Exploring the impact of durvalumab on biliary tract cancer: insights from real-world clinical data.

INTRODUCTION: This study assesses the effectiveness of durvalumab with platinum and gemcitabine for biliary tract cancers (BTC). It aims to confirm the TOPAZ-1 trial results in a real-world context and explore the link between BTC molecular profiles and patient outcomes. METHODS: A retrospective analysis was conducted on 102 BTC patients treated with durvalumab, platinum, and gemcitabine at five cancer centers in Austria and one in Germany from 2022 to 2024. Molecular profiling used targeted DNA and RNA assays. Clinical endpoints, including progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS), were assessed using log-rank tests and Cox regression, with correlations to second-line molecular-targeted therapies. RESULTS: Among 102 patients, 60.8% had intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma. The treatment achieved a disease control rate of 71.57% and an overall response rate of 35.11%. Median PFS was 6.51 months, and OS was 13.61 months. Patients under 65 had significantly better OS. Alterations in chromatin remodeling or homologous recombination repair genes were not predictive of survival benefit (HR: 0.45; p = 0.851 and HR: 1.63; p = 0.26, respectively). Patients with molecular-informed second-line therapy showed a trend toward survival benefit (HR: 0.23; p = 0.052). CONCLUSION: This study confirms the phase 3 trial results of durvalumab with platinum and gemcitabine, providing a substantial real-world dataset with detailed molecular characterization. No specific patient subgroup showed a markedly better response to durvalumab based on conventional NGS panels. Further research is needed to explore the link between immunotherapy responses and molecular subgroups.

Are bone targeted agents still useful in times of immunotherapy? The SAKK 80/19 BTA pilot study.

Background: Patients with bone metastases from solid tumors often have additional treatment with bone targeted agents (BTAs) to avoid symptomatic skeletal events (SSEs) such as clinically significant pathological fracture leading toradiation therapy or surgery to the bone, spinal cord compression, or hypercalcemia. The absolute value of BTA treatment in the era of immunotherapy (IO) is unknown. Methods: Patients with bone metastases treated with immunotherapy within the Alpine Tumor Immunology Registry were compared based on whether they received an additional BTA such as denosumab or zoledronic acid. The primary endpoint was time to first SSE. Continuous data were summarized as median and range, categorical data using frequency counts and percentages. Kaplan-Meier estimates were used to describe and visualize the effect of categorical variables. Results: One hundred and ninety-seven patients with bone metastases and treatment with immunotherapy such as nivolumab (48 %), pembrolizumab (40 %), atezolizumab (12 %), ipilimumab (9 %) and other immunotherapy (5 %) were included. The most frequent tumor types were lung cancer (50 %), malignant melanoma (11 %), renal cell cancer (10 %) and bladder cancer (9 %), respectively. One hundred and twenty-two patients (62 %) received a BTA treatment (91 % denosumab). The median treatment duration of a BTA was 178 days (min: 1 day, max: 2010 days). Out of the 197 patients, 47 (24 %) experienced at least one SSE, 100 (51 %) had bone pain. Ten of the 122 patients (8 %) receiving a BTA developed osteonecrosis of the jaw (ONJ). The percentage of patients without an SSE at fixed time points was higher if treated with a BTA (e.g., at 6 months, 92 % [95 % CI: 84 % - 96 %] versus 88 % [95 % CI: 77 % - 94 %]), but no significant difference in time to first SSE (HR 0.69; 95 % CI 0.34-1.39, log-rank p = 0.29) or time to first bone pain (HR: 0.85; 95 % CI: 0.51-1.43, p = 0.54) between these two groups could be detected. There were differences in OS between patients treated with a BTA and patients not treated with a BTA (HR: 1.46; 95 % CI: 1.01-2.10, p = 0.043). Conclusion: No significant difference in time to first SSE or bone pain was observed between patients who have received a BTA or not when treated with immunotherapy. Based on these retrospective results the indication of BTAs to reduce SSEs in cancer patients under treatment with immunotherapy needs further evaluation.

Real-World Treatment Patterns and Timeliness of Clinical Care Pathway for Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer Patients in Austria: The PRATER Retrospective Study.

This was a retrospective study of the profile and initial treatments of adults diagnosed with early-stage (ES) non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) during January 2018-December 2021 at 16 leading hospital institutions in Austria, excluding patients enrolled in clinical trials. In total, 319 patients were enrolled at a planned ~1:1:1 ratio across StI:II:III. Most tested biomarkers were programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1; 58% expressing), Kirsten rat sarcoma virus (KRAS; 22% positive), and epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR; 18% positive). Of 115/98/106 StI/II/III patients, 82%/85%/36% underwent surgery, followed by systemic therapy in 9%/45%/47% of those [mostly chemotherapy (ChT)]. Unresected treated StIII patients received ChT + radiotherapy [43%; followed by immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) in 39% of those], ICI ± ChT (35%), and ChT-alone/radiotherapy-alone (22%). Treatment was initiated a median (interquartile range) of 24 (7-39) days after histological confirmation, and 55 (38-81) days after first medical visit. Based on exploratory analyses of all patients newly diagnosed with any stage NSCLC during 2018-2021 at 14 of the sites (N = 7846), 22%/10%/25%/43% had StI/II/III/IV. The total number was not significantly different between pre-COVID-19 (2018-2019) and study-specific COVID-19 (2020-2021) periods, while StI proportion increased (21% vs. 23%; p = 0.012). Small differences were noted in treatments. In conclusion, treatments were aligned with guideline recommendations at a time which preceded the era of ICIs and targeted therapies in the (neo)adjuvant setting.

Interplay of inflammatory markers and anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies in COVID-19 mortality: A prospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVES: Despite high global vaccination coverage, it remains unclear how vaccination and anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies affect immune responses and inflammation levels in patients with COVID-19. It is further unclear whether the inflammatory response differs depending on antibody levels and whether the combination of antibody and inflammation levels in COVID-19 patients affects mortality rates. METHODS: We conducted a prospective multicenter cohort study that included 1031 hospitalized COVID-19 patients from five hospitals. Anti-SARS-CoV-2-spike antibodies, interleukin-6 (IL6), and CRP were measured on hospital admission. The prespecified endpoint was all-cause in-hospital mortality. RESULTS: We observed significantly lower levels of CRP (P<0.001) and IL6 (P<0.001) in patients with antibody levels above 1200 BAU/ml. After adjusting for potential confounders, patients with high levels of inflammatory markers (CRP>6 mg/dl or IL6>100 pg/ml) combined with low levels of anti-SARS-CoV-2-spike antibodies (<1200 BAU/ml) were approximately 8 times more likely to die than patients with low inflammatory responses and high antibody levels (CRP: aHR 7.973, 95% CI 2.744-23.169, P<0.001; IL6: aHR 8.973, 95% CI 3.549-22.688, P<0.001). CONCLUSION: Hospitalized COVID-19 patients presenting with high inflammatory markers and low antibody levels exhibited the highest mortality risks. Higher antibody levels are associated with lower levels of inflammation in hospitalized COVID-19 patients.

Efficacy and safety of tixagevimab/cilgavimab as passive immunisation against COVID-19 infections in patients with hematological malignancies.

Monoclonal antibodies, as tixagevimab/cilgavimab, have been introduced as prophylaxis against COVID-19 infections in high-risk populations. However, data on efficacy are limited. This study investigates efficacy and tolerability of tixagevimab/cilgavimab in hematological patients under real-life conditions. Tixagevimab/cilgavimab was administered to 155 hematological patients (March-August 2022) at two Austrian centres. S/RBD-antibody assessments were performed before (T0), four weeks (T1), and six months (T2) after application. Side effects, the occurrence of COVID-19 infections, and the course of S/RBD-antibody titres were analysed retrospectively in relation to clinical variables. 155 hematological patients, who refused tixagevimab/cilgavimab, were included as a control group to compare the frequency of COVID-19 infections. Of all immunised patients (52.3% males; 91% triple vaccinated), 25.8% had a COVID-19 breakthrough infection (76% mild) compared to 43.9% in the control group. Patients with chronic lymphocytic leukaemia (CLL)/lymphoma were at highest risk of a COVID-19 infection (OR = 2.21; 95% CI 1.05-4.65; p = 0.037). After immunisation, a steep increase in median antibody levels (1193.4BAU/ml, IQR 0-2318.94) was observed in 67.8%, followed by a rapid decrease between T1 and T2 (465.95BAU/ml, IQR 0-1900.65.3) with the greatest declines in CLL/lymphoma (848.7BAU/ml, IQR 0-1949.6, p = 0.026). Side-effects occurred in 21.2% (CTCAE I/II). These real-world data indicate that S/RBD antibodies respond rapidly after passive immunisation in all hematological patients without safety concerns. Given the rapid decline in S/RBD antibodies, early booster immunisations should be considered for future scenarios in this vulnerable group.

Early kinetics of C reactive protein for cancer-agnostic prediction of therapy response and mortality in patients treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors: a multicenter cohort study.

BACKGROUND: C reactive protein (CRP) kinetics have recently been suggested as predictive biomarkers for the efficacy of immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) therapy in selected cancer types. The aim of this study was to characterize early CRP kinetics as a tumor-agnostic biomarker for ICI treatment outcomes. METHODS: In this multicenter retrospective cohort study, two independent cohorts of patients with various cancer types undergoing palliative ICI treatment at Austrian academic centers served as the discovery (n=562) and validation cohort (n=474). Four different patterns of CRP kinetics in the first 3 months of ICI therapy were defined (CRP-flare responders, CRP-responders, CRP non-responders, patients with all-normal CRP). Objective response rate (ORR), progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were defined as coprimary endpoints. Univariable and multivariable logistic regression, landmark analysis and Cox regression including CRP kinetics as time-dependent variable were performed. RESULTS: The ORR in patients with all-normal CRP, CRP responders, CRP flare-responders and CRP non-responders was 41%, 38%, 31% and 12%, respectively. The median OS and PFS estimates were 24.5 months (95% CI 18.5 to not reached) and 8.2 months (95% CI 5.9 to 12.0) in patients with all-normal CRP, 16.1 months (95% CI 12.6 to 19-8) and 6.1 months (95% CI 4.9 to 7.2) in CRP-responders, 14.0 months (95% CI 8.5 to 19.4) and 5.7 months (95% CI 4.1 to 8.5) in CRP flare-responders and 8.1 months (95% CI 5.8 to 9.9) and 2.3 months (95% CI 2.2 to 2.8) in CRP non-responders (log-rank p for PFS and OS<0.001). These findings prevailed in multivariable analysis and could be fully confirmed in our validation cohort. Pooled subgroup analysis suggested a consistent predictive significance of early CRP kinetics for treatment efficacy and outcome independent of cancer type. CONCLUSION: Early CRP kinetics represent a tumor-agnostic predictor for treatment response, progression risk and mortality in patients with cancer undergoing ICI therapy.

Attrition Rates in Multiple Myeloma Treatment under Real World Conditions-An Analysis from the Austrian Myeloma Registry (AMR).

Multiple myeloma (MM) is characterized by serial relapses, necessitating the application of sequential lines of therapy (LoT). Reports on attrition rates (ARs) vary widely. The present study analysed ARs from the Austrian Myeloma Registry. Attrition was defined as being either deceased, progressive without having received another LoT, or lack of follow-up for ≥5 years. A total of 571 patients diagnosed between January 2009 and August 2021 were included (median age: 72 years; median follow-up: 50.8 months). Some 507 patients received at least one LoT. Of the total, 43.6% underwent autologous stem cell transplantation (SCT, transplant eligible = TE)) with primarily VRd (Bortezomib/Lenalidomide/Dexamethasone) given as induction (26.5%), followed by lenalidomide maintenance in 55.7% of cases. Transplant-ineligible (NTE) patients were predominantly treated with Vd (Bortezomib/Dexamethasone, 21.6%), receiving maintenance in 27.1%. A total of 37.5% received a second LoT. ARs across one to five LoTs were 16.7-27%. Frontline induction/ SCT followed by maintenance reduced ARs associated with age and achievement of deep remission in the frontline. Deep remission prolongs follow-up and time-to-next-treatment (TTNT), while high-risk-cyctogenetics negatively affected these outcomes. Our results demonstrate considerably lower ARs for MM patients within the AMR data versus other healthcare systems. Young age and the achievement of significant remissions after optimal frontline therapy resulted in particularly low ARs. These promising results support a key role for the ease of drug access and reimbursement policies in governing long-term MM patient outcomes.

Cell-free circulating RAS mutation concentrations significantly impact the survival of metastatic colorectal cancer patients.

PURPOSE: RAS mutations are predictors of an adverse outcome in EGFR-targeted therapies and have been proposed as prognostic biomarkers of survival in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). The analysis of circulating tumor DNA from plasma samples, known as liquid biopsies, has indicated that the RAS mutation status may change over time, potentially affecting patients' prognosis. To further evaluate the clinical validity of RAS mutation retesting using liquid biopsies, we prospectively investigated the impact of the circulating quantitative RAS mutation status on the course of mCRC. METHODS: The present study included 81 consecutively recruited patients with mCRC. We used targeted next-generation sequencing of circulating cell-free DNA to determine and quantify plasma RAS mutation status. RESULTS: Patients with a RAS mutation detected by liquid biopsy (37%; n = 30) were at increased risk of death during the follow-up period compared to RAS wild-type patients. Patients with evidence of a RAS mutation in the primary tumor but a putative RAS mutation loss in plasma (28%; n = 11) showed a prolonged survival compared to patients with a preserved RAS mutation status. Also, circulating RAS mutation concentrations significantly affected the outcome: The mortality risk of patients with a high RAS mutation concentration increased fivefold compared to subjects with a putative RAS mutation loss or low RAS mutation concentration. CONCLUSION: Our results emphasize the clinical value of circulating RAS mutations in managing mCRC.

Circulating syndecan-1 and glypican-4 predict 12-month survival in metastatic colorectal cancer patients.

Cell surface syndecans and glypicans play important roles in the development and prognosis of colorectal cancer (CRC). Their soluble forms from proteoglycan shedding can be detected in blood and have been proposed as new prognostic biomarkers in several cancer entities. However, studies on circulating syndecan-1 (SDC1) and glypican-4 (GPC4) in CRC are limited. We, therefore, evaluated the impact of plasma SDC1 and GPC4 on the prognosis of metastatic (m)CRC patients. The present study included 93 patients with mCRC. The endpoints were progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) at 12 months. SDC1 and GPC4 levels were measured in plasma using enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays. Plasma levels of SDC1 and GPC4 were significantly correlated. Significant correlations of these two markers were also found with carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA). Kaplan-Meier curve analyses indicated that PFS and OS probabilities significantly decreased with increasing levels of SDC1 and GPC4, respectively. Multivariable Cox regression analyses showed that both markers were significantly associated with PFS and OS independently from clinicopathological characteristics including CEA. Respective adjusted hazard ratios (HR) together with corresponding 95% confidence intervals for one standard deviation change of SDC1 were 1.32 [1.02-1.84] for PFS and 1.48 [1.01-2.15] for OS. Adjusted HRs [95% confidence intervals] of GPC4 were 1.42 [1.07-1.89] for PFS and 2.40 [1.51-3.81] for OS. Results from area under the receiver operating characteristic curve analyses suggest that GPC4 and SDC1 add additional prognostic values to CEA for OS. In conclusion, we showed significant associations of circulating SDC1 and GPC4 with poor survival of mCRC patients.

Checkpoint inhibitors in metastatic gastric and GEJ cancer: a multi-institutional retrospective analysis of real-world data in a Western cohort.

BACKGROUND: Safety and efficacy of immune checkpoint inhibitors in advanced gastric or gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) cancer could be demonstrated in predominantly Asian cohorts, whereas data in Western patients outside of clinical trials are vastly missing. METHODS: In this multi-institutional retrospective analysis conducted at nine oncologic centers in Austria, we tried to assess feasibility of checkpoint inhibitors in advanced gastric/GEJ cancer in a real-world Western cohort. RESULTS: In total, data from 50 patients with metastatic gastric/GEJ cancer who received nivolumab or pembrolizumab in a palliative setting between November 2015 and April 2020 have been evaluated. The median number of previous palliative therapy lines was two. The median progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were 2.1 (95% CI: 1.4-2.8) and 6.3 (95% CI: 3.3-9.3) months, respectively. There was no statistically significant difference in median OS according to microsatellite or PD-L1 status. However, a trend towards prolonged PFS and OS for the microsatellite instability high subgroup could be observed. Patients with an ECOG Performance Status (PS) ≥ 2 displayed a significantly worse outcome than those with an ECOG PS ≤ 1 (p = .03). Only one patient discontinued immunotherapy due to treatment-related toxicity. CONCLUSIONS: Our results support feasibility of nivolumab and pembrolizumab in pre-treated patients with metastatic gastric and GEJ cancer in a Western real-world cohort. Further phase II/III studies are needed to confirm clinical efficacy.

Efficacy and safety of heterologous booster vaccination with Ad26.COV2.S after BNT162b2 mRNA COVID-19 vaccine in haemato-oncological patients with no antibody response.

Patients with haemato-oncological malignancies are one of the high-risk groups for a severe course in case of COVID-19 infections. Furthermore, vaccination results in significantly lower response rates in haematological malignancies and lower antibody levels in patients with solid cancer. We investigated efficacy and safety of a heterologous booster vaccination with Ad26.COV2.S DNA vector vaccine in haemato-oncological patients without antibody response after double-dose BNT162b2 messenger (m-)RNA COVID-19 vaccine. A total of 32 haemato-oncological non-responders to double-dose BNT162b2 received a heterologous booster vaccination with Ad26.COV2.S. Blood samples were assessed directly before the vaccination (T0) and four weeks after (T1). Safety assessment was performed using a standardised questionnaire. The overall response rate was 31%, with a mean (SD) antibody titre of 693·79 (1 096·99) binding activity units (BAU)/ml. Patients with chronic lymphocytic leukaemia or lymphoma showed a significantly lower response rate (P = 0·048). Adverse events were reported in 29·6% of patients, of which 7·1% were graded as severe, including grade III and IV events following the Common Terminology Criteria of Adverse Events (CTCAE). The heterologous booster vaccination with Ad26.COV2.S led to a serological response in nine out of 29 patients without response after double-dose BNT162b2. Furthermore, the vaccination was safe in our cohort, leading to mainly mild local and systemic reactions. Overall, this vaccination regimen should be further evaluated to increase the response rate in the highly vulnerable population of haemato-oncological patients.

Serological SARS-CoV-2 antibody response, potential predictive markers and safety of BNT162b2 mRNA COVID-19 vaccine in haematological and oncological patients.

Haemato-oncological patients are at risk in case of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection. Currently, vaccination is the best-evaluated preventive strategy. In the present study, we aimed to assess serological response, predictive markers, and safety of BNT162b2 in haemato-oncological patients. A total of 259 haemato-oncological patients were vaccinated with two 30 µg doses of BNT162b2 administered 21 days apart. Serological response was assessed by ELECSYS® Anti-SARS-CoV-2-S immunoassay before vaccination, and at 3 and 7 weeks after the first dose (T1, T2). Safety assessment was performed. At T2 spike protein receptor binding domain (S/RBD) antibodies were detected in 71·4% of haematological and in 94·5% of oncological patients (P < 0·001). Haematological patients receiving systemic treatment had a 14·2-fold increased risk of non-responding (95% confidence interval 3·2-63·3, P = 0·001). Subgroups of patients with lymphoma or chronic lymphocytic leukaemia were at highest risk of serological non-response. Low immunoglobulin G (IgG) level, lymphocyte- and natural killer (NK)-cell counts were significantly associated with poor serological response (P < 0·05). Vaccination was well tolerated with only 2·7% of patients reporting severe side-effects. Patients with side-effects developed a higher S/RBD-antibody titre compared to patients without side-effects (P = 0·038). Haematological patients under treatment were at highest risk of serological non-response. Low lymphocytes, NK cells and IgG levels were found to be associated with serological non-response. Serological response in oncological patients was encouraging. The use of BNT162b2 is safe in haemato-oncological patients.