Overall Survival with Adjuvant Pembrolizumab in Renal-Cell Carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Adjuvant pembrolizumab therapy after surgery for renal-cell carcinoma was approved on the basis of a significant improvement in disease-free survival in the KEYNOTE-564 trial. Whether the results regarding overall survival from the third prespecified interim analysis of the trial would also favor pembrolizumab was uncertain. METHODS: In this phase 3, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, we randomly assigned (in a 1:1 ratio) participants with clear-cell renal-cell carcinoma who had an increased risk of recurrence after surgery to receive pembrolizumab (at a dose of 200 mg) or placebo every 3 weeks for up to 17 cycles (approximately 1 year) or until recurrence, the occurrence of unacceptable toxic effects, or withdrawal of consent. A significant improvement in disease-free survival according to investigator assessment (the primary end point) was shown previously. Overall survival was the key secondary end point. Safety was a secondary end point. RESULTS: A total of 496 participants were assigned to receive pembrolizumab and 498 to receive placebo. As of September 15, 2023, the median follow-up was 57.2 months. The disease-free survival benefit was consistent with that in previous analyses (hazard ratio for recurrence or death, 0.72; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.59 to 0.87). A significant improvement in overall survival was observed with pembrolizumab as compared with placebo (hazard ratio for death, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.44 to 0.87; P = 0.005). The estimated overall survival at 48 months was 91.2% in the pembrolizumab group, as compared with 86.0% in the placebo group; the benefit was consistent across key subgroups. Pembrolizumab was associated with a higher incidence of serious adverse events of any cause (20.7%, vs. 11.5% with placebo) and of grade 3 or 4 adverse events related to pembrolizumab or placebo (18.6% vs. 1.2%). No deaths were attributed to pembrolizumab therapy. CONCLUSIONS: Adjuvant pembrolizumab was associated with a significant and clinically meaningful improvement in overall survival, as compared with placebo, among participants with clear-cell renal-cell carcinoma at increased risk for recurrence after surgery. (Funded by Merck Sharp and Dohme, a subsidiary of Merck; KEYNOTE-564 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03142334.).

A phase II trial of nivolumab followed by ipilimumab and nivolumab in advanced non-clear-cell renal cell carcinoma.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy of sequential treatment with ipilimumab and nivolumab following progression on nivolumab monotherapy in individuals with advanced, non-clear-cell renal cell carcinoma (nccRCC). MATERIALS AND METHODS: UNISoN (ANZUP1602; NCT03177239) was an open-label, single-arm, phase 2 clinical trial that recruited adults with immunotherapy-naïve, advanced nccRCC. Participants received nivolumab 240 mg i.v. two-weekly for up to 12 months (Part 1), followed by sequential addition of ipilimumab 1 mg/kg three-weekly for four doses to nivolumab if disease progression occurred during treatment (Part 2). The primary endpoint was objective tumour response rate (OTRR) and secondary endpoints included duration of response (DOR), progression-free (PFS) and overall survival (OS), and toxicity (treatment-related adverse events). RESULTS: A total of 83 participants were eligible for Part 1, including people with papillary (37/83, 45%), chromophobe (15/83, 18%) and other nccRCC subtypes (31/83, 37%); 41 participants enrolled in Part 2. The median (range) follow-up was 22 (16-30) months. In Part 1, the OTRR was 16.9% (95% confidence interval [CI] 9.5-26.7), the median DOR was 20.7 months (95% CI 3.7-not reached) and the median PFS was 4.0 months (95% CI 3.6-7.4). Treatment-related adverse events were reported in 71% of participants; 19% were grade 3 or 4. For participants who enrolled in Part 2, the OTRR was 10%; the median DOR was 13.5 months (95% CI 4.8-19.7) and the median PFS 2.6 months (95% CI 2.2-3.8). Treatment-related adverse events occurred in 80% of these participants; 49% had grade 3, 4 or 5. The median OS was 24 months (95% CI 16-28) from time of enrolment in Part 1. CONCLUSIONS: Nivolumab monotherapy had a modest effect overall, with a few participants experiencing a long DOR. Sequential combination immunotherapy by addition of ipilimumab in the context of disease progression to nivolumab in nccRCC is not supported by this study, with only a minority of participants benefiting from this strategy.

89Zirconium-labelled girentuximab (89Zr-TLX250) PET in Urothelial Cancer Patients (ZiPUP): protocol for a phase I trial of a novel staging modality for urothelial carcinoma.

INTRODUCTION: Bladder cancer is a lethal disease with a rising incidence on a background of limited conventional imaging modalities for staging (either CT of the chest-abdomen-pelvis or 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emitting tomography (FDG-PET/CT)). CT is known to have relatively low sensitivity for detecting low volume metastatic disease, an important goal when considering surgical interventions entailing significant potential morbidity. FDG is also limited, being predominantly renally excreted and, therefore, producing intense non-specific activity in the urinary tract, which limits its utility to detect bladder and upper tract lesions, or nodal metastases in close proximity to the urinary tract. 89Zirconium-labelled girentuximab (89Zr-TLX250) may have utility in the accurate staging of bladder and urothelial carcinomas, with less renal excretion as compared with FDG; however, this has not previously been investigated. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: 89Zirconium-labelled girentuximab PET in Urothelial Cancer Patients is a single-arm phase I trial examining the feasibility of using 89Zr-TLX250-PET/CT as a staging modality for urothelial and bladder carcinomas by examining isotope uptake by the cancer. This trial will also examine the safety and utility of 89Zr-TLX250-PET/CT in patients either undergoing preoperative staging of bladder or other urothelial carcinomas for curative intent, or with known metastatic urothelial carcinomas. All participants will undergo 89Zr-TLX250-PET/CT and will need to have undergone recent FDG-PET/CT for comparison. This trial aims to recruit 10 participants undergoing preoperative staging and 10 participants with known metastatic disease. The primary endpoint is feasibility defined by the ability to recruit to the target sample size within the study duration; secondary endpoints are safety, tolerability, sensitivity and specificity in detecting lymph node metastases compared with FDG-PET/CT. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethics approval has been obtained from the South Metropolitan Health Service Human Research Ethics Committee (RGS0000003940). Eligible patients will only be enrolled after providing written informed consent. Patients will be given a full explanation, in lay terms, of the aims of the study and potential risks including as a written patient information sheet. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBERS: ACTRN12621000411842, NCT05046665.

A phase I open label dose-escalation study to evaluate the tolerability, safety and immunological efficacy of sub-urothelial durvalumab injection in adults with muscle-invasive or high-risk non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer (SUBDUE-1, SUB-urothelial DUrvalumab injection-1 study): clinical trial protocol.

OBJECTIVES: This article presents the clinical trial protocol for a phase I open label dose-escalation study to evaluate the tolerability, safety and immunological efficacy of sub-urothelial durvalumab injection in adults with muscle-invasive or high-risk non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC), the SUB-urothelial DUrvalumab injection-1 study (SUBDUE-1). The primary objectives of this study are to assess the safety of sub-urothelial injection of durvalumab using patient reported outcome measures and observed local or systemic adverse events. The secondary objectives are to examine the local immunological efficacy of sub-urothelial administration of durvalumab. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The SUBDUE-1 trial will include adult patients with either high-risk NMIBC or MIBC, who are scheduled for radical cystectomy or who have refused or are unsuitable for systemic neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Three fixed total dose levels of durvalumab (25, 75, 150 mg) will be studied to identify a dose suitable to be taken forward into phase II trials. The primary endpoint is to evaluate the safety and tolerability of the trial intervention in terms of the incidence and severity of adverse events and the potential establishment of dose-limiting toxicities. The secondary efficacy endpoints include rates of pT0 status at resection, lymph node status, as well as the change in distribution of tumour-infiltrating lymphocytes and tumour-activated macrophages between pre- and post-injection bladder biopsies. Translational studies will focus on bladder tumour molecular sub-typing, immune infiltrate characterisation, and immune checkpoint protein expression relative to efficacy end-points. OUTCOME AND SIGNIFICANCE: If proven safe and effective, this novel strategy comprising sub-urothelial durvalumab injections aimed at promoting an anti-tumour immune reaction, will provide additional treatment options for reducing tumour recurrence and progression in treatment-naïve patients with high-risk NMIBC or in patients with bacille Calmette-Guérin-refractory NMIBC. Local administration of durvalumab may be associated with a reduced rate of immunological side-effects and lower costs when compared to systemic delivery.

Can exercise suppress tumour growth in advanced prostate cancer patients with sclerotic bone metastases? A randomised, controlled study protocol examining feasibility, safety and efficacy.

INTRODUCTION: Exercise may positively alter tumour biology through numerous modulatory and regulatory mechanisms in response to a variety of modes and dosages, evidenced in preclinical models to date. Specifically, localised and systemic biochemical alterations produced during and following exercise may suppress tumour formation, growth and distribution by virtue of altered epigenetics and endocrine-paracrine activity. Given the impressive ability of targeted mechanical loading to interfere with metastasis-driven tumour formation in human osteolytic tumour cells, it is of equal interest to determine whether a similar effect is observed in sclerotic tumour cells. The study aims to (1) establish the feasibility and safety of a combined modular multimodal exercise programme with spinal isometric training in advanced prostate cancer patients with sclerotic bone metastases and (2) examine whether targeted and supervised exercise can suppress sclerotic tumour growth and activity in spinal metastases in humans. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A single-blinded, two-armed, randomised, controlled and explorative phase I clinical trial combining spinal isometric training with a modular multimodal exercise programme in 40 men with advanced prostate cancer and stable sclerotic spinal metastases. Participants will be randomly assigned to (1) the exercise intervention or (2) usual medical care. The intervention arm will receive a 3-month, supervised and individually tailored modular multimodal exercise programme with spinal isometric training. Primary endpoints (feasibility and safety) and secondary endpoints (tumour morphology; biomarker activity; anthropometry; musculoskeletal health; adiposity; physical function; quality of life; anxiety; distress; fatigue; insomnia; physical activity levels) will be measured at baseline and following the intervention. Statistical analyses will include descriptive characteristics, t-tests, effect sizes and two-way (group × time) repeated-measures analysis of variance (or analysis of covariance) to examine differences between groups over time. The data-set will be primarily examined using an intention-to-treat approach with multiple imputations, followed by a secondary sensitivity analysis to ensure data robustness using a complete cases approach. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethics approval was obtained from the Human Research Ethics Committee (HREC) of Edith Cowan University and the Sir Charles Gairdner and Osborne Park Health Care Group. If proven to be feasible and safe, this study will form the basis of future phase II and III trials in human patients with advanced cancer. To reach a maximum number of clinicians, practitioners, patients and scientists, outcomes will be disseminated through national and international clinical, conference and patient presentations, as well as publication in high-impact, peer-reviewed academic journals. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ACTRN 12616000179437.

SIRFLOX: Randomized Phase III Trial Comparing First-Line mFOLFOX6 (Plus or Minus Bevacizumab) Versus mFOLFOX6 (Plus or Minus Bevacizumab) Plus Selective Internal Radiation Therapy in Patients With Metastatic Colorectal Cancer.

PURPOSE: SIRFLOX was a randomized, multicenter trial designed to assess the efficacy and safety of adding selective internal radiation therapy (SIRT) using yttrium-90 resin microspheres to standard fluorouracil, leucovorin, and oxaliplatin (FOLFOX)-based chemotherapy in patients with previously untreated metastatic colorectal cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Chemotherapy-naïve patients with liver metastases plus or minus limited extrahepatic metastases were randomly assigned to receive either modified FOLFOX (mFOLFOX6; control) or mFOLFOX6 plus SIRT (SIRT) plus or minus bevacizumab. The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS) at any site as assessed by independent centralized radiology review blinded to study arm. RESULTS: Between October 2006 and April 2013, 530 patients were randomly assigned to treatment (control, 263; SIRT, 267). Median PFS at any site was 10.2 v 10.7 months in control versus SIRT (hazard ratio, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.77 to 1.12; P = .43). Median PFS in the liver by competing risk analysis was 12.6 v 20.5 months in control versus SIRT (hazard ratio, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.55 to 0.90; P = .002). Objective response rates (ORRs) at any site were similar (68.1% v 76.4% in control v SIRT; P = .113). ORR in the liver was improved with the addition of SIRT (68.8% v 78.7% in control v SIRT; P = .042). Grade ≥ 3 adverse events, including recognized SIRT-related effects, were reported in 73.4% and 85.4% of patients in control versus SIRT. CONCLUSION: The addition of SIRT to FOLFOX-based first-line chemotherapy in patients with liver-dominant or liver-only metastatic colorectal cancer did not improve PFS at any site but significantly delayed disease progression in the liver. The safety profile was as expected and was consistent with previous studies.