Prognostic Role of Circulating Tumor Cells in Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma: A Large, Multicenter, Prospective Trial.

BACKGROUND: Circulating tumor cells (CTCs) correlate with adverse prognosis in patients with breast, colorectal, lung, and prostate cancer. Little data are available for renal cell carcinoma (RCC). MATERIALS AND METHODS: We designed a multicenter prospective observational study to assess the correlation between CTC counts and progression-free survival (PFS) in patients with metastatic RCC treated with an antiangiogenic tyrosine kinase inhibitor as a first-line regimen; overall survival (OS) and response were secondary objectives. CTC counts were enumerated by the CellSearch system at four time points: day 0 of treatment, day 28, day 56 and then at progression, or at 12 months in the absence of progression. RESULTS: One hundred ninety-five eligible patients with a median age of 69 years were treated with sunitinib (77.5%) or pazopanib (21%). At baseline, 46.7% of patients had one or more CTCs per milliliter (range, 1 to 263). Thirty patients had at least three CTCs, with a median PFS of 5.8 versus 15 months in the remaining patients (p = .002; hazard ratio [HR], 1.99), independently of the International Metastatic RCC Database Consortium score at multivariate analysis (HR, 1.91; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.16-3.14). Patients with at least three CTCs had a shorter estimated OS of 13.8 months versus 52.8 months in those with fewer than three CTCs (p = .003; HR, 1.99; multivariate analysis HR, 1.67; 95% CI, 0.95-2.93). Baseline CTC counts did not correlate with response; neither did having CTC sequencing counts greater than or equal to one, two, three, four, or five. CONCLUSION: We provide prospective evidence that the presence of three or more CTCs at baseline is associated with a significantly shorter PFS and OS in patients with metastatic RCC. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: This prospective study evaluated whether the presence of circulating tumor cells (CTCs) in the peripheral blood correlates with activity of first-line tyrosine kinase inhibitors in metastatic renal cell carcinoma (RCC). This study demonstrated that almost half of patients with metastatic RCC have at least one CTC in their blood and that those patients with at least three CTCs are at increased risk of early progressive disease and early death due to RCC. Studies incorporating CTC counts in the prognostic algorithms of metastatic RCC are warranted.

Comprehensive analysis of 34 MiT family translocation renal cell carcinomas and review of the literature: investigating prognostic markers and therapy targets.

Recently cabozantinib, a tyrosine kinase inhibitor with activity against VEGF, MET, AXL, and downregulating cathepsin K in vitro, has been proposed for the treatment of advanced clear and non-clear renal cell carcinomas. Since it is well known that cathepsin K is expressed in the majority of MiT family translocation renal cell carcinomas, we investigated cathepsin K, MET, AXL, and VEGF in a large series of those tumours, looking for possible predictive markers. We collected the clinicopathological features of 34 genetically confirmed MiT family translocation renal cell carcinomas [26 Xp11 and 8 t(6;11) renal cell carcinomas] and studied them using an immunohistochemical panel including PAX8, cathepsin K, HMB45, Melan-A, CD68 (PG-M1), CK7, CA9, MET, AXL and by FISH for VEGFA and MET. Cathepsin K was expressed in 14 of 26, HMB45 in 8 of 25, and Melan-A in 4 of 23 Xp11 renal cell carcinomas, whereas labelling for CK7 and CA9 was minimal. In t(6;11) renal cell carcinoma, cathepsin K and melanogenesis markers were constantly positive, whereas CK7 and CA9 were negative. None of the 34 carcinomas showed CD68 (PG-M1) and AXL expression. One aggressive Xp11 renal cell carcinoma showed increased VEGFA gene copy number (4-5 copies) with concurrent gains of TFE3 and TFEB. None of the 34 carcinomas showed MET gene amplification, whereas staining for MET was found in 7 of 8 t(6;11) and in 16 of 24 Xp11 renal cell carcinomas, and in the latter cases, when the expression was >50%, correlated with aggressiveness (p=0.0049). In Xp11 renal cell carcinomas, the aggressiveness was also correlated with larger tumour size (p=0.0008) and the presence of necrosis (p=0.027) but not nucleolar grading (p=1). Interestingly, in patients with tumours exhibiting two of three parameters (necrosis, larger tumour size and MET immunolabelling >50%) an aggressive clinical behaviour was observed in 88% of cases. In conclusion, cathepsin K, CD68 (PG-M1), CK7, CA9, and PAX8 is a useful panel for the diagnosis. Larger tumour size, the presence of necrosis and MET immunohistochemical expression correlate with aggressive behaviour in Xp11 renal cell carcinomas, especially in combination. VEGF, MET, cathepsin K but not AXL may be potential predictive markers for targeted therapy in MiT family translocation renal cell carcinomas.

Oral maintenance metronomic vinorelbine versus best supportive care in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer after platinum-based chemotherapy: The MA.NI.LA. multicenter, randomized, controlled, phase II trial.

BACKGROUND: Oral vinorelbine administered at the maximum tolerated dose has already showed activity and a good safety profile in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). The MA.NI.LA study was a phase II, multicenter, randomized, controlled trial that aimed to assess the effects of a 'switched maintenance' regimen with oral metronomic vinorelbine (OMV) in patients with NSCLC who had not progressed after first-line platinum-based chemotherapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to either OMV (50 mg three-times weekly) as maintenance treatment or best supportive care (BSC). The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS). Secondary endpoints included overall survival (OS), objective disease control rate (DCR, CR + PR + SD), safety and quality of life. RESULTS: In total, 61 and 59 patients were assigned to OMV and BSC, respectively. At a median follow-up of 23.9 (IQR 10.2-38.2) months, patients treated with OMV reported a significantly lower progression rate compared to patient in the BSC arm (89% [54/61] vs 96% [56/58]; HR 0.73; 90% CI 0.53-0.999, p = 0.049). Median PFS for patients treated with vinorelbine was 4.3 months (95% CI 2.8-5.6) vs 2.8 months (95% CI 1.9-4.5) for patients receiving BSC. This benefit was specifically evident in patients aged ≥70 years, in current smokers, and in those who reported disease stabilization as best response to induction chemotherapy. OS and response rate and quality of life were similar in the two arms. Drop-out rate for major toxicity with OMV was unexpectedly high (25%, 14/61) mainly due to grade 3-4 neutropenia (11%, 7/61). Conclusions In patients with unselected NSCLC achieving disease control after platinum-based chemotherapy switch maintenance therapy with OMV prolonged PFS compared to BSC; however, the optimal dose of OMV requires further investigation.

Clinical outcomes of oral metronomic vinorelbine in advanced non-small cell lung cancer: correlations with pharmacokinetics and MDR1 polymorphisms.

PURPOSE: This study investigated correlations of the clinical outcomes of oral metronomic vinorelbine (VNR) with VNR pharmacokinetics and MDR1 polymorphisms. METHODS: Eighty-two patients with metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) unfit for standard chemotherapy were treated with VNR at the oral doses of 20-30 mg every other day or 50 mg three times a week. They had a performance status (PS) ≤ 3, were > 70-year-old and drug-naïve or cisplatin-pretreated. MDR1 2677G > T and 3435C > T polymorphisms were analysed and blood concentrations of VNR and desacetyl-VNR (dVNR: active metabolite) assayed. Overall survival (OS), treatment duration and drug-related toxicity were the main endpoints. RESULTS: Median OS and treatment duration were 27 weeks (range 1.3-183) and 15 weeks (range 1.3-144), respectively. OS was directly correlated with the duration of VNR treatment and number of therapy lines after VNR treatment (multiple linear regression: adjusted r2 = 0.71; p < 0.00001). Neither MDR1 genotypes nor VNR/dVNR concentrations predicted OS. VNR blood levels were positively correlated with platelet counts (r2 = 0.12; p = 0.0036). Patients who had long-term benefit (treated for ≥ 6 month without toxicity) showed lower VNR concentrations than those who had not. Twelve patients stopped therapy due to grade 3-4 toxicity. Toxicity was associated with blood concentrations of VNR ≥ 1.57 ng/mL and dVNR ≥ 3.04 ng/mL, but not with MDR1 polymorphisms. CONCLUSIONS: Neither pharmacokinetic nor pharmacogenetic monitoring seem useful to predict OS. On the other hand, high VNR and dVNR blood levels were associated with severe toxicity.

Oral Metronomic Vinorelbine (OMV) in elderly or pretreated patients with advanced non small cell lung cancer: outcome and pharmacokinetics in the real world.

Background Oral metronomic therapy (OMV) is particularly suitable for palliative care, and schedules adapted for unfit patients are advisable. This study investigated the effects of oral vinorelbine given every other day without interruption and its pharmacokinetic profile in patients with advanced lung cancer. Materials and Methods Ninety-two patients received OMV at doses of 20, 30 or 50 mg. Toxic events, clinical benefit and overall survival were analysed. Blood pharmacokinetics were evaluated in 82 patients. Results Median treatment duration and overall survival were 15 (range 1.3-144) and 32.3 weeks, respectively; fourty-eight (60%) patients experienced clinical benefit. Outcomes were unrelated to previous therapies, age, histology or comorbidities. Toxicity was associated with higher blood concentrations of the drug. Pharmacokinetics were stable for up to two years, and were not influenced by treatment line or age. Conclusions OMV produced non-negligible survival in patients and also showed stable long-term blood concentrations. The schedule of 20-30 mg every other day without interruption gave good tolerability and clinical benefit.

Is It Possible to Improve Prognostic Classification in Patients Affected by Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma With an Intermediate or Poor Prognosis?

BACKGROUND: The International mRCC (metastatic renal cell carcinoma) Database Consortium (IMDC) is the standard classification for mRCC. We aimed to evaluate the outcomes of a large cohort of patients with an intermediate or a poor prognosis treated with sunitinib using a different cutoff point for IMDC to improve the classification. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with an intermediate or a poor prognosis according to the IMDC criteria and treated with sunitinib were included in the present study. A new cutoff point was used to categorize the patients. The new score was validated in an independent cohort of patients. RESULTS: A total of 457 patients were included in the present study. Significant differences in overall survival (OS) were highlighted regarding the number of prognostic factors. Three categories were identified according to the presence of 1 (ie, favorable-intermediate group), 2 (ie, real-intermediate group), and > 2 (ie, poor group) factors. The corresponding median OS periods were 32.9, 20.0, and 8.9 months, with significant differences among the groups. The validation cohort included 389 patients. The median OS period for the favorable-intermediate group, real-intermediate group, and poor group was 34.3, 19.4, and 9.0 months, respectively, with confirmed significant differences among the groups. CONCLUSION: Our analysis revealed significant differences among patients with an intermediate prognosis using the IMDC prognostic factors. Further investigations to optimize the use of available and upcoming therapies are required.

First-Line PAzopanib in NOn-clear-cell Renal cArcinoMA: The Italian Retrospective Multicenter PANORAMA Study.

INTRODUCTION: Pazopanib is a standard first-line treatment for metastatic clear-cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC). Very few data on its activity in non-clear-cell renal cell carcinoma (nccRCC) are currently available. The aim of this study was to retrospectively analyze efficacy and toxicity of pazopanib in nccRCC patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Records from advanced nccRCC patients (consecutive sample) treated with first-line pazopanib between 2010 and 2015 at 17 Italian centers were reviewed. Response rate, progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS) were evaluated. Univariate and descriptive analyses were performed. RESULTS: Thirty-seven patients with nccRCC were treated with first-line pazopanib; 51% had papillary histology, 24% chromophobe, 22% unclassified, and 3% had Xp11.2 translocation. Dose reductions/temporary interruptions for toxicity were required in 46% of cases. Grade (G) 3/4 toxicity was seen in 32%, G1/2 in 89% of cases; 81% achieved disease control, with 10 partial responses (27%) and 20 cases of stable disease (54%); 16% of patients had disease progression as best response. Median PFS and OS were 15.9 and 17.3 months, respectively. In univariate analysis, nephrectomy (P = .020), Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center (MSKCC) score (P < .001), basal neutrophil/lymphocyte ratio (NLR; P = .009) and performance status (PS) (P = .001) were associated with PFS; MSKCC score (P < .001), International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium score (P = .003), PS (P < .0001), nephrectomy (P = .002), histology (P = .035), dose reductions/interruptions (P = .039), best response to treatment (P < .001), and NLR (P = .008) were associated with OS. CONCLUSION: In nccRCC patients, treatment with pazopanib was effective and feasible; dose reductions required for toxicity were similar as expected in ccRCC.

GEMOX: An Active Regimen for the Treatment of Luminal and Human Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor 2-Positive Metastatic Breast Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Pretreated metastatic breast cancer (MBC) remains a formidable challenge with unmet needs both in terms of prolonged survival and quality-of-life-related issues. METHODS: We collected data from 27 MBC patients treated with gemcitabine and oxaliplatin (GEMOX) at our institution between June 2009 and April 2015. The patients were heavily pretreated, and all had previously been exposed to anthracyclines and taxanes. RESULTS: We achieved a complete response in 1 patient (4%), a partial response in 7 patients (26%) and stable disease in 12 patients (44%), while 6 patients (22%) experienced progressive disease. The response of 1 patient (4%) could not be evaluated because she interrupted her treatment during the first cycle due to a major reaction to oxaliplatin. We observed grade 4 hypertransaminasaemia in only 1 patient (4%) and grade 2 neuropathy in 16 patients (59%). Grade 3 leuconeutropenia was observed in 5 patients (18%). The median progression-free survival was 5.9 months and the median overall survival was 9.6 months. CONCLUSIONS: GEMOX is an efficient and well-tolerated salvage regimen for MBC patients.

Targeted therapies for advanced and metastatic adenocarcinoma of the gastroesophageal junction: is there something new?

Despite improvements in systemic chemotherapy (CT), the prognosis of metastatic adenocarcinoma of the gastroesophageal junction remains poor. Over the years, new targeting agents have become available and were tested, with or without CT, in first or subsequent lines of therapy. The epidermal growth factor receptor family was targeted with monoclonal antibodies (MoAbs) (trastuzumab, cetuximab, panitumumab) and tyrosin kinase inhibitors (TKIs) (lapatinib, erlotinib, gefitinib). Only trastuzumab, in combination with cisplatin and fluoropyrimidines, significantly improved overall survival (OS) in first-line therapy (13.8 vs. 11.1 months). Angiogenesis also was targeted with MoAbs (bevacizumab and ramucirumab); ramucirumab, a vascular endothelial growth factor-receptor 2 antagonist, enhanced OS in two phase III studies in the first (9.6 vs. 7.4 months) and subsequent lines of treatment (5.2 vs. 3.8 months), while the bevacizumab study was negative. TKIs (sunitinib, sorafenib, regorafenib, apatinib) were tested in this setting in phase II studies in the second/third line, only showing modest antitumor activity. The hepatocyte growth factor receptor (MET) was targeted in untreated patients in a phase III trial with MoAb rilotumumab, with or without CT, but the study was stopped because of mortality excess in the rilotumumab arm. Mammalian target of rapamycin (MTOR) pathway inhibition with everolimus was tested in pretreated patients in a placebo-controlled phase III trial who failed to improve OS (5.4 vs. 4.3 months). In conclusion, considering the modest survival gain obtained overall, the high cost of these therapies and the quality of life issue must be primarily considered in treating these patients.

First-line sunitinib versus pazopanib in metastatic renal cell carcinoma: Results from the International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium.

BACKGROUND: Sunitinib (SU) and pazopanib (PZ) are standards of care for first-line treatment of metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). However, how the efficacy of these drugs translates into effectiveness on a population-based level is unknown. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We used the International mRCC Database Consortium (IMDC) to assess overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), response rate (RR) and performed proportional hazard regression adjusting for IMDC prognostic groups. Second-line OS (OS2) and second-line PFS (PFS2) were also evaluated. RESULTS: We obtained data from 7438 patients with mRCC treated with either first-line SU (n = 6519) or PZ (n = 919) with an overall median follow-up of 40.4 months (95% confidence interval [CI] 39.2-42.1). There were no significant differences in IMDC prognostic groups (p = 0.36). There was no OS difference between SU and PZ (22.3 versus 22.6 months, respectively, p = 0.65). When adjusted for IMDC criteria, the hazard ratio (HR) of death for PZ versus SU was 1.03 (95% CI 0.92-1.17, p = 0.58). There was no PFS difference between SU and PZ (8.4 versus 8.3 months, respectively, p = 0.17). When adjusted for IMDC criteria, the HR for PFS for PZ versus SU was 1.08 (95% CI 0.981-1.19, p = 0.12). There was no difference in RR between SU and PZ (30% versus 28%, respectively, p = 0.15). We also found no difference in any second-line treatment between either post-SU or post-PZ groups for OS2 (13.1 versus 11 months, p = 0.27) and PFS2 (3.7 versus 5.0 months, p = 0.07). CONCLUSIONS: We confirmed in real-world practice that SU and PZ have similar efficacy in the first-line setting for mRCC and do not affect outcomes with subsequent second-line treatment.

Adjuvant Carboplatin Treatment in 115 Patients With Stage I Seminoma: Retrospective Multicenter Survey.

BACKGROUND: The administration of carboplatin AUC 7 has become a standard adjuvant option for patients undergoing orchiectomy for stage I seminoma, in alternative to radiotherapy on retroperitoneal lymphnodes or surveillance. The toxicity of AUC 7 carboplatin appeared manageable in the pivotal trial of Oliver et al, but dose ranges were not reported. Fear of toxicity may induce arbitrary dose reductions, which may potentially compromise patients' outcome. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We reviewed adjuvant carboplatin administration in 115 stage I seminoma patients followed in 11 Italian medical oncology centers since 2005. Clinical and pathological data, modality of carboplatin dose calculation, dose reductions, toxicities, and relapses were recorded. RESULTS: Median age was 35 years (range, 18-65 years), adverse prognostic factors were either T ≥ 4 cm (17.4%) or rete testis invasion (28.7%), both of them (35.7%), none or unspecified (18.3%). GFR was estimated mainly by Cockroft-Gault formula (55.7%) or Jeliffe formula (26.1%), with a median of 105 mL/min (range, 75-209 mL/min). The median dose of carboplatin was 900 mg (range, 690-1535 mg). A dose reduction > 10% was applied to 14 patients. Toxicities were mild fatigue, moderate nausea/vomiting, 5.2% of grade 3 to 4 thrombocytopenia. After a median follow-up of 22.1 months, 5.2% of patients have relapsed in the retroperitoneal lymph nodes. None of the patients that relapsed were treated with reduced dose. All but one achieved complete remission with salvage chemotherapy. CONCLUSIONS: Adjuvant AUC 7 carboplatin reduce relapses of stage I seminoma patients to 5.2%, with manageable toxicities. Dose reductions should be proscribed.

Safety and Clinical Outcomes of Abiraterone Acetate After Docetaxel in Octogenarians With Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer: Results of the Italian Compassionate Use Named Patient Programme.

UNLABELLED: Metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer mainly affects older men, opening issues about the efficacy and safety of therapies in this population. We have demonstrated that abiraterone, a selective androgen biosynthesis inhibitor, is a safe and active therapeutic option in a subgroup of 47 very elderly adults (aged > 80 years) enrolled in the Italian named patient program, with a tolerability profile and clinical outcomes comparable to those of younger population. BACKGROUND: Prostate cancer mainly affects elderly men, who are often frail and whose reduced physiological reserves and multiple comorbidities increase the risk of side effects. The availability of new drugs has improved the overall survival (OS) of patients with castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC) but has increased the number of very elderly CRPC patients receiving anticancer drugs, raising questions about their efficacy and safety in this population. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We assessed the tolerability of abiraterone (AA) in a cohort of very elderly adults with metastatic CRPC (mCRPC) enrolled in the Italian AA named patient program and analyzed their clinical outcomes. We retrospectively reviewed the clinical records of 47 mCRPC patients aged > 80 years who had received AA after docetaxel. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to calculate OS and progression-free survival (PFS). Safety and clinical outcomes were also analyzed by age group (< 80 and > 80 years). Cox regression analysis was used to calculate the differences in PFS and OS between the groups according to the stratification variables. RESULTS: In very elderly men, the prostate-specific antigen response rate was 48.9%, and the median PFS and OS were 8 and 18 months, respectively. The differences in toxicities between the older and younger age groups were not major. The limitation of the present study was mainly its retrospective nature. CONCLUSION: Our data show that AA is active and safe in very elderly patients and leads to outcomes similar to those observed in younger patients, thus confirming that AA is a manageable therapeutic option for this patient population.

The role of chemotherapy in metastatic gastric cancer.

In the setting of metastatic or inoperable gastric cancer, the current evidence shows that chemotherapy improves survival in comparison to best supportive care and that combination chemotherapy is superior to monotherapy in terms of survival, response rate and symptom control. Many randomized phase III trials tested different combinations of therapies showing better outcome for cisplatin-containing schedules. In recent years, new drugs, such as docetaxel, oxaliplatin, irinotecan, capecitabine and S1 have also been tested in phase III studies. Unfortunately, in all of these studies, but one, the median survival remained below one year. Although there are no internationally accepted standard regimens, in Europe, ECF (epirubicin, cisplatin, fluorouracil) has been considered the reference regimen; in the US cisplatin-fluoropyrimidine combinations are mainly used, while in Japan, cisplatin with S1 has become the standard. Currently, various targeted agents are being tested in clinical trials and promising data have been recently published for trastuzumab-containing therapy, with median survival exceeding one year. As regards progressive disease, about 20%-50% of patients receive second line chemotherapy and, although two phase III studies reported survival benefit with single-agent chemotherapy, the role of chemotherapy in this setting still needs to be defined. Despite the progress of recent decades, metastatic gastric cancer remains an incurable disease, and treatment options should primarily take into account the quality of life and quality-adjusted survival of patients. The hope for the future is that tailored interventions based on new cytotoxic drugs, targeted therapies and integration of molecular determinants may help to improve the current treatments.

Multiple-target chemotherapy (LV-modulated 5-FU bolus and continuous infusion, oxaliplatin, CPT- 11) in advanced 5-FU-refractory colorectal cancer: MTD definition and efficacy evaluation. A phase I-II study.

AIMS AND BACKGROUND: To identify the maximum tolerated doses and to define the activity of a regimen incorporating leucovorin (LV)-modulated 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) bolus and continuous infusion, oxaliplatin (I-OHP) and irinotecan (CPT-11) in patients with advanced, 5-FU-refractory colorectal cancer (CRC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Starting doses: LV 100 mg/m2 as a 2-hour infusion followed by 5-FU 300 mg/m2 bolus administration followed by 5-FU 500 mg/m2 as a 22-hour infusion on days 1 and 2; I-OHP 65 mg/m2 as a 2-hour infusion concomitantly with LV on day 1; CPT-11 90 mg/m2 concomitantly with LV on day 2. Planned cycle interval: 2 weeks. RESULTS: Two hundred twenty-six cycles were administered to 27 patients. Recommended doses were 5-FU bolus 300 mg/m2, 5-FU protracted infusion 500 mg/m2, I-OHP 75 mg/m2, and CPT-11 150 mg/m2. Among 25 patients evaluable for response we observed 13 disease stabilizations (52%; 95% CI: 33-71%), 6 instances of disease progression and 6 responses (24%; 95% CI: 7-41%). Median time to progression and overall survival were 24 and 60 weeks, respectively. A cycle delay > 3 days was observed in 134/199 cycles (67%). CONCLUSIONS: This study confirms the feasibility of triplet chemotherapy in patients with advanced 5-FU-refractory CRC.