Impact of the changing landscape of induction therapy prior to autologous stem cell transplantation in 540 newly diagnosed myeloma patients: a retrospective real-world study.

INTRODUCTION: Autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) is the standard treatment for younger patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (MM). However, due to restrictive exclusion criteria, more than half of eligible patients are usually excluded from transplant studies. METHODS: This retrospective monocentric analysis included 540 patients with MM who received an ASCT between 1996 and 2019. RESULTS: Up to 2005, induction therapy consisted mainly of conventional chemotherapies, e.g. vincristine/doxorubicin/dexamethasone (VAD). In the following years, the triple-combinations based on bortezomib coupled with doxorubicin/dexamethasone (PAD), melphalan/prednisolone (VMP), cyclophposphamide/dexamethasone (VCD) or bendamustine/prednisolone (BPV) became the most popular treatment options. A progressive improvement in PFS was observed in patients treated with the two current induction therapies BPV (47 months) or VCD (54 months) compared to VAD (35 months, p < 0.03), PAD (39 months, p < 0.01 and VMP (36 months, p < 0.01). However, there was no significant difference in median OS (VAD 78, PAD 74, VMP 72, BPV 80 months and VCD not reached). In our analysis, we also included 139 patients who do fulfill at least one of the exclusion criteria for most phase 3 transplant studies (POEMS/amyloidosis/plasma cell leukemia, eGFR < 40 mL/min, severe cardiac dysfunction or poor general condition). Outcome for these patients was not significantly inferior compared to patients who met the inclusion criteria for most of the transplant studies with PFS of 36 vs 41 months (p = 0.78) and OS of 78 vs 79 months (p = 0.34). CONCLUSIONS: Our real-world data in unselected pts also stress the substantial value of ASCT during the first-line treatment of younger MM pts.

Retrospective Analysis of Treatment Pathways in Patients With BRAFV600E-mutant Metastatic Colorectal Carcinoma - MORSECRC.

BACKGROUND/AIM: Metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) is a heterogeneous disease with distinct molecular subtypes. The BRAFV600E-mutation found in approximately 8-12% of mCRC patients is associated with poor prognosis. Guideline recommendations for this population are mostly based on small cohorts due to lack of clinical data. This retrospective analysis was designed to evaluate (approved) therapeutic approaches and algorithms in BRAFV600E-mutant mCRC prior to approval of the targeted combination encorafenib plus cetuximab in Germany, Austria, and Switzerland. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Anonymized data from BRAFV600E-mutant mCRC patients were analyzed retrospectively regarding 1st-, 2nd- and 3rd-line treatment using descriptive statistics. RESULTS: Forty-two patients were eligible for analysis (mean age 62.1 years, 47.6% female). At initial diagnosis, 20 patients (47.6%) were documented with right-sided tumors. Most patients (81.0%) were tested for BRAF before 1st-line. Four patients (9.5%) showed high microsatellite instability (MSI-H). Based on 94 treatment lines, chemotherapy combined with targeted therapy (TT) was used mostly (61.7%), followed by chemotherapy alone (19.1%). Backbone therapies were most frequently FOLFOXIRI (27.7%), FOLFOX/CAPOX (22.3%), or FOLFIRI (20.2%). Anti-VEGF/VEGFR and anti-EGFR-treatments were used in 45.7% and 23.4% of patients, respectively. Across all treatment lines and types, the predominantly documented reason for discontinuation was lack of efficacy. CONCLUSION: Combined chemotherapy+TT (anti-VEGF/VEGFR and anti-EGFR) played a predominant role in BRAFV600E-mutated mCRC treatment prior to approval of the targeted combination encorafenib plus cetuximab. Since lack of efficacy was the major reason for treatment discontinuation, newly approved therapies including encorafenib plus cetuximab and - for MSI-H tumors - pembrolizumab represent urgently needed options for future mCRC patients.

Has programmed cell death ligand-1 MET an accomplice in non-small cell lung cancer?-a narrative review.

Recently approved and highly specific small-molecule inhibitors of c-MET exon 14 skipping mutations (e.g., capmatinib, tepotinib) are a new and important therapeutic option for the treatment of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients harbouring c-MET alterations. Several experimental studies have provided compelling evidence that c-MET is involved in the regulation of the immune response by up-regulating inhibitory molecules (e.g., PD-L1) and down-regulating of immune stimulators (e.g., CD137, CD252, CD70, etc.). In addition, c-MET was found to be implicated in the regulation of the inflamed tumour microenvironment (TME) and thereby contributing to an increased immune escape of tumour cells from T cell killing. Moreover, it is a major resistance mechanism following treatment of epidermal growth factor receptor mutations (EGFRmut) with tyrosine kinase receptor inhibitors (TKIs). In line with these findings c-MET alterations have also been shown to be associated with a worse clinical outcome and a poorer prognosis in NSCLC patients. However, the underlying mechanisms for these experimental observations are neither fully evaluated nor conclusive, but clearly multifactorial and most likely tumour-specific. In this regard the clinical efficacy of checkpoint inhibitors (CPIs) and TKIs against EGFRmut in NSCLC patients harbouring c-MET alterations is also not yet established, and further research will certainly provide some guidance as to optimally utilise CPIs and c-MET inhibitors in the future.

Lorlatinib in pretreated ALK- or ROS1-positive lung cancer and impact of TP53 co-mutations: results from the German early access program.

INTRODUCTION: We report on the results of the German early access program (EAP) with the third-generation ALK- and ROS1-inhibitor lorlatinib. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with documented treatment failure of all approved ALK/ROS1-specific therapies or with resistance mutations not covered by approved inhibitors or leptomeningeal carcinomatosis were enrolled and analyzed. RESULTS: In total, 52 patients were included [median age 57 years (range 32-81), 54% female, 62% never smokers, 98% adenocarcinoma]; 71% and 29% were ALK- and ROS1-positive, respectively. G1202R and G2032R resistance mutations prior to treatment with lorlatinib were observed in 10 of 26 evaluable patients (39%), 11 of 39 patients showed TP53 mutations (28%). Thirty-six patients (69%) had active brain metastases (BM) and nine (17%) leptomeningeal carcinomatosis when entering the EAP. Median number of prior specific TKIs was 3 (range 1-4). Median duration of treatment, progression-free survival (PFS), response rate and time to treatment failure were 10.4 months, 8.0 months, 54% and 13.0 months. Calculated 12-, 18- and 24-months survival rates were 65, 54 and 47%, overall survival since primary diagnosis (OS2) reached 79.6 months. TP53 mutations were associated with a substantially reduced PFS (3.7 versus 10.8 month, HR 3.3, p = 0.003) and were also identified as a strong prognostic biomarker (HR for OS2 3.0 p = 0.02). Neither prior treatments with second-generation TKIs nor BM had a significant influence on PFS and OS. CONCLUSIONS: Our data from real-life practice demonstrate the efficacy of lorlatinib in mostly heavily pretreated patients, providing a clinically meaningful option for patients with resistance mutations not covered by other targeted therapies and those with BM or leptomeningeal carcinomatosis.

Efficacy and Safety of Approved First-Line Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitor Treatments in Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma: A Network Meta-Analysis.

INTRODUCTION: This network meta-analysis aims to deliver an up-to-date, comprehensive efficacy and toxicity comparison of the approved first-line tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) for metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) in order to provide support for evidence-based treatment decisions. Previous NMAs of first-line mRCC treatments either predate the approval of all the first-line TKIs currently available or do not include evaluation of safety data for all treatments. METHODS: We performed a systematic literature review and network meta-analysis of phase II/III randomised controlled trials (RCTs) assessing approved first-line TKI therapies for mRCC. A random effects model with a frequentist approach was computed for progression-free survival (PFS) data and for the proportion of patients experiencing a maximum of grade 3 or 4 adverse events (AEs). RESULTS: The network meta-analysis of PFS demonstrated no significant differences between cabozantinib and either sunitinib (50 mg 4/2), pazopanib or tivozanib. The network meta-analysis indicated that in terms of grade 3 and 4 AEs, tivozanib had the most favourable safety profile and was associated with significantly less risk of toxicity than the other TKIs. CONCLUSION: These network meta-analysis data demonstrate that cabozantinib, sunitinib, pazopanib and tivozanib do not significantly differ in their efficacy, but tivozanib is associated with a more favourable safety profile in terms of grade 3 or 4 toxicities. Consequently, the relative toxicity of these first-line TKIs may play a more significant role than efficacy comparisons in treatment decisions and in planning future RCTs.

Programmed cell death ligand-1 (PD-L1) as a biomarker for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) treatment-are we barking up the wrong tree?

Immunotherapy with monoclonal antibodies targeting programmed cell death-1 (PD-1) and programmed cell death ligand-1 (PD-L1) has become a standard of care treatment for patients with advanced or metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) in first and later treatment lines with durable responses seen in approximately 10-20% of patients treated. However, the optimal selection of eligible patients who will benefit most, is far from being clear and the best biomarker has not yet been established. PD-L1 expression as a predictive biomarker for immunotherapy in NSCLC patients has shown some value for predicting response to immune checkpoint inhibitors in some studies, but not in others, and its use has been complicated by a number of factors which has prompted many researchers to establish better predictive biomarkers for immunotherapy of NSCLC. Most recently, two phase III first-line NSCLC studies have provided evidence that tumour mutational burden (TMB) correlates with the clinical response to the combination of nivolumab and ipilimumab (CheckMate-227; NCT02477826), whereas atezolizumab response was correlated with T effector gene signature expression (IMPower 150; NCT02366143). Both studies demonstrated a significant primary endpoint [progression-free survival (PFS)] benefit in the TMB group and in the group of patients expressing a T effector cell signature, respectively. However, PFS benefit in both studies was seen regardless of the PD-L1 status of all patients suggesting that TMB and T effector cell signatures may be more robust to predict clinical response following treatment with checkpoint inhibitors. The role of putative novel predictive biomarkers evaluated in the CheckMate-227 and the IMPower 150 trials may, if confirmed in future prospective studies, offer a new perspective for predicting immunotherapy treatment outcomes of NSCLC patients in the near future.

Targeting SHP-1, 2 and SHIP Pathways: A Novel Strategy for Cancer Treatment?

Well-balanced levels of tyrosine phosphorylation, maintained by the reversible and coordinated actions of protein tyrosine kinases (PTKs) and protein tyrosine phosphatases (PTPs), are critical for a wide range of cellular processes including growth, differentiation, metabolism, migration, and survival. Aberrant tyrosine phosphorylation, as a result of a perturbed balance between the activities of PTKs and PTPs, is linked to the pathogenesis of numerous human diseases, including cancer, suggesting that PTPs may be innovative molecular targets for cancer treatment. Two PTPs that have an important inhibitory role in haematopoietic cells are SHP-1 and SHP-2. SHP-1, 2 promote cell growth and act by both upregulating positive signaling pathways and by downregulating negative signaling pathways. SHIP is another inhibitory phosphatase that is specific for the inositol phospholipid phosphatidylinositol-3,4,5-trisphosphate (PIP3). SHIP acts as a negative regulator of immune response by hydrolysing PIP3, and SHIP deficiency results in myeloproliferation and B-cell lymphoma in mice. The validation of SHP-1, 2 and SHIP as oncology targets has generated interest in the development of inhibitors as potential therapeutic agents for cancers; however, SHP-1, 2 and SHIP have proven to be an extremely difficult target for drug discovery, primarily due to the highly conserved and positively charged nature of their PTP active site, and many PTP inhibitors lack either appro-priate selectivity or membrane permeability. To overcome these caveats, novel techniques have been employed to synthesise new inhibitors that specifically attenuate the PTP-dependent signaling inside the cell and amongst them; some are already in clinical development which are discussed in this review.

Targeting Developmental Pathways: The Achilles Heel of Cancer?

Developmental pathways (e.g., Notch, Hippo, Hedgehog, Wnt, and TGF-ß/BMP/FGF) are networks of genes that act co-ordinately to establish the body plan, and disruptions of genes in one pathway can have effects in related pathways and may result in serious dysmorphogenesis or cancer. Interestingly, all developmental pathways are highly conserved cell signalling systems present in almost all multicellular organisms. In addition, they have a crucial role in cell proliferation, apoptosis, differentiation, and finally in organ development. Of note, almost all of these pathways promote oncogenesis through synergistic associations with the Hippo signalling pathway, and several lines of evidence have also indicated that these pathways (e.g., Wnt/ß-catenin) may be implicated in checkpoint inhibitor resistance (e.g., CTLA-4, PD-1, and PD-L1). Since Notch inhibition in vivo results in partial loss of its stemness features such as self-renewal, chemoresistance, invasive and migratory potential, and tumorigenesis, these highly conserved developmental pathways are regarded as being critical for regulation of self-renewal in both embryonic and adult stem cells and hence are likely to be implicated in the maintenance of cancer stem cells. Many small molecules are currently in preclinical and early clinical development, and only two compounds are approved for treatment of advanced or metastatic basal cell carcinoma (vismodegib and sonidegib). Furthermore, therapeutic targeting of cancer stem cells using drugs that disrupt activated developmental pathways may also represent an attractive strategy that is potentially relevant to many types of malignancy, notably blood cancers, where the evidence for leukaemia stem cells is well established. Future work will hopefully pave the way for the development of new strategies for targeting these pervasive oncogenic pathways.

Second- and third-generation drugs for immuno-oncology treatment-The more the better?

Recent success in cancer immunotherapy (anti-CTLA-4, anti-PD1/PD-L1) has confirmed the hypothesis that the immune system can control many cancers across various histologies, in some cases producing durable responses in a way not seen with many small-molecule drugs. However, only less than 25% of all patients do respond to immuno-oncology drugs and several resistance mechanisms have been identified (e.g. T-cell exhaustion, overexpression of caspase-8 and ß-catenin, PD-1/PD-L1 gene amplification, MHC-I/II mutations). To improve response rates and to overcome resistance, novel second- and third-generation immuno-oncology drugs are currently evaluated in ongoing phase I/II trials (either alone or in combination) including novel inhibitory compounds (e.g. TIM-3, VISTA, LAG-3, IDO, KIR) and newly developed co-stimulatory antibodies (e.g. CD40, GITR, OX40, CD137, ICOS). It is important to note that co-stimulatory agents strikingly differ in their proposed mechanism of action compared with monoclonal antibodies that accomplish immune activation by blocking negative checkpoint molecules such as CTLA-4 or PD-1/PD-1 or others. Indeed, the prospect of combining agonistic with antagonistic agents is enticing and represents a real immunologic opportunity to 'step on the gas' while 'cutting the brakes', although this strategy as a novel cancer therapy has not been universally endorsed so far. Concerns include the prospect of triggering cytokine-release syndromes, autoimmune reactions and hyper immune stimulation leading to activation-induced cell death or tolerance, however, toxicity has not been a major issue in the clinical trials reported so far. Although initial phase I/II clinical trials of agonistic and novel antagonistic drugs have shown highly promising results in the absence of disabling toxicity, both in single-agent studies and in combination with chemotherapy or other immune system targeting drugs; however, numerous questions remain about dose, schedule, route of administration and formulation as well as identifying the appropriate patient populations. In our view, with such a wealth of potential mechanisms of action and with the ability to fine-tune monoclonal antibody structure and function to suit particular requirements, the second and third wave of immuno-oncology drugs are likely to provide rapid advances with new combinations of novel immunotherapy (especially co-stimulatory antibodies). Here, we will review the mechanisms of action and the clinical data of these new antibodies and discuss the major issues facing this rapidly evolving field.

Overall survival in non-small cell lung cancer-what is clinically meaningful?

The development of molecularly targeted therapies [tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) and monoclonal antibodies] has significantly improved outcomes for patients with advanced or metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) resulting in improved progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS) and quality of life (QoL). In addition, targeting the immune axis (CTLA-4, PD-1/PD-L1) has also shown promising results. Major goals of almost all clinical trials based on histology and molecular markers for NSCLC patients are improvements of OS and QoL. However, in the majority of these trials only small incremental improvements in OS were seen. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and other health authorities have recommended to consider OS to be the standard clinical benefit endpoint that should be used to establish the efficacy of a treatment for NSCLC patients, however, the question remains what is clinically meaningful and how can this outcome be measured. According to suggestions of the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) Cancer Research Committee a relative improvement in median OS of at least 20% (3-4 months) is regarded to define a clinically meaningful improvement in outcome of NSCLC patients. However, this should not diminish PFS as a valid endpoint since a PFS improvement can also result in a meaningful palliation (e.g., painful bone metastases). Other factors (e.g., QoL) may also be involved to measure and to define the clinical importance of a given trial result. Using the "Quality-adjusted Time Without Symptoms of Toxicity" (Q-TWiST) analysis method it has been demonstrated that a clinically important and meaningful difference for Q-TWiST is 10-15% of OS in a study. Trials that are designed with less ambitious goals, however, may still be of benefit to individual NSCLC patients if the trial endpoints are met. Since there is no single factor which will make a trial clinically meaningful, these recommendations, however, are not intended to set standards for regulatory approval or insurance coverage but rather to encourage patients and investigators to demand more from clinical trials.

Immunotherapies for NSCLC: Are We Cutting the Gordian Helix?

Chemotherapy is currently the standard-of-care for non-oncogene-driven advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Due to improvements in chemotherapeutic choices and supportive care, patients currently typically undergo multiple lines of chemotherapy as their disease progresses. Although treatments have improved over recent years, limited benefits are seen, especially in patients receiving later-line chemotherapy, as response rates can be low, response duration short and survival poor. Molecular-targeted therapies have provided improvement in outcomes. However, these treatments only offer a clear benefit in subsets of tumors harbouring the appropriate genomic alteration (mutation, amplification, translocation). Recent advances in immunotherapy have highlighted the potential of immuno-oncology-based treatments for NSCLC, offering the potential to provide durable responses and outcomes regardless of histology or mutation status. Blocking inhibitory pathways such as the cytotoxic lymphocyte antigen-4 (CTLA-4) and programmed cell death-1 (PD-1) checkpoint pathways with monoclonal antibodies has generated antitumor immune responses that are transforming cancer therapeutics. PD-1 and programmed cell death ligand-1(PD-L1) antibodies have shown durable responses in NSCLC, with a favourable safety profile and manageable side-effects. The activity of immune checkpoint inhibitors is currently been assessed in treatment-naïve patients with PD-L1-positive advanced NSCLC. Combinatorial approaches with other immune checkpoint inhibitors, chemotherapy, or targeted-agents are being explored in ongoing clinical trials, and may improve outcome in NSCLC. The emerging data not only offer the hope of a better cancer therapy but also provide evidence that changes our understanding on how the host immune system interacts with human cancer. It is therefore conceivable that agents blocking the CTLA-4/PD-1/PD-L1 axis will provide valuable additions to the growing armamentarium of targeted-agents.

Improved overall survival following tyrosine kinase inhibitor treatment in advanced or metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer-the Holy Grail in cancer treatment?

Advanced or metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is characterized by a poor prognosis and few second- or third-line treatments. First-generation epidermal growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase inhibition has paved the way for targeted therapies in lung cancer. Although these drugs result in excellent responses [and significantly improved progression-free survival (PFS)] in patients with activating EGFR mutations, none of these randomized studies has yet demonstrated a statistically significant improvement of overall survival (OS). PFS is often used as a predictor for improved OS since it is independent of subsequent treatment, but OS is acknowledged as the key clinical outcome in the treatment of advanced NSCLC. When effective treatment is given as post therapy, it will be difficult to distinguish the treatment effect of original and subsequent treatments because differences in OS are potentially confounded by crossover, and a relevant number of patients assigned to chemotherapy arms received tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) as second- or third-line treatment after disease progression. The high proportion of crossover may extend the benefit associated with the administration of TKIs to patients assigned to the control arm, and its "salvage"-effect may compensate for the relevant differences in PFS of first-line treatment consistently demonstrated in all TKI trials. Results for the INFORM trial (maintenance therapy with gefitinib following platinum-based chemotherapy) provided evidence that maintenance therapy with gefitinib significantly improved PFS, with greatest benefit in patients harboring EGFR mutation. Despite a high crossover rate (53%) final OS results of this study have now demonstrated a significant survival benefit for the gefitinib-treated EGFR mutation-positive patients (46.9 vs. 21.0 months, P=0.036). This is the first randomized clinical trial that showed a significant and clinical meaningful OS benefit in EGFR mutation-positive NSCLC patients following maintenance therapy with gefitinib as compared to placebo. It remains to be seen whether further exploration of this treatment strategy will confirm these promising results.

Leukemia cutis - epidemiology, clinical presentation, and differential diagnoses.

Leukemia cutis is an extramedullary manifestation of leukemia. The frequency and age distribution depend on the leukemia subtype. The clinical and morphological findings have a wide range of cutaneous manifestations and may present with nodular lesions and plaques. Rare manifestations include erythematous macules, blisters and ulcers which can each occur alone or in combination. Apart from solitary or grouped lesions, leukemia cutis may also present with an erythematous rash in a polymorphic clinical pattern. Consequently, leukemia cutis has to be distinguished from numerous differential diagnoses, i. e. cutaneous metastases of visceral malignancies, lymphoma, drug eruptions, viral infections, syphilis, ulcers of various origins, and blistering diseases. In the oral mucosa, gingival hyperplasia is the main differential diagnosis. The knowledge of the clinical morphology is of tremendously importance in cases in which leukemia was not yet known.