Enfortumab Vedotin and Pembrolizumab in Untreated Advanced Urothelial Cancer.

BACKGROUND: No treatment has surpassed platinum-based chemotherapy in improving overall survival in patients with previously untreated locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma. METHODS: We conducted a phase 3, global, open-label, randomized trial to compare the efficacy and safety of enfortumab vedotin and pembrolizumab with the efficacy and safety of platinum-based chemotherapy in patients with previously untreated locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma. Patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive 3-week cycles of enfortumab vedotin (at a dose of 1.25 mg per kilogram of body weight intravenously on days 1 and 8) and pembrolizumab (at a dose of 200 mg intravenously on day 1) (enfortumab vedotin-pembrolizumab group) or gemcitabine and either cisplatin or carboplatin (determined on the basis of eligibility to receive cisplatin) (chemotherapy group). The primary end points were progression-free survival as assessed by blinded independent central review and overall survival. RESULTS: A total of 886 patients underwent randomization: 442 to the enfortumab vedotin-pembrolizumab group and 444 to the chemotherapy group. As of August 8, 2023, the median duration of follow-up for survival was 17.2 months. Progression-free survival was longer in the enfortumab vedotin-pembrolizumab group than in the chemotherapy group (median, 12.5 months vs. 6.3 months; hazard ratio for disease progression or death, 0.45; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.38 to 0.54; P<0.001), as was overall survival (median, 31.5 months vs. 16.1 months; hazard ratio for death, 0.47; 95% CI, 0.38 to 0.58; P<0.001). The median number of cycles was 12 (range, 1 to 46) in the enfortumab vedotin-pembrolizumab group and 6 (range, 1 to 6) in the chemotherapy group. Treatment-related adverse events of grade 3 or higher occurred in 55.9% of the patients in the enfortumab vedotin-pembrolizumab group and in 69.5% of those in the chemotherapy group. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment with enfortumab vedotin and pembrolizumab resulted in significantly better outcomes than chemotherapy in patients with untreated locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma, with a safety profile consistent with that in previous reports. (Funded by Astellas Pharma US and others; EV-302 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04223856.).

Amivantamab plus Chemotherapy in NSCLC with EGFR Exon 20 Insertions.

BACKGROUND: Amivantamab has been approved for the treatment of patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) with epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) exon 20 insertions who have had disease progression during or after platinum-based chemotherapy. Phase 1 data showed the safety and antitumor activity of amivantamab plus carboplatin-pemetrexed (chemotherapy). Additional data on this combination therapy are needed. METHODS: In this phase 3, international, randomized trial, we assigned in a 1:1 ratio patients with advanced NSCLC with EGFR exon 20 insertions who had not received previous systemic therapy to receive intravenous amivantamab plus chemotherapy (amivantamab-chemotherapy) or chemotherapy alone. The primary outcome was progression-free survival according to blinded independent central review. Patients in the chemotherapy group who had disease progression were allowed to cross over to receive amivantamab monotherapy. RESULTS: A total of 308 patients underwent randomization (153 to receive amivantamab-chemotherapy and 155 to receive chemotherapy alone). Progression-free survival was significantly longer in the amivantamab-chemotherapy group than in the chemotherapy group (median, 11.4 months and 6.7 months, respectively; hazard ratio for disease progression or death, 0.40; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.30 to 0.53; P<0.001). At 18 months, progression-free survival was reported in 31% of the patients in the amivantamab-chemotherapy group and in 3% in the chemotherapy group; a complete or partial response at data cutoff was reported in 73% and 47%, respectively (rate ratio, 1.50; 95% CI, 1.32 to 1.68; P<0.001). In the interim overall survival analysis (33% maturity), the hazard ratio for death for amivantamab-chemotherapy as compared with chemotherapy was 0.67 (95% CI, 0.42 to 1.09; P = 0.11). The predominant adverse events associated with amivantamab-chemotherapy were reversible hematologic and EGFR-related toxic effects; 7% of patients discontinued amivantamab owing to adverse reactions. CONCLUSIONS: The use of amivantamab-chemotherapy resulted in superior efficacy as compared with chemotherapy alone as first-line treatment of patients with advanced NSCLC with EGFR exon 20 insertions. (Funded by Janssen Research and Development; PAPILLON ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04538664.).

Atezolizumab monotherapy versus chemotherapy in untreated locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma (IMvigor130): final overall survival analysis from a randomised, controlled, phase 3 study.

BACKGROUND: The primary analysis of IMvigor130 showed a significant progression-free survival benefit with first-line atezolizumab plus platinum-based chemotherapy (group A) versus placebo plus platinum-based chemotherapy (group C) in patients with locally advanced or metastatic urothelial cancer. However, this finding did not translate into significant overall survival benefit for group A versus group C at the final analysis, precluding formal statistical testing of outcomes with atezolizumab monotherapy (group B) versus group C. Here we report the final overall survival results for group B versus group C; this report is descriptive and should be considered exploratory due to the study's statistical design. METHODS: In this global, partially blinded, randomised, controlled, phase 3 study, patients (aged ≥18 years) who had locally advanced or metastatic urothelial cancer previously untreated in the metastatic setting and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-2 were enrolled at 221 hospitals and oncology centres in 35 countries. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1:1), using a permuted block method (block size of six) and an interactive voice and web response system, stratified by PD-L1 status, Bajorin score, and investigator's choice of platinum-based chemotherapy, to receive either atezolizumab plus platinum-based chemotherapy (group A), atezolizumab alone (group B), or placebo plus platinum-based chemotherapy (group C). Sponsors, investigators, and patients were masked to assignment to atezolizumab or placebo in group A and group C; atezolizumab monotherapy in group B was open label. For groups B and C, atezolizumab (1200 mg) or placebo was administered intravenously every 3 weeks. Chemotherapy involved 21-day cycles of gemcitabine (1000 mg/m2 body surface area on day 1 and day 8 of each cycle) plus the investigator's choice of carboplatin (area under the curve 4·5 mg/mL per min or 5 mg/mL per min) or cisplatin (70 mg/m2 body surface area), administered intravenously. Co-primary endpoints were progression-free survival and overall survival in group A versus group C, and overall survival in group B versus group C, tested hierarchically, in the intention-to-treat (ITT) population, and then the populations with high PD-L1 tumour expression (immune cell [IC] expression score of IC2/3) if the results from group A versus group C were significant. Here, we report the co-primary endpoint of overall survival for group B versus group C in the ITT and IC2/3 populations. The ITT population for this analysis comprised concurrently enrolled patients in groups B and C who were randomly assigned to treatment. For the safety analysis, all patients enrolled in group B and group C who received any study treatment were included. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02807636, and is active but no longer recruiting. FINDINGS: Between July 15, 2016, and July 20, 2018, 1213 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to treatment, of whom 362 patients were assigned to group B and 400 to group C, of whom 360 and 359, respectively, were enrolled concurrently (ITT population). 543 (76%) of 719 patients were male, 176 (24%) were female, and 534 (74%) were White. As of data cutoff (Aug 31, 2022), after a median follow-up of 13·4 months (IQR 6·2-30·8), median overall survival was 15·2 months (95% CI 13·1-17·7; 271 deaths) in group B and 13·3 months (11·9-15·6; 275 deaths) in group C (stratified hazard ratio 0·98 [95% CI 0·82-1·16]). The most common grade 3-4 treatment-related adverse events were anaemia (two [1%] in patients who received atezolizumab monotherapy vs 133 [34%] in those who received placebo plus chemotherapy), neutropenia (one [<1%] vs 115 [30%]), decreased neutrophil count (0 vs 95 [24%]), and decreased platelet count (one [<1%] vs 92 [24%]). Serious adverse events occurred in 163 (46%) patients versus 196 (50%). Treatment-related deaths occurred in three (1%; n=1 each, pneumonia, interstitial lung disease, large intestinal obstruction) patients who received atezolizumab monotherapy and four (1%; n=1 each, diarrhoea, febrile neutropenia, unexplained death, toxic hepatitis) who received placebo plus chemotherapy. INTERPRETATION: The final analysis from IMvigor130 did not show a significant improvement in overall survival with first-line atezolizumab monotherapy compared with platinum-based chemotherapy in the intention-to-treat population. The safety profile of atezolizumab monotherapy remained acceptable after extended follow-up, with no new safety signals. FUNDING: F Hoffmann-La Roche.

Pembrolizumab for Persistent, Recurrent, or Metastatic Cervical Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Pembrolizumab has efficacy in programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1)-positive metastatic or unresectable cervical cancer that has progressed during chemotherapy. We assessed the relative benefit of adding pembrolizumab to chemotherapy with or without bevacizumab. METHODS: In a double-blind, phase 3 trial, we randomly assigned patients with persistent, recurrent, or metastatic cervical cancer in a 1:1 ratio to receive pembrolizumab (200 mg) or placebo every 3 weeks for up to 35 cycles plus platinum-based chemotherapy and, per investigator discretion, bevacizumab. The dual primary end points were progression-free survival and overall survival, each tested sequentially in patients with a PD-L1 combined positive score of 1 or more, in the intention-to-treat population, and in patients with a PD-L1 combined positive score of 10 or more. The combined positive score is defined as the number of PD-L1-staining cells divided by the total number of viable tumor cells, multiplied by 100. All results are from the protocol-specified first interim analysis. RESULTS: In 548 patients with a PD-L1 combined positive score of 1 or more, median progression-free survival was 10.4 months in the pembrolizumab group and 8.2 months in the placebo group (hazard ratio for disease progression or death, 0.62; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.50 to 0.77; P<0.001). In 617 patients in the intention-to-treat population, progression-free survival was 10.4 months and 8.2 months, respectively (hazard ratio, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.53 to 0.79; P<0.001). In 317 patients with a PD-L1 combined positive score of 10 or more, progression-free survival was 10.4 months and 8.1 months, respectively (hazard ratio, 0.58; 95% CI, 0.44 to 0.77; P<0.001). Overall survival at 24 months was 53.0% in the pembrolizumab group and 41.7% in the placebo group (hazard ratio for death, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.50 to 0.81; P<0.001), 50.4% and 40.4% (hazard ratio, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.54 to 0.84; P<0.001), and 54.4% and 44.6% (hazard ratio, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.44 to 0.84; P = 0.001), respectively. The most common grade 3 to 5 adverse events were anemia (30.3% in the pembrolizumab group and 26.9% in the placebo group) and neutropenia (12.4% and 9.7%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Progression-free and overall survival were significantly longer with pembrolizumab than with placebo among patients with persistent, recurrent, or metastatic cervical cancer who were also receiving chemotherapy with or without bevacizumab. (Funded by Merck Sharp and Dohme; KEYNOTE-826 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03635567.).

Real-world treatment outcomes from nationwide Onco-colon Turkey registry in RAS wild-type patients treated with biologics second-line mCRC.

BACKGROUNDS AND OBJECTIVES: Colorectal cancer is one of the leading causes of mortality both globally and in our country. In Turkey, we conducted a multicenter investigation into the effectiveness of second-line treatments and real-life data for patients with RAS wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer (NCT04757311). MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this retrospective analysis, records from 28 centers were collected, and histopathological, molecular, and clinical characteristics were documented. Patients were categorized into groups based on their second-line biological treatments: anti-EGFR (Group A and Group B, panitumumab and cetuximab) and anti-VEGF (Group C, bevacizumab and aflibercept). They were then compared within these groups. RESULTS: A total of 588 patients with documented RAS wild-type status were evaluated. The median OS was 15.7, 14.3 and 14.7 months in Group A, Group B and Group C, respectively (p = 0.764). The median PFS of the patients in second-line setting that received panitumumab, cetuximab and bevacizumab/aflibercept were 7.8, 6.6 and 7.4 months, respectively (p = 0.848). CONCLUSION: According to the results of our real-life data study, there is no significant difference in efficiency between the combination of biological agent and chemotherapy used in the second-line treatments.

First-line cemiplimab monotherapy and continued cemiplimab beyond progression plus chemotherapy for advanced non-small-cell lung cancer with PD-L1 50% or more (EMPOWER-Lung 1): 35-month follow-up from a mutlicentre, open-label, randomised, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Cemiplimab provided significant survival benefit to patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer with PD-L1 tumour expression of at least 50% and no actionable biomarkers at 1-year follow-up. In this exploratory analysis, we provide outcomes after 35 months' follow-up and the effect of adding chemotherapy to cemiplimab at the time of disease progression. METHODS: EMPOWER-Lung 1 was a multicentre, open-label, randomised, phase 3 trial. We enrolled patients (aged ≥18 years) with histologically confirmed squamous or non-squamous advanced non-small-cell lung cancer with PD-L1 tumour expression of 50% or more. We randomly assigned (1:1) patients to intravenous cemiplimab 350 mg every 3 weeks for up to 108 weeks, or until disease progression, or investigator's choice of chemotherapy. Central randomisation scheme generated by an interactive web response system governed the randomisation process that was stratified by histology and geographical region. Primary endpoints were overall survival and progression free survival, as assessed by a blinded independent central review (BICR) per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours version 1.1. Patients with disease progression on cemiplimab could continue cemiplimab with the addition of up to four cycles of chemotherapy. We assessed response in these patients by BICR against a new baseline, defined as the last scan before chemotherapy initiation. The primary endpoints were assessed in all randomly assigned participants (ie, intention-to-treat population) and in those with a PD-L1 expression of at least 50%. We assessed adverse events in all patients who received at least one dose of their assigned treatment. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03088540. FINDINGS: Between May 29, 2017, and March 4, 2020, we recruited 712 patients (607 [85%] were male and 105 [15%] were female). We randomly assigned 357 (50%) to cemiplimab and 355 (50%) to chemotherapy. 284 (50%) patients assigned to cemiplimab and 281 (50%) assigned to chemotherapy had verified PD-L1 expression of at least 50%. At 35 months' follow-up, among those with a verified PD-L1 expression of at least 50% median overall survival in the cemiplimab group was 26·1 months (95% CI 22·1-31·8; 149 [52%] of 284 died) versus 13·3 months (10·5-16·2; 188 [67%] of 281 died) in the chemotherapy group (hazard ratio [HR] 0·57, 95% CI 0·46-0·71; p<0·0001), median progression-free survival was 8·1 months (95% CI 6·2-8·8; 214 events occurred) in the cemiplimab group versus 5·3 months (4·3-6·1; 236 events occurred) in the chemotherapy group (HR 0·51, 95% CI 0·42-0·62; p<0·0001). Continued cemiplimab plus chemotherapy as second-line therapy (n=64) resulted in a median progression-free survival of 6·6 months (6·1-9·3) and overall survival of 15·1 months (11·3-18·7). The most common grade 3-4 treatment-emergent adverse events were anaemia (15 [4%] of 356 patients in the cemiplimab group vs 60 [17%] of 343 in the control group), neutropenia (three [1%] vs 35 [10%]), and pneumonia (18 [5%] vs 13 [4%]). Treatment-related deaths occurred in ten (3%) of 356 patients treated with cemiplimab (due to autoimmune myocarditis, cardiac failure, cardio-respiratory arrest, cardiopulmonary failure, septic shock, tumour hyperprogression, nephritis, respiratory failure, [n=1 each] and general disorders or unknown [n=2]) and in seven (2%) of 343 patients treated with chemotherapy (due to pneumonia and pulmonary embolism [n=2 each], and cardiac arrest, lung abscess, and myocardial infarction [n=1 each]). The safety profile of cemiplimab at 35 months, and of continued cemiplimab plus chemotherapy, was generally consistent with that previously observed for these treatments, with no new safety signals INTERPRETATION: At 35 months' follow-up, the survival benefit of cemiplimab for patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer was at least as pronounced as at 1 year, affirming its use as first-line monotherapy for this population. Adding chemotherapy to cemiplimab at progression might provide a new second-line treatment for patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer. FUNDING: Regeneron Pharmaceuticals and Sanofi.

Health-related quality of life with pembrolizumab or placebo plus chemotherapy with or without bevacizumab for persistent, recurrent, or metastatic cervical cancer (KEYNOTE-826): a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: In the KEYNOTE-826 study, the addition of the anti-PD-1 monoclonal antibody pembrolizumab to chemotherapy with or without bevacizumab improved overall survival and progression-free survival (primary endpoints) versus placebo plus chemotherapy with or without bevacizumab, with manageable toxicity, in patients with persistent, recurrent, or metastatic cervical cancer. In this Article, we report patient-reported outcomes (PROs) from KEYNOTE-826. METHODS: KEYNOTE-826 is a multicentre, randomised, phase 3 trial in 151 cancer treatment centres in 19 countries. Eligible patients were aged 18 years or older with persistent, recurrent, or metastatic cervical cancer not previously treated with systemic chemotherapy (previous radiosensitising chemotherapy was allowed) and not amenable to curative treatment and had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) centrally by means of an interactive voice response system in a double-blind manner to receive either pembrolizumab 200 mg or placebo every 3 weeks intravenously for up to 35 cycles plus chemotherapy (paclitaxel 175 mg/m2 plus cisplatin 50 mg/m2 or carboplatin area under the curve 5 mg/mL per min, intravenously) with or without bevacizumab 15 mg/kg every 3 weeks intravenously. Randomisation (block size of 4) was stratified by metastatic disease at diagnosis, planned bevacizumab use, and PD-L1 combined positive score. Patients, investigators, and other study personnel involved in study treatment administration or clinical evaluation of patients were unaware of treatment group assignments. PRO instruments were the EORTC Quality-of-Life-Core 30 (QLQ-C30), the EORTC cervical cancer module (QLQ-CX24), and the EuroQol-5 dimension-5 level (EQ-5D-5L) visual analogue scale, each collected before treatment at cycles 1-14 and every other cycle thereafter. Primary endpoints were overall survival and progression-free survival per RECIST version 1.1 by investigator review. Change from baseline in QLQ-C30 global health status (GHS)-quality of life (QoL) was a prespecified secondary endpoint and was assessed in the PRO full analysis population (all patients who received at least one dose of study treatment and completed at least one post-baseline PRO assessment). Other PRO analyses were protocol-specified exploratory endpoints. The study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03635567, and is ongoing. FINDINGS: Between Nov 20, 2018, and Jan 31, 2020, of 883 patients screened, 617 were randomly assigned (pembrolizumab group, n=308; placebo group, n=309). 587 (95%) of 617 patients received at least one dose of study treatment and completed at least one post-baseline PRO assessment and were therefore included in the PRO analyses (pembrolizumab group, n=290; placebo group, n=297). Median follow-up was 22·0 months (IQR 19·1-24·4). At week 30, QLQ-C30 completion was 199 (69%) of 290 patients in the pembrolizumab group and 168 (57%) of 297 patients in the placebo group; compliance was 199 (94%) of 211 and 168 (90%) of 186, respectively. The least squares mean change in QLQ-C30 GHS-QoL score from baseline to week 30 was -0·3 points (95% CI -3·1 to 2·6) in the pembrolizumab group and -1·3 points (-4·2 to 1·7) in the placebo group, with a between-group difference in least squares mean change of 1·0 point (95% CI -2·7 to 4·7). Median time to true deterioration in GHS-QoL was not reached (NR; 95% CI 13·4 months-NR) in the pembrolizumab group and 12·9 months (6·6-NR) in the placebo group (hazard ratio 0·84 [95% CI 0·65-1·09]). 122 (42%) of 290 patients in the pembrolizumab group versus 85 (29%) of 297 in the placebo group had improved GHS-QoL at any time during the study (p=0·0003). INTERPRETATION: Addition of pembrolizumab to chemotherapy with or without bevacizumab did not negatively affect health-related quality of life. Along with the efficacy and safety results already reported from KEYNOTE-826, these data support the benefit of pembrolizumab and the value of immunotherapy in patients with recurrent, persistent, or metastatic cervical cancer. FUNDING: Merck Sharp & Dohme.

Patient-reported outcomes with cemiplimab monotherapy for first-line treatment of advanced non-small cell lung cancer with PD-L1 of ≥50%: The EMPOWER-Lung 1 study.

BACKGROUND: In the EMPOWER-Lung 1 trial (ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03088540), cemiplimab conferred longer survival than platinum-doublet chemotherapy for advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) with programmed cell death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) ≥50%. Patient-reported outcomes were evaluated among trial participants. METHODS: Adults with NSCLC and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0 to 1 were randomly assigned cemiplimab 350 mg every 3 weeks or platinum-doublet chemotherapy. At baseline and day 1 of each treatment cycle, patients were administered the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life-Core 30 (QLQ-C30) and Lung Cancer Module (QLQ-LC13) questionnaires. Mixed-model repeated measures analysis estimated overall change from baseline for PD-L1 ≥50% and intention-to-treat populations. Kaplan-Meier analysis estimated time to definitive deterioration. RESULTS: In PD-L1 ≥50% patients (cemiplimab, n = 283; chemotherapy, n = 280), baseline QLQ-C30 and QLQ-LC13 scores showed moderate-to-high functioning and low symptom burden. Change from baseline favored cemiplimab on global health status/quality of life (GHS/QOL), functioning, and most symptom scales. Risk of definitive deterioration across functioning scales was reduced versus chemotherapy; hazard ratios were 0.48 (95% CI, 0.32-0.71) to 0.63 (95% CI, 0.41-0.96). Cemiplimab showed lower risk of definitive deterioration for disease-related (dyspnea, cough, pain in chest, pain in other body parts, fatigue) and treatment-related symptoms (peripheral neuropathy, alopecia, nausea/vomiting, appetite loss, constipation, diarrhea) (nominal p < .05). Results were similar in the intention-to-treat population. CONCLUSIONS: Results support cemiplimab for first-line therapy of advanced NSCLC from the patient's perspective. Improved survival is accompanied by improvements versus platinum-doublet chemotherapy in GHS/QOL and functioning and reduction in symptom burden.

Impact of adding pertuzumab to trastuzumab plus chemotherapy in neoadjuvant treatment of HER2 positive breast cancer patients: a multicenter real-life HER2PATH study.

AIM: To investigate the pathological complete response (pCR) achieved after neoadjuvant therapy with versus without adding pertuzumab (P) to trastuzumab (H) plus neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NCT) in HER2+ breast cancer (BC) patients in a real-life setting. METHODS: A total of 1528 female HER2+ BC patients who received NCT plus H with or without P were included in this retrospective real-life study. Primary endpoint was pCR rate (ypT0/Tis ypN0). Clinicopathological characteristics, event-free survival (EFS) time, and relapse rates were evaluated with respect to HER2 blockade (NCT-H vs. NCT-HP) and pCR. RESULTS: Overall, 62.2% of patients received NCT-H and 37.8% received NCT-HP. NCT-HP was associated with a significantly higher pCR rate (66.4 vs. 56.8%, p < 0.001) and lower relapse (4.5 vs. 12.2%, p < 0.001) in comparison to NCT-H. Patients with pCR had a significantly lower relapse (5.6 vs. 14.9%, p < 0.001) and longer EFS time (mean(SE) 111.2(1.9) vs. 93.9(2.7) months, p < 0.001) compared to patients with non-pCR. Patients in the NCT-HP group were more likely to receive docetaxel (75.0 vs. 40.6%, p < 0.001), while those with pCR were more likely to receive paclitaxel (50.2 vs. 40.7%, p < 0.001) and NCT-HP (41.5 vs. 32.1%, p < 0.001). Hormone receptor status and breast conservation rates were similar in NCT-HP vs. NCT-H groups and in patients with vs. without pCR. Invasive ductal carcinoma (OR, 2.669, 95% CI 1.596 to 4.464, p < 0.001), lower histological grade of the tumor (OR, 4.052, 95% CI 2.446 to 6.713, p < 0.001 for grade 2 and OR, 3.496, 95% CI 2.020 to 6.053, p < 0.001 for grade 3), lower T stage (OR, 1.959, 95% CI 1.411 to 2.720, p < 0.001) and paclitaxel (vs. docetaxel, OR, 1.571, 95% CI 1.127 to 2.190, p = 0.008) significantly predicted the pCR. CONCLUSIONS: This real-life study indicates that adding P to NCT-H enables higher pCR than NCT-H in HER2+ BC, while pCR was associated with lower relapse and better EFS time.

KEYSTEP-008: phase II trial of pembrolizumab-based combination in MSI-H/dMMR metastatic colorectal cancer.

Robust clinical activity has been observed with the immune checkpoint inhibitor pembrolizumab in patients with microsatellite instability-high/mismatch repair-deficient (MSI-H/dMMR) metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). However, given the response rate of 45% and a median progression-free survival of 16.5 months with first-line pembrolizumab demonstrated in KEYNOTE-177, there is room for improvement. Targeting a second immune receptor, such as CTLA-4, LAG-3, TIGIT, or ILT-4 may improve efficacy of PD-1 inhibition. Here we describe the design and rationale for the open-label, randomized, phase II KEYSTEP-008 trial, which will evaluate the efficacy and safety of pembrolizumab-based combination therapy compared with pembrolizumab monotherapy in chemotherapy-refractory (cohort A) or previously untreated (cohort B) MSI-H/dMMR mCRC. Clinical Trial Registration: NCT04895722 (ClinicalTrials.gov).

Does Proton Pump Inhibitors Decrease the Efficacy of Palbociclib and Ribociclib in Patients with Metastatic Breast Cancer?

Background and Objectives: This investigation aimed to determine the impacts of concurrent proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) on progression-free survival (PFS) in patients with hormone receptor-positive and HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer managed with palbociclib or ribociclib as either the initial or subsequent line of therapy option. Materials and Methods: In this retrospective study, patients were classified as "concurrent PPIs" if PPIs were given for at least two-thirds of the palbociclib or ribociclib therapy period, and "no concurrent PPIs" if no PPIs were given during the period of palbociclib or ribociclib therapy. Each patient was also classified as endocrine-sensitive or endocrine-resistant according to the duration of previous endocrine responses. "Concurrent PPIs" and "no concurrent PPIs" groups were compared with each other in terms of PFS. This comparison was performed for both ribociclib and palbociclib groups. Results: The research included 220 patients in total. The PFS of 57 patients on palbociclib using concomitant PPIs was 14.4 months. Among 63 patients using palbociclib without concomitant PPIs, the PFS was 15.8 months. No statistically significant difference was found with PPI use (p = 0.82). Among 29 patients using ribociclib concurrently with PPIs, the PFS was 22.4 months. Among 71 patients using ribociclib without PPIs, the PFS was 20.2 months. No statistically significant difference was found with PPI use (p = 0.40). Conclusion: The results of our investigation showed that concomitant use of the most commonly used PPIs in the study (lansoprazole, pantoprazole, and esomeprazole) with palbociclib or ribociclib did not have any detrimental effects on PFS. Where appropriate, PPIs can be used concurrently with palbociclib and ribociclib. However, the effect of PPIs on cycling-dependent kinase 4/6 inhibitors deserves further investigation.

The Prognostic Utility of the Metastatic Lymph Node Ratio and the Number of Regional Lymph Nodes Removed from Patients with Small Bowel Adenocarcinomas.

Background and Objectives: Small bowel adenocarcinomas (SBAs) are rare tumors of the gastrointestinal system. Lymph node metastasis in patients with curatively resected SBAs is associated with poor prognosis. In this study, we determined the prognostic utility of the number of removed lymph nodes and the metastatic lymph node ratio (the N ratio). Materials and Methods: The data of 97 patients who underwent curative SBA resection in nine hospitals of Turkey were retrospectively evaluated. Univariate and multivariate analyses of potentially prognostic factors including the N ratio and the numbers of regional lymph nodes removed were evaluated. Results: Univariate analysis showed that perineural and vascular invasion, metastatic lymph nodes, advanced TNM stage, and a high N ratio were significant predictors of poor survival. Multivariate analysis revealed that the N ratio was a significant independent predictor of disease-specific survival (DSS). The group with the lowest N ratio exhibited the longest disease-free survival (DFS) and DSS; these decreased significantly as the N ratio increased (both, p < 0.001). There was no significant difference in either DFS or DSS between groups with low and high numbers of dissected lymph nodes (i.e., <13 and ≥13) (both, p = 0.075). Conclusions: We found that the N ratio was independently prognostic of DSS in patients with radically resected SBAs. The N ratio is a convenient and accurate measure of the severity of lymph node metastasis.

Cemiplimab monotherapy for first-line treatment of advanced non-small-cell lung cancer with PD-L1 of at least 50%: a multicentre, open-label, global, phase 3, randomised, controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: We aimed to examine cemiplimab, a programmed cell death 1 inhibitor, in the first-line treatment of advanced non-small-cell lung cancer with programmed cell death ligand 1 (PD-L1) of at least 50%. METHODS: In EMPOWER-Lung 1, a multicentre, open-label, global, phase 3 study, eligible patients recruited in 138 clinics from 24 countries (aged ≥18 years with histologically or cytologically confirmed advanced non-small-cell lung cancer, an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-1; never-smokers were ineligible) were randomly assigned (1:1) to cemiplimab 350 mg every 3 weeks or platinum-doublet chemotherapy. Crossover from chemotherapy to cemiplimab was allowed following disease progression. Primary endpoints were overall survival and progression-free survival per masked independent review committee. Primary endpoints were assessed in the intention-to-treat population and in a prespecified PD-L1 of at least 50% population (per US Food and Drug Administration request to the sponsor), which consisted of patients with PD-L1 of at least 50% per 22C3 assay done according to instructions for use. Adverse events were assessed in all patients who received at least one dose of the assigned treatment. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03088540 and is ongoing. FINDINGS: Between June 27, 2017 and Feb 27, 2020, 710 patients were randomly assigned (intention-to-treat population). In the PD-L1 of at least 50% population, which consisted of 563 patients, median overall survival was not reached (95% CI 17·9-not evaluable) with cemiplimab (n=283) versus 14·2 months (11·2-17·5) with chemotherapy (n=280; hazard ratio [HR] 0·57 [0·42-0·77]; p=0·0002). Median progression-free survival was 8·2 months (6·1-8·8) with cemiplimab versus 5·7 months (4·5-6·2) with chemotherapy (HR 0·54 [0·43-0·68]; p<0·0001). Significant improvements in overall survival and progression-free survival were also observed with cemiplimab in the intention-to-treat population despite a high crossover rate (74%). Grade 3-4 treatment-emergent adverse events occurred in 98 (28%) of 355 patients treated with cemiplimab and 135 (39%) of 342 patients treated with chemotherapy. INTERPRETATION: Cemiplimab monotherapy significantly improved overall survival and progression-free survival compared with chemotherapy in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer with PD-L1 of at least 50%, providing a potential new treatment option for this patient population. FUNDING: Regeneron Pharmaceuticals and Sanofi.

Efficacy and safety profile of COVID-19 vaccine in cancer patients: a prospective, multicenter cohort study.

Aim: To compare the seropositivity rate of cancer patients with noncancer controls after inactive SARS-CoV-2 vaccination and evaluate the factors affecting seropositivity. Method: Spike IgG antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 were measured in blood samples of 776 cancer patients and 715 noncancer volunteers. An IgG level ≥50 AU/ml is accepted as seropositive. Results: The seropositivity rate was 85.2% in the patient group and 97.5% in the control group. The seropositivity rate and antibody levels were significantly lower in the patient group (p < 0.001). Age and chemotherapy were associated with lower seropositivity in cancer patients (p < 0.001). Conclusion: This study highlighted the efficacy and safety of the inactivated vaccine in cancer patients. Clinical Trials Registration: NCT04771559 (ClinicalTrials.gov).

Cancer patients are at high risk for infection with SARS-CoV-2 and of developing the associated disease, COVID-19, which therefore puts them in the priority group for vaccination. This study evaluated the efficacy and safety of inactive SARSCoV-2 vaccination, an inactivated virus vaccine, in cancer patients. The immune response rate, defined as seropositivity, was 85.2% in the cancer patient group and 97.5% in the control group. The levels of antibodies, which are blood markers of immune response to the vaccine, were also significantly lower in the patient group, especially in those older than 60 years and receiving chemotherapy. These results highlight the importance of determining the effective vaccine type and dose in cancer patients to protect them from COVID-19 without disrupting their cancer treatment.

Atezolizumab with or without chemotherapy in metastatic urothelial cancer (IMvigor130): a multicentre, randomised, placebo-controlled phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Atezolizumab can induce sustained responses in metastatic urothelial carcinoma. We report the results of IMvigor130, a phase 3 trial that compared atezolizumab with or without platinum-based chemotherapy versus placebo plus platinum-based chemotherapy in first-line metastatic urothelial carcinoma. METHODS: In this multicentre, phase 3, randomised trial, untreated patients aged 18 years or older with locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma, from 221 sites in 35 countries, were randomly assigned to receive atezolizumab plus platinum-based chemotherapy (group A), atezolizumab monotherapy (group B), or placebo plus platinum-based chemotherapy (group C). Patients received 21-day cycles of gemcitabine (1000 mg/m2 body surface area, administered intravenously on days 1 and 8 of each cycle), plus either carboplatin (area under the curve of 4·5 mg/mL per min administered intravenously) or cisplatin (70 mg/m2 body surface area administered intravenously) on day 1 of each cycle with either atezolizumab (1200 mg administered intravenously on day 1 of each cycle) or placebo. Group B patients received 1200 mg atezolizumab, administered intravenously on day 1 of each 21-day cycle. The co-primary efficacy endpoints for the intention-to-treat population were investigator-assessed Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours 1.1 progression-free survival and overall survival (group A vs group C) and overall survival (group B vs group C), which was to be formally tested only if overall survival was positive for group A versus group C. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02807636. FINDINGS: Between July 15, 2016, and July 20, 2018, we enrolled 1213 patients. 451 (37%) were randomly assigned to group A, 362 (30%) to group B, and 400 (33%) to group C. Median follow-up for survival was 11·8 months (IQR 6·1-17·2) for all patients. At the time of final progression-free survival analysis and interim overall survival analysis (May 31, 2019), median progression-free survival in the intention-to-treat population was 8·2 months (95% CI 6·5-8·3) in group A and 6·3 months (6·2-7·0) in group C (stratified hazard ratio [HR] 0·82, 95% CI 0·70-0·96; one-sided p=0·007). Median overall survival was 16·0 months (13·9-18·9) in group A and 13·4 months (12·0-15·2) in group C (0·83, 0·69-1·00; one-sided p=0·027). Median overall survival was 15·7 months (13·1-17·8) for group B and 13·1 months (11·7-15·1) for group C (1·02, 0·83-1·24). Adverse events that led to withdrawal of any agent occurred in 156 (34%) patients in group A, 22 (6%) patients in group B, and 132 (34%) patients in group C. 50 (11%) patients in group A, 21 (6%) patients in group B, and 27 (7%) patients in group C had adverse events that led to discontinuation of atezolizumab or placebo. INTERPRETATION: Addition of atezolizumab to platinum-based chemotherapy as first-line treatment prolonged progression-free survival in patients with metastatic urothelial carcinoma. The safety profile of the combination was consistent with that observed with the individual agents. These results support the use of atezolizumab plus platinum-based chemotherapy as a potential first-line treatment option for metastatic urothelial carcinoma. FUNDING: F Hoffmann-La Roche and Genentech.

Pembrolizumab plus Chemotherapy for Squamous Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Standard first-line therapy for metastatic, squamous non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is platinum-based chemotherapy or pembrolizumab (for patients with programmed death ligand 1 [PD-L1] expression on ≥50% of tumor cells). More recently, pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy was shown to significantly prolong overall survival among patients with nonsquamous NSCLC. METHODS: In this double-blind, phase 3 trial, we randomly assigned, in a 1:1 ratio, 559 patients with untreated metastatic, squamous NSCLC to receive 200 mg of pembrolizumab or saline placebo for up to 35 cycles; all the patients also received carboplatin and either paclitaxel or nanoparticle albumin-bound [nab]-paclitaxel for the first 4 cycles. Primary end points were overall survival and progression-free survival. RESULTS: After a median follow-up of 7.8 months, the median overall survival was 15.9 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 13.2 to not reached) in the pembrolizumab-combination group and 11.3 months (95% CI, 9.5 to 14.8) in the placebo-combination group (hazard ratio for death, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.49 to 0.85; P<0.001). The overall survival benefit was consistent regardless of the level of PD-L1 expression. The median progression-free survival was 6.4 months (95% CI, 6.2 to 8.3) in the pembrolizumab-combination group and 4.8 months (95% CI, 4.3 to 5.7) in the placebo-combination group (hazard ratio for disease progression or death, 0.56; 95% CI, 0.45 to 0.70; P<0.001). Adverse events of grade 3 or higher occurred in 69.8% of the patients in the pembrolizumab-combination group and in 68.2% of the patients in the placebo-combination group. Discontinuation of treatment because of adverse events was more frequent in the pembrolizumab-combination group than in the placebo-combination group (13.3% vs. 6.4%). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with previously untreated metastatic, squamous NSCLC, the addition of pembrolizumab to chemotherapy with carboplatin plus paclitaxel or nab-paclitaxel resulted in significantly longer overall survival and progression-free survival than chemotherapy alone. (Funded by Merck Sharp & Dohme; KEYNOTE-407 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02775435 .).

Is the duration of castration resistance predictive for sequential treatment responses in the metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer setting?

OBJECTIVE: Prostate cancer is the second leading cause of cancer death in men. Androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) has been the primary therapeutic approach for treatment of prostate cancer. However,nearly all patients develop the castration-resistant disease . We evaluated real-world data with abiraterone and enzalutamide treatment. By this data, we aimed to analyze whether that prior short response to ADT could predict response to subsequent therapy with androgen receptor axis targeted agent (ARATA). MATERIAL AND METHOD: We collected data from two cancer centers, 151 consecutive patients with treated abiraterone or enzalutamide in the first line of metastatic castration resistant prostat cancer (mCRPC) setting were included. The patients who received docetaxel in castration naive setting is also included. Time to castration resistance (TTCR) was defined as the duration from the initial to failure of primary ADT. RESULTS: Patients with treated ARATA were divided into two groups according to the time to castration resistance (TTCR). Patients who became resistant to ADT up to one year had a median PFS of 6.6 months, compared to median PFS of 13.3 months for patients who responded ADT for more than 1 year. (p = 0.002). In the post-docetaxel setting, median PFS is 12.6 months of patients with treated ARATA who had TTCR for more than one year, and median PFS is 6.6 months in those who had TTCR less than one year (p = 0.007).Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to determine the clinical factors on ARATA outcomes. Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status(PS), median prostate-specific antigen(PSA) and time to CRPC were significantly predicted outcomes of ARATA on multivariate analysis. CONCLUSION: TTCR is also a predictor for PFS of the patients who were treated ARATA both whole cohort and post-docetaxel.

Tyrosine kinase inhibitors in the treatment of metastatic renal cell cancer patients with early cytokine intolerance: TURCOS, a Turkish national, prospective observational study.

OBJECTIVE: Cytokines have been the mainstay of treatment in metastatic renal cell cancer (mRCC) for decades before the introduction of tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs), which dramatically changed the therapeutic landscape in these patients. This observational study was designed to evaluate use of TKIs in the treatment of cytokine-intolerant mRCC patients. METHODS: A total of 151 cytokine-intolerant mRCC patients who were treated with TKIs (sunitinib, pazopanib and sorafenib) were enrolled in this prospective, non-interventional, multi-center observational study at 16 oncology centers across Turkey. Mean (SD) age was 61.3 (11.1) years and 74.8% were males. Data on duration of TKI treatment was the primary outcome measure. Additionally, overall response rate (ORR), progression free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS) and safety data were recorded. RESULTS: Median duration of treatment was 8.2 months at a median follow up of 17.9 months. ORR and disease control rate were 12.5% and 70.8%, respectively. Median PFS and OS were 7.5 months (95%CI: 6.4-10.4) and 27.3 months (95%CI: 17.6-27.3) with no significant difference among three TKI agents in terms of treatment duration, ORR, PFS and OS. The most common adverse events excluding progression-which was the protocol requirement were diarrhea (13.6%), asthenia (13.6%) and hand-foot syndrome (12.6%). Dose modifications were required in 30.5% of the patients and 15% discontinued TKIs because of toxicity. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings confirm the efficacy and safety profile of TKIs in the first-line treatment of mRCC patients intolerant to cytokine treatment. There was no significant difference among three TKI agents in terms of treatment duration, ORR, PFS and OS.Trial registration: TURCOS ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01585974. Registered April 25, 2012.

A comparison of metacognitive factors among patients with cancer and the control group.

OBJECTIVE: Research examining the relationship between metacognitions and cancer has only recently begun to emerge. This study attempted to compare the metacognitions of the patients with and without cancer. The effects of stage of cancer, type of cancer, and treatment modality (chemotherapy, radiotherapy, operation) on metacognitions were investigated. Patients with cancer were hypothesized to have higher levels of negative metacognitions. METHODS: Participants were patients with cancer (N = 279) and patients without cancer (control group, N = 212). The Metacognition Questionnaire-30 was administered to all participants. Results were analyzed according to demographic and histopathological characteristics of the patients. RESULTS: The results showed that patients with different cancer diagnoses scored higher than the controls on all subscales of the MCQ-30. Those who received chemotherapy scored the highest on the MCQ-30. The patients who were in early stages of cancer had higher levels of negative metacognitions. Patients who did not have operation but had chemotherapy had the highest levels of negative metacognitions. Patients who were in locally advanced stage, did not have operation but had received or was receiving chemotherapy had the highest levels of negative metacognitions. CONCLUSIONS: Patients who were in early stages of cancer appeared to be in greater need for psychological help and access to services. Findings indicated a need for psychological support for patients who undergo chemotherapy.

Outcomes of surveillance versus adjuvant chemotherapy for patients with stage IA and IB nonseminomatous testicular germ cell tumors.

BACKGROUND: Currently, it is accepted that risk assessment of clinical stage I (CS I) nonseminomatous germ cell tumors (NSGCT) patient is mainly dependent on the presence of lymphovascular invasion (LVI). Initial active surveillance, adjuvant chemotherapy and retroperitoneal lymph node dissection (RPLND) are acceptable treatment options for these patients, but there is no uniform consensus. The purpose of this study was to compare outcomes of active surveillance with adjuvant chemotherapy. METHODS: A total of 201 patients with CS I NSGCT after orchiectomy were included. Outcomes of active surveillance and adjuvant chemotherapy were retrospectively analyzed. The prognostic significance of risk factors for survival and relapse was evaluated. RESULTS: Of the 201 patients, 110 (54.7%) received adjuvant chemotherapy, while the remaining 91 patients (45.3%) underwent surveillance. Relapses were significantly higher for patients underwent surveillance compared to adjuvant chemotherapy group (18.3 vs. 1.2%, p < 0.001). The 5-year relapse-free survival (RFS) rate for patients who were treated with adjuvant chemotherapy was significantly better than those of patients underwent surveillance (97.6 vs. 80.8%, respectively; p < 0.001). Univariate analysis showed that the presence of LVI (p = 0.01) and treatment option (p < 0.001) were prognostic factors for RFS and pT stage (p = 0.004) and invasion of rete testis (p = 0.004) and the presence of relapse (p < 0.001) were significant prognostic factors for OS. Multivariate analysis revealed that the treatment strategy was an independent prognostic factor for RFS (p < 0.001, HR 0.54). A logistic regression analysis demonstrated that treatment options (p = 0.031), embryonal carcinoma (EC) >50% (p = 0.013) and tumor diameter (p = 0.016) were found to be independent factors for predicting relapse. CONCLUSIONS: Our results indicate that adjuvant chemotherapy is associated with improved RFS compared with surveillance for CS I NSGCT patients. Moreover, the treatment strategy is an important prognostic indicator for RFS and a predictive factor for relapse. Although adjuvant chemotherapy seems to be a suitable treatment for patients with risk factors for relapse, surveillance is still preferred management option.