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.).

Enfortumab Vedotin in Previously Treated Advanced Urothelial Carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Patients with advanced urothelial carcinoma have poor overall survival after platinum-containing chemotherapy and programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1) or programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) inhibitor treatment. METHODS: We conducted a global, open-label, phase 3 trial of enfortumab vedotin for the treatment of patients with locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma who had previously received platinum-containing chemotherapy and had had disease progression during or after treatment with a PD-1 or PD-L1 inhibitor. Patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive enfortumab vedotin (at a dose of 1.25 mg per kilogram of body weight on days 1, 8, and 15 of a 28-day cycle) or investigator-chosen chemotherapy (standard docetaxel, paclitaxel, or vinflunine), administered on day 1 of a 21-day cycle. The primary end point was overall survival. RESULTS: A total of 608 patients underwent randomization; 301 were assigned to receive enfortumab vedotin and 307 to receive chemotherapy. As of July 15, 2020, a total of 301 deaths had occurred (134 in the enfortumab vedotin group and 167 in the chemotherapy group). At the prespecified interim analysis, the median follow-up was 11.1 months. Overall survival was longer in the enfortumab vedotin group than in the chemotherapy group (median overall survival, 12.88 vs. 8.97 months; hazard ratio for death, 0.70; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.56 to 0.89; P = 0.001). Progression-free survival was also longer in the enfortumab vedotin group than in the chemotherapy group (median progression-free survival, 5.55 vs. 3.71 months; hazard ratio for progression or death, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.51 to 0.75; P<0.001). The incidence of treatment-related adverse events was similar in the two groups (93.9% in the enfortumab vedotin group and 91.8% in the chemotherapy group); the incidence of events of grade 3 or higher was also similar in the two groups (51.4% and 49.8%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Enfortumab vedotin significantly prolonged survival as compared with standard chemotherapy in patients with locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma who had previously received platinum-based treatment and a PD-1 or PD-L1 inhibitor. (Funded by Astellas Pharma US and Seagen; EV-301 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03474107.).

Sexual satisfaction and its predictors in patients with advanced cancer and their family caregivers in six European countries: Baseline data from the DIAdIC study.

OBJECTIVE: To identify predictors of sexual satisfaction in patients with advanced cancer and their family caregivers. METHODS: Cross-sectional study using baseline survey data from a randomized controlled trial in six European countries. Patients with advanced cancer and their family caregiver completed measures on sexual satisfaction (one item from Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - General questionnaire for patients and Caregiver Quality of Life Index-Cancer scale for family caregivers) and health-related characteristics. Multivariable linear regressions were performed for all predictors (identified based on literature) with sexual satisfaction as dependent variable. RESULTS: The sample comprised 431 patient-family caregiver dyads. Patients with prostate or gynecological cancer reported lower sexual satisfaction (respectively B = -0.267 95% CI: -1.674, -0.594 and B = -0.196, 95% CI -2.103, -0.452). Higher emotional (B = 0.278, 95% CI 0.024, 0.057) physical (B = 0.305, 95% CI 0.012, 0.025) and social functioning (B = 0.151, 95% CI 0.001, 0.013), global health (B = 0.356, 95% CI 0.007, 0.013) and social wellbeing (B = 0.161, 95% CI 0.013, 0.082) among patients were associated with higher sexual satisfaction. Among family caregivers, sexual satisfaction was lower with increased age (B = -0.142, 95% CI -0.022, -0.004). Higher emotional functioning (B = 0.027, 95% CI 0.011, 0.043) and quality of life (B = 0.165, 95% CI -0.165, 0.716) were associated with higher sexual satisfaction in family caregivers. CONCLUSIONS: The results underscore that sexual wellbeing of patients and family caregivers is related to health related factors in physical, emotional, and social domains. Patients and family caregivers could benefit from a dyadic approach to address sexual wellbeing.

Malnutrition prevalence in cancer patients in Belgium: The ONCOCARE study.

RATIONALE: Unintentional weight loss and malnutrition are common among cancer patients. Malnutrition has been associated with impaired health-related quality of life, less well-tolerated chemotherapy regimens and shorter life duration. In Belgium there is a lack of epidemiological data on malnutrition in oncology patients at advanced stages of the disease. METHODS: Malnutrition assessment data was collected through a prospective, observational study in 328 patients who started a neoadjuvant anticancer therapy regimen or who started 1st, 2nd or 3rd line anticancer therapy for a metastatic cancer via 3 visits according to regular clinical practice (baseline visit (BV) maximum 4 weeks before start therapy, 1st Follow up visit (FUV1) ± 6 weeks after start therapy, FUV2 ± 4 months after start therapy). Malnutrition screening was evaluated using the Nutritional Risk Screening score 2002 (NRS-2002)and the diagnosis of malnutrition by the GLIM criteria. In addition, SARC-F questionnaire and Fearon criteria were used respectively to screen for sarcopenia and cachexia. RESULTS: Prevalence of malnutrition risk at BV was high: 54.5% of the patients had a NRS ≥ 3 (NRS 2002) and increased during the study period (FUV1: 73.2%, FUV2: 70.1%). Prevalence of malnutrition based on physician subjective assessment (PSA) remained stable over the study period but was much lower compared to NRS results (14.0%-16.5%). At BV, only 10% of the patients got a nutrition plan and 43.9% received ≤ 70% of nutritional needs, percentage increased during FU period (FUV1: 68.4%, FUV2: 67.6%). Prevalence of sarcopenia and cachexia were respectively 12.4% and 38.1% at BV and without significant variation during the study period, but higher than assessed by PSA (11.6% and 6.7% respectively). Figures were also higher compared to PSA. There were modifications in cancer treatment at FUV1 (25.2%) and at FUV2 (50.8%). The main reasons for these modifications at FUV1 were adverse events and tolerability. Patient reported daily questionnaires of food intake showed early nutritional deficits, preceding clinical signs of malnutrition, and therefore can be very useful in the ambulatory setting. CONCLUSIONS: Prevalence of malnutrition and cachexia was high in advanced cancer patients and underestimated by physician assessment. Earlier and rigorous detection of nutritional deficit and adjusted nutritional intake could lead to improved clinical outcomes in cancer patients. Reporting of daily caloric intake by patients was also very helpful with regards to nutritional assessment.

Randomized phase II trial of farletuzumab plus chemotherapy versus placebo plus chemotherapy in low CA-125 platinum-sensitive ovarian cancer.

OBJECTIVE: The primary purpose of this study was to determine if farletuzumab, an antifolate receptor-α monoclonal antibody, improved progression-free survival (PFS) versus placebo when added to standard chemotherapy regimens in patients with platinum-sensitive recurrent ovarian cancer (OC) in first relapse (platinum-free interval: 6-36 months) with low cancer antigen 125 (CA-125) levels. METHODS: Eligibility included CA-125 ≤ 3 x upper limit of normal (ULN, 105 U/mL), high-grade serous, platinum-sensitive recurrent OC, previous treatment with debulking surgery, and first-line platinum-based chemotherapy with 1st recurrence between 6 and 36 months since frontline platinum-based treatment. Patients received investigator's choice of either carboplatin (CARBO)/paclitaxel (PTX) every 3 weeks or CARBO/pegylated liposomal doxorubicin (PLD) every 4 weeks x6 cycles in combination with either farletuzumab [5 mg/kg weekly] or placebo randomized in a 2:1 ratio. Maintenance treatment with farletuzumab (5 mg/kg weekly) or placebo was given until disease progression or intolerance. RESULTS: 214 patients were randomly assigned to farletuzumab+chemotherapy (142 patients) versus placebo+chemotherapy (72 patients). The primary efficacy endpoint, PFS, was not significantly different between treatment groups (1-sided α = 0.10; p-value = 0.25; hazard ratio [HR] = 0.89, 80% confidence interval [CI]: 0.71, 1.11), a median of 11.7 months (95% CI: 10.2, 13.6) versus 10.8 months (95% CI: 9.5, 13.2) for farletuzumab+chemotherapy and placebo+chemotherapy, respectively. No new safety concerns were identified with the combination of farletuzumab+chemotherapy. CONCLUSIONS: Adding farletuzumab to standard chemotherapy does not improve PFS in patients with OC who were platinum-sensitive in first relapse with low CA-125 levels. Folate receptor-α expression was not measured in this study. (Clinical Trial Registry NCT02289950).

Niraparib in Patients with Newly Diagnosed Advanced Ovarian Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Niraparib, an inhibitor of poly(adenosine diphosphate [ADP]-ribose) polymerase (PARP), has been associated with significantly increased progression-free survival among patients with recurrent ovarian cancer after platinum-based chemotherapy, regardless of the presence or absence of BRCA mutations. The efficacy of niraparib in patients with newly diagnosed advanced ovarian cancer after a response to first-line platinum-based chemotherapy is unknown. METHODS: In this randomized, double-blind, phase 3 trial, we randomly assigned patients with newly diagnosed advanced ovarian cancer in a 2:1 ratio to receive niraparib or placebo once daily after a response to platinum-based chemotherapy. The primary end point was progression-free survival in patients who had tumors with homologous-recombination deficiency and in those in the overall population, as determined on hierarchical testing. A prespecified interim analysis for overall survival was conducted at the time of the primary analysis of progression-free survival. RESULTS: Of the 733 patients who underwent randomization, 373 (50.9%) had tumors with homologous-recombination deficiency. Among the patients in this category, the median progression-free survival was significantly longer in the niraparib group than in the placebo group (21.9 months vs. 10.4 months; hazard ratio for disease progression or death, 0.43; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.31 to 0.59; P<0.001). In the overall population, the corresponding progression-free survival was 13.8 months and 8.2 months (hazard ratio, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.50 to 0.76; P<0.001). At the 24-month interim analysis, the rate of overall survival was 84% in the niraparib group and 77% in the placebo group (hazard ratio, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.44 to 1.11). The most common adverse events of grade 3 or higher were anemia (in 31.0% of the patients), thrombocytopenia (in 28.7%), and neutropenia (in 12.8%). No treatment-related deaths occurred. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with newly diagnosed advanced ovarian cancer who had a response to platinum-based chemotherapy, those who received niraparib had significantly longer progression-free survival than those who received placebo, regardless of the presence or absence of homologous-recombination deficiency. (Funded by GlaxoSmithKline; PRIMA/ENGOT-OV26/GOG-3012 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02655016.).

Efficacy of niraparib by time of surgery and postoperative residual disease status: A post hoc analysis of patients in the PRIMA/ENGOT-OV26/GOG-3012 study.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the association between surgical timing and postoperative residual disease status on the efficacy of niraparib first-line maintenance therapy in patients with newly diagnosed advanced ovarian cancer at high risk of recurrence. METHODS: Post hoc analysis of the phase 3 PRIMA/ENGOT-OV26/GOG-3012 (NCT02655016) study of niraparib in patients with newly diagnosed primary advanced ovarian, primary peritoneal, or fallopian tube cancer with a complete/partial response to first-line platinum-based chemotherapy. Progression-free survival (PFS) was assessed by surgical status (primary debulking surgery [PDS] vs neoadjuvant chemotherapy/interval debulking surgery [NACT/IDS]) and postoperative residual disease status (no visible residual disease [NVRD] vs visible residual disease [VRD]) in the intent-to-treat population. RESULTS: In PRIMA (N = 733), 236 (32.2%) patients underwent PDS, and 481 (65.6%) received NACT/IDS before enrollment. Median PFS (niraparib vs placebo) and hazard ratios (95% CI) for progression were similar in PDS (13.7 vs 8.2 months; HR, 0.67 [0.47-0.96]) and NACT/IDS (14.2 vs 8.2 months; HR, 0.57 [0.44-0.73]) subgroups. In patients who received NACT/IDS and had NVRD (n = 304), the hazard ratio (95% CI) for progression was 0.65 (0.46-0.91). In patients with VRD following PDS (n = 183) or NACT/IDS (n = 149), the hazard ratios (95% CI) for progression were 0.58 (0.39-0.86) and 0.41 (0.27-0.62), respectively. PFS was not evaluable for patients with PDS and NVRD because of sample size (n = 37). CONCLUSIONS: In this post hoc analysis, niraparib efficacy was similar across PDS and NACT/IDS subgroups. Patients who had NACT/IDS and VRD had the highest reduction in the risk of progression with niraparib maintenance.

Phase 3, randomized, open-label study of pembrolizumab plus lenvatinib versus chemotherapy for first-line treatment of advanced or recurrent endometrial cancer: ENGOT-en9/LEAP-001.

BACKGROUND: Pembrolizumab plus lenvatinib is a novel combination with promising efficacy in patients with advanced and recurrent endometrial cancer. This combination demonstrated high objective response rates in a single-arm phase 1b/2 trial of lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab in patients with advanced endometrial cancer (KEYNOTE-146/Study 111) after ≤2 previous lines of therapy. In a randomized phase 3 trial of lenvatinib in combination with pembrolizumab versus treatment of physician's choice in patients with advanced endometrial cancer (KEYNOTE-775/Study 309), after 1‒2 previous lines of therapy (including neoadjuvant/adjuvant), this combination improved objective response rates, progression-free survival, and overall survival compared with chemotherapy. PRIMARY OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy and safety of first-line pembrolizumab plus lenvatinib versus paclitaxel plus carboplatin in patients with newly diagnosed stage III/IV or recurrent endometrial cancer, with measurable or radiographically apparent disease. STUDY HYPOTHESIS: Pembrolizumab plus lenvatinib is superior to chemotherapy with respect to progression-free survival and overall survival in patients with mismatch repair-proficient tumors and all patients (all-comers). TRIAL DESIGN: Phase 3, randomized (1:1), open-label, active-controlled trial. Patients will receive pembrolizumab intravenously every 3 weeks plus lenvatinib orally daily or paclitaxel plus carboplatin intravenously every 3 weeks, stratified by mismatch repair status (proficient vs deficient). Patients with mismatch repair-proficient tumors will be further stratified by Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (0/1), measurable disease (yes/no), and prior chemotherapy and/or chemoradiation (yes/no). MAJOR INCLUSION/EXCLUSION CRITERIA: Adults with stage III/IV/recurrent histologically confirmed endometrial cancer that is measurable or radiographically apparent per blinded independent central review. Patients may have received previous chemotherapy only as neoadjuvant/adjuvant therapy and/or concurrently with radiation. Patients with carcinosarcoma (malignant mixed Müllerian tumor), endometrial leiomyosarcoma, or other high grade sarcomas, or endometrial stromal sarcomas were excluded. PRIMARY ENDPOINTS: Progression-free and overall survival (dual primary endpoints). SAMPLE SIZE: About 875 patients. ESTIMATED DATES FOR COMPLETING ACCRUAL AND PRESENTING RESULTS: Enrollment is expected to take approximately 24 months, with presentation of results in 2022. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03884101.

Prospective non-interventional BELOVA/BGOG-ov16 study on safety of frontline bevacizumab in elderly patients with FIGO stage IV ovarian cancer: a study of the Belgian and Luxembourg Gynaecological Oncology Group.

OBJECTIVE: Because elderly patients with ovarian cancer are underrepresented in randomized studies, this study aimed to expand our knowledge on the safety and effectiveness of frontline treatment with bevacizumab in combination with standard carboplatin and paclitaxel chemotherapy in patients aged 70 years and older with a diagnosis of Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) stage IV ovarian cancer in routine clinical practice in Belgium. METHODS: Patients aged 70 years and older with FIGO stage IV ovarian cancer were included in a multicenter, non-interventional prospective studyto evaluate the safety and effectiveness of treatment with bevacizumab in combination with frontline carboplatin and paclitaxel chemotherapy. Comprehensive geriatric assessments were performed at baseline and during treatment. RESULTS: The most frequently reported adverse events for bevacizumab were hypertension (55%), epistaxis (32%) and proteinuria (21%). The Kaplan-Meier estimate of progression-free survival was 14.5 months. The results of the comprehensive geriatric assessments during treatment indicated a slight improvement in the geriatric eight health status screening tool score for general health status and the mini-nutritional assessment score for nutritional status. The median change from baseline score was close to zero for the instruments measuring independency, activity of daily living and instrumental activities of daily living, and for the mobility-tiredness test measuring self-perceived fatigue. CONCLUSIONS: No new safety signals were registered in this study in patients aged 70 years and older treated with bevacizumab and frontline carboplatin and paclitaxel for FIGO stage IV ovarian cancer. Elderly patients should not be excluded from treatment for advanced ovarian cancer based on age alone. EU PAS REGISTER: ENCEPP/SDPP/13849. CLINICALTRIALSGOV IDENTIFIER: NCT02393898.

Elective nodal radiotherapy in prostate cancer.

In patients with prostate cancer who have a high risk of pelvic nodal disease, the use of elective whole pelvis radiotherapy is still controversial. Two large, randomised, controlled trials (RTOG 9413 and GETUG-01) did not show a benefit of elective whole pelvis radiotherapy over prostate-only radiotherapy. In 2020, the POP-RT trial established the role of elective whole pelvis radiotherapy in patients who have more than a 35% risk of lymph node invasion (known as the Roach formula). POP-RT stressed the importance of patient selection. In patients with cN1 (clinically node positive) disease or pN1 (pathologically node positive) disease, the addition of whole pelvis radiotherapy to androgen deprivation therapy significantly improved survival compared with androgen deprivation therapy alone, as shown in large, retrospective studies. This patient population might increase in the future because use of the more sensitive prostate-specific membrane antigen PET-CT will become the standard staging procedure. Additionally, the SPORTT trial suggested a benefit of whole pelvis radiotherapy in biochemical recurrence-free survival in the salvage setting. A correct definition of the upper field border, which should include the bifurcation of the abdominal aorta, is key in the use of pelvic radiotherapy. As a result of using modern radiotherapy technology, severe late urinary and intestinal toxic effects are rare and do not seem to increase compared with prostate-only radiotherapy.

Pembrolizumab alone or combined with chemotherapy versus chemotherapy as first-line therapy for advanced urothelial carcinoma (KEYNOTE-361): a randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: PD-1 and PD-L1 inhibitors are active in metastatic urothelial carcinoma, but positive randomised data supporting their use as a first-line treatment are lacking. In this study we assessed outcomes with first-line pembrolizumab alone or combined with chemotherapy versus chemotherapy for patients with previously untreated advanced urothelial carcinoma. METHODS: KEYNOTE-361 is a randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial of patients aged at least 18 years, with untreated, locally advanced, unresectable, or metastatic urothelial carcinoma, with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of up to 2. Eligible patients were enrolled from 201 medical centres in 21 countries and randomly allocated (1:1:1) via an interactive voice-web response system to intravenous pembrolizumab 200 mg every 3 weeks for a maximum of 35 cycles plus intravenous chemotherapy (gemcitabine [1000 mg/m2] on days 1 and 8 and investigator's choice of cisplatin [70 mg/m2] or carboplatin [area under the curve 5] on day 1 of every 3-week cycle) for a maximum of six cycles, pembrolizumab alone, or chemotherapy alone, stratified by choice of platinum therapy and PD-L1 combined positive score (CPS). Neither patients nor investigators were masked to the treatment assignment or CPS. At protocol-specified final analysis, sequential hypothesis testing began with superiority of pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy versus chemotherapy alone in the total population (all patients randomly allocated to a treatment) for the dual primary endpoints of progression-free survival (p value boundary 0·0019), assessed by masked, independent central review, and overall survival (p value boundary 0·0142), followed by non-inferiority and superiority of overall survival for pembrolizumab versus chemotherapy in the patient population with CPS of at least 10 and in the total population (also a primary endpoint). Safety was assessed in the as-treated population (all patients who received at least one dose of study treatment). This study is completed and is no longer enrolling patients, and is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02853305. FINDINGS: Between Oct 19, 2016 and June 29, 2018, 1010 patients were enrolled and allocated to receive pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy (n=351), pembrolizumab monotherapy (n=307), or chemotherapy alone (n=352). Median follow-up was 31·7 months (IQR 27·7-36·0). Pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy versus chemotherapy did not significantly improve progression-free survival, with a median progression-free survival of 8·3 months (95% CI 7·5-8·5) in the pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy group versus 7·1 months (6·4-7·9) in the chemotherapy group (hazard ratio [HR] 0·78, 95% CI 0·65-0·93; p=0·0033), or overall survival, with a median overall survival of 17·0 months (14·5-19·5) in the pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy group versus 14·3 months (12·3-16·7) in the chemotherapy group (0·86, 0·72-1·02; p=0·0407). No further formal statistical hypothesis testing was done. In analyses of overall survival with pembrolizumab versus chemotherapy (now exploratory based on hierarchical statistical testing), overall survival was similar between these treatment groups, both in the total population (15·6 months [95% CI 12·1-17·9] with pembrolizumab vs 14·3 months [12·3-16·7] with chemotherapy; HR 0·92, 95% CI 0·77-1·11) and the population with CPS of at least 10 (16·1 months [13·6-19·9] with pembrolizumab vs 15·2 months [11·6-23·3] with chemotherapy; 1·01, 0·77-1·32). The most common grade 3 or 4 adverse event attributed to study treatment was anaemia with pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy (104 [30%] of 349 patients) or chemotherapy alone (112 [33%] of 342 patients), and diarrhoea, fatigue, and hyponatraemia (each affecting four [1%] of 302 patients) with pembrolizumab alone. Six (1%) of 1010 patients died due to an adverse event attributed to study treatment; two patients in each treatment group. One each occurred due to cardiac arrest and device-related sepsis in the pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy group, one each due to cardiac failure and malignant neoplasm progression in the pembrolizumab group, and one each due to myocardial infarction and ischaemic colitis in the chemotherapy group. INTERPRETATION: The addition of pembrolizumab to first-line platinum-based chemotherapy did not significantly improve efficacy and should not be widely adopted for treatment of advanced urothelial carcinoma. FUNDING: Merck Sharp and Dohme, a subsidiary of Merck, Kenilworth, NJ, USA.

AMTRA: a multicentered experience of a web-based monitoring and tailored toxicity management system for cancer patients.

BACKGROUND: Technology-based interventions are increasingly being introduced in routine clinical cancer care. There is a need for reliable systems to monitor treatment-related toxicity in a standardized manner. Such electronic tools bridge the gap in providing quality home-based monitoring. METHODS: From July 2017 to December 2017, we performed a multicentered, non-randomized prospective cohort analysis with patients who were receiving routine chemotherapy for various solid tumors, using a web-based patient-reported toxicity registration, management, and intervention system called AMTRA (ambulatory Monitoring of cancer Therapy using an interactive Application) linked to the homecare nursing organization Remedus®. Twelve common toxicities plus pain and two biometrics could be registered daily or more frequently as required. These were processed centrally to generate tailored advice for lesser symptoms or a phone call from a dedicated nurse in case of severe or prolonged toxicity. A compliance tool to monitor oral therapies was incorporated in the system. RESULTS: One hundred sixty-eight patients (92%) were enrolled, with 31,514 registrations analyzed. One hundred eight patients reported severe toxicity (> 1461 registrations), resulting in 102 clinical interventions ranging from self-management advice, supplemental consultations to hospitalizations. Compliance to oral chemotherapy was high using AMTRA with a median of 98.7% (95 confidence interval (CI) [93.5-100.0%]). Seventy-nine percent of patients stated that the availability of AMTRA self-reports was useful in communication with the care provider, while 75% felt more in control while managing their treatment. CONCLUSIONS: The application of an interactive PRO-system in routine symptom management of cancer patients allowed standardized documentation of toxicities and recorded a high compliance with oral treatment. It allows for rapid interaction for toxicities and cancer-related symptoms experienced at home.

Safety and tolerability of subcutaneous trastuzumab at home administration, results of the phase IIIb open-label BELIS study in HER2-positive early breast cancer.

PURPOSE: The subcutaneous (SC) administration of trastuzumab is highly preferred by patients. At home, administration of trastuzumab SC might further improve patient benefit. The aims of the BELIS study are to evaluate the safety and tolerability of trastuzumab SC when administered at home by a healthcare professional (HCP) and to evaluate patient-reported outcomes for treatment experience of at home cancer therapy. METHODS: This open-label phase IIIb study enrolled HER2-positive early breast cancer patients in Belgium and Israel who completed the first six cycles of trastuzumab IV (neo)adjuvant therapy. The study consisted of three consecutive treatment periods: three cycles of trastuzumab IV and SC each at the hospital and six cycles of trastuzumab SC at home. RESULTS: Between November 2013 and December 2014, 23 centres enrolled 102 patients in the intent-to-treat population of which 101 patients entered the safety population. No new safety signals were detected with as expected, more mild administration site events with trastuzumab SC when compared to IV treatment. All patients agreed that they had benefit from at home administration to a large (18/81; 22%) or very large (63/81; 78%) extent. All HCPs (21/21) agreed that SC is the quickest method from start of preparation to finish of administration and that less resource use is needed. CONCLUSION: The results of the BELIS study support that trastuzumab SC can be safely administered at home by a HCP and all patients considered this setting as beneficial. HCPs consider the SC formulation as the quickest method to administer trastuzumab. TRIAL REGISTRATION: EudraCT Identifier: 2013-000123-13. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01926886.

Progression-free survival and safety at 3.5 years of follow-up: results from the randomized phase 3 PRIMA/ENGOT-OV26/GOG-3012 trial of niraparib maintenance treatment in patients with newly diagnosed ovarian cancer - a plain language summary.

What is this summary about? This PLSP provides a short summary of an original scientific article that presented results from the PRIMA study after 3.5 years of follow-up time. The original article was published in the European Journal of Cancer in 2023.The PRIMA study included adult patients with newly diagnosed advanced high-risk ovarian cancer whose tumors shrunk or became undetectable after treatment with chemotherapy with or without surgery. The PRIMA study evaluated how well the drug niraparib, also known as Zejula, worked at delaying or preventing ovarian cancer from coming back (recurring) or getting worse (progressing) compared with placebo (a substance with no effects that a doctor gives to a patient instead of a drug). The first results from the PRIMA study were published in 2019, when patients had participated in the PRIMA study for about 1.2 years.The article this PLSP is based on reports longer-term data from the PRIMA study, when patients had participated in the PRIMA study for about 3.5 years. Patients were monitored (or followed) for a longer time to understand how well niraparib continued to work and to evaluate whether the safety of niraparib changed with additional time being monitored.What were the results? Patients who took niraparib had more time before their cancer came back or got worse than patients who took placebo. In terms of safety, no new types of side effects with niraparib treatment were observed with additional time being monitored as part of the PRIMA study.What do the results mean? These results support that niraparib remains an important treatment option to help delay the cancer from coming back or getting worse in patients with newly diagnosed advanced ovarian cancer that responded to initial treatment.Clinical Trial Registration: NCT02655016 (PRIMA study) (ClinicalTrials.gov).

Clinical and genetic risk factors for epirubicin-induced cardiac toxicity in early breast cancer patients.

Anthracycline-induced cardiotoxicity (ACT) is a well-known serious adverse drug reaction leading to substantial morbidity. The purpose of this study was to assess ACT occurrence and clinical and genetic risk factors in early breast cancer patients. In 6 genes of interest (ABCC1, ABCC2, CYBA, NCF4, RAC2, SLC28A3), 10 single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) involved in ACT were selected based on a literature search. Eight hundred and seventy-seven patients treated between 2000 and 2010 with 3-6 cycles of (neo) adjuvant 5-fluorouracil, epirubicin and cyclophosphamide (FEC) were genotyped for these SNPs using Sequenom MassARRAY. Main outcome measures were asymptomatic decrease of left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) > 10 % and cardiac failure grade 3-5 (CTCAE 4.0). To evaluate the impact of these 10 SNPs as well as clinical factors (age, relative dose intensity of epirubicin, left-sided radiotherapy, occurrence of febrile neutropenia, and planned and received cycles of epirubicin) on decrease of LVEF and cardiac failure, we performed uni- and multivariable logistic regression analysis. Additionally, exploratory analyses including 11 additional SNPs related to the metabolism of anthracyclines were performed. After a median follow-up of 3.62 years (range 0.40-9.60), a LVEF decline of > 10 % occurred in 153 patients (17.5 %) and cardiac failure in 16 patients (1.8 %). In multivariable analysis, six cycles of FEC compared to three cycles received and heterozygous carriers of the rs246221 T-allele in ABCC1 relative to homozygous carriers of the T-allele were significantly associated with LVEF decline of > 10 % (OR 1.3, 95 % CI 1.1-1.4, p < 0.001 and OR 1.6, 95 % CI 1.1-2.3, p = 0.02). Radiotherapy for left-sided breast cancer was associated with cardiac failure (OR 3.7, 95 % CI 1.2-11.5, p 0.026). The other 9 SNPs and clinical factors tested were not significantly associated. In our exploratory analysis, no other SNPs related to anthracycline metabolism were retained in the multivariate model for prediction of LVEF decline. ACT in breast cancer patients is related to number of received cycles of epirubicin and left-sided radiotherapy. Additional studies should be performed to independently confirm the potential association between rs246221 in ABCC1 and LVEF.

Multivariable regression analysis of febrile neutropenia occurrence in early breast cancer patients receiving chemotherapy assessing patient-related, chemotherapy-related and genetic risk factors.

BACKGROUND: Febrile neutropenia (FN) is common in breast cancer patients undergoing chemotherapy. Risk factors for FN have been reported, but risk models that include genetic variability have yet to be described. This study aimed to evaluate the predictive value of patient-related, chemotherapy-related, and genetic risk factors. METHODS: Data from consecutive breast cancer patients receiving chemotherapy with 4-6 cycles of fluorouracil, epirubicin, and cyclophosphamide (FEC) or three cycles of FEC and docetaxel were retrospectively recorded. Multivariable logistic regression was carried out to assess risk of FN during FEC chemotherapy cycles. RESULTS: Overall, 166 (16.7%) out of 994 patients developed FN. Significant risk factors for FN in any cycle and the first cycle were lower platelet count (OR = 0.78 [0.65; 0.93]) and haemoglobin (OR = 0.81 [0.67; 0.98]) and homozygous carriers of the rs4148350 variant T-allele (OR = 6.7 [1.04; 43.17]) in MRP1. Other significant factors for FN in any cycle were higher alanine aminotransferase (OR = 1.02 [1.01; 1.03]), carriers of the rs246221 variant C-allele (OR = 2.0 [1.03; 3.86]) in MRP1 and the rs351855 variant C-allele (OR = 2.48 [1.13; 5.44]) in FGFR4. Lower height (OR = 0.62 [0.41; 0.92]) increased risk of FN in the first cycle. CONCLUSIONS: Both established clinical risk factors and genetic factors predicted FN in breast cancer patients. Prediction was improved by adding genetic information but overall remained limited. Internal validity was satisfactory. Further independent validation is required to confirm these findings.

Close Cardiovascular Monitoring during the Early Stages of Treatment for Patients Receiving Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors.

Background: There is an unmet medical need for the early detection of immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI)-induced cardiovascular (CV) adverse events due to a lack of adequate biomarkers. This study aimed to provide insights on the incidence of troponin elevations and echocardiographic dynamics during ICI treatment in cancer patients and their role as potential biomarkers for submyocardial damage. In addition, it is the first study to compare hs-TnT and hs-TnI in ICI-treated patients and to evaluate their interchangeability in the context of screening. Results: Among 59 patients, the mean patient age was 68 years, and 76% were men. Overall, 25% of patients received combination therapy. Although 10.6% [95% CI: 5.0-22.5] of the patients developed troponin elevations, none experienced a CV event. No significant changes were found in 3D left ventricular (LV) ejection fraction nor in global longitudinal strain f (56 ± 6% vs. 56 ± 6%, p = 0.903 and -17.8% [-18.5; -14.2] vs. -17.0% [-18.8; -15.1], p = 0.663) at 3 months. There were also no significant changes in diastolic function and right ventricular function. In addition, there was poor agreement between hs-TnT and hs-TnI. Methods: Here, we present a preliminary analysis of the first 59 patients included in our ongoing prospective clinical trial (NCT05699915) during the first three months of treatment. All patients underwent electrocardiography and echocardiography along with blood sampling at standardized time intervals. This study aimed to investigate the incidence of elevated hs-TnT levels within the first three months of ICI treatment. Elevations were defined as hs-TnT above the upper limit of normal (ULN) if the baseline value was normal, or 1.5 ≥ times baseline if the baseline value was above the ULN. Conclusions: Hs-TnT elevations occurred in 10.6% of the patients. However, no significant changes were found on 3D echocardiography, nor did any of the patients develop a CV event. There were also no changes found in NT-proBNP. The study is still ongoing, but these preliminary findings do not show a promising role for cardiac troponins nor for echocardiographic dynamics in the prediction of CV events during the early stages of ICI treatment.

Tolerability of the niraparib individualized starting dose in the PRIMA/ENGOT-OV26/GOG-3012 trial of niraparib first-line maintenance therapy.

PURPOSE: To explore safety and tolerability parameters for the niraparib individualized starting dose (ISD) in patients with newly diagnosed advanced ovarian cancer that responded to platinum-based chemotherapy who participated in the phase 3 PRIMA/ENGOT-OV26/GOG-3012 trial (NCT02655016). METHODS: The PRIMA protocol was amended so newly enrolled patients received an ISD based on baseline body weight/platelet count. In this ad hoc analysis, the timing, duration, and resolution of the first occurrence of common any-grade hematologic (thrombocytopenia, anemia, neutropenia) and nonhematologic (nausea, asthenia/fatigue, constipation, insomnia, hypertension) treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were evaluated by treatment arm in the ISD safety population (data cutoff, November 17, 2021; median follow-up, 3.5 years). RESULTS: Of 733 randomized patients, 255 were enrolled after the ISD protocol amendment and received ≥ 1 dose of study treatment (niraparib, 169; placebo, 86). In the niraparib arm, median times to first events were 22.0-35.0 days for hematologic TEAEs and 7.0-56.0 days for nonhematologic TEAEs. First events resolved in ≥ 89.8% of patients for hematologic TEAEs; for nonhematologic TEAEs, resolution rates ranged from 55.3% (insomnia) to 86.0% (nausea). Median durations of first hematologic TEAEs were ≤ 16.0 days, but for first nonhematologic TEAEs ranged from 18.0 days (nausea) to 134.0 days (insomnia). CONCLUSION: The niraparib ISD was generally well tolerated and TEAEs were manageable. Common hematologic and nonhematologic TEAEs occurred early and first events of hematologic TEAEs had a short duration (≈ 2 weeks) and a high resolution rate. These findings support close monitoring immediately following niraparib initiation and may help inform patient expectations for niraparib safety.

Pembrolizumab or Placebo Plus Adjuvant Chemotherapy With or Without Radiotherapy For Newly Diagnosed, High-Risk Endometrial Cancer: Results in Mismatch Repair-Deficient Tumors.

Mismatch repair-deficient (dMMR) endometrial cancer is an inflamed phenotype with poor outcomes when meeting high-risk criteria and limited treatment options in the adjuvant setting. We report protocol-prespecified subgroup analysis of patients with dMMR tumors from the phase 3 ENGOT-en11/GOG-3053/KEYNOTE-B21 study (NCT04634877) in newly-diagnosed, high-risk endometrial cancer after surgery with curative intent. Patients were randomized to pembrolizumab 200mg or placebo (6 cycles) plus carboplatin-paclitaxel (4-6 cycles) Q3W, then pembrolizumab 400mg or placebo Q6W (6 cycles), respectively. MMR status was a stratification factor. Patients received radiotherapy at investigator discretion. Investigator-assessed disease-free survival (DFS) was a primary endpoint. No formal hypothesis testing was performed for subgroup analysis. In the intention-to-treat population, 141 patients in the pembrolizumab arm and 140 in the placebo arm had dMMR tumors. At this interim analysis, hazard ratio for DFS favored pembrolizumab (0.31; 95%CI, 0.14-0.69); median DFS was not reached in either group. Two-year DFS rates were 92.4% (95%CI, 84.4%-96.4%) and 80.2% (95%CI, 70.8%-86.9%), respectively. No new safety signals occurred. Longer-term follow-up of outcomes will be evaluated at final analysis. Preplanned subgroup analysis based on the study's stratification factors suggests that pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy improves DFS and is clinically relevant for patients with dMMR tumors in the curative-intent setting.