Derivative survival analyses: Analysis methods to derive survival outcomes for the remainder patient cohort without individual patient data.

It is not uncommon for industry-sponsored randomized controlled trials to publish survival curves/data for the overall patient cohort("A+B") and for a favorable subgroup ("A") pre-specified or post hoc, but not the survival curves/data for the remainder cohort("B"). Consequently, following regulatory approval of the intervention treatment for the overall patient population if the primary endpoint is met, it is common for cancer patients representing the remainder cohort (B) to be treated as per the results of the overall cohort (A+B). To overcome this important issue in clinical decision-making, this study aimed to identify methods to accurately derive the survival curves and/or hazard ratio (95% confidence interval) for the remainder cohort (B), utilizing published curves and hazard ratios (95% confidence intervals) of the overall (A+B) and favorable subgroup (A) cohorts. The analysis methods (method I and method II) presented here, termed "derivative survival analyses," enable accurate assessment of survival outcomes in the remainder cohort without individual patient data.

Nivolumab Plus Ipilimumab vs Nivolumab Alone in Advanced Cancers Other Than Melanoma: A Meta-Analysis.

Importance: Although the combination of nivolumab plus ipilimumab has unquestionable benefit over nivolumab monotherapy in advanced melanoma, currently no summative analyses have compared the combination with nivolumab monotherapy for advanced cancers other than melanoma. Objective: To examine whether the addition of ipilimumab to standard-dose nivolumab safely improves clinical outcomes in patients with advanced cancers other than melanoma. Data Sources: Electronic databases (PubMed, EBSCO Information Services, Embase, and Cochrane Library) were systematically searched for studies of standard-dose nivolumab plus ipilimumab vs nivolumab alone in the treatment of advanced cancers other than melanoma published from database inception to October 31, 2022. Study Selection: Eight studies (total patients, 1727; nivolumab plus ipilimumab group, 854; nivolumab monotherapy group, 873) met the selection criteria. Patients had squamous cell lung cancer, non-small cell lung cancer with programmed death ligand 1 level of 1% or higher, small cell lung cancer, pleural mesothelioma, urothelial carcinoma, esophagogastric carcinoma, sarcoma, or glioblastoma multiforme. Data Extraction and Synthesis: For comparison of overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) outcomes, estimation of log(hazard ratios [HRs]) and SEs was initially performed for OS and PFS of each included study based on summary statistics extracted from individual Kaplan-Meier curves. Inverse-variance weighting was then used to compute pooled HRs (95% CIs). For comparison of dichotomous data (treatment-related grade 3 to 4 adverse events and discontinuations), odds ratios (ORs) were used, and the Mantel-Haenszel method was used to estimate pooled ORs (95% CIs). Results: Treatment with nivolumab plus ipilimumab was not associated with improvement in OS over treatment with nivolumab alone (pooled HR, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.85-1.06; P = .36), with 4 of the 8 studies having numerically lower median OS with the combination. Nivolumab plus ipilimumab combination therapy was associated with marginal, but not clinically meaningful, improvement in PFS over nivolumab alone (pooled HR, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.79-0.98; P = .02). The combination was associated with substantially higher treatment-related grade 3 to 4 adverse events (pooled OR, 1.84; 95% CI, 1.47-2.31; P < .001) and treatment-related discontinuations (pooled OR, 1.96; 95% CI, 1.44-2.65; P < .001). This finding was recapitulated in meta-analyses of individual grade 3 to 4 adverse events of hepatotoxicity, gastrointestinal toxicity, pneumonitis, endocrine dysfunction, dermatitis, fatigue. Conclusions and Relevance: In this meta-analysis of 8 advanced cancers other than melanoma, the differences detected in OS and PFS between nivolumab plus ipilimumab and nivolumab were not clinically meaningful (even though statistical significance was detected in PFS). Treatment-related higher-grade toxicity and discontinuations were substantially higher with the combination therapy. The data indicate that investigations of anti-programmed death 1 (PD1) plus anti-cytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated protein 4 (CTLA-4) therapies in any nonmelanoma advanced cancer should be conducted along with anti-PD1 monotherapy to ensure that the net effect of the addition of anti-CTLA-4 to anti-PD1 can be clearly established for that cancer and setting and that unnecessary CTLA-4 inhibition with related toxic effects (both clinical and financial) can be avoided.

Neurological applications of belzutifan in von Hippel-Lindau disease.

Von Hippel-Lindau (VHL) disease is a tumor predisposition syndrome caused by mutations in the VHL gene that presents with visceral neoplasms and growths, including clear cell renal cell carcinoma, and central nervous system manifestations, such as hemangioblastomas of the brain and spine. The pathophysiology involves dysregulation of oxygen sensing caused by the inability to degrade HIFα, leading to the overactivation of hypoxic pathways. Hemangioblastomas are the most common tumors in patients with VHL and cause significant morbidity. Until recently, there were no systemic therapies available for patients that could effectively reduce the size of these lesions. Belzutifan, the first approved HIF-2α inhibitor, has demonstrated benefit in VHL-associated tumors, with a 30% response rate in hemangioblastomas and ~30%-50% reduction in their sizes over the course of treatment. Anemia is the most prominent adverse effect, affecting 76%-90% of participants and sometimes requiring dose reduction or transfusion. Other significant adverse events include hypoxia and fatigue. Overall, belzutifan is well tolerated; however, long-term data on dosing regimens, safety, and fertility are not yet available. Belzutifan holds promise for the treatment of neurological manifestations of VHL and its utility may influence the clinical management paradigms for this patient population.

Scleroderma Induced by Pembrolizumab: A Case Series.

Immune checkpoint inhibitors are approved for select cancer treatment and have shown survival benefit in patients with advanced melanoma. Adverse events, including immune-related adverse events, are common and potentially life-threatening. We describe cases of 2 patients with scleroderma (patient 1 had diffuse scleroderma, and patient 2 had limited scleroderma) that developed while they were receiving pembrolizumab therapy for metastatic melanoma. Prompt recognition and treatment of immune-related adverse events may improve tolerance to immune checkpoint inhibitors and contribute to an understanding of the manifesting autoimmune disease.

miR-375 induces docetaxel resistance in prostate cancer by targeting SEC23A and YAP1.

BACKGROUND: Treatment options for metastatic castrate-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) are limited and typically are centered on docetaxel-based chemotherapy. We previously reported that elevated miR-375 levels were significantly associated with poor overall survival of mCRPC patients. In this study, we evaluated if miR-375 induced chemo-resistance to docetaxel through regulating target genes associated with drug resistance. METHODS: We first compared miR-375 expression level between prostate cancer tissues and normal prostate tissues using data from The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA). To examine the role of miR-375 in docetaxel resistance, we transfected miR-375 using a pre-miRNA lentiviral vector and examined the effects of exogenously overexpressed miR-375 on cell growth in two prostate cancer cell lines, DU145 and PC-3. To determine the effect of overexpressed miR-375 on tumor growth and chemo-resistance in vivo, we injected prostate cancer cells overexpressing miR-375 into nude mice subcutaneously and evaluated tumor growth rate during docetaxel treatment. Lastly, we utilized qRT-PCR and Western blot assay to examine two miR-375 target genes, SEC23A and YAP1, for their expression changes after miR-375 transfection. RESULTS: By examining 495 tumor tissues and 52 normal tissues from TCGA data, we found that compared to normal prostate, miR-375 was significantly overexpressed in prostate cancer tissues (8.45-fold increase, p value = 1.98E-23). Docetaxel treatment induced higher expression of miR-375 with 5.83- and 3.02-fold increases in DU145 and PC-3 cells, respectively. Interestingly, miR-375 appeared to play a dual role in prostate cancer proliferation. While miR-375 overexpression caused cell growth inhibition and cell apoptosis, elevated miR-375 also significantly reduced cell sensitivity to docetaxel treatment in vitro, as evidenced by decreased apoptotic cells. In vivo xenograft mouse study showed that tumors with increased miR-375 expression were more tolerant to docetaxel treatment, demonstrated by greater tumor weight and less apoptotic cells in miR-375 transfected group when compared to empty vector control group. In addition, we examined expression levels of the two miR-375 target genes (SEC23A and YAP1) and observed significant reduction in the expression at both protein and mRNA levels in miR-375 transfected prostate cancer cell lines. TCGA dataset analysis further confirmed the negative correlations between miR-375 and the two target genes (r = -0.62 and -0.56 for SEC23A and YAP1, respectively; p < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: miR-375 is involved in development of chemo-resistance to docetaxel through regulating SEC23A and YAP1 expression. Our results suggest that miR-375 or its target genes, SEC23A or YAP1, might serve as potential predictive biomarkers to docetaxel-based chemotherapy and/or therapeutic targets to overcome chemo-resistance in mCRPC stage.

Finasteride and Male Breast Cancer: Does the MHRA Report Show a Link?

Finasteride is an important drug for the management of androgenetic alopecia. However, there are concerns about the possible side effects of the drug such as impotence. Recently stray reports have appeared about the occurrence of male breast carcinoma in patients who received the drug. These have been looked in to by Medicines and Health care products Regulatory Agency (MHRA). This article summarizes the MHRA report.