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.).

PREDICT-GTN 2: Two-factor streamlined models match FIGO performance in gestational trophoblastic neoplasia.

OBJECTIVE: The International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) scoring system uses the sum of eight risk-factors to predict single-agent chemotherapy resistance in Gestational Trophoblastic Neoplasia (GTN). To improve ease of use, this study aimed to generate: (i) streamlined models that match FIGO performance and; (ii) visual-decision aids (nomograms) for guiding management. METHODS: Using training (n = 4191) and validation datasets (n = 144) of GTN patients from two UK specialist centres, logistic regression analysis generated two-factor models for cross-validation and exploration. Performance was assessed using true and false positive rate, positive and negative predictive values, Bland-Altman calibration plots, receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves, decision-curve analysis (DCA) and contingency tables. Nomograms were developed from estimated model parameters and performance cross-checked upon the training and validation dataset. RESULTS: Three streamlined, two-factor models were selected for analysis: (i) M1, pre-treatment hCG + history of failed chemotherapy; (ii) M2, pre-treatment hCG + site of metastases and; (iii) M3, pre-treatment hCG + number of metastases. Using both training and validation datasets, these models showed no evidence of significant discordance from FIGO (McNemar's test p > 0.78) or across a range of performance parameters. This behaviour was maintained when applying algorithms simulating the logic of the nomograms. CONCLUSIONS: Our streamlined models could be used to assess GTN patients and replace FIGO, statistically matching performance. Given the importance of imaging parameters in guiding treatment, M2 and M3 are favoured for ongoing validation. In resource-poor countries, where access to specialist centres is problematic, M1 could be pragmatically implemented. Further prospective validation on a larger cohort is recommended.

Patient-Reported Outcomes in KEYNOTE-564: Adjuvant Pembrolizumab Versus Placebo for Renal Cell Carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: In patients with renal cell carcinoma (RCC) enrolled in the phase III KEYNOTE-564 trial (NCT03142334), disease-free survival (DFS) following nephrectomy was prolonged with use of adjuvant pembrolizumab therapy versus placebo. Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) provide an important measure of health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and can complement efficacy and safety results. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In KEYNOTE-564, 994 patients were randomly assigned to receive pembrolizumab 200 mg (n = 496) or placebo (n = 498) intravenously every 3 weeks for ≤17 cycles. Patients who received ≥1 dose of treatment and completed ≥1 HRQoL assessment were included in this analysis. HRQoL end points were assessed using the EORTC QLQ-C30, FKSI-DRS, and EQ VAS. Prespecified and exploratory PRO end points were mean change from baseline in EORTC QLQ-C30 GHS/QoL score, EORTC QLQ-C30 physical function subscale score, and FKSI-DRS score. RESULTS: No clinically meaningful difference in least squares mean scores for pembrolizumab versus placebo were observed at week 52 for EORTC QLQ-C30 GHS/QoL (-2.5; 95% CI -5.2 to 0.1), EORTC QLQ-C30 physical functioning (-0.87; 95% CI -2.7 to 1.0), and FKSI-DRS (-0.7; 95% CI -1.2 to -0.1). Most PRO scores remained stable or improved for the EORTC QLQ-C30 GHS/QoL (pembrolizumab, 54.3%; placebo, 67.5%), EORTC QLQ-C30 physical functioning (pembrolizumab, 64.7%; placebo, 68.8%), and FKSI-DRS (pembrolizumab, 58.2%; placebo, 66.3%). CONCLUSIONS: Adjuvant treatment with pembrolizumab did not result in deterioration of HRQoL. These findings together with the safety and efficacy findings support adjuvant pembrolizumab treatment following nephrectomy. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT03142334.

Fertility outcomes following surgery and multiagent chemotherapy in malignant ovarian germ cell tumor survivors: a survey study.

OBJECTIVE: To assess fertility outcomes in long-term survivors of malignant ovarian germ cell tumors treated with fertility-sparing surgery with or without additional chemotherapy. METHODS: Women diagnosed and treated for malignant ovarian germ cell tumors at Charing Cross Hospital or Mount Vernon Cancer Centre between 1977 and 2015 were included. Questionnaires assessing fertility issues were sent to patients treated with fertility-sparing surgery. Fertility outcomes were evaluated according to the treatment received. The effect of the mean total dose of cyclophosphamide and cisplatin was assessed. RESULTS: A total of 146 patients were sent the questionnaire; 77 (56.5%) patients were included in the analysis. A total of 49 (64%) patients received platinum-based chemotherapy after surgery, 39 (79.6%) of these with cisplatin, vincristine, methotrexate, bleomycin, actinomycin D, cyclophosphamide, and etoposide, while 10 (20.4%) with bleomycin, etoposide, and cisplatin. After any treatment, 39/46 patients (85%) became pregnant: the conception rate was not different between those receiving surgery only and those receiving also chemotherapy (85.7% vs 84.4%, p=1.0). Live birth rate was 80.4% (37/46), with no statistically significant difference between the treatment groups (p=0.42). Median age of women achieving conception was 29 years (IQR 26-33). The probability of live birth at 5 years was 48% and 40% for patients in the surgery only and chemotherapy group, respectively (p=0.55). Infertility and miscarriage rates did not differ significantly between the two treatment groups (p=0.30 and p=0.32). The mean doses of cisplatin and cyclophosphamide received by patients failing and achieving conception were not different (p=0.10, p=0.47). CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that fertility may not be hampered in patients with malignant ovarian germ cell tumor treated with fertility-sparing surgery or receiving additional chemotherapy.

Efficacy analysis of single-agent carboplatin AUC4 2-weekly as second-line therapy for methotrexate-resistant (MTX-R) low risk gestational trophoblastic neoplasia (GTN).

BACKGROUND: Approximately one-third of patients with low-risk Gestational Trophoblastic Neoplasia (WHO 0-6) develop methotrexate-resistance (MTX-R). In the UK, subsequent treatment with either actinomycin-D (ActD) or multi-agent combination chemotherapy has depended on whether the hCG was above or below an hCG threshold. To reduce exposure to combination chemotherapy (CC), over the years the UK service has raised this threshold as well as using single-agent carboplatin AUC6 3-weekly at MTX-R instead of CC. Updated results for carboplatin demonstrate an 86% complete hCG response (hCG CR) but associated with haematological dose-limiting toxicity. METHODS: In 2017, single-agent carboplatin became the national standard second-line treatment following MTX-R at hCG of >3000 IU/L. Carboplatin was changed to two-weekly AUC4 scheduling and continued until normal hCG plus 3 consolidation cycles. For patients failing to respond, CC (Etoposide-Actinomycin-D or EMA-CO) was introduced. RESULTS: 22 evaluable patients with a median hCG at MTX-R of 10,147 IU/L (IQR 5527-19,639) received carboplatin AUC4 2-weekly (median no. of cycles = 6, IQR 2-8). Of these, 36% achieved a hCG CR. All 14 non-CR patients were cured with subsequent CC; 11 and 2 patients with 3rd line and 4th line CC respectively and 1 patient following 5th line CC and hysterectomy. Overall survival remains 100%. CONCLUSION: Carboplatin is not sufficiently active in the second-line treatment of low-risk MTX-resistant GTN. New strategies are required to increase hCG CR and spare more toxic CC regimens.

Recurrence of primitive germ cell tumour 20 years on.

We present a case of a woman in her 20s, with a prior history of paediatric sacrococcygeal germ cell tumour, presenting with a 6-month history of perianal pain. An MRI pelvis revealed a heterogeneous soft tissue mass causing destruction of the sacrococcygeal bone. A staging CT demonstrated metastatic deposits in the lungs and hypodense foci in the liver suspicious of metastatic disease. Her alpha-fetoprotein levels were raised and a CT-guided biopsy was in keeping with recurrent germ cell tumour. She was referred to a national centre for the treatment of germ cell tumours in adults and was rechallenged with cisplatin-based multiagent chemotherapy with a curative intent. This case raises the important question of how long we should follow-up these patients and whether they can ever be safely discharged from oncology surveillance.

PREDICT-GTN 1: Can we improve the FIGO scoring system in gestational trophoblastic neoplasia?

Gestational trophoblastic neoplasia (GTN) patients are treated according to the eight-variable International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) scoring system, that aims to predict first-line single-agent chemotherapy resistance. FIGO is imperfect with one-third of low-risk patients developing disease resistance to first-line single-agent chemotherapy. We aimed to generate simplified models that improve upon FIGO. Logistic regression (LR) and multilayer perceptron (MLP) modelling (n = 4191) generated six models (M1-6). M1, all eight FIGO variables (scored data); M2, all eight FIGO variables (scored and raw data); M3, nonimaging variables (scored data); M4, nonimaging variables (scored and raw data); M5, imaging variables (scored data); and M6, pretreatment hCG (raw data) + imaging variables (scored data). Performance was compared to FIGO using true and false positive rates, positive and negative predictive values, diagnostic odds ratio, receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves, Bland-Altman calibration plots, decision curve analysis and contingency tables. M1-6 were calibrated and outperformed FIGO on true positive rate and positive predictive value. Using LR and MLP, M1, M2 and M4 generated small improvements to the ROC curve and decision curve analysis. M3, M5 and M6 matched FIGO or performed less well. Compared to FIGO, most (excluding LR M4 and MLP M5) had significant discordance in patient classification (McNemar's test P < .05); 55-112 undertreated, 46-206 overtreated. Statistical modelling yielded only small gains over FIGO performance, arising through recategorisation of treatment-resistant patients, with a significant proportion of under/overtreatment as the available data have been used a priori to allocate primary chemotherapy. Streamlining FIGO should now be the focus.

Pembrolizumab versus placebo as post-nephrectomy adjuvant therapy for clear cell renal cell carcinoma (KEYNOTE-564): 30-month follow-up analysis of a multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: The first interim analysis of the KEYNOTE-564 study showed improved disease-free survival with adjuvant pembrolizumab compared with placebo after surgery in patients with clear cell renal cell carcinoma at an increased risk of recurrence. The analysis reported here, with an additional 6 months of follow-up, was designed to assess longer-term efficacy and safety of pembrolizumab versus placebo, as well as additional secondary and exploratory endpoints. METHODS: In the multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 KEYNOTE-564 trial, adults aged 18 years or older with clear cell renal cell carcinoma with an increased risk of recurrence were enrolled at 213 hospitals and cancer centres in North America, South America, Europe, Asia, and Australia. Eligible participants had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1, had undergone nephrectomy 12 weeks or less before randomisation, and had not received previous systemic therapy for advanced renal cell carcinoma. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) via central permuted block randomisation (block size of four) to receive pembrolizumab 200 mg or placebo intravenously every 3 weeks for up to 17 cycles. Randomisation was stratified by metastatic disease status (M0 vs M1), and the M0 group was further stratified by ECOG performance status and geographical region. All participants and investigators involved in study treatment administration were masked to the treatment group assignment. The primary endpoint was disease-free survival by investigator assessment in the intention-to-treat population (all participants randomly assigned to a treatment). Safety was assessed in the safety population, comprising all participants who received at least one dose of pembrolizumab or placebo. As the primary endpoint was met at the first interim analysis, updated data are reported without p values. This study is ongoing, but no longer recruiting, and is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03142334. FINDINGS: Between June 30, 2017, and Sept 20, 2019, 994 participants were assigned to receive pembrolizumab (n=496) or placebo (n=498). Median follow-up, defined as the time from randomisation to data cutoff (June 14, 2021), was 30·1 months (IQR 25·7-36·7). Disease-free survival was better with pembrolizumab compared with placebo (HR 0·63 [95% CI 0·50-0·80]). Median disease-free survival was not reached in either group. The most common all-cause grade 3-4 adverse events were hypertension (in 14 [3%] of 496 participants) and increased alanine aminotransferase (in 11 [2%]) in the pembrolizumab group, and hypertension (in 13 [3%] of 498 participants) in the placebo group. Serious adverse events attributed to study treatment occurred in 59 (12%) participants in the pembrolizumab group and one (<1%) participant in the placebo group. No deaths were attributed to pembrolizumab. INTERPRETATION: Updated results from KEYNOTE-564 support the use of adjuvant pembrolizumab monotherapy as a standard of care for participants with renal cell carcinoma with an increased risk of recurrence after nephrectomy. FUNDING: Merck Sharp & Dohme LLC, a subsidiary of Merck & Co, Inc, Rahway, NJ, USA.

Pembrolizumab-Induced Pancreatic Exocrine Insufficiency Complicated by Severe Hepatic Steatosis.

Anti-programmed death receptor-1 (anti-PD-1) monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) are used to treat an increasing range of cancers. However, the distinct toxicity profile of immune-related adverse events (irAEs) is a frequent drawback of their clinical application. Among the more common irAEs are hepatitis and colitis, which are diagnosed and graded in patients based on elevated serum liver enzyme levels and increased stool frequency, respectively, and both of which often require treatment with high-dose corticosteroids. Herein, we describe the case of a patient who developed severe transaminase elevation and diarrhoea due to an unusual irAE, which was successfully treated without corticosteroids.

Sensitive screening of single nucleotide polymorphisms in cell free DNA for diagnosis of gestational tumours.

Tumours expressing human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG), the majority of which are difficult to biopsy due to their vascularity, have disparate prognoses depending on their origin. As optimal management relies on accurate diagnosis, we aimed to develop a sensitive cell free DNA (cfDNA) assay to non-invasively distinguish between cases of gestational and non-gestational origin. Deep error-corrected Illumina sequencing of 195 common single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in cfDNA and matched genomic DNA from 36 patients with hCG-secreting tumours (serum hCG 5 to 3,042,881 IU/L) and 7 controls with normal hCG levels (≤4 IU/L) was performed. cfDNA from confirmed gestational tumours with hCG levels ranging from 1497 to 700,855 IU/L had multiple (n ≥ 12) 'non-host' alleles (i.e. alleles of paternal origin). In such cases the non-host fraction of cfDNA ranged from 0.3 to 40.4% and correlated with serum hCG levels. At lower hCG levels the ability to detect non-host cfDNA was variable, with the detection limit dependent on the type of causative pregnancy. Patients with non-gestational tumours were identifiable by the absence of non-host cfDNA, with copy number alterations detectable in the majority of cases. Following validation in a larger cohort, our sensitive assay will enable clinicians to better inform patients, for whom biopsy is inappropriate, of their prognosis and provide optimum management.

A Systematic Review of Patients' Values, Preferences, and Expectations for the Treatment of Metastatic Prostate Cancer.

CONTEXT: Advances in systemic agents have increased overall survival for men diagnosed with metastatic prostate cancer. Additional cytoreductive prostate treatments and metastasis-directed therapies are under evaluation. These confer toxicity but may offer incremental survival benefits. Thus, an understanding of patients' values and treatment preferences is important for counselling, decision-making, and guideline development. OBJECTIVE: To perform a systematic review of patients' values, preferences, and expectations regarding treatment of metastatic prostate cancer. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: The MEDLINE, Embase, and CINAHL databases were systematically searched for qualitative and preference elucidation studies reporting on patients' preferences for treatment of metastatic prostate cancer. Certainty of evidence was assessed using Grading of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) or GRADE Confidence in the Evidence from Reviews of Qualitative Research (CERQual). The protocol was registered on PROSPERO as CRD42020201420. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: A total of 1491 participants from 15 studies met the prespecified eligibility for inclusion. The study designs included were discrete choice experiments (n = 5), mixed methods (n = 3), and qualitative methods (n = 7). Disease states reported per study were: metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer in nine studies (60.0%), metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer in two studies (13.3%), and a mixed cohort in four studies (26.6%). In quantitative preference elicitation studies, patients consistently valued treatment effectiveness and delay in time to symptoms as the two top-ranked treatment attributes (low or very low certainty). Patients were willing to trade off treatment-related toxicity for potential oncological benefits (low certainty). In qualitative studies, thematic analysis revealed cancer progression and/or survival, pain, and fatigue as key components in treatment decisions (low or very low certainty). Patients continue to value oncological benefits in making decisions on treatments under qualitative assessment. CONCLUSIONS: There is limited understanding of how patients make treatment and trade-off decisions following a diagnosis of metastatic prostate cancer. For appropriate investment in emerging cytoreductive local tumour and metastasis-directed therapies, we should seek to better understand how this cohort weighs the oncological benefits against the risks. PATIENT SUMMARY: We looked at how men with advanced (metastatic) prostate cancer make treatment decisions. We found that little is known about patients' preferences for current and proposed new treatments. Further studies are required to understand how patients make decisions to help guide the integration of new treatments into the standard of care.

Metastatic prostate cancer men's attitudes towards treatment of the local tumour and metastasis evaluative research (IP5-MATTER): protocol for a prospective, multicentre discrete choice experiment study.

INTRODUCTION: Systemic therapy with androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) and intensification with agents such as docetaxel, abiraterone acetate and enzalutamide has resulted in improved overall survival in men with de novo synchronous metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC). Novel local cytoreductive treatments and metastasis-directed therapy are now being evaluated. Such interventions may provide added survival benefit or delay the requirement for further systemic agents and associated toxicity but can confer additional harm. Understanding men's preferences for treatment options in this disease state is crucial for patients, clinicians, carers and future healthcare service providers. METHODS: Using a prospective, multicentre discrete choice experiment (DCE), we aim to determine the attributes associated with treatment that are most important to men with mHSPC. Furthermore, we plan to determine men's preferences for, and trade-offs between, the attributes (survival and side effects) of different treatment options including systemic therapy, local cytoreductive approaches (external beam radiotherapy, cytoreductive radical prostatectomy or minimally invasive ablative therapy) and metastases-directed therapies (metastasectomy or stereotactic ablative body radiotherapy). All men with newly diagnosed mHSPC within 4 months of commencing ADT and WHO performance status 0-2 are eligible. Men who have previously consented to a cytoreductive treatment or have developed castrate-resistant disease will be excluded. This study includes a qualitative analysis component, with patients (n=15) and healthcare professionals (n=5), to identify and define the key attributes associated with treatment options that would warrant trade-off evaluation in a DCE. The main phase component planned recruitment is 300 patients over 1 year, commencing in January 2021, with planned study completion in March 2022. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval was obtained from the Health Research Authority East of England, Cambridgeshire and Hertfordshire Research Ethics Committee (Reference: 20/EE/0194). Project information will be reported on the publicly available Imperial College London website and the Heath Economics Research Unit (HERU website including the HERU Blog). We will use the social media accounts of IP5-MATTER, Imperial Prostate London, HERU and the individual researchers to disseminate key findings following publication. Findings from the study will be presented at national/international conferences and peer-reviewed journals. Authorship policy will follow the recommendations of the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT04590976.

Adjuvant Pembrolizumab after Nephrectomy in Renal-Cell Carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Patients with renal-cell carcinoma who undergo nephrectomy have no options for adjuvant therapy to reduce the risk of recurrence that have high levels of supporting evidence. METHODS: In a double-blind, phase 3 trial, we randomly assigned, in a 1:1 ratio, patients with clear-cell renal-cell carcinoma who were at high risk for recurrence after nephrectomy, with or without metastasectomy, to receive either adjuvant pembrolizumab (at a dose of 200 mg) or placebo intravenously once every 3 weeks for up to 17 cycles (approximately 1 year). The primary end point was disease-free survival according to the investigator's assessment. Overall survival was a key secondary end point. Safety was a secondary end point. RESULTS: A total of 496 patients were randomly assigned to receive pembrolizumab, and 498 to receive placebo. At the prespecified interim analysis, the median time from randomization to the data-cutoff date was 24.1 months. Pembrolizumab therapy was associated with significantly longer disease-free survival than placebo (disease-free survival at 24 months, 77.3% vs. 68.1%; hazard ratio for recurrence or death, 0.68; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.53 to 0.87; P = 0.002 [two-sided]). The estimated percentage of patients who remained alive at 24 months was 96.6% in the pembrolizumab group and 93.5% in the placebo group (hazard ratio for death, 0.54; 95% CI, 0.30 to 0.96). Grade 3 or higher adverse events of any cause occurred in 32.4% of the patients who received pembrolizumab and in 17.7% of those who received placebo. No deaths related to pembrolizumab therapy occurred. CONCLUSIONS: Pembrolizumab treatment led to a significant improvement in disease-free survival as compared with placebo after surgery among patients with kidney cancer who were at high risk for recurrence. (Funded by Merck Sharp and Dohme, a subsidiary of Merck; KEYNOTE-564 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03142334.).

Predictors for single-agent resistance in FIGO score 5 or 6 gestational trophoblastic neoplasia: a multicentre, retrospective, cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Patients with gestational trophoblastic neoplasia who have an International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) risk score of 5 or 6 usually receive non-toxic single-agent chemotherapy as a first-line treatment. Previous studies suggest that only a third of patients have complete remission, with the remaining patients requiring toxic multiagent chemotherapy to attain remission. As stratification factors are unknown, some centres offer multiagent therapy upfront, resulting in overtreatment of many patients. We aimed to identify predictive factors for resistance to single-agent therapy to inform clinicians on which patients presenting with a FIGO score of 5 or 6 are likely to benefit from upfront multiagent chemotherapy. METHODS: We did a multicentre, retrospective, cohort study of patients with gestational trophoblastic neoplasia presenting with a FIGO score of 5 or 6, who received treatment at three gestational trophoblastic neoplasia reference centres in the UK, Brazil, and the USA between Jan 1, 1964, and Dec 31, 2018. All patients who had been followed up for at least 12 months after remission were included. Patients were excluded if they had received a non-standard single-agent treatment (eg, etoposide); had been given a previously established first-line multiagent chemotherapy regimen; or had incomplete data for our analyses. Patient data were retrieved from medical records. The primary outcome was the incidence of chemoresistance after first-line or second-line single-agent chemotherapy. Variables associated with chemoresistance to single-agent therapies were identified by logistic regression analysis. In patient subgroups defined by choriocarcinoma histology and metastatic disease status, we did bootstrap modelling to define thresholds of pretreatment human chorionic gonadotropin concentrations and identify groups of patients with a greater than 80% risk (ie, a positive predictive value [PPV] of 0·8) of resistance to single-agent chemotherapy. FINDINGS: Of 5025 patients with low-risk gestational trophoblastic neoplasia, we identified 431 patients with gestational trophoblastic neoplasia presenting with a FIGO risk score of 5 or 6. All patients were followed up for a minimum of 2 years. 141 (40%) of 351 patients developed resistance to single-agent treatments and required multiagent chemotherapy to achieve remission. Univariable and multivariable logistic regression revealed metastatic disease status (multivariable logistic regression analysis, odds ratio [OR] 1·9 [95% CI 1·1-3·2], p=0·018), choriocarcinoma histology (3·7 [1·9-7·4], p=0·0002), and pretreatment human chorionic gonadotropin concentration (2·8 [1·9-4·1], p<0·0001) as significant predictors of resistance to single-agent therapies. In patients with no metastatic disease and without choriocarcinoma, a pretreatment human chorionic gonadotropin concentration of 411 000 IU/L or higher yielded a PPV of 0·8, whereas in patients with either metastases or choriocarcinoma, a pretreatment human chorionic gonadotropin concentration of 149 000 IU/L or higher yielded the same PPV for resistance to single-agent therapy. INTERPRETATION: Approximately 60% of women with gestational trophoblastic neoplasia presenting with a FIGO risk score of 5 or 6 achieve remission with single-agent therapy; almost all remaining patients have complete remission with subsequent multiagent chemotherapy. Primary multiagent chemotherapy should only be given to patients with metastatic disease and choriocarcinoma, regardless of pretreatment human chorionic gonadotropin concentration, or to those defined by our new predictors. FUNDING: None. TRANSLATION: For the Portuguese translation of the abstract see Supplementary Materials section.

Additional Treatments to the Local tumour for metastatic prostate cancer-Assessment of Novel Treatment Algorithms (IP2-ATLANTA): protocol for a multicentre, phase II randomised controlled trial.

INTRODUCTION: Survival in men diagnosed with de novo synchronous metastatic prostate cancer has increased following the use of upfront systemic treatment, using chemotherapy and other novel androgen receptor targeted agents, in addition to standard androgen deprivation therapy (ADT). Local cytoreductive and metastasis-directed interventions are hypothesised to confer additional survival benefit. In this setting, IP2-ATLANTA will explore progression-free survival (PFS) outcomes with the addition of sequential multimodal local and metastasis-directed treatments compared with standard care alone. METHODS: A phase II, prospective, multicentre, three-arm randomised controlled trial incorporating an embedded feasibility pilot. All men with new histologically diagnosed, hormone-sensitive, metastatic prostate cancer, within 4 months of commencing ADT and of performance status 0 to 2 are eligible. Patients will be randomised to Control (standard of care (SOC)) OR Intervention 1 (minimally invasive ablative therapy to prostate±pelvic lymph node dissection (PLND)) OR Intervention 2 (cytoreductive radical prostatectomy±PLND OR prostate radiotherapy±pelvic lymph node radiotherapy (PLNRT)). Metastatic burden will be prespecified using the Chemohormonal Therapy Versus Androgen Ablation Randomized Trial for Extensive Disease (CHAARTED) definition. Men with low burden disease in intervention arms are eligible for metastasis-directed therapy, in the form of stereotactic ablative body radiotherapy (SABR) or surgery. Standard systemic therapy will be administered in all arms with ADT±upfront systemic chemotherapy or androgen receptor agents. Patients will be followed-up for a minimum of 2 years. PRIMARY OUTCOME: PFS. Secondary outcomes include predictive factors for PFS and overall survival; urinary, sexual and rectal side effects. Embedded feasibility sample size is 80, with 918 patients required in the main phase II component. Study recruitment commenced in April 2019, with planned follow-up completed by April 2024. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Approved by the Health Research Authority (HRA) Research Ethics Committee Wales-5 (19/WA0005). Study results will be submitted for publication in peer-reviewed journals. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03763253; ISCRTN58401737.

Phase I Trial of DNA Methyltransferase Inhibitor Guadecitabine Combined with Cisplatin and Gemcitabine for Solid Malignancies Including Urothelial Carcinoma (SPIRE).

PURPOSE: Preclinical data indicate that DNA methyltransferase inhibition will circumvent cisplatin resistance in various cancers. PATIENT AND METHODS: SPIRE comprised a dose-escalation phase for incurable metastatic solid cancers, followed by a randomized dose expansion phase for neoadjuvant treatment of T2-4a N0 M0 bladder urothelial carcinoma. The primary objective was a recommended phase II dose (RP2D) for guadecitabine combined with gemcitabine and cisplatin. Treatment comprised 21-day gemcitabine and cisplatin cycles (cisplatin 70 mg/m2, i.v., day 8 and gemcitabine 1,000 mg/m2, i.v., days 8 + 15). Guadecitabine was injected subcutaneously on days 1-5, within escalation phase cohorts, and to half of 20 patients in the expansion phase. Registration ID: ISRCTN 16332228. RESULTS: Within the escalation phase, dose-limiting toxicities related predominantly to myelosuppression requiring G-CSF prophylaxis from cohort 2 (guadecitabine 20 mg/m2, days 1-5). The most common grade ≥3 adverse events in 17 patients in the dose-escalation phase were neutropenia (76.5%), thrombocytopenia (64.7%), leukopenia (29.4%), and anemia (29.4%). Addition of guadecitabine to gemcitabine and cisplatin in the expansion phase resulted in similar rates of severe hematologic adverse events, similar cisplatin dose intensity, but modestly reduced gemcitabine dose intensity. Radical treatment options after chemotherapy were not compromised. Pharmacodynamics evaluations indicated guadecitabine maximal target effect at the point of cisplatin administration. Pharmacokinetics were consistent with prior data. No treatment-related deaths occurred. CONCLUSIONS: The guadecitabine RP2D was 20 mg/m2, days 1-5, in combination with gemcitabine and cisplatin and required GCSF prophylaxis. Gene promoter methylation pharmacodynamics are optimal with this schedule. Addition of guadecitabine to gemcitabine and cisplatin was tolerable, despite some additional myelosuppression, and warrants further investigation to assess efficacy.

Can we replace adjuvant chemotherapy with surveillance for stage IA-C immature ovarian teratomas of any grade? an international multicenter analysis.

BACKGROUND: The role of surveillance after surgery for stage IA-C grade 2 (G2) or grade 3 (G3) immature teratomas (ITs) is controversial with many guidelines advocating adjuvant chemotherapy. Here, we investigate the safety of surveillance in stage IA-C G1-3 ITs. METHODS: Clinicopathological data were analysed on postpubertal patients with stage I pure ITs in Multicenter Italian Trials in Ovarian Cancer centres and at Charing Cross Hospital, UK, between January 1985 and January 2018. RESULTS: Of 108 stage I patients, 66 (61.1%), 3 (2.8%) and 39 (36.1%) were International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics IA, IB, IC, respectively, with 31 (28.7%), 41 (38%) and 36 (33.3%) having grade 1 (G1), 2 and 3 disease, respectively. After surgery, 27 patients (25%) had adjuvant chemotherapy and 81 (75%) surveillance. There was no significant increase in the risk of malignant (G2-3 IT) relapse (9/81 vs 2/27; p = 0.72) or in disease-free survival (DFS) or overall survival in the surveillance vs chemotherapy groups. The median time to relapse was 17.8 months (range: 3-47) with no significant difference between surveillance or chemotherapy groups. The median follow-up was 64.3 months (Interquartile range (IQR) 22.2-101.7). Chemotherapy induced cures in all except for one patient who did not follow the surveillance protocol due to pregnancy and died of disease. Univariate and multivariate analyses revealed that only tumour grade (hazard ratio [HR] = 3.11; p = 0.02) and complete surgical staging (HR = 0.2; p = 0.01) were independent prognostic factors for decreased DFS. CONCLUSION: The present study suggests that in the adult setting careful surveillance appears to be an acceptable alternative to adjuvant chemotherapy for stage IA-C ITs of any grade, properly staged and with negative postoperative tumour markers.

Following chemotherapy for gestational trophoblastic neoplasia, do residual lung lesions increase the risk of relapse?

BACKGROUND: There remains uncertainty about the prognostic significance of residual lung lesion on imaging after completion of treatment of low- or high-risk gestational trophoblastic neoplasia (GTN). Here, we determine if such residual lung lesions are associated with an increased risk of relapse. METHODS: We retrospectively screened our electronic database to identify patients with low- or high-risk GTN and lung metastases between 2004 and 18. Recurrences among patients with or without residual lung lesions on imaging were compared. Chi square analysis and Kaplan-Meier survival curves were constructed. As the numbers of cases were low, we combined this data with our previously published and non-overlapping patient cohort (1995-2004). RESULTS: Of 1304 GTN patients treated at our centre between 2004 and 18, 99 had lung metastases without other distant sites. There were 40 patients (40.4%) with residual lung lesions. Whilst an increased rate of relapse was observed among patients with residual lung lesions (4/40; 10.0%) compared to without such lesions (3/59; 5.1%), this difference was not statistically significant (p = .35). By combining the data with our previous cohort, there was an increase in relapse rate of patients with residual lung lesions (5/63; 7.9%) compared to those without such lesions (4/112; 3.6%). However, this difference was also not statistically significant (p = .21). CONCLUSION: Residual lung lesions on imaging after completion of GTN treatment are common. However, this finding did not statistically increase relapse rate. Due to low number of recurrent events, a multi-centre, larger dataset would be needed to provide more definitive evidence.

Association of Prior Antibiotic Treatment With Survival and Response to Immune Checkpoint Inhibitor Therapy in Patients With Cancer.

Importance: Gut dysbiosis impairs response to immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) and can be caused by broad-spectrum antibiotic (ATB) therapy. Objective: To evaluate whether there is an association between ATB therapy administered concurrently (cATB) or prior (pATB) to ICI therapy and overall survival (OS) and treatment response to ICI therapy in patients with cancer treated with ICIs in routine clinical practice. Design, Setting, and Participants: This prospective, multicenter, cohort study conducted at 2 tertiary academic referral centers recruited 196 patients with cancer who received ICI therapy between January 1, 2015, and April 1, 2018, in routine clinical practice rather than clinical trials. Main Outcomes and Measures: Overall survival calculated from the time of ICI therapy commencement and radiologic response to ICI treatment defined using the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (version 1.1), with disease refractory to ICI therapy defined as progressive disease 6 to 8 weeks after the first ICI dose without evidence of pseudoprogression. Results: Among 196 patients (137 men and 59 women; median [range] age, 68 [27-93] years) with non-small cell lung cancer (n = 119), melanoma (n = 38), and other tumor types (n = 39), pATB therapy (HR, 7.4; 95% CI, 4.3-12.8; P < .001), but not cATB therapy (HR, 0.9; 95% CI, 0.5-1.4; P = .76), was associated with worse OS (2 vs 26 months for pATB therapy vs no pATB therapy, respectively) (hazard ratio [HR], 7.4; 95% CI, 4.2-12.9) and a higher likelihood of primary disease refractory to ICI therapy (21 of 26 [81%] vs 66 of 151 [44%], P < .001). Overall survival in patients with non-small cell lung cancer (2.5 vs 26 months, P < .001), melanoma (3.9 vs 14 months, P < .001), and other tumor types (1.1 vs 11, P < .001) was consistently worse in those who received pATBs vs those who did not. Multivariate analyses confirmed that pATB therapy (HR, 3.4; 95% CI, 1.9-6.1; P < .001) and response to ICI therapy (HR, 8.2; 95% CI, 4.0-16.9; P < .001) were associated with OS independent of tumor site, disease burden, and performance status. Conclusions and Relevance: Despite being limited by sample size, geographic origin, and the lack of correlative analyses on patients' gut microbiota, this study suggests that pATB therapy but not cATB therapy is associated with a worse treatment response and OS in unselected patients treated with ICIs in routine clinical practice. Mechanistic studies are urgently required to investigate ATB-mediated alterations of gut microbiota as a determinant of poorer outcome following ICI treatment.