. atg7 loss altered tumor fate from adenomas and carcinomas to oncocytomas-rare, predominantly benign tumors characterized by the accumulation of defective mitochondria. Surprisingly, lipid accumulation occurred in atg7-deficient tumors only when p53 was deleted. atg7- and p53-deficient tumor-derived cell lines (TDCLs) had compromised starvation survival and formed lipidic cysts instead of tumors, suggesting defective utilization of lipid stores. atg7 deficiency reduced fatty acid oxidation (FAO) and increased sensitivity to FAO inhibition, indicating that with p53 loss, Ras-driven tumors require autophagy for mitochondrial function and lipid catabolism. Thus, autophagy is required for carcinoma fate, and autophagy defects may be a molecular basis for the occurrence of oncocytomas. Moreover, cancers require autophagy for distinct roles in metabolism that are oncogene- and tumor suppressor gene-specific.

New developments in mechanisms of prostate cancer progression.

Prostate cancer is the most prevalent type of cancer in men. The etiology of prostate cancer development and the mechanisms underlying androgen-independent progression remains to be further investigated. There are many known targets for prostate cancer therapy including the androgen receptor (AR) axis, but resistance eventually develops in advanced disease suggesting the need to better understand mechanisms of resistance and consideration of multi-targeted therapy. Mechanisms contributing to resistance may include gene amplifications, gene mutations, AR splice variants, and changes in expression of androgen receptor co-regulatory proteins. Given the limitations of approved therapies, further study of additional potential targets is warranted. This review focuses on the roles of autophagy pathway, p62, Yes-associated protein (YAP), cancer stem cells, and epigenetics. Therapies targeting these potential mechanisms of resistance may interact with currently approved therapies either additively or synergistically. Thus, the study of combination therapy against multiple targets may be critically important to achieve more impact against lethal forms of prostate cancer resistant to all approved current therapies.

Impact of baseline serum IL-8 on metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer outcomes in the Phase 3 CHAARTED trial (E3805).

BACKGROUND: The immunosuppressive cytokine interleukin- 8 (IL-8), produced by tumor cells and some myeloid cells, promotes inflammation, angiogenesis, and metastasis. In our discovery work, elevated serum IL-8 at androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) initiation portended worse overall survival (OS). Leveraging serum samples from the phase 3 CHAARTED trial of patients treated with ADT +/- docetaxel for metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC), we validated these findings. METHODS: Two hundred and thirty-three patients had serum samples drawn within 28 days of ADT initiation. The samples were assayed using the same Mesoscale Multiplex ELISA platform employed in the discovery cohort. After adjusting for performance status, disease volume, and de novo/metachronous metastases, multivariable Cox proportional hazards models assessed associations between IL-8 as continuous and binary variables on OS and time to castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC). The median IL-8 level (9.3 pg/ml) was the a priori binary cutpoint. Fixed-effects meta-analyses of the discovery and validation sets were performed. RESULTS: Higher IL-8 levels were prognostic for shorter OS (continuous: hazard ratio [HR] 2.2, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.4-3.6, p = .001; binary >9.3: HR 1.7, 95% CI: 1.2-2.4, p = .007) and time to CRPC (continuous: HR 2.3, 95% CI: 1.6-3.3, p < .001; binary: HR 1.8, 95% CI: 1.3-2.5, p < .001) and independent of docetaxel use, disease burden, and time of metastases. Meta-analysis including the discovery cohort, also showed that binary IL-8 levels >9.3 pg/ml from patients treated with ADT alone was prognostic for poorer OS (HR 1.8, 95% CI: 1.2-2.7, p = .007) and shorter time to CRPC (HR 1.4, 95% CI: 0.99-1.9, p = .057). CONCLUSIONS: In the phase 3 CHAARTED study of men with mHSPC at ADT initiation, elevated IL-8 portended worse survival and shorter time to castration-resistant prostate cancer independent of docetaxel administration, metastatic burden, and metachronous versus de novo metastatic presentation. These findings support targeting IL-8 as a strategy to improve mHSPC outcomes.

Local Recurrence Following Resection of Intermediate-High Risk Nonmetastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma: An Anatomical Classification and Analysis of the ASSURE (ECOG-ACRIN E2805) Adjuvant Trial.

PURPOSE: We describe what is to our knowledge a novel classification system for local recurrence after surgery of renal cell carcinoma. We assessed its prognostic implications using prospective, randomized controlled data. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We queried the ASSURE (Sunitinib Malate or Sorafenib Tosylate in Treating Patients With Kidney Cancer That Was Removed By Surgery) (ECOG-ACRIN [Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group-American College of Radiology Imaging Network] E2805) trial data for patients with fully resected, intermediate-high risk, nonmetastatic renal cell carcinoma with local recurrence. We used certain definitions, including type I-single recurrence in a remnant kidney or ipsilateral renal fossa, type II-single recurrence in the ipsilateral vasculature, the ipsilateral adrenal gland or a lymph node, type III-single recurrence in other intra-abdominal soft tissues or organs and type IV-any combination of types I-III or multiple recurrences of a single type. Multivariable logistic regression and the log rank test were performed to identify clinicopathological predictors and compare survival, respectively. RESULTS: Of the 1,943 patients 300 (15.4%) had local recurrence, which was type I, II, III and IV in 66 (22.0%), 97 (32.3%), 87 (29.0%) and 50 (16.7%), respectively. Surgical modality (minimally invasive vs open) and type of surgery (partial vs radical) did not predict any local recurrence. Five-year cancer specific survival and overall survival were worse in patients with type IV recurrence (each p <0.001). There was no difference in survival among patients with types I to III recurrence. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with intermediate-high risk nonmetastatic renal cell carcinoma local recurrence appears to be a function of biology more than of surgical modality or surgery type. The prognosis for solitary intra-abdominal local recurrences appear similar regardless of location (types I-III). Local recurrences involving multiple sites and/or subdivisions are associated with worse survival (type IV).

Association between age and sex and mortality after adjuvant therapy for renal cancer.

BACKGROUND: In phase 3 trials of patients with resected high-risk renal cell carcinoma, adjuvant sunitinib has demonstrated no overall survival (OS) benefit, an uncertain disease-free survival (DFS) benefit, and increased toxicity versus placebo. To identify patients who may derive benefit or harm from adjuvant therapy, the authors assessed the effects of age and sex on treatment outcomes in the phase 3 Adjuvant Sorafenib or Sunitinib for Unfavorable Renal Cancer (ASSURE) trial. METHODS: The authors conducted a post hoc subgroup analysis of age and sex among patients in the ASSURE trial. Adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) for OS and DFS were evaluated with sunitinib or sorafenib versus placebo in 4 patient subgroups defined by sex and median age at the time of the study. RESULTS: Sunitinib treatment was associated with decreased OS (HR, 2.21; 95% confidence interval, 1.29-3.80) among women aged >56 years, but not in women aged ≤56 years or men of any age. Similar associations with age and sex were observed for DFS, but these were not statistically significant (women aged >56 years: HR, 1.41 [95% confidence interval, 0.94-2.10]). No such association was found for sorafenib. The interaction by age and sex on mortality was found to be statistically significant for sunitinib (P = .01), but not sorafenib (P = .10). CONCLUSIONS: Adjuvant sunitinib may increase mortality among older women with renal cell carcinoma. Given the recent approval of adjuvant sunitinib for patients with high-risk resected renal cell carcinoma, additional studies are needed to confirm these findings.

Patterns of Relapse and Implications for Post-Nephrectomy Surveillance in Patients with High Risk Nonclear Cell Renal Cell Carcinoma: Subgroup Analysis of the Phase 3 ECOG-ACRIN E2805 Trial.

PURPOSE: The natural history of nonclear cell renal cell carcinoma following surgery with curative intent remains poorly defined with postoperative surveillance informed by guidelines largely intended for clear cell renal cell carcinoma. We evaluated relapse patterns and potential implications for post-nephrectomy surveillance in patients with nonclear cell renal cell carcinoma enrolled in the E2805 trial, the largest randomized trial of adjuvant antiangiogenic therapy of high risk renal cell carcinoma. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed the records of patients with completely resected nonclear cell renal cell carcinoma. Participants received up to 54 weeks of postoperative therapy with sunitinib, sorafenib or placebo and underwent surveillance imaging at standardized intervals for 10 years. For recurrence rates by site the cumulative incidence was estimated, accounting for competing risks. The adequacy of strict adherence to post-nephrectomy surveillance guidelines was evaluated. RESULTS: A total of 403 patients with nonclear cell renal cell carcinoma were enrolled in the study. During a median followup of 6.2 years 36% of nonclear cell renal cell carcinomas recurred. Five-year recurrence rates were comparable for nonclear and clear cell renal cell carcinoma in the 1,541 patients, including 34.6% (95% CI 29.8-39.4) and 39.5% (95% CI 36.9-42.1), respectively. However, patients with nonclear cell renal cell carcinoma were significantly more likely to have abdominal sites of relapse (5-year recurrence rate 26.4% vs 18.2%, p = 0.0008) and significantly less likely to experience relapse in the chest (5-year recurrence rate 13.7% vs 20.9%, p = 0.0005). Current surveillance guidelines would potentially capture approximately 90% of relapses at any site. CONCLUSIONS: Nonclear cell renal cell carcinoma may show a distinct pattern of relapse compared to clear cell renal cell carcinoma. Our findings emphasize the importance of cross-sectional, long-term imaging in patients with high risk, resected, nonclear cell renal cell carcinoma.

Activated Ras requires autophagy to maintain oxidative metabolism and tumorigenesis.

Autophagy is a catabolic pathway used by cells to support metabolism in response to starvation and to clear damaged proteins and organelles in response to stress. We report here that expression of a H-ras(V12) or K-ras(V12) oncogene up-regulates basal autophagy, which is required for tumor cell survival in starvation and in tumorigenesis. In Ras-expressing cells, defective autophagosome formation or cargo delivery causes accumulation of abnormal mitochondria and reduced oxygen consumption. Autophagy defects also lead to tricarboxylic acid (TCA) cycle metabolite and energy depletion in starvation. As mitochondria sustain viability of Ras-expressing cells in starvation, autophagy is required to maintain the pool of functional mitochondria necessary to support growth of Ras-driven tumors. Human cancer cell lines bearing activating mutations in Ras commonly have high levels of basal autophagy, and, in a subset of these, down-regulating the expression of essential autophagy proteins impaired cell growth. As cancers with Ras mutations have a poor prognosis, this "autophagy addiction" suggests that targeting autophagy and mitochondrial metabolism are valuable new approaches to treat these aggressive cancers.

p62 as a therapeutic target for inhibition of autophagy in prostate cancer.

BACKGROUND: To test the hypothesis that p62 is an optimal target for autophagy inhibition and Verteporfin, a clinically available drug approved by FDA to treat macular degeneration that inhibits autophagy by targeting p62 protein, can be developed clinically to improve therapy for advanced prostate cancer. METHODS: Forced expression of p62 in PC-3 cells and normal prostate epithelial cells, RWPE-1 and PZ-HPV7, were carried out by transfection of these cells with pcDNA3.1/p62 or p62 shRNA plasmid. Autophagosomes and autophagic flux were measured by transfection of tandem fluorescence protein mCherry-GFP-LC3 construct. Apoptosis was measured by Annexin V/PI staining. Tumorigenesis was measured by a xenograft tumor growth model. RESULTS: Verteporfin inhibited cell growth and colony formation in PC-3 cells. Verteporfin generated crosslinked p62 oligomers, resulting in inhibition of autophagy and constitutive activation of Nrf2 as well as its target genes, Bcl-2 and TNF-α. In normal prostate epithelial cells, forced expression of p62 caused constitutive Nrf2 activation, development of apoptosis resistance, and Verteporfin treatment exhibited inhibitory effects. Verteporfin treatment also inhibited starvation-induced autophagic flux of these cells. Verteporfin inhibited tumorigenesis of both normal prostate epithelial cells with p62 expression and prostate cancer cells and decreased p62, constitutive Nrf2, and Bcl-xL in xenograft tumor tissues, indicating that p62 can be developed as a drug target against prostate cancer. CONCLUSIONS: p62 has a high potential to be developed as a therapeutic target. Verteporfin represents a prototypical agent with therapeutic potential against prostate cancer through inhibition of autophagy by a novel mechanism of p62 inhibition.

Chemohormonal Therapy in Metastatic Hormone-Sensitive Prostate Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Androgen-deprivation therapy (ADT) has been the backbone of treatment for metastatic prostate cancer since the 1940s. We assessed whether concomitant treatment with ADT plus docetaxel would result in longer overall survival than that with ADT alone. METHODS: We assigned men with metastatic, hormone-sensitive prostate cancer to receive either ADT plus docetaxel (at a dose of 75 mg per square meter of body-surface area every 3 weeks for six cycles) or ADT alone. The primary objective was to test the hypothesis that the median overall survival would be 33.3% longer among patients receiving docetaxel added to ADT early during therapy than among patients receiving ADT alone. RESULTS: A total of 790 patients (median age, 63 years) underwent randomization. After a median follow-up of 28.9 months, the median overall survival was 13.6 months longer with ADT plus docetaxel (combination therapy) than with ADT alone (57.6 months vs. 44.0 months; hazard ratio for death in the combination group, 0.61; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.47 to 0.80; P<0.001). The median time to biochemical, symptomatic, or radiographic progression was 20.2 months in the combination group, as compared with 11.7 months in the ADT-alone group (hazard ratio, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.51 to 0.72; P<0.001). The rate of a prostate-specific antigen level of less than 0.2 ng per milliliter at 12 months was 27.7% in the combination group versus 16.8% in the ADT-alone group (P<0.001). In the combination group, the rate of grade 3 or 4 febrile neutropenia was 6.2%, the rate of grade 3 or 4 infection with neutropenia was 2.3%, and the rate of grade 3 sensory neuropathy and of grade 3 motor neuropathy was 0.5%. CONCLUSIONS: Six cycles of docetaxel at the beginning of ADT for metastatic prostate cancer resulted in significantly longer overall survival than that with ADT alone. (Funded by the National Cancer Institute and others; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00309985.).

Retroperitoneal Lymphadenectomy for High Risk, Nonmetastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma: An Analysis of the ASSURE (ECOG-ACRIN 2805) Adjuvant Trial.

PURPOSE: Lymphadenectomy is a well established practice for many urological malignancies but its role in renal cell carcinoma is less clear. Our primary objective was to determine whether lymphadenectomy impacted survival in patients with fully resected, high risk renal cell carcinoma. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients with fully resected, high risk, nonmetastatic renal cell carcinoma were randomized to adjuvant sorafenib, sunitinib or placebo in the ASSURE (Adjuvant Sorafenib and Sunitinib for Unfavorable Renal Carcinoma) trial. Lymphadenectomy was performed for cN+ disease or at surgeon discretion. Patients treated with lymphadenectomy were compared to patients in the trial who did not undergo lymphadenectomy. The primary outcome was overall survival associated with lymphadenectomy. Secondary outcomes were disease free survival, factors associated with performing lymphadenectomy and surgical complications. RESULTS: Of the 1,943 patients in ASSURE 701 (36.1%) underwent lymphadenectomy, including all resectable patients with cN+ and 30.1% of those with cN0 disease. A median of 3 lymph nodes (IQR 1-8) were removed and the rate of pN+ disease in the lymphadenectomy group was 23.4%. There was no overall survival benefit for lymphadenectomy relative to no lymphadenectomy (HR 1.14, 95% CI 0.93-1.39, p = 0.20). In patients with pN+ disease who underwent lymphadenectomy no improvement in overall or disease-free survival was observed for adjuvant therapy relative to placebo. Lymphadenectomy did not confer an increased risk of surgical complications (14.2% vs 13.4%, p = 0.63). CONCLUSIONS: The benefit of lymphadenectomy in patients undergoing surgery for high risk renal cell carcinoma remains uncertain. Future strategies to answer this question should include a prospective trial in which patients with high risk renal cell carcinoma are randomized to specific lymphadenectomy templates.

Fatigue among patients with renal cell carcinoma receiving adjuvant sunitinib or sorafenib: patient-reported outcomes of ECOG-ACRIN E2805 trial.

BACKGROUND: E2805 was a phase III trial to test whether adjuvant sunitinib or sorafenib could improve disease-free survival compared to placebo in patients with renal cell carcinoma. Patient-reported outcomes (PRO), focusing on fatigue, were evaluated as a secondary endpoint. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 463 patients participated in the PRO study. Fatigue was measured by the FACIT Fatigue scale and PROMIS Fatigue SF1 measure at baseline, week 10, and week 22. The primary endpoint was change in fatigue score from baseline to week 22, measured by the FACIT Fatigue scale. Secondarily, the psychometric properties of PROMIS Fatigue SF1 were assessed in relation to the FACIT Fatigue scale. RESULTS: Fatigue got significantly worse on all arms after 2 cycles of treatment, and especially so in patients on sunitinib (- 9.6 vs. - 5.6 on sorafenib vs. - 4.7 on placebo). Fatigue remained stable during week 10 and week 22. Overall, the mean score change between baseline and week 22 was - 7.9 (p < 0.001) on sunitinib, - 6.4 (p < 0.001) on sorafenib and - 5.6 (p < 0.001) on placebo arm. The difference in score change was not statistically significant between the two experimental arms and the placebo arm (difference = - 2.34 [p = 0.110] and - 0.87 [p = 0.535] for sunitinib vs. placebo and sorafenib vs. placebo). PROMIS Fatigue SF1 had good internal consistency reliability and construct and criterion validity, and was highly correlated with the FACIT Fatigue scale score. CONCLUSIONS: Fatigue got worse during study period, especially in patients on sunitinib. The PROMIS Fatigue SF1 was highly correlated with FACIT Fatigue and produced similar results.

Longitudinal and dynamic measurement invariance of the FACIT-Fatigue scale: an application of the measurement model of derivatives to ECOG-ACRIN study E2805.

PURPOSE: While quality of life measures may be used to assess meaningful change and group differences, their scaling and validation often rely on a single occasion of measurement. Using the 13-item FACIT-Fatigue questionnaire at three timepoints, this study tests whether individual items change together in ways consistent with a general fatigue factor. METHODS: The measurement model of derivatives (MMOD) is a novel method for measurement evaluation that directly assesses whether a given factor structure accurately describes how individual test items change over time. MMOD transforms item-level longitudinal data into a set of orthogonal change scores, each one representing either a within-person longitudinal mean or a different type of longitudinal change. These change scores are then factor analyzed and tested for invariance. This approach is applied to the FACIT-Fatigue scale in a sample of patients with renal cell carcinoma treated on 'ECOG-ACRIN Cancer Research Group (ECOG-ACRIN) study 2805. RESULTS: Analyses revealed strong evidence of unidimensionality, and apparent factorial invariance using traditional techniques. MMOD revealed a small but statistically significant difference in factor structure ([Formula: see text], [Formula: see text]), where factor loadings were weaker and more variable for measuring longitudinal change. CONCLUSIONS: The differences in factor structure were not large enough to substantially affect scale usage in this application, but they do reveal some variability across items in the FACIT-Fatigue in their ability to detect change. Future applications should consider differential sensitivity of individual items in multi-item scales, and perhaps even capitalize upon these differences by selecting items that are more sensitive to change.

Adjuvant sunitinib or sorafenib for high-risk, non-metastatic renal-cell carcinoma (ECOG-ACRIN E2805): a double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomised, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Renal-cell carcinoma is highly vascular, and proliferates primarily through dysregulation of the vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) pathway. We tested sunitinib and sorafenib, two oral anti-angiogenic agents that are effective in advanced renal-cell carcinoma, in patients with resected local disease at high risk for recurrence. METHODS: In this double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomised, phase 3 trial, we enrolled patients at 226 study centres in the USA and Canada. Eligible patients had pathological stage high-grade T1b or greater with completely resected non-metastatic renal-cell carcinoma and adequate cardiac, renal, and hepatic function. Patients were stratified by recurrence risk, histology, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status, and surgical approach, and computerised double-blind randomisation was done centrally with permuted blocks. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1:1) to receive 54 weeks of sunitinib 50 mg per day orally throughout the first 4 weeks of each 6 week cycle, sorafenib 400 mg twice per day orally throughout each cycle, or placebo. Placebo could be sunitinib placebo given continuously for 4 weeks of every 6 week cycle or sorafenib placebo given twice per day throughout the study. The primary objective was to compare disease-free survival between each experimental group and placebo in the intention-to-treat population. All treated patients with at least one follow-up assessment were included in the safety analysis. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00326898. FINDINGS: Between April 24, 2006, and Sept 1, 2010, 1943 patients from the National Clinical Trials Network were randomly assigned to sunitinib (n=647), sorafenib (n=649), or placebo (n=647). Following high rates of toxicity-related discontinuation after 1323 patients had enrolled (treatment discontinued by 193 [44%] of 438 patients on sunitinib, 199 [45%] of 441 patients on sorafenib), the starting dose of each drug was reduced and then individually titrated up to the original full doses. On Oct 16, 2014, because of low conditional power for the primary endpoint, the ECOG-ACRIN Data Safety Monitoring Committee recommended that blinded follow-up cease and the results be released. The primary analysis showed no significant differences in disease-free survival. Median disease-free survival was 5·8 years (IQR 1·6-8·2) for sunitinib (hazard ratio [HR] 1·02, 97·5% CI 0·85-1·23, p=0·8038), 6·1 years (IQR 1·7-not estimable [NE]) for sorafenib (HR 0·97, 97·5% CI 0·80-1·17, p=0·7184), and 6·6 years (IQR 1·5-NE) for placebo. The most common grade 3 or worse adverse events were hypertension (105 [17%] patients on sunitinib and 102 [16%] patients on sorafenib), hand-foot syndrome (94 [15%] patients on sunitinib and 208 [33%] patients on sorafenib), rash (15 [2%] patients on sunitinib and 95 [15%] patients on sorafenib), and fatigue 110 [18%] patients on sunitinib [corrected]. There were five deaths related to treatment or occurring within 30 days of the end of treatment; one patient receiving sorafenib died from infectious colitis while on treatment and four patients receiving sunitinib died, with one death due to each of neurological sequelae, sequelae of gastric perforation, pulmonary embolus, and disease progression. Revised dosing still resulted in high toxicity. INTERPRETATION: Adjuvant treatment with the VEGF receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitors sorafenib or sunitinib showed no survival benefit relative to placebo in a definitive phase 3 study. Furthermore, substantial treatment discontinuation occurred because of excessive toxicity, despite dose reductions. These results provide a strong rationale against the use of these drugs for high-risk kidney cancer in the adjuvant setting and suggest that the biology of cancer recurrence might be independent of angiogenesis. FUNDING: US National Cancer Institute and ECOG-ACRIN Cancer Research Group, Pfizer, and Bayer.

Clinical Actionability of Comprehensive Genomic Profiling for Management of Rare or Refractory Cancers.

BACKGROUND: The frequency with which targeted tumor sequencing results will lead to implemented change in care is unclear. Prospective assessment of the feasibility and limitations of using genomic sequencing is critically important. METHODS: A prospective clinical study was conducted on 100 patients with diverse-histology, rare, or poor-prognosis cancers to evaluate the clinical actionability of a Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments (CLIA)-certified, comprehensive genomic profiling assay (FoundationOne), using formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded tumors. The primary objectives were to assess utility, feasibility, and limitations of genomic sequencing for genomically guided therapy or other clinical purpose in the setting of a multidisciplinary molecular tumor board. RESULTS: Of the tumors from the 92 patients with sufficient tissue, 88 (96%) had at least one genomic alteration (average 3.6, range 0-10). Commonly altered pathways included p53 (46%), RAS/RAF/MAPK (rat sarcoma; rapidly accelerated fibrosarcoma; mitogen-activated protein kinase) (45%), receptor tyrosine kinases/ligand (44%), PI3K/AKT/mTOR (phosphatidylinositol-4,5-bisphosphate 3-kinase; protein kinase B; mammalian target of rapamycin) (35%), transcription factors/regulators (31%), and cell cycle regulators (30%). Many low frequency but potentially actionable alterations were identified in diverse histologies. Use of comprehensive profiling led to implementable clinical action in 35% of tumors with genomic alterations, including genomically guided therapy, diagnostic modification, and trigger for germline genetic testing. CONCLUSION: Use of targeted next-generation sequencing in the setting of an institutional molecular tumor board led to implementable clinical action in more than one third of patients with rare and poor-prognosis cancers. Major barriers to implementation of genomically guided therapy were clinical status of the patient and drug access. Early and serial sequencing in the clinical course and expanded access to genomically guided early-phase clinical trials and targeted agents may increase actionability. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Identification of key factors that facilitate use of genomic tumor testing results and implementation of genomically guided therapy may lead to enhanced benefit for patients with rare or difficult to treat cancers. Clinical use of a targeted next-generation sequencing assay in the setting of an institutional molecular tumor board led to implementable clinical action in over one third of patients with rare and poor prognosis cancers. The major barriers to implementation of genomically guided therapy were clinical status of the patient and drug access both on trial and off label. Approaches to increase actionability include early and serial sequencing in the clinical course and expanded access to genomically guided early phase clinical trials and targeted agents.

Use of comprehensive genomic profiling to direct point-of-care management of patients with gynecologic cancers.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the feasibility and clinical utility of using comprehensive genomic profiling (CGP) in the course of clinical care to identify clinically relevant tumor genomic alterations for patients with either rare or refractory gynecologic cancers to facilitate point-of-care management. Use of an expert, multidisciplinary, institutional molecular tumor board (MTB) assessment is discussed regarding input on putative targeted options for individualized therapy. METHODS: A prospective clinical trial is ongoing. We report on the initial 69 patients with gynecologic cancers that were either rare or refractory to standard therapy. CGP was performed by Foundation Medicine, Inc. Genomic alterations were reviewed by members of an MTB. Consensus recommendations on genomically targeted, FDA-approved, on- and off-label therapies and clinical trials were sent to the treating physician, and decisions and outcomes were assessed. RESULTS: Study outcomes were available for 64 patients. The mean number of genes altered per tumor was 4.97 (median=4; range, 1-26), and the average turnaround time from testing laboratory report to generation of formal recommendations was approximately three weeks. Evaluation of genomic and clinical data by the MTB led to generation of targeted treatment options in all 64 patients, and the percentage of patients for whom one or more of these recommendations were implemented by the treating physician was 39%. Sixty-four percent of the patients receiving targeted therapy based on a CGP result experienced radiologic response or showed evidence of clinical benefit or stable disease. CONCLUSION: These data suggest that an institutional MTB is a feasible venue for reviewing tumor genomic profiling results and generating clinical recommendations. These data also support the need for further studies and guidelines on clinical decision making with greater availability of broad genomically based diagnostics.