Tislelizumab plus chemotherapy versus placebo plus chemotherapy as first line treatment for advanced gastric or gastro-oesophageal junction adenocarcinoma: RATIONALE-305 randomised, double blind, phase 3 trial.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of tislelizumab added to chemotherapy as first line (primary) treatment for advanced gastric or gastro-oesophageal junction adenocarcinoma compared with placebo plus chemotherapy. DESIGN: Randomised, double blind, placebo controlled, phase 3 study. SETTING: 146 medical centres across Asia, Europe, and North America, between 13 December 2018 and 28 February 2023. PARTICIPANTS: 1657 patients aged ≥18 years with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 negative locally advanced unresectable or metastatic gastric or gastro-oesophageal junction adenocarcinoma, regardless of programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression status, who had not received systemic anticancer therapy for advanced disease. INTERVENTIONS: Patients were randomly (1:1) assigned to receive either tislelizumab 200 mg or placebo intravenously every three weeks in combination with chemotherapy (investigator's choice of oxaliplatin and capecitabine, or cisplatin and 5-fluorouracil) and stratified by region, PD-L1 expression, presence or absence of peritoneal metastases, and investigator's choice of chemotherapy. Treatment continued until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary endpoint was overall survival, both in patients with a PD-L1 tumour area positivity (TAP) score of ≥5% and in all randomised patients. Safety was assessed in all those who received at least one dose of study treatment. RESULTS: Of 1657 patients screened between 13 December 2018 and 9 February 2021, 660 were ineligible due to not meeting the eligibility criteria, withdrawal of consent, adverse events, or other reasons. Overall, 997 were randomly assigned to receive tislelizumab plus chemotherapy (n=501) or placebo plus chemotherapy (n=496). Tislelizumab plus chemotherapy showed statistically significant improvements in overall survival versus placebo plus chemotherapy in patients with a PD-L1 TAP score of ≥5% (median 17.2 months v 12.6 months; hazard ratio 0.74 (95% confidence interval 0.59 to 0.94); P=0.006 (interim analysis)) and in all randomised patients (median 15.0 months v 12.9 months; hazard ratio 0.80 (0.70 to 0.92); P=0.001 (final analysis)). Grade 3 or worse treatment related adverse events were observed in 54% (268/498) of patients in the tislelizumab plus chemotherapy arm versus 50% (246/494) in the placebo plus chemotherapy arm. CONCLUSIONS: Tislelizumab added to chemotherapy as primary treatment for advanced or metastatic gastric or gastro-oesophageal junction adenocarcinoma provided superior overall survival with a manageable safety profile versus placebo plus chemotherapy in patients with a PD-L1 TAP score of ≥5%, and in all randomised patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03777657.

A systematic review of cytoreductive prostatectomy outcomes and complications in oligometastatic disease.

Objective: To analyze outcomes and complications of cytoreductive prostatectomy (CRP) for oligometastatic prostate cancer (PCa) in order to elucidate its role in this space. Methods: We performed a systematic literature search using three databases (Medline, Scopus, and Web of Science). The primary endpoints were oncologic outcomes. The secondary endpoints were complication rates and functional results. Results: In all studies, overall survival was better or at least comparable variable in the groups with CRP compared to no local treatment. The greatest benefit from CRP in 5-year overall survival in one study was 67.4% for CRP versus 22.5% for no local treatment. Cancer-specific survival (CSS) showed the same trend. Several authors found significant benefits from CSS in the CRP group: from 79% vs. 46% to 100% vs. 61%. CRP was a predictor of better CSS (hazard ratio 0.264, p=0.004). Positive surgical margin rates differed widely from 28.6% to 100.0%. Urinary continence in CRP versus RP for localized PCa was significantly lower (57.4% vs. 90.8%, p<0.0001). Severe incontinence occurred seldom (2.5%-18.6%). Total complication rates after CRP differed widely, from 7.0% to 43.6%. Rates of grades 1 and 2 events prevailed. Patients on ADT alone also showed a considerable number of complications varying from 5.9% to 57.7%. Conclusion: CRP improves medium-term cancer control in patients with oligometastatic PCa. The morbidity and complication rates of this surgery are comparable with other approaches, but postoperative incontinence rate is higher compared with RP for localized disease.

A single-lead ECG based cardiotoxicity detection in patients on polychemotherapy.

Background: Anti-cancer treatment can be fraught with cardiovascular complications, which is the most common cause of death among oncological survivors. Without appropriate cardiomonitoring during anti-cancer treatment, it becomes challenging to detect early signs of cardiovascular complications. In order to achieve higher survival rates, it is necessary to monitor oncological patients outpatiently after anti-cancer treatment administration. In this regard, we aim to evaluate the efficacy of single-lead ECG remote monitoring to detect cardiotoxicity in cancer patients with minimal cardiovascular diseases after the first cycle of polychemotherapy. Materials and methods: The study included patients 162 patients over 18 years old with first diagnosed different types of solid tumors, planed for adjuvant (within 8 weeks after surgery) or neoadjuvant polychemotherapy. All patients were monitored, outpatiently, during 14-21 days (depending on the regimen of polychemotherapy) after polychemotherapy administration using single-lead ECG. Results: QTc > 500 mc prolongation was detected in 8 patients (6.6 %), first-diagnosed arial fibrillation was detected in 11 patients (9 %) in period after chemotherapy administration. Moreover, left ventricular diastolic dysfunction using single-lead ECG after polychemotherapy was detected in 49 (40.1 %) patients with sensitivity 80 %, specificity 95 %, AUC 0.88 (95 % CI, 0.82-0.93). Conclusions: The side effects of cancer treatment may cause life-threatening risks. Early identification of cardiotoxicity plays a vital role in the solution of this problem. Using portable devices to detect early cardiotoxicity is a simple, convenient and affordable screening method, that can be used for promptly observation of patients.

Clinical effectiveness and safety of olaparib in BRCA-mutated, HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer in a real-world setting: final analysis of LUCY.

PURPOSE: The interim analysis of the phase IIIb LUCY trial demonstrated the clinical effectiveness of olaparib in patients with germline BRCA-mutated (gBRCAm), human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-negative metastatic breast cancer (mBC), with median progression-free survival (PFS) of 8.11 months, which was similar to that in the olaparib arm of the phase III OlympiAD trial (7.03 months). This prespecified analysis provides final overall survival (OS) and safety data. METHODS: The open-label, single-arm LUCY trial of olaparib (300 mg, twice daily) enrolled adults with gBRCAm or somatic BRCA-mutated (sBRCAm), HER2-negative mBC. Patients had previously received a taxane or anthracycline for neoadjuvant/adjuvant or metastatic disease and up to two lines of chemotherapy for mBC. RESULTS: Of 563 patients screened, 256 (gBRCAm, n = 253; sBRCAm, n = 3) were enrolled. In the gBRCAm cohort, median investigator-assessed PFS (primary endpoint) was 8.18 months and median OS was 24.94 months. Olaparib was clinically effective in all prespecified subgroups: hormone receptor status, previous chemotherapy for mBC, previous platinum-based chemotherapy (including by line of therapy), and previous cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 inhibitor use. The most frequent treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were nausea (55.3%) and anemia (39.2%). Few patients (6.3%) discontinued olaparib owing to a TEAE. No deaths associated with AEs occurred during the study treatment or 30-day follow-up. CONCLUSION: The LUCY patient population reflects a real-world population in line with the licensed indication of olaparib in mBC. These findings support the clinical effectiveness and safety of olaparib in patients with gBRCAm, HER2-negative mBC. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinical trials registration number: NCT03286842.

Human Blood Serum Can Diminish EGFR-Targeted Inhibition of Squamous Carcinoma Cell Growth through Reactivation of MAPK and EGFR Pathways.

Regardless of the presence or absence of specific diagnostic mutations, many cancer patients fail to respond to EGFR-targeted therapeutics, and a personalized approach is needed to identify putative (non)responders. We found previously that human peripheral blood and EGF can modulate the activities of EGFR-specific drugs on inhibiting clonogenity in model EGFR-positive A431 squamous carcinoma cells. Here, we report that human serum can dramatically abolish the cell growth rate inhibition by EGFR-specific drugs cetuximab and erlotinib. We show that this phenomenon is linked with derepression of drug-induced G1S cell cycle transition arrest. Furthermore, A431 cell growth inhibition by cetuximab, erlotinib, and EGF correlates with a decreased activity of ERK1/2 proteins. In turn, the EGF- and human serum-mediated rescue of drug-treated A431 cells restores ERK1/2 activity in functional tests. RNA sequencing revealed 1271 and 1566 differentially expressed genes (DEGs) in the presence of cetuximab and erlotinib, respectively. Erlotinib- and cetuximab-specific DEGs significantly overlapped. Interestingly, the expression of 100% and 75% of these DEGs restores to the no-drug level when EGF or a mixed human serum sample, respectively, is added along with cetuximab. In the case of erlotinib, EGF and human serum restore the expression of 39% and 83% of DEGs, respectively. We further assessed differential molecular pathway activation levels and propose that EGF/human serum-mediated A431 resistance to EGFR drugs can be largely explained by reactivation of the MAPK signaling cascade.

Large-scale assessment of pros and cons of autopsy-derived or tumor-matched tissues as the norms for gene expression analysis in cancers.

Normal tissues are essential for studying disease-specific differential gene expression. However, healthy human controls are typically available only in postmortal/autopsy settings. In cancer research, fragments of pathologically normal tissue adjacent to tumor site are frequently used as the controls. However, it is largely underexplored how cancers can systematically influence gene expression of the neighboring tissues. Here we performed a comprehensive pan-cancer comparison of molecular profiles of solid tumor-adjacent and autopsy-derived "healthy" normal tissues. We found a number of systemic molecular differences related to activation of the immune cells, intracellular transport and autophagy, cellular respiration, telomerase activation, p38 signaling, cytoskeleton remodeling, and reorganization of the extracellular matrix. The tumor-adjacent tissues were deficient in apoptotic signaling and negative regulation of cell growth including G2/M cell cycle transition checkpoint. We also detected an extensive rearrangement of the chemical perception network. Molecular targets of 32 and 37 cancer drugs were over- or underexpressed, respectively, in the tumor-adjacent norms. These processes may be driven by molecular events that are correlated between the paired cancer and adjacent normal tissues, that mostly relate to inflammation and regulation of intracellular molecular pathways such as the p38, MAPK, Notch, and IGF1 signaling. However, using a model of macaque postmortal tissues we showed that for the 30 min - 24-hour time frame at 4ºC, an RNA degradation pattern in lung biosamples resulted in an artifact "differential" expression profile for 1140 genes, although no differences could be detected in liver. Thus, such concerns should be addressed in practice.

Lazertinib Versus Gefitinib as First-Line Treatment in Patients With EGFR-Mutated Advanced Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer: Results From LASER301.

PURPOSE: Lazertinib is a potent, CNS-penetrant, third-generation epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) tyrosine kinase inhibitor. This global, phase III study (LASER301) compared lazertinib versus gefitinib in treatment-naïve patients with EGFR-mutated (exon 19 deletion [ex19del]/L858R) locally advanced or metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients were 18 years and older with no previous systemic anticancer therapy. Neurologically stable patients with CNS metastases were allowed. Patients were randomly assigned 1:1 to lazertinib 240 mg once daily orally or gefitinib 250 mg once daily orally, stratified by mutation status and race. The primary end point was investigator-assessed progression-free survival (PFS) by RECIST v1.1. RESULTS: Overall, 393 patients received double-blind study treatment across 96 sites in 13 countries. Median PFS was significantly longer with lazertinib than with gefitinib (20.6 v 9.7 months; hazard ratio [HR], 0.45; 95% CI, 0.34 to 0.58; P < .001). The PFS benefit of lazertinib over gefitinib was consistent across all predefined subgroups. The objective response rate was 76% in both groups (odds ratio, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.62 to 1.59). Median duration of response was 19.4 months (95% CI, 16.6 to 24.9) with lazertinib versus 8.3 months (95% CI, 6.9 to 10.9) with gefitinib. Overall survival data were immature at the interim analysis (29% maturity). The 18-month survival rate was 80% with lazertinib and 72% with gefitinib (HR, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.51 to 1.08; P = .116). Observed safety of both treatments was consistent with their previously reported safety profiles. CONCLUSION: Lazertinib demonstrated significant efficacy improvement compared with gefitinib in the first-line treatment of EGFR-mutated advanced NSCLC, with a manageable safety profile.

First-line nivolumab plus ipilimumab for metastatic non-small cell lung cancer, including patients with ECOG performance status 2 and other special populations: CheckMate 817.

BACKGROUND: CheckMate 817, a phase 3B study, evaluated flat-dose nivolumab plus weight-based ipilimumab in patients with metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Here, in this research, we report on first-line treatment in patients with Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status (PS) 0-1 (cohort A) and special populations (cohort A1: ECOG PS 2; or ECOG PS 0-1 with untreated brain metastases, renal impairment, hepatic impairment, or controlled HIV infection). METHODS: Cohorts A and A1 received nivolumab 240 mg every 2 weeks plus ipilimumab 1 mg/kg every 6 weeks. The primary endpoint was the incidence of grade 3-4 and grade 5 immune-mediated adverse events (IMAEs; adverse events (AEs) deemed potentially immune-related, occurring <100 days of last dose, and treated with immune-modulating medication (except endocrine events)) and treatment-related select AEs (treatment-related AEs with potential immunological etiology requiring frequent monitoring/intervention, reported between first dose and 30 days after the last dose) in cohort A; efficacy endpoints were secondary/exploratory. In cohort A1, safety/efficacy assessment was exploratory. RESULTS: The most common grade 3-4 IMAEs were pneumonitis (5.1%), diarrhea/colitis (4.9%), and hepatitis (4.6%) in cohort A (N=391) and diarrhea/colitis (3.5%), hepatitis (3.5%), and rash (3.0%) in cohort A1 (N=198). The most common grade 3-4 treatment-related select AEs were hepatic (5.9%), gastrointestinal (4.9%), and pulmonary (4.6%) events in cohort A and gastrointestinal (4.0%), skin (3.5%), and endocrine (3.0%) events in cohort A1. No grade 5 IMAEs or treatment-related select AEs occurred. Treatment-related deaths occurred in 4 (1.0%) and 3 (1.5%) patients in cohorts A and A1, respectively. Three-year overall survival (OS) rates were 33.7% and 20.5%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Flat-dose nivolumab plus weight-based ipilimumab was associated with manageable safety and durable efficacy in cohort A, consistent with data from phase 3 metastatic NSCLC studies. Special populations of cohort A1 including patients with ECOG PS 2 or ECOG PS 0-1 with untreated brain metastases had manageable treatment-related toxicity and clinically meaningful 3-year OS rate. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02869789.

Pan-cancer antagonistic inhibition pattern of ATM-driven G2/M checkpoint pathway vs other DNA repair pathways.

DNA repair mechanisms keep genome integrity and limit tumor-associated alterations and heterogeneity, but on the other hand they promote tumor survival after radiation and genotoxic chemotherapies. We screened pathway activation levels of 38 DNA repair pathways in nine human cancer types (gliomas, breast, colorectal, lung, thyroid, cervical, kidney, gastric, and pancreatic cancers). We took RNAseq profiles of the experimental 51 normal and 408 tumor samples, and from The Cancer Genome Atlas and Clinical Proteomic Tumor Analysis Consortium databases - of 500/407 normal and 5752/646 tumor samples, and also 573 normal and 984 tumor proteomic profiles from Proteomic Data Commons portal. For all the samplings we observed a congruent trend that all cancer types showed inhibition of G2/M arrest checkpoint pathway compared to the normal samples, and relatively low activities of p53-mediated pathways. In contrast, other DNA repair pathways were upregulated in most of the cancer types. The G2/M checkpoint pathway was statistically significantly downregulated compared to the other DNA repair pathways, and this inhibition was strongly impacted by antagonistic regulation of (i) promitotic genes CCNB and CDK1, and (ii) GADD45 genes promoting G2/M arrest. At the DNA level, we found that ATM, TP53, and CDKN1A genes accumulated loss of function mutations, and cyclin B complex genes - transforming mutations. These findings suggest importance of activation for most of DNA repair pathways in cancer progression, with remarkable exceptions of G2/M checkpoint and p53-related pathways which are downregulated and neutrally activated, respectively.

Tislelizumab Versus Docetaxel in Patients With Previously Treated Advanced NSCLC (RATIONALE-303): A Phase 3, Open-Label, Randomized Controlled Trial.

INTRODUCTION: The phase 3 RATIONALE-303 trial (NCT03358875) investigated the efficacy and safety of tislelizumab versus docetaxel in pretreated patients with advanced NSCLC. Here, we report the efficacy and safety results and describe the exploratory biomarker analyses. METHODS: A total of 805 patients aged more than or equal to 18 years with locally advanced or metastatic squamous or nonsquamous NSCLC were randomized 2:1 to intravenous tislelizumab 200 mg or docetaxel 75 mg/m2 every 3 weeks. Co-primary end points were overall survival (OS) in the intent-to-treat (ITT) and programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) tumor cell expression greater than or equal to 25% populations. The exploratory biomarker analyses included PD-L1 expression, tumor mutation burden, and gene expression profile. RESULTS: At the prespecified interim analysis (August 10, 2020), the co-primary end point of OS in the ITT population was met, with a statistically significant and clinically meaningful improvement in OS with tislelizumab versus docetaxel (median 17.2 versus 11.9 mo, respectively; hazard ratio [HR] = 0.64, p < 0.0001). At the final analysis (July 15, 2021), the other co-primary end point of OS in the PD-L1 tumor cell greater than or equal to 25% population was further met (median 19.3 versus 11.5 mo, respectively; HR = 0.53, p < 0.0001), and OS continued to improve in the ITT population (median 16.9 versus 11.9 mo, respectively, HR = 0.66). Exploratory biomarker analyses revealed the potential association of NOTCH1-4 mutations with improved tislelizumab efficacy for both OS and progression-free survival, whereas tissue tumor mutation burden correlated with progression-free survival benefit, but not OS benefit. No new safety signals were identified. CONCLUSIONS: Tislelizumab was found to have a significantly improved and long-term clinical benefit in OS versus docetaxel in pretreated patients with advanced NSCLC, regardless of PD-L1 expression.

Personalized targeted therapy prescription in colorectal cancer using algorithmic analysis of RNA sequencing data.

BACKGROUND: Overall survival of advanced colorectal cancer (CRC) patients remains poor, and gene expression analysis could potentially complement detection of clinically relevant mutations to personalize CRC treatments. METHODS: We performed RNA sequencing of formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded (FFPE) cancer tissue samples of 23 CRC patients and interpreted the data obtained using bioinformatic method Oncobox for expression-based rating of targeted therapeutics. Oncobox ranks cancer drugs according to the efficiency score calculated using target genes expression and molecular pathway activation data. The patients had primary and metastatic CRC with metastases in liver, peritoneum, brain, adrenal gland, lymph nodes and ovary. Two patients had mutations in NRAS, seven others had mutated KRAS gene. Patients were treated by aflibercept, bevacizumab, bortezomib, cabozantinib, cetuximab, crizotinib, denosumab, panitumumab and regorafenib as monotherapy or in combination with chemotherapy, and information on the success of totally 39 lines of therapy was collected. RESULTS: Oncobox drug efficiency score was effective biomarker that could predict treatment outcomes in the experimental cohort (AUC 0.77 for all lines of therapy and 0.91 for the first line after tumor sampling). Separately for bevacizumab, it was effective in the experimental cohort (AUC 0.87) and in 3 independent literature CRC datasets, n = 107 (AUC 0.84-0.94). It also predicted progression-free survival in univariate (Hazard ratio 0.14) and multivariate (Hazard ratio 0.066) analyses. Difference in AUC scores evidences importance of using recent biosamples for the prediction quality. CONCLUSION: Our results suggest that RNA sequencing analysis of tumor FFPE materials may be helpful for personalizing prescriptions of targeted therapeutics in CRC.

Experimentally Deduced Criteria for Detection of Clinically Relevant Fusion 3' Oncogenes from FFPE Bulk RNA Sequencing Data.

Drugs targeting receptor tyrosine kinase (RTK) oncogenic fusion proteins demonstrate impressive anti-cancer activities. The fusion presence in the cancer is the respective drug prescription biomarker, but their identification is challenging as both the breakpoint and the exact fusion partners are unknown. RNAseq offers the advantage of finding both fusion parts by screening sequencing reads. Paraffin (FFPE) tissue blocks are the most common way of storing cancer biomaterials in biobanks. However, finding RTK fusions in FFPE samples is challenging as RNA fragments are short and their artifact ligation may appear in sequencing libraries. Here, we annotated RNAseq reads of 764 experimental FFPE solid cancer samples, 96 leukemia samples, and 2 cell lines, and identified 36 putative clinically relevant RTK fusions with junctions corresponding to exon borders of the fusion partners. Where possible, putative fusions were validated by RT-PCR (confirmed for 10/25 fusions tested). For the confirmed 3'RTK fusions, we observed the following distinguishing features. Both moieties were in-frame, and the tyrosine kinase domain was preserved. RTK exon coverage by RNAseq reads upstream of the junction site were lower than downstream. Finally, most of the true fusions were present by more than one RNAseq read. This provides the basis for automatic annotation of 3'RTK fusions using FFPE RNAseq profiles.

Three-year follow-up and patient-reported outcomes from CheckMate 078: Nivolumab versus docetaxel in a predominantly Chinese patient population with previously treated advanced non-small cell lung cancer.

OBJECTIVES: In the phase 3 CheckMate 078 study, nivolumab prolonged overall survival (OS) and showed a favorable safety profile versus docetaxel in a predominantly Chinese patient population with previously treated advanced non-small cell lung cancer (aNSCLC). However, long-term efficacy, safety, and health-related quality of life findings with second-line nivolumab are very limited in Asian patients with previously treated aNSCLC. Here, we report updated clinical data and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) from the phase 3 CheckMate 078 trial with a 3-year minimum follow-up. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients with aNSCLC and disease progression after platinum-doublet chemotherapy were randomized 2:1 to nivolumab (3 mg/kg every 2 weeks) or docetaxel (75 mg/m2 every 3 weeks) until progression or unacceptable toxicity. The primary endpoint was OS; secondary endpoints included objective response rate, progression-free survival, safety, and disease-related symptom deterioration assessed using the Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS) by Week 12. Additional PRO assessments were exploratory endpoints. RESULTS: At ≥ 37.3 months follow-up, 3-year OS rates were 19% with nivolumab and 12% with docetaxel; 30% and 0% of responders remained in response for ≥ 3 years, respectively. Incidence of treatment-related adverse events occurring after 2 years was lower than during the first 2 years. No new treatment-related deaths were reported. By Week 12 of treatment, rates of disease-related symptom deterioration were 32% with nivolumab and 47% with docetaxel. Completion rates for PRO questionnaires were ≥ 80% in both arms. Clinically meaningful and sustained improvements in LCSS Average Symptom Burden Index scores and delayed time to first symptom deterioration were observed with nivolumab against docetaxel. CONCLUSIONS: At 3 years, nivolumab continued to demonstrate survival benefit versus docetaxel, exhibiting improvements in disease-related symptoms and overall health status in a predominantly Chinese patient population with previously treated aNSCLC. No new safety signals were observed. These findings are similar to the global population.

Experimental and Meta-Analytic Validation of RNA Sequencing Signatures for Predicting Status of Microsatellite Instability.

Microsatellite instability (MSI) is an important diagnostic and prognostic cancer biomarker. In colorectal, cervical, ovarian, and gastric cancers, it can guide the prescription of chemotherapy and immunotherapy. In laboratory diagnostics of susceptible tumors, MSI is routinely detected by the size of marker polymerase chain reaction products encompassing frequent microsatellite expansion regions. Alternatively, MSI status is screened indirectly by immunohistochemical interrogation of microsatellite binding proteins. RNA sequencing (RNAseq) profiling is an emerging source of data for a wide spectrum of cancer biomarkers. Recently, three RNAseq-based gene signatures were deduced for establishing MSI status in tumor samples. They had 25, 15, and 14 gene products with only one common gene. However, they were developed and tested on the incomplete literature of The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) sampling and never validated experimentally on independent RNAseq samples. In this study, we, for the first time, systematically validated these three RNAseq MSI signatures on the literature colorectal cancer (CRC) (n = 619), endometrial carcinoma (n = 533), gastric cancer (n = 380), uterine carcinosarcoma (n = 55), and esophageal cancer (n = 83) samples and on the set of experimental CRC RNAseq samples (n = 23) for tumors with known MSI status. We found that all three signatures performed well with area under the curve (AUC) ranges of 0.94-1 for the experimental CRCs and 0.94-1 for the TCGA CRC, esophageal cancer, and uterine carcinosarcoma samples. However, for the TCGA endometrial carcinoma and gastric cancer samples, only two signatures were effective with AUC 0.91-0.97, whereas the third signature showed a significantly lower AUC of 0.69-0.88. Software for calculating these MSI signatures using RNAseq data is included.

RNA Sequencing Data for FFPE Tumor Blocks Can Be Used for Robust Estimation of Tumor Mutation Burden in Individual Biosamples.

Tumor mutation burden (TMB) is a well-known efficacy predictor for checkpoint inhibitor immunotherapies. Currently, TMB assessment relies on DNA sequencing data. Gene expression profiling by RNA sequencing (RNAseq) is another type of analysis that can inform clinical decision-making and including TMB estimation may strongly benefit this approach, especially for the formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded (FFPE) tissue samples. Here, we for the first time compared TMB levels deduced from whole exome sequencing (WES) and RNAseq profiles of the same FFPE biosamples in single-sample mode. We took TCGA project data with mean sequencing depth 23 million gene-mapped reads (MGMRs) and found 0.46 (Pearson)-0.59 (Spearman) correlation with standard mutation calling pipelines. This was converted into low (<10) and high (>10) TMB per megabase classifier with area under the curve (AUC) 0.757, and application of machine learning increased AUC till 0.854. We then compared 73 experimental pairs of WES and RNAseq profiles with lower (mean 11 MGMRs) and higher (mean 68 MGMRs) RNA sequencing depths. For higher depth, we observed ~1 AUC for the high/low TMB classifier and 0.85 (Pearson)-0.95 (Spearman) correlation with standard mutation calling pipelines. For the lower depth, the AUC was below the high-quality threshold of 0.7. Thus, we conclude that using RNA sequencing of tumor materials from FFPE blocks with enough coverage can afford for high-quality discrimination of tumors with high and low TMB levels in a single-sample mode.

Ensartinib vs Crizotinib for Patients With Anaplastic Lymphoma Kinase-Positive Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

IMPORTANCE: Ensartinib, an oral tyrosine kinase inhibitor of anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK), has shown systemic and central nervous system efficacy for patients with ALK-positive non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). OBJECTIVE: To compare ensartinib with crizotinib among patients with advanced ALK-positive NSCLC who had not received prior treatment with an ALK inhibitor. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This open-label, multicenter, randomized, phase 3 trial conducted in 120 centers in 21 countries enrolled 290 patients between July 25, 2016, and November 12, 2018. Eligible patients were 18 years of age or older and had advanced, recurrent, or metastatic ALK-positive NSCLC. INTERVENTIONS: Patients were randomized (1:1) to ensartinib, 225 mg once daily, or crizotinib, 250 mg twice daily. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The primary end point was blinded independent review committee-assessed progression-free survival (PFS). Secondary end points included systemic and intracranial response, time to central nervous system progression, and overall survival. Efficacy was evaluated in the intent-to-treat (ITT) population as well as a prespecified modified ITT (mITT) population consisting of patients with central laboratory-confirmed ALK-positive NSCLC. RESULTS: A total of 290 patients (149 men [51.4%]; median age, 54 years [range, 25-90 years]) were randomized. In the ITT population, the median PFS was significantly longer with ensartinib than with crizotinib (25.8 [range, 0.03-44.0 months] vs 12.7 months [range, 0.03-38.6 months]; hazard ratio, 0.51 [95% CI, 0.35-0.72]; log-rank P < .001), with a median follow-up of 23.8 months (range, 0-44 months) for the ensartinib group and 20.2 months (range, 0-38 months) for the crizotinib group. In the mITT population, the median PFS in the ensartinib group was not reached, and the median PFS in the crizotinib group was 12.7 months (95% CI, 8.9-16.6 months; hazard ratio, 0.45; 95% CI, 0.30-0.66; log-rank P < .001). The intracranial response rate confirmed by a blinded independent review committee was 63.6% (7 of 11) with ensartinib vs 21.1% (4 of 19) with crizotinib for patients with target brain metastases at baseline. Progression-free survival for patients without brain metastases was not reached with ensartinib vs 16.6 months with crizotinib as a result of a lower central nervous system progression rate (at 12 months: 4.2% with ensartinib vs 23.9% with crizotinib; cause-specific hazard ratio, 0.32; 95% CI, 0.16-0.63; P = .001). Frequencies of treatment-related serious adverse events (ensartinib: 11 [7.7%] vs crizotinib: 9 [6.1%]), dose reductions (ensartinib: 34 of 143 [23.8%] vs crizotinib: 29 of 146 [19.9%]), or drug discontinuations (ensartinib: 13 of 143 [9.1%] vs crizotinib: 10 of 146 [6.8%]) were similar, without any new safety signals. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: In this randomized clinical trial, ensartinib showed superior efficacy to crizotinib in both systemic and intracranial disease. Ensartinib represents a new first-line option for patients with ALK-positive NSCLC. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02767804.

Chemotherapy with or without avelumab followed by avelumab maintenance versus chemotherapy alone in patients with previously untreated epithelial ovarian cancer (JAVELIN Ovarian 100): an open-label, randomised, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Although most patients with epithelial ovarian cancer respond to frontline platinum-based chemotherapy, around 70% will relapse within 3 years. The phase 3 JAVELIN Ovarian 100 trial compared avelumab (anti-PD-L1 monoclonal antibody) in combination with chemotherapy followed by avelumab maintenance, or chemotherapy followed by avelumab maintenance, versus chemotherapy alone in patients with treatment-naive epithelial ovarian cancer. METHODS: JAVELIN Ovarian 100 was a global, open-label, three-arm, parallel, randomised, phase 3 trial run at 159 hospitals and cancer treatment centres in 25 countries. Eligible women were aged 18 years and older with stage III-IV epithelial ovarian, fallopian tube, or peritoneal cancer (following debulking surgery, or candidates for neoadjuvant chemotherapy), and had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1:1) via interactive response technology to receive chemotherapy (six cycles; carboplatin dosed at an area under the serum-concentration-time curve of 5 or 6 intravenously every 3 weeks plus paclitaxel 175 mg/m2 every 3 weeks or 80 mg/m2 once a week [investigators' choice]) followed by avelumab maintenance (10 mg/kg intravenously every 2 weeks; avelumab maintenance group); chemotherapy plus avelumab (10 mg/kg intravenously every 3 weeks) followed by avelumab maintenance (avelumab combination group); or chemotherapy followed by observation (control group). Randomisation was in permuted blocks of size six and stratified by paclitaxel regimen and resection status. Patients and investigators were masked to assignment to the two chemotherapy groups without avelumab at the time of randomisation until completion of the chemotherapy phase. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival assessed by blinded independent central review in all randomly assigned patients (analysed by intention to treat). Safety was analysed in all patients who received at least one dose of study treatment. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02718417. The trial was fully enrolled and terminated at interim analysis due to futility, and efficacy is no longer being assessed. FINDINGS: Between May 19, 2016 and Jan 23, 2018, 998 patients were randomly assigned (avelumab maintenance n=332, avelumab combination n=331, and control n=335). At the planned interim analysis (data cutoff Sept 7, 2018), prespecified futility boundaries were crossed for the progression-free survival analysis, and the trial was stopped as recommended by the independent data monitoring committee and endorsed by the protocol steering committee. Median follow-up for progression-free survival for all patients was 10·8 months (IQR 7·1-14·9); 11·1 months (7·0-15·3) for the avelumab maintenance group, 11·0 months (7·4-14·5) for the avelumab combination group, and 10·2 months (6·7-14·0) for the control group. Median progression-free survival was 16·8 months (95% CI 13·5-not estimable [NE]) with avelumab maintenance, 18·1 months (14·8-NE) with avelumab combination treatment, and NE (18·2 months-NE) with control treatment. The stratified hazard ratio for progression-free survival was 1·43 (95% CI 1·05-1·95; one-sided p=0·99) with the avelumab maintenance regimen and 1·14 (0·83-1·56; one-sided p=0·79) with the avelumab combination regimen, versus control treatment. The most common grade 3-4 adverse events were anaemia (69 [21%] patients in the avelumab maintenance group, 63 [19%] in the avelumab combination group, and 53 [16%] in the control group), neutropenia (91 [28%], 99 [30%], and 88 [26%]), and neutrophil count decrease (49 [15%], 45 [14%], and 59 [18%]). Serious adverse events of any grade occurred in 92 (28%) patients in the avelumab maintenance group, 118 (36%) in the avelumab combination group, and 64 (19%) in the control group. Treatment-related deaths occurred in one (<1%) patient in the avelumab maintenance group (due to atrial fibrillation) and one (<1%) patient in the avelumab combination group (due to disease progression). INTERPRETATION: Although no new safety signals were observed, results do not support the use of avelumab in the frontline treatment setting. Alternative treatment regimens are needed to improve outcomes in patients with advanced epithelial ovarian cancer. FUNDING: Pfizer and Merck KGaA, Darmstadt, Germany.

Efficacy, Safety and Immunogenicity of MB02 (Bevacizumab Biosimilar) versus Reference Bevacizumab in Advanced Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: A Randomized, Double-Blind, Phase III Study (STELLA).

BACKGROUND: MB02 (bevacizumab biosimilar) showed similar structural, functional, and pharmacokinetic properties to reference bevacizumab (Avastin®; EU-bevacizumab). OBJECTIVES: To confirm clinical similarity between MB02 and EU-bevacizumab, a comparability study was undertaken in the first-line treatment of stage IIIB/IV non-squamous non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: This multinational, double-blind, randomized, phase III study (STELLA) compared MB02 or EU-bevacizumab (15 mg/kg) administered with chemotherapy (paclitaxel 200 mg/m2 and carboplatin AUC6) on Day 1 of every 3-week cycle for 6 cycles (Week 18), followed by MB02/EU-bevacizumab in blinded monotherapy until disease progression, unacceptable toxicity, death, withdrawal of consent or end of study (Week 52). The primary efficacy endpoint was objective response rate (ORR) evaluated by an independent radiological review committee (IRC) at Week 18 (intent-to-treat population). Secondary endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), safety and immunogenicity. RESULTS: A total of 627 subjects were randomized 1:1 to MB02 (n = 315) or EU-bevacizumab (n = 312). ORR, assessed by the IRC at Week 18, was comparable in MB02 (40.3%) and EU-bevacizumab (44.6%) groups. ORR risk ratio of 0.910 (90% CI 0.780 to 1.060; 95% CI 0.758 to 1.092) and ORR risk difference of -4.02 (90% CI -10.51 to 2.47; 95% CI -11.76 to 3.71) were within the similarity predefined margins. There were no significant differences between MB02 and EU-bevacizumab groups in median PFS (36.0 vs 37.3 weeks, respectively; HR 1.187; 95% CI 0.98 to 1.44) and median OS (not achieved; HR 1.108; 95% CI: 0.83 to 1.49) at the end of study. The safety profile of MB02 and EU-bevacizumab regarding nature, frequency and severity of the adverse events (AE) was comparable. The most frequent grade ≥3 investigational-product-related AEs were hypertension and anemia, with a difference between treatment groups of <5%. Anti-drug antibodies (ADA) and neutralizing ADA (NAb) incidence were similar in both treatment groups. CONCLUSION: MB02 demonstrated similar efficacy to EU-bevacizumab, in combination with carboplatin and paclitaxel, in subjects with advanced non-squamous NSCLC, with comparable safety and immunogenicity profiles. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: EudraCT No. 2017-001769-26; ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03296163.

A systematic review of nerve-sparing surgery for high-risk prostate cancer.

INTRODUCTION: We provide a systematic analysis of nerve-sparing surgery (NSS) to assess and summarize the risks and benefits of NSS in high-risk prostate cancer (PCa). EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: We have undertaken a systematic search of original articles using 3 databases: Medline/PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science. Original articles in English containing outcomes of nerve-sparing radical prostatectomy (RP) for high-risk PCa were included. The primary outcomes were oncological results: the rate of positive surgical margins and biochemical relapse. The secondary outcomes were functional results: erectile function (EF) and urinary continence. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: The rate of positive surgical margins differed considerably, from zero to 47%. The majority of authors found no correlation between NSS and a positive surgical margin rate. The rate of biochemical relapse ranged from 9.3% to 61%. Most of the articles lacked data on odds ratio (OR) for positive margin and biochemical relapse. The presented results showed no effect of nerve sparing (NS) on positive margin (OR=0.81, 0.6-1.09) or biochemical relapse (hazard ratio [HR]=0.93, 0.52-1.64). A strong association between NSS and potency rate was observed. Without NSS, between 0% and 42% of patients were potent, with unilateral 79-80%, with bilateral - up to 90-100%. Urinary continence was not strongly associated with NSS and was relatively good in both patients with and without NSS. CONCLUSIONS: NSS may provide benefits for patients with urinary continence and significantly improves EF in high-risk patients. Moreover, it is not associated with an increased risk of relapse in short- and middle-term follow-up. However, the advantages of using such a surgical technique are unclear.

Abnormal promoter DNA hypermethylation of the integrin, nidogen, and dystroglycan genes in breast cancer.

Cell transmembrane receptors and extracellular matrix components play a pivotal role in regulating cell activity and providing for the concerted integration of cells in the tissue structures. We have assessed DNA methylation in the promoter regions of eight integrin genes, two nidogen genes, and the dystroglycan gene in normal breast tissues and breast carcinomas (BC). The protein products of these genes interact with the basement membrane proteins LAMA1, LAMA2, and LAMB1; abnormal hypermethylation of the LAMA1, LAMA2, and LAMB1 promoters in BC has been described in our previous publications. In the present study, the frequencies of abnormal promoter hypermethylation in BC were 13% for ITGA1, 31% for ITGA4, 4% for ITGA7, 39% for ITGA9, 38% for NID1, and 41% for NID2. ITGA2, ITGA3, ITGA6, ITGB1, and DAG1 promoters were nonmethylated in normal and BC samples. ITGA4, ITGA9, and NID1 promoter hypermethylation was associated with the HER2 positive tumors, and promoter hypermethylation of ITGA1, ITGA9, NID1 and NID2 was associated with a genome-wide CpG island hypermethylated BC subtype. Given that ITGA4 is not expressed in normal breast, one might suggest that its abnormal promoter hypermethylation in cancer is non-functional and is thus merely a passenger epimutation. Yet, this assumption is not supported by our finding that it is not associated with a hypermethylated BC subtype. ITGA4 acquires expression in a subset of breast carcinomas, and methylation of its promoter may be preventive against expression in some tumors. Strong association of abnormal ITGA4 hypermethylation with the HER2 positive tumors (p = 0.0025) suggests that simultaneous presence of both HER2 and integrin α4 receptors is not beneficial for tumor cells. This may imply HER2 and integrin α4 signaling pathways interactions that are yet to be discovered.