Erdafitinib or Chemotherapy in Advanced or Metastatic Urothelial Carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Erdafitinib is a pan-fibroblast growth factor receptor (FGFR) inhibitor approved for the treatment of locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma in adults with susceptible FGFR3/2 alterations who have progression after platinum-containing chemotherapy. The effects of erdafitinib in patients with FGFR-altered metastatic urothelial carcinoma who have progression during or after treatment with checkpoint inhibitors (anti-programmed cell death protein 1 [PD-1] or anti-programmed death ligand 1 [PD-L1] agents) are unclear. METHODS: We conducted a global phase 3 trial of erdafitinib as compared with chemotherapy in patients with metastatic urothelial carcinoma with susceptible FGFR3/2 alterations who had progression after one or two previous treatments that included an anti-PD-1 or anti-PD-L1. Patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive erdafitinib or the investigator's choice of chemotherapy (docetaxel or vinflunine). The primary end point was overall survival. RESULTS: A total of 266 patients underwent randomization: 136 to the erdafitinib group and 130 to the chemotherapy group. The median follow-up was 15.9 months. The median overall survival was significantly longer with erdafitinib than with chemotherapy (12.1 months vs. 7.8 months; hazard ratio for death, 0.64; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.47 to 0.88; P = 0.005). The median progression-free survival was also longer with erdafitinib than with chemotherapy (5.6 months vs. 2.7 months; hazard ratio for progression or death, 0.58; 95% CI, 0.44 to 0.78; P<0.001). The incidence of grade 3 or 4 treatment-related adverse events was similar in the two groups (45.9% in the erdafitinib group and 46.4% in the chemotherapy group). Treatment-related adverse events that led to death were less common with erdafitinib than with chemotherapy (in 0.7% vs. 5.4% of patients). CONCLUSIONS: Erdafitinib therapy resulted in significantly longer overall survival than chemotherapy among patients with metastatic urothelial carcinoma and FGFR alterations after previous anti-PD-1 or anti-PD-L1 treatment. (Funded by Janssen Research and Development; THOR ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03390504.).

Current Status of Predictive Biomarker Development in Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: In this review, we analyze the current state of research in development of new biomarkers that may be useful in managing metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) setting. RECENT FINDINGS: Combining tumor-based biomarkers (gene expression profile) and blood-based biomarkers (ctDNA, cytokines) would be helpful in acquiring information regarding RCC and might be significant in the decision-making process. Renal cell carcinoma (RCC) is the sixth most frequently diagnosed neoplasm in men and tithe in women, making it responsible for 5% and 3% of all diagnosed cancers respectively. Metastatic stage represents a non-negligible percentage at diagnosis and is characterized by poor prognosis. Despite clinical features and prognostic score could guide clinicians in therapeutic approach of this disease, biomarkers predictive of response to treatment remain an unmet need.

Current Understanding of Urachal Adenocarcinoma and Management Strategy.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The aim of this review is to sum up the state of the art of urachal carcinoma (UC) in order to easily guide clinicians. RECENT FINDINGS: UC is a rare and aggressive disease with consequent few data about diagnosis and treatment. Dates are mainly based on retrospective trial and case reports with limited prospective trial. Clinical presentation is not specific, often with urinary symptoms. Diagnosis is mainly based on CT scan and MRI, useful to evaluate local invasion and nodal status and to detect the presence of distant metastases. Therefore, biopsy is needed to obtain histological confirmation. Surgery is the gold standard for localized disease, while different chemotherapy schemes have been used in metastatic setting. Novel findings based on mutational analysis of the tumor include the use of biological treatment, such as cetuximab, and immunotherapy, such as atezolizumab, with satisfactory responses, suggesting that personalized treatment could be the most suitable option for UC.

A phase II study evaluating the efficacy of enzalutamide and the role of liquid biopsy for evaluation of ARv7 in mCRPC patients with measurable metastases including visceral disease (Excalibur study).

Background: Up to 30% of patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) develop visceral metastases, which are associated with a poor prognosis. Objectives: Efficacy of enzalutamide in mCRPC patients with measurable metastases, including visceral and/or extra-regional lymph nodes. Methods: In this phase II multicenter study, patients with mCRPC and measurable metastases received enzalutamide as the first line. Primary endpoint: 3-month (mo) disease control rate (DCR) defined as the proportion of patients with complete (CR) or partial response (PR) or stable disease (SD) as per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors 1.1. Secondary endpoint: safety. Exploratory endpoint: the association between ARv7 splicing variants in basal circulating tumor cell (CTC)-enriched blood samples and treatment response/resistance using the AdnaTest ProstateCancerSelect kit and the AdnaTest ProstateCancer Panel AR-V7. Results: From March 2017 to January 2021, 68 patients were enrolled. One patient never started treatment. Median age: 72 years. A total of 52 patients (78%) received enzalutamide as a first line for mCRPC. The median follow-up was 32 months. At the 3-month assessment, 24 patients presented an SD, 1 patient achieved a CR, and 23 patients had a PR (3-mo-DCR of 72%). Discontinuations due to adverse events (AEs), disease-related death, or disease progression occurred in 9%, 6%, and 48% of patients. All patients reported at least one grade (G) 1-2 AE: the most common were fatigue (49%) and hypertension (33%). Six G3 AEs were reported: two hypertension, one seizure, one fatigue, one diarrhea, and one headache. Basal detection of ARv7 was significantly associated with poor treatment response (p = 0.034) and a nonsignificant association (p = 0.15) was observed between ARv7 detection and response assessments. At month 3, ARv7 was detected in 57%, 25%, and 15% of patients undergoing progressive disease, SD, and PR, respectively. Conclusion: The study met its primary endpoint, showing the efficacy of enzalutamide in men with mCRPC and measurable metastatic lesions in visceral and/or lymph node sites. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03103724. First Posted: 6 April 2017. First patient enrollment: 19 April 2017.

A multicenter phase 2 single arm study of cabozantinib in patients with advanced or unresectable renal cell carcinoma pre-treated with one immune-checkpoint inhibitor: The BREAKPOINT trial (Meet-Uro trial 03).

BACKGROUND: First-line therapies based on immune-checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) significantly improved survival of metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) patients. Cabozantinib was shown to target kinases involved in immune-escape and to prolong survival in patients pre-treated with tyrosine-kinase-inhibitors (TKIs). The impact of ICIs combinations in first line on subsequent therapies is still unclear. METHODS: This is an open label, multicenter, single arm, phase II study designed to assess activity, safety and efficacy of cabozantinib in mRCC patients progressed after an adjuvant or first line anti-Programmed Death (PD)-1/PD-Ligand (PD-L) 1-based therapy. Primary endpoint was progression free survival (PFS), secondary endpoints were overall survival (OS), objective response rate (ORR) and safety. RESULTS: 31 patients were included in the analysis. After a median (m) follow-up of 11.9 months, mPFS was 8.3 months (90%CI 3.9-17.4) and mOS was 13.8 months (95%CI 7.7-29.0). ORR was 37.9% with an additional 13 patients achieving disease stability. Grade 3-4 adverse events occurred in 47% of patients, including more frequently creatine phosphokinase (CPK) serum level elevation, neutropenia, hyponatremia, diarrhea, hand-food syndrome, oral mucositis and hypertension. CONCLUSIONS: The BREAKPOINT trial met its primary endpoint showing that cabozantinib as second line therapy after ICIs was active in mRCC. Safety profile was manageable. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03463681 - A Study of CaBozantinib in Patients With Advanced or Unresectable Renal cEll cArcinoma (BREAKPOINT) - https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03463681.

Impact of influenza vaccination on survival of patients with advanced cancer receiving immune checkpoint inhibitors (INVIDIa-2): final results of the multicentre, prospective, observational study.

Background: The prospective multicentre observational INVIDIa-2 study investigated the clinical effectiveness of influenza vaccination in patients with advanced cancer receiving immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI). In this secondary analysis of the original trial, we aimed to assess the outcomes of patients to immunotherapy based on vaccine administration. Methods: The original study enrolled patients with advanced solid tumours receiving ICI at 82 Italian Oncology Units from Oct 1, 2019, to Jan 31, 2020. The trial's primary endpoint was the time-adjusted incidence of influenza-like illness (ILI) until April 30, 2020, the results of which were reported previously. Secondary endpoints (data cut-off Jan 31, 2022) included the outcomes of patients to immunotherapy based on vaccine administration, for which the final results are reported herein. A propensity score matching by age, sex, performance status, primary tumour site, comorbidities, and smoking habits was planned for the present analysis. Only patients with available data for these variables were included. The outcomes of interest were overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate (ORR), and disease-control rate (DCR). Findings: The original study population consisted of 1188 evaluable patients. After a propensity score matching, 1004 patients were considered (502 vaccinated and 502 unvaccinated), and 986 of them were evaluable for overall survival (OS). At the median follow-up of 20 months, the influenza vaccination demonstrated a favourable impact on the outcome receiving ICI in terms of median OS [27.0 months (CI 19.5-34.6) in vaccinated vs. 20.9 months (16.6-25.2) in unvaccinated, p = 0.003], median progression-free survival [12.5 months (CI 10.4-14.6) vs. 9.6 months (CI 7.9-11.4), p = 0.049], and disease-control rate (74.7% vs. 66.5%, p = 0.005). The multivariable analyses confirmed the favourable impact of influenza vaccination in terms of OS (HR 0.75, 95% C.I. 0.62-0.92; p = 0.005) and DCR (OR 1.47, 95% C.I. 1.11-1.96; p = 0.007). Interpretation: The INVIDIa-2 study results suggest a favourable immunological impact of influenza vaccination on the outcome of cancer patients receiving ICI immunotherapy, further encouraging the vaccine recommendation in this population and supporting translational investigations about the possible synergy between antiviral and antitumour immunity. Funding: The Federation of Italian Cooperative Oncology Groups (FICOG), Roche S.p.A., and Seqirus.

Biomarker-driven immunotherapy for precision medicine in prostate cancer.

Although immunotherapy has recently revolutionized standard of care in different cancer types, prostate cancer has generally failed to show dramatic responses to immune checkpoint inhibitors. As in other tumors, the goal in prostate cancer is now to target treatments more precisely on patient's individual characteristics through precision medicine. Defects in mismatch repair, mutations in the exonuclease domain of the DNA polymerase epsilon (POLE), high tumor mutational burden and the presence of biallelic loss of CDK12 among others, are predictive biomarkers of response to immunotherapy. In the present review, we summarize the evolving landscape of immunotherapy in prostate cancer, including precision approaches and strategies to define classes of responsive patients and scale up resistance to immune checkpoint inhibitors.

Optimal Choice of Adjuvant Treatment for Renal Cell Carcinoma Following Nephrectomy.

Renal cell carcinoma (RCC) is the fourteenth most common cancer worldwide. In about 55% of cases, it is diagnosed at a localised and/or locally advanced stage and therefore amenable to a curative approach. Although nephrectomy still represents the cornerstone of non-metastatic RCC (nmRCC) treatment, a relapse is observed in about 25-30% of patients undergoing curative surgery. Prognosis is drastically influenced by lymph nodal involvement. After the first disappointing results with a cytokine-based strategy, tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) were tested as adjuvant agents. Despite their efficacy in the metastatic setting, results in terms of disease-free survival (DFS) are not unequivocal and the overall survival (OS) benefit has not been demonstrated. Moreover, their toxicity profile induced a remarkable percentage of patients to discontinue the treatment. On the contrary, the KEYNOTE-564 trial showed the benefit of adjuvant pembrolizumab compared with placebo in terms of DFS with promising results in term of OS. Patients included were at intermediate or high risk of relapse, or patients with no evidence of disease after metastasectomy (M1 NED). The updated analysis presented at the American Society of Clinical Oncology Genito-Urinary (ASCO GU) 2022 confirmed the benefit of pembrolizumab versus placebo over time, although OS data are still immature. A longer follow-up and the several ongoing trials with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) will provide further data about adjuvant immuno-oncology (IO). Furthermore, the patients' selection based on clinical or biological features will be crucial in order to identify who benefits most from treatments.

Cabozantinib as First-line Treatment in Patients With Metastatic Collecting Duct Renal Cell Carcinoma: Results of the BONSAI Trial for the Italian Network for Research in Urologic-Oncology (Meet-URO 2 Study).

Importance: Metastatic collecting duct carcinoma (mCDC) is a rare type of non-clear cell renal cell carcinoma (ncRCC) with poor prognosis and no standard treatments. Despite retrospective series that have documented the benefit of cabozantinib in ncRCC, no prospective trials have evaluated this treatment in mCDC. Objective: To determine whether cabozantinib is an active treatment in patients with mCDC. Design, Setting, and Participants: The caBozantinib in cOllectiNg ductS Renal Cell cArcInoma (BONSAI) trial was an open-label, single-arm, phase 2 clinical trial carried out between January 2018 and November 2020 at a single academic center with data cut off in September 2021 on behalf of the the Italian Network for Research in Urologic-Oncology (Meet-URO 2). Eligible patients had histologic diagnosis of centrally confirmed mCDC with measurable disease according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST; version 1.1). In total, 25 patients were screened. Interventions: Patients received cabozantinib, 60 mg orally once daily, until disease progression, unacceptable toxic effects, or withdrawal of consent. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point was objective response rate (ORR) per RECIST, version 1.1. Results: At data cut off, of 25 patients enrolled, 23 started treatment because 2 were excluded after failing the screening process at pathologic review. The median follow-up cannot be estimated using the reverse Kaplan-Meier estimator. The median time to censoring was 11 months (95% CI, 0-22 months). Median (range) age was 66 (53-74) years. As best overall response, 3 patients presented stable disease, 1 patient achieved a complete response, and 7 a partial response. The ORR was 35% (95% CI, 16%-57%). The median progression-free survival was 4 months (95% CI, 3-13 months). The median OS was 7 months (95% CI, 3-31 months). All patients reported at least 1 grade (G) 1 to 2 adverse event (AE). The most common G1 to G2 AEs were fatigue (14 [60%]), anorexia (9 [39%]), hand-foot syndrome (7 [30%]), hypothyroidism (7 [30%]), mucositis (7 [30%]), diarrhea (5 [22%]), and hypertension (3 [13%]). Six G3 AEs were reported: 2 arterial hyperthension, 1 pulmonary thromboembolism, 1 bleeding, and 2 fatigue. There were no permanent discontinuations from the study owing to AEs. Four patients (17%) required dose reduction to 40 mg, and 4 (17%) required a transitory interruption to manage toxic effects. Conclusions and Relevance: The study met the ORR primary end point, showing encouraging efficacy of cabozantinib in untreated patients with mCDC. Further investigations to advance the molecular understanding of this tumor are ongoing. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03354884.

Update on radioligand therapy with 177Lu-PSMA for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer: clinical aspects and survival effects.

OBJECTIVE: To give an updated overview on clinical aspects and survival effects of lutetium-177-prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) (177Lu-PSMA) radioligand therapy (RLT), a novel treatment option for patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). METHODS: PubMed/MEDLINE database was searched for relevant articles published up to March 2021. The search was restricted to English-language articles. RESULTS: Current evidence from the literature consistently demonstrated the efficacy, safety, and survival benefit of 177Lu-PSMA RLT in mCRPC. However, current data rely predominantly on retrospective analyses, showing heterogeneity of patient population and treatment protocols. More recently, results from the first randomized phase II study (TheraP) demonstrated that 177Lu-PMSA therapy significantly improved prostate-specific antigen response rate (66% vs 37%) and had fewer grade 3/4 adverse events when compared to cabazitaxel in patients with docetaxel-pretreated, progressive mCRPC. This review is intended to provide an updated overview of treatment protocols and responses, toxicity profile, and survival effects of 177Lu-PSMA RLT. CONCLUSIONS: 177Lu-PSMA RLT has emerged as a promising targeted treatment in mCRPC. It is currently applied in compassionate use programs and following exhaustion of approved therapies. Crucial for establishing this treatment in routine clinical management will be the results of the phase III VISION trial, which may confirm the encouraging patient outcomes reported to date.

Cabozantinib beyond progression improves survival in advanced renal cell carcinoma patients: the CABEYOND study (Meet-URO 21).

BACKGROUND: Cabozantinib improves survival in metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) after prior antiangiogenics. The best treatment at disease progression (PD) is unknown. Being also a AXL/MET inhibitor, involved in acquired resistance, we hypothesized a prolonged tumor growth control in patients continuing cabozantinib despite PD. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: This retrospective multicenter study enrolled patients receiving cabozantinib after the first line between 2014 and 2020. We compared patients maintaining cabozantinib after first PD due to clinical benefit and good tolerability with those who changed therapy. The postprogression survival (PPS) of both was our primary endpoint. RESULTS: We analyzed 89 patients: 45 received cabozantinib beyond PD and 44 switched therapy. 40.4%, 31.5%, and 28.1% of patients received 1, 2, or >2 prior treatment, respectively. 84.3% were intermediate-poor International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database risk. Patients continuing cabozantinib showed a higher response rate to cabozantinib before PD (46.7% vs 25%, p = 0.03) and were more heavily pretreated. Continuing cabozantinib showed a significantly longer PPS compared with switching therapy (median PPS 16.9 vs 13.2 months, HR 0.66, 95%CI 0.48-0.92, p = 0.011). CONCLUSIONS: We observed longer PPS in patients continuing cabozantinib beyond PD, suggesting that this could be an effective option.

Low dose of ketoconazole in patients with prostate adenocarcinoma resistant to pharmacological castration.

OBJECTIVE: • To assess the efficacy of ketoconazole in patients with castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: • From April 2008 to November 2009, 37 patients with CRPC have been treated with ketoconazole. The primary endpoint was the prostate-specific antigen (PSA) response; the secondary endpoints were progression-free survival and safety profile. • Ketoconazole was administered by oral route at a dose of 200 mg every 8 h continuous dosing until the onset of serious adverse events or disease progression. • The study was based on a two-step design with an interim efficacy analysis carried out on the first 12 patients accrued. RESULTS: • Main characteristics of population were: median age 75 years (range 60-88); baseline mean PSA 28.8 ng/mL (4.3-1000); 30 patients previously challenged with at least two lines of hormone therapy; 15 patients previously treated with chemotherapy. • Biochemical responses accounted for: two complete responses (5%), six partial responses (16%), 13 patients with stable disease (35%), and 14 with progressive disease (38%). Of 15 patients resistant to chemotherapy, overall disease control (complete plus partial responses plus stable disease) was recorded in seven of them. • Treatment was feasible without inducing grade 3-4 adverse events. The most common grade 1-2 adverse events were asthenia (27%), vomiting (8%) and abdominal pain (8%). CONCLUSION: • Treatment with low-dose ketoconazole is feasible and well tolerated. The efficacy was satisfactory in patients previously treated with chemotherapy.

Sequential use of sorafenib and sunitinib in advanced renal-cell carcinoma (RCC): an Italian multicentre retrospective analysis of 189 patient cases.

OBJECTIVE: •To conduct a retrospective, multicentre, cohort analysis to assess the sequential use of the tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) sorafenib and sunitinib. PATIENTS AND METHODS: •Records of 189 patients with renal-cell carcinoma (RCC) who were treated with sorafenib and sunitinib sequentially between March 2004 and April 2009 at 12 Italian study centres were analysed. •Patients were treated under European Expanded Access Programmes or, following market approval, in general clinical practice. •Interventions were sorafenib (800 mg/day) and sunitinib (50 mg every day; 4 weeks on and 2 weeks off). •Progression-free survival (PFS) during treatment with the first and second TKI was evaluated. RESULTS: •In all, 99 patients were treated with sunitinib followed by sorafenib (SuSo) and 90 were treated with sorafenib followed by sunitinib (SoSu); 104 (55%) patients had received prior systemic therapy, mostly with cytokines. •The median (range) PFS on the first TKI was similar between treatment groups [sorafenib 8.4 (1.1-28.9) months; sunitinib 7.8 (0.5-30.4) months; hazard ratio (HR) 1.05, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.78-1.40, P=0.758]. Multivariate analysis showed that good Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center status was associated with increased PFS. •After the second TKI, patients in the SoSu group had a longer median PFS than those in the SuSo group (7.9 months vs 4.2 months, respectively; HR 0.54, 95% CI 0.39-0.74, P<0.001). •Multivariate analysis showed only treatment and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (and not age, gender, study centre or previous treatment) were significantly associated with duration of PFS. CONCLUSION: •Our findings suggest a limited cross-resistance between sorafenib and sunitinib and that the sequence SoSu may result in a longer combined PFS than SuSo. This is the largest retrospective study to date, though its findings are limited in part by the retrospective nature.

Third-line chemotherapy with tyrosine kinase inhibitor (imatinib mesylate) in recurrent ovarian granulosa cell tumor: case report.

Granulosa cell tumors (GCT) of the ovary represent less than 5% of malignant ovarian tumors. Primary treatment of GCT is surgery. GCT present indolent growth and also tend to relapse many years after diagnosis. Radiotherapy, chemotherapy and hormonal therapy are of little benefit. We report a case of a 60-year-old woman with a heavily pretreated recurrent, c-kit positive, GCT of the ovary who underwent an experimental therapy with imatinib, a tyrosine kinase inhibitor. Imatinib (400 mg/day during the first 2 months; 800 mg/day after) was given, without notable side-effects. Monthly positron emission tomography-computed tomography scan evaluations were performed revealing a marked reduction of disease after 6 months of treatment. To our knowledge this is the first case of highly recurrent and unresponsive GCT of the ovary responding to imatinib. Further studies evaluating this drug in recurrent and/or aggressive GCT are warranted.

Second-line treatment in renal cell carcinoma: clinical experience and decision making.

Currently, conventional treatments for metastatic RCC (mRCC) include immune-based combination regimens and/or targeted therapies, the latter mainly acting on angiogenesis, a key element of the process of tumor growth and spread. Although these agents proved able to improve patients' outcomes, drug resistance and disease progression are still experienced by a substantial number of VEGFR-TKIs-treated mRCC patients. Following the inhibition of the VEGF/VEGFRs axis, two strategies have emerged: either specifically targeting resistance pathways, at the same time continuing to inhibit angiogenesis, or using a completely different approach aimed at re-activating the immune system through the use of inhibitors of specific negative immune checkpoints. These two approaches, practically represented by the use of either cabozantinib or nivolumab, seem to remain a rational therapeutic approach also when first-line immune-based combinations are used. The objective of this study is to design a preferential therapeutic pathway for the second-line treatment of mRCC. The procedure applied in this project was a group discussion, based on the Nominal Group Technique (NGT) method in a meeting session, aimed at defining the therapeutic choice for the second-line treatment of mRCC. The NGT process defined the most relevant parameters that, according to the interviewed panelists, clinicians should consider for the selection of the second-line therapy in the context of advanced renal cell carcinoma of mRCC. The algorithm developed for the treatment selection as a result of this process should thus be considered by clinicians as reference for therapy selection. PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARY: The result of this paper was the definition of an algorithm intended to suggest a preferential therapeutic pathway considering both the outputs of the Nominal Group Technique (NGT) process and the actual clinical practice and the experience of selected panelists. During the NGT process and the discussion phase, panelists defined the most important parameters to be included in the algorithm that are important for the treatment definition. Cabozantinib and nivolumab are identified as the most reasonable therapeutic options for patients progressing after first-line treatment and are the medication options included in the algorithm for therapy selection.

Characteristics and Treatment Challenges of Non-Clear Cell Renal Cell Carcinoma.

Non-clear cell renal cell carcinomas (RCC) comprise several rare and poorly described diseases, often characterized by bad prognosis and with no standard treatments available. The gap in their clinical management is linked to the poor molecular characterization in handling the treatment of non clear-cell RCC with untailored therapies. Due to their rarity, non-clear RCC are in fact under-represented in prospective randomized trials. Thus, treatment choices are based on extrapolating results from clear cell RCC trials, retrospective data, or case reports. Over the last two decades, various options have been considered as the mainstay for the treatment of metastatic RCC (mRCC), including angiogenesis inhibitors, vascular endothelial growth factor receptor inhibitors, other tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs), as well as MET inhibitors and mammalian targeting of rapamycin (mTOR) inhibitors. More recently, the therapeutic armamentarium has been enriched with immunotherapy, alone or in combination with targeted agents that have been shown to significantly improve outcomes of mRCC patients, if compared to TKI single-agent. It has been widely proven that non-clear cell RCC is a morphologically and clinically distinct entity from its clear cell counterpart but more knowledge about its biology is certainly needed. Histology-specific collaborative trials are in fact now emerging to investigate different treatments for non-clear cell RCC. This review summarizes pathogenetic mechanisms of non-clear cell RCC, the evolution of treatment paradigms over the last few decades, with a focus on immunotherapy-based trials, and future potential treatment options.

Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors With or Without Bone-Targeted Therapy in NSCLC Patients With Bone Metastases and Prognostic Significance of Neutrophil-to-Lymphocyte Ratio.

Introduction: Bone metastases (BMs) are a negative prognostic factor in patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Although immune-checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have dramatically changed the therapeutic landscape of NSCLC, little information is available on BMs from NSCLC treated with ICIs alone or in association with bone-targeted therapy (BTT) such as zoledronate or denosumab. Methods: From 2014 to 2020, 111 of the 142 patients with BMs secondary to NSCLC extrapolated from the prospective multicenter Italian BM Database were eligible for analysis. Information on blood count, comorbidities, and toxicity was retrospectively collected. The neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) pre- and post-treatment was calculated. Survival was analyzed using the Kaplan-Meier method, with statistical significance of survival differences assessed using the log-rank test. Results: Median age was 66 (range, 42-84) years. Performance status (PS) Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) was 0-1 in 79/111 patients. The majority of patients (89.2%) had adenocarcinoma histology. At a median follow-up of 47.4 months, median progression-free (mPFS) and overall survival (mOS) was 4.9 (95%CI, 2.8-10.0) and 11.9 (95%CI, 8.2-14.4) months, respectively. Forty-six (43.4%) patients with BM NSCLC underwent first- or further-line therapy with ICIs: 28 (60.8%) received nivolumab, 9 (19.6%) pembrolizumab, and 9 (19.6%) atezolizumab. Of the 46 patients treated with ICIs, 30 (65.2%) underwent BTT: 24 (80.0%) with zoledronate and 6 (20.0%) with denosumab. The ICI-alone group had an mOS of 15.8 months [95%CI, 8.2-not evaluable (NE)] vs. 21.8 months (95%CI, 14.5-not evaluable) for the ICI plus BTT group and 7.5 (95%CI, 6.1-10.9) months for the group receiving other treatments (p < 0.001). NLR ≤5 had a positive impact on OS. Conclusion: BTT appears to have a synergistic effect when used in combination with ICIs, improving patient survival.

INfluenza Vaccine Indication During therapy with Immune checkpoint inhibitors: a multicenter prospective observational study (INVIDIa-2).

BACKGROUND: Until now, no robust data supported the efficacy, safety and recommendation for influenza vaccination in patients with cancer receiving immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs). METHODS: The prospective multicenter observational INfluenza Vaccine Indication During therapy with Immune checkpoint inhibitors (INVIDIa-2) study investigated the clinical effectiveness of influenza vaccination in patients with advanced cancer receiving ICIs, enrolled in 82 Italian centers from October 2019 to January 2020. The primary endpoint was the time-adjusted incidence of influenza-like illness (ILI) until April 30, 2020. Secondary endpoints regarded ILI severity and vaccine safety. RESULTS: The study enrolled 1279 patients; 1188 patients were evaluable for the primary endpoint analysis. Of them, 48.9% (581) received influenza vaccination. The overall ILI incidence was 8.2% (98 patients). Vaccinated patients were significantly more frequently elderly (p<0.0001), males (p=0.004), with poor European Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (p=0.009), affected by lung cancer (p=0.01), and by other non-cancer comorbidities (p<0.0001) when compared with unvaccinated. ILI incidence was not different basing on influenza vaccination: the time-to-ILI was similar in vaccinated and unvaccinated patients (p=0.62). ILI complications were significantly less frequent for patients receiving the vaccination (11.8% vs 38.3% in unvaccinated, p=0.002). ILI-related intravenous therapies were significantly less frequent in vaccinated patients than in unvaccinated (11.8% vs 29.8%, p=0.027). ILI lethality was, respectively, 0% in vaccinated and 4.3% in unvaccinated patients. Vaccine-related adverse events were rare and mild (1.5%, grades 1-2). CONCLUSION: The INVIDIa-2 study results support a positive recommendation for influenza vaccination in patients with advanced cancer receiving immunotherapy.

Predictive Biomarkers of Response to Immunotherapy in Metastatic Renal Cell Cancer.

INTRODUCTION: In the last decades, the therapeutic decision-making approach to metastatic renal cell cancer (mRCC) has dramatically changed thanks to the introduction in the treatment scenario of, first, anti-angiogenic agents and, afterward, immune-checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs). Immunotherapy is now the standard of care in pretreated mRCC patients and has recently entered even the first line setting. Nevertheless, in mRCC as well as in other tumor settings, a durable and clinically meaningful benefit from treatment with ICIs is not obtained for all patients treated. Therefore, the necessity to identify and validate predictive biomarkers of response to immunotherapy has emerged, in order to design the optimal treatment strategy for mRCC patients. DISCUSSION: In this review, we present and discuss the most promising predictive biomarkers of response to ICIs in mRCC with the recent data available. In details, the first marker that was investigated is the immunohistochemical expression of programmed death receptor ligand 1 (PD-L1), showing a negative prognostic role in mRCC, but the debate about its potential predictive value is still open. Additionally, the high heterogeneity in PD-L1 determination methods adds complexity to this issue. Second, the tumor mutational or neoantigen burden is an emerging biomarker of increased response to immunotherapy, hypothesizing that the higher the TMB, the higher is the production of neoantigens, and thus the stimulation of anti-tumor immune response, even though controversial results have been obtained. Third, the tumor microenvironment, namely the different populations of the immune infiltrate, plays a key role in tumor progression and in the response to immunotherapy. Finally, several studies have collected evidence on the potential association of the occurrence of immune-related adverse events (irAEs) with the benefit from ICIs, first in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and melanoma, and recently even in mRCC. CONCLUSION: Several promising biomarkers of response to immunotherapy with ICIs have been identified, though without conclusive results upon their potential predictive value in mRCC. Therefore, the results of the exploratory analyses of the recently presented first-line trials and hopefully of future prospective, biomarker-driven studies could provide useful tools to be applied in the everyday clinical practice.

Prospective Translational Study Investigating Molecular PrEdictors of Resistance to First-Line PazopanIb in Metastatic reNal CEll Carcinoma (PIPELINE Study).

OBJECTIVES: Despite the initial clinical benefit, resistance to antiangiogenic therapies develops through the activation of alternative pathways. We measured plasma levels of circulating angiogenic factors to explore their predictive role in metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) patients treated with pazopanib. MATERIALS AND METHODS: mRCC patients receiving first-line pazopanib were prospectively enrolled. The levels of circulating interleuchine (IL)-6, IL-8, stromal derived factor-1, vascular endothelial growth factor-A, hepatocyte growth factor (HGF), osteopontin, and E-selectin were quantified at baseline and every 4 weeks until disease progression (PD). Patients were dichotomized into "low" and "high" subgroups by a cutoff point defined by the respective median circulating angiogenic factor (CAF) value at baseline. Then, association with the objective response was determined. Changes in CAF levels between baseline and PD were also compared. RESULTS: Among 25 patients included in the final data set, 6 patients were still on treatment. As best response, 12 patients presented a partial response (48%), 9 showed stable disease, and 4 showed PD. The median follow-up was 31.9 months. The median progression-free survival was 14.8 months. Low baseline levels of IL-6, IL-8, HGF, and osteopontin were found to be significantly associated with objective response. In addition, patients with low baseline levels of HGF showed longer progression-free survival and overall survival, whereas patients with low baseline levels of IL-8 showed longer overall survival. Among patients experiencing PD, the median plasma levels of stromal derived factor-1 and vascular endothelial growth factor-A were significantly higher compared with the baseline (P=0.01; P=0.011). Conversely, the median levels of E-selectin were significantly lower compared with the baseline (P=0.017). CONCLUSION: Changes in levels of selected CAFs were associated with response/resistance to pazopanib in mRCC patients.