The Double Antibody Drug Conjugate (DAD) phase I trial: sacituzumab govitecan plus enfortumab vedotin for metastatic urothelial carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: The antibody-drug conjugates sacituzumab govitecan (SG) and enfortumab vedotin (EV) are standard monotherapies for metastatic urothelial carcinoma (mUC). Given the different targets and payloads, we evaluated the safety and efficacy of SG + EV in a phase I trial in mUC (NCT04724018). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with mUC and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status ≤1 who had progressed on platinum and/or immunotherapy were enrolled. SG + EV were administered on days 1 + 8 of a 21-day cycle until progression or unacceptable toxicity. Primary endpoint was the incidence of dose-limiting toxicities during cycle 1. The number of patients treated at each of four pre-specified dose levels (DLs) and the maximum tolerated doses in combination (MTD) were determined using a Bayesian Optimal Interval design. Objective response, progression-free survival, and overall survival were secondary endpoints. RESULTS: Between May 2021 and April 2023, 24 patients were enrolled; 1 patient never started therapy and was excluded from the analysis. Median age was 70 years (range 41-88 years); 11 patients received ≥3 lines of therapy. Seventy-eight percent (18/23) of patients experienced grade ≥3 adverse event (AE) regardless of attribution at any DL, with one grade 5 AE (pneumonitis possibly related to EV). The recommended phase II doses are SG 8 mg/kg with EV 1.25 mg/kg with granulocyte colony-stimulating factor support; MTDs are SG 10 mg/kg with EV 1.25 mg/kg. The objective response rate was 70% (16/23, 95% confidence interval 47% to 87%) with three complete responses; three patients had progressive disease as best response. With a median follow-up of 14 months, 9/23 patients have ongoing response including 6 responses lasting over 12 months. CONCLUSIONS: The combination of SG + EV was assessed at different DLs and a safe dose for phase II was identified. The combination had encouraging activity in patients with mUC with high response rates, including clinically significant complete responses. Additional study of this combination is warranted.

Efficacy and safety of pembrolizumab in metastatic urothelial carcinoma: results from KEYNOTE-045 and KEYNOTE-052 after up to 5 years of follow-up.

BACKGROUND: Immune checkpoint inhibitors are a standard therapy in metastatic urothelial carcinoma (UC). Long-term follow-up is necessary to confirm durability of response and identify further safety concerns. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In KEYNOTE-045, patients with metastatic UC that progressed on platinum-containing chemotherapy were randomly assigned 1:1 to receive pembrolizumab or investigator's choice of paclitaxel, docetaxel, or vinflunine. Primary endpoints were progression-free survival per RECIST version 1.1 by blinded independent central review (BICR) and overall survival. In KEYNOTE-052, cisplatin-ineligible patients with metastatic UC received first-line pembrolizumab. The primary endpoint was objective response rate per RECIST version 1.1 by BICR. RESULTS: A total of 542 patients (pembrolizumab, n = 270; chemotherapy, n = 272) were randomly assigned in KEYNOTE-045. The median follow-up was 62.9 months (range 58.6-70.9 months; data cut-off 1 October 2020). At 48 months, overall survival rates were 16.7% for pembrolizumab and 10.1% for chemotherapy; progression-free survival rates were 9.5% and 2.7%, respectively. The median duration of response (DOR) was 29.7 months (range 1.6+ to 60.5+ months) for pembrolizumab and 4.4 months (range 1.4+ to 63.1+ months) for chemotherapy; 36-month DOR rates were 44.4% and 28.3%, respectively. A total of 370 patients were enrolled in KEYNOTE-052. The median follow-up was 56.3 months (range 51.2-65.3 months; data cut-off 26 September 2020). The confirmed objective response rate was 28.9% (95% confidence interval 24.3-33.8), and the median DOR was 33.4 months (range 1.4+ to 60.7+ months); the 36-month DOR rate was 44.8%. Most treatment-related adverse events for pembrolizumab in either study were grade 1 or 2 and manageable, which is consistent with prior reports. CONCLUSION: With ∼5 years of follow-up, pembrolizumab monotherapy continued to demonstrate durable efficacy with no new safety signals in patients with platinum-resistant metastatic UC and as first-line therapy in cisplatin-ineligible patients. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRY AND ID: With ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02256436 (KEYNOTE-045); https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02256436 and NCT02335424 (KEYNOTE-052); https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02335424.

Randomized phase III KEYNOTE-045 trial of pembrolizumab versus paclitaxel, docetaxel, or vinflunine in recurrent advanced urothelial cancer: results of >2 years of follow-up.

BACKGROUND: Novel second-line treatments are needed for patients with advanced urothelial cancer (UC). Interim analysis of the phase III KEYNOTE-045 study showed a superior overall survival (OS) benefit of pembrolizumab, a programmed death 1 inhibitor, versus chemotherapy in patients with advanced UC that progressed on platinum-based chemotherapy. Here we report the long-term safety and efficacy outcomes of KEYNOTE-045. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Adult patients with histologically/cytologically confirmed UC whose disease progressed after first-line, platinum-containing chemotherapy were enrolled. Patients were randomly assigned 1 : 1 to receive pembrolizumab [200 mg every 3 weeks (Q3W)] or investigator's choice of paclitaxel (175 mg/m2 Q3W), docetaxel (75 mg/m2 Q3W), or vinflunine (320 mg/m2 Q3W). Primary end points were OS and progression-free survival (PFS) per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors, version 1.1 (RECIST v1.1) by blinded independent central radiology review (BICR). A key secondary end point was objective response rate per RECIST v1.1 by BICR. RESULTS: A total of 542 patients were enrolled (pembrolizumab, n = 270; chemotherapy, n = 272). Median follow-up as of 26 October 2017 was 27.7 months. Median 1- and 2-year OS rates were higher with pembrolizumab (44.2% and 26.9%, respectively) than chemotherapy (29.8% and 14.3%, respectively). PFS rates did not differ between treatment arms; however, 1- and 2-year PFS rates were higher with pembrolizumab. The objective response rate was also higher with pembrolizumab (21.1% versus 11.0%). Median duration of response to pembrolizumab was not reached (range 1.6+ to 30.0+ months) versus chemotherapy (4.4 months; range 1.4+ to 29.9+ months). Pembrolizumab had lower rates of any grade (62.0% versus 90.6%) and grade ≥3 (16.5% versus 50.2%) treatment-related adverse events than chemotherapy. CONCLUSIONS: Long-term results (>2 years' follow-up) were consistent with those of previously reported analyses, demonstrating continued clinical benefit of pembrolizumab over chemotherapy for efficacy and safety for treatment of locally advanced/metastatic, platinum-refractory UC. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02256436.

EAU-ESMO consensus statements on the management of advanced and variant bladder cancer-an international collaborative multi-stakeholder effort: under the auspices of the EAU and ESMO Guidelines Committees†.

BACKGROUND: Although guidelines exist for advanced and variant bladder cancer management, evidence is limited/conflicting in some areas and the optimal approach remains controversial. OBJECTIVE: To bring together a large multidisciplinary group of experts to develop consensus statements on controversial topics in bladder cancer management. DESIGN: A steering committee compiled proposed statements regarding advanced and variant bladder cancer management which were assessed by 113 experts in a Delphi survey. Statements not reaching consensus were reviewed; those prioritised were revised by a panel of 45 experts before voting during a consensus conference. SETTING: Online Delphi survey and consensus conference. PARTICIPANTS: The European Association of Urology (EAU), the European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO), experts in bladder cancer management. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Statements were ranked by experts according to their level of agreement: 1-3 (disagree), 4-6 (equivocal), 7-9 (agree). A priori (level 1) consensus was defined as ≥70% agreement and ≤15% disagreement, or vice versa. In the Delphi survey, a second analysis was restricted to stakeholder group(s) considered to have adequate expertise relating to each statement (to achieve level 2 consensus). RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: Overall, 116 statements were included in the Delphi survey. Of these, 33 (28%) statements achieved level 1 consensus and 49 (42%) statements achieved level 1 or 2 consensus. At the consensus conference, 22 of 27 (81%) statements achieved consensus. These consensus statements provide further guidance across a broad range of topics, including the management of variant histologies, the role/limitations of prognostic biomarkers in clinical decision making, bladder preservation strategies, modern radiotherapy techniques, the management of oligometastatic disease and the evolving role of checkpoint inhibitor therapy in metastatic disease. CONCLUSIONS: These consensus statements provide further guidance on controversial topics in advanced and variant bladder cancer management until a time where further evidence is available to guide our approach.

Impact of contemporary patterns of chemotherapy utilization on survival in patients with advanced cancer of the urinary tract: a Retrospective International Study of Invasive/Advanced Cancer of the Urothelium (RISC).

Background: Cisplatin-based combination chemotherapy is the standard treatment of advanced urinary tract cancer (aUTC), but 50% of patients are ineligible for cisplatin according to recently published criteria. We used a multinational database to study patterns of chemotherapy utilization in patients with aUTC and determine their impact on survival. Patients and methods: This was a retrospective study of patients with: UTC (bladder, renal pelvis, ureter or urethra); advanced disease (stages T4b and/or N+ and/or M+); urothelial, squamous or adenocarcinoma histology. Primary objective was overall survival (OS). Eligibility-for-cisplatin was defined by Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status ≤ 1, creatinine clearance ≥ 60 ml/min, no hearing loss, no neuropathy and no heart failure. Cox regression multivariate analyses were used to establish independent associations of cisplatin versus noncisplatin-based chemotherapy on OS. Results: 1794 patients treated between 2000 and 2013 at 29 centers were analyzed. Median follow-up was 29.1 months. About 1333 patients (74%) received first-line chemotherapy: the use of first-line chemotherapy was associated with longer OS: [hazard ratio (HR): 1.91, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.67-2.20]. Type of first-line chemotherapy received was: cisplatin-based 669 (50%), carboplatin-based 399 (30%) and other 265 (20%). Cisplatin use was an independent favorable prognostic factor (HR: 1.54, 95% CI: 1.35-1.77). This benefit was independent of baseline characteristics or comorbidities but was associated with eligibility-for-cisplatin: eligible patients treated with cisplatin lived longer than those who were not (HR: 1.74, 95% CI: 1.36-2.21), while such benefit was not observed among ineligible patients. About 26% of patients who did not receive cisplatin were eligible for this agent. Median OS of ineligible patients was poor irrespective of the chemotherapy used. Conclusions: The importance of applying published criteria of eligibility-for-cisplatin was confirmed in a multinational, real-world setting in aUTC. The reasons for deviations from these criteria set targets to improve adherence. Effective therapies for cisplatin-ineligible patients are needed.

Borealis-1: a randomized, first-line, placebo-controlled, phase II study evaluating apatorsen and chemotherapy for patients with advanced urothelial cancer.

BACKGROUND: Five-year survival of patients with inoperable, advanced urothelial carcinoma treated with the first-line chemotherapy is 5%-15%. We assessed whether the Hsp27 inhibitor apatorsen combined with gemcitabine plus cisplatin (GC) could improve overall survival (OS) in these patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This placebo-controlled, double-blind, phase II trial randomized 183 untreated urothelial carcinoma patients (North America and Europe) to receive GC plus either placebo (N = 62), 600 mg apatorsen (N = 60), or 1000 mg apatorsen (N = 61). In the experimental arm, treatment included loading doses of apatorsen followed by up to six cycles of apatorsen plus GC. Patients receiving at least four cycles could continue apatorsen monotherapy as maintenance until progression or unacceptable toxicity. The primary end point was OS. RESULTS: OS was not significantly improved in the single or combined 600- or 1000-mg apatorsen arms versus placebo [hazard ratio (HR), 0.86 and 0.90, respectively]. Exploratory study of specific statistical modeling showed a trend for improved survival in patients with baseline poor prognostic features treated with 600 mg apatorsen compared with placebo (HR = 0.72). Landmark analysis of serum Hsp27 (sHsp27) levels showed a trend toward survival benefit for poor-prognosis patients in 600- and 1000-mg apatorsen arms who achieved lower area under the curve sHsp27 levels, compared with the placebo arm (HR = 0.45 and 0.62, respectively). Higher baseline circulating tumor cells (≥5 cells/7.5 ml) was observed in patients with poor prognosis in correlation with poor survival. Treatment-emergent adverse events were manageable and more common in both apatorsen-treatment arms. CONCLUSIONS: Even though apatorsen combined with standard chemotherapy did not demonstrate a survival benefit in the overall study population, patients with poor prognostic features might benefit from this combination. Serum Hsp27 levels may act as a biomarker to predict treatment outcome. Further exploration of apatorsen in poor-risk patients is warranted.

A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase II study of maintenance therapy with tasquinimod in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer responsive to or stabilized during first-line docetaxel chemotherapy.

BACKGROUND: This phase II study was conducted to assess clinical efficacy of tasquinimod maintenance therapy in patients with metastatic castrate-resistant prostate cancer not progressing during first-line docetaxel-based therapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients were randomly assigned (1 : 1) to receive tasquinimod (0.25-1.0 mg/day orally) or placebo. The primary end point was radiologic progression-free survival (rPFS); secondary efficacy end points included: overall survival (OS); PFS on next-line therapy (PFS 2) and symptomatic PFS, assessed using the Brief Pain Inventory (BPI) questionnaire and analgesic use. Quality of life was measured by the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Prostate (FACT-P) questionnaire and by the EuroQol-5 Dimension Quality of Life Instrument (EQ-5D). Adverse events were recorded. RESULTS: A total of 219 patients were screened and 144 patients randomized. The median duration of treatment was 18.7 weeks (range 0.6-102.7 weeks) for the tasquinimod arm and 19.2 weeks (range 0.4-80.0 weeks) for the placebo arm. Median (90% CI) rPFS was 31.7 (24.3-53.7) and 22.7 (16.1-25.9) weeks in the tasquinimod and placebo arms, respectively [HR (90% CI) 0.6 (0.4-0.9), P = 0.0162]. The median OS was not reached because only 14 deaths occurred by the cut-off date. No statistically significant differences between treatment arms were noted for symptomatic PFS, PFS 2, BPI score, FACT-P score, or EQ-5D. The incidence of any treatment emergent adverse event (TEAE) was similar in the tasquinimod and placebo arms (97.2% versus 94.3%, respectively), whereas severe TEAEs (NCI-CTC Grade 3-5) incidence was higher in the tasquinimod group (50.7% versus 27.1%). CONCLUSIONS: Randomized trials testing new drugs as maintenance can be successfully conducted after chemotherapy in castrate-resistant prostate cancer. Maintenance tasquinimod therapy significantly reduced the risk of rPFS by 40%. CLINICALTRIALS: gov identifier NCT01732549.

A randomized phase II/III study of cabazitaxel versus vinflunine in metastatic or locally advanced transitional cell carcinoma of the urothelium (SECAVIN).

BACKGROUND: Despite the advent of immunotherapy in urothelial cancer, there is still a need to find effective cytotoxic agents beyond first and second lines. Vinflunine is the only treatment approved in this setting by the European Medicines Agency and taxanes are also widely used in second line. Cabazitaxel is a taxane with activity in docetaxel-refractory cancers. A randomized study was conducted to compare its efficacy versus vinflunine. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This is a multicenter, randomized, open-label, phase II/III study, following a Simon's optimal method with stopping rules based on an interim futility analysis and a formal efficacy analysis at the end of the phase II. ECOG Performance Status, anaemia and liver metastases were stratification factors. Primary objectives were overall response rate for the phase II and overall survival for the phase III. RESULTS: Seventy patients were included in the phase II across 19 institutions in Europe. Baseline characteristics were well balanced between the two arms. Three patients (13%) obtained a partial response on cabazitaxel (95% CI 2.7-32.4) and six patients (30%) in the vinflunine arm (95% CI 11.9-54.3). Median progression-free survival for cabazitaxel was 1.9 versus 2.9 months for vinflunine (P = 0.039). The study did not proceed to phase III since the futility analysis showed a lack of efficacy of cabazitaxel. A trend for overall survival benefit was found favouring vinflunine (median 7.6 versus 5.5 months). Grade 3- to 4-related adverse events were seen in 41% patients with no difference between the two arms. CONCLUSION: This phase II/III second line bladder study comparing cabazitaxel with vinflunine was closed when the phase II showed a lack of efficacy of the cabazitaxel arm. Vinflunine results were consistent with those known previously. TRIAL NUMBER: NCT01830231.

New advances in genitourinary cancer: evidence gathered in 2014.

This review provides updated information published in 2014 regarding advances and major achievements in genitourinary cancer. Sections include the best in prostate cancer, renal cancer, bladder cancer, and germ cell tumors. In the field of prostate cancer, data related to treatment approach of hormone-sensitive disease, castrate-resistant prostate cancer, mechanisms of resistance, new drugs, and molecular research are presented. In relation to renal cancer, relevant aspects in the treatment of advanced renal cell carcinoma, immunotherapy, and molecular research, including angiogenesis and von Hippel-Lindau gene, molecular biology of non-clear cell histologies, and epigenetics of clear renal cell cancer are described. New strategies in the management of muscle-invasive localized bladder cancer and metastatic disease are reported as well as salient findings of biomolecular research in urothelial cancer. Some approaches intended to improve outcomes in poor prognosis patients with metastatic germ cell cancer are also reported. Results of clinical trials in these areas are discussed.

Second-line single-agent versus doublet chemotherapy as salvage therapy for metastatic urothelial cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: The efficacy and safety of a combination of chemotherapeutic agent compared with single-agent chemotherapy in the second-line setting of advanced urothelial carcinoma (UC) are unclear. We aimed to study the survival impact of single-agent compared with doublet chemotherapy as second-line chemotherapy of advanced UC. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Literature was searched for studies including single-agent or doublet chemotherapy in the second-line setting after platinum-based chemotherapy. Random-effects models were used to pool trial-level data according to treatment arm, including median progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), objective response rate (ORR) probability, and grade 3-4 toxicity. Univariable and multivariable analyses, including sensitivity analyses, were carried out, adjusting for the percent of patients with ECOG performance status ≥1 and hepatic metastases. RESULTS: Forty-six arms of trials including 1910 patients were selected: 22 arms with single agent (n = 1202) and 24 arms with doublets (n = 708). The pooled ORR with single agents was 14.2% [95% confidence interval (CI) 11.1-17.9] versus 31.9% [95% CI 27.3-36.9] with doublet chemotherapy. Pooled median PFS was 2.69 and 4.05 months, respectively. The pooled median OS was 6.98 and 8.50 months, respectively. Multivariably, the odds ratio for ORR and the pooled median difference of PFS were statistically significant (P < 0.001 and P = 0.002) whereas the median difference in OS was not (P = 0.284). When including single-agent vinflunine or taxanes only, differences were significant only for ORR (P < 0.001) favoring doublet chemotherapy. No statistically significant differences in grade 3-4 toxicity were seen between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: Despite significant improvements in ORR and PFS, doublet regimens did not extend OS compared with single agents for the second-line chemotherapy of UC. Prospective trials are necessary to elucidate the role of combination chemotherapy, with or without targeted agents, in the salvage setting. Currently, improvements in this field should be pursued considering single-agent chemotherapy as the foundation for new more active combinations.

Vinflunine-gemcitabine versus vinflunine-carboplatin as first-line chemotherapy in cisplatin-unfit patients with advanced urothelial carcinoma: results of an international randomized phase II trial (JASINT1).

BACKGROUND: There is no standard first-line chemotherapy for advanced urothelial carcinoma (aUC) in cisplatin-ineligible (cisplatin-unfit) patients. The study assessed the efficacy and tolerability profile of two vinflunine-based cytotoxic regimens in this setting. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with aUC a creatinine clearance (CrCl) of <60 but ≥30 ml/min, performance status 0 or 1 and no prior chemotherapy for advanced disease were randomized (1 : 1). They received vinflunine 250 or 280 mg/m(2) (based on baseline CrCl) on day 1, plus either gemcitabine [750 mg/m(2) escalated to 1000 mg/m(2) in cycle 2 if no toxicity grade (G) ≥2 on days 1 and 8 (VG) or plus carboplatin area under the curve 4.5 day 1 (VC) every 21 days]. To detect a 22% improvement in each arm compared with H0 (41%) in the primary end point, disease control rate (DCR = complete response + partial response + stable disease), 31 assessable patients per arm were required (α = 5%, ß = 20%). RESULTS: Sixty-nine patients were enrolled (34 VG, 35 VC). Less G3/4 haematological adverse events (AEs) were reported with VG: neutropaenia was seen in 38% (versus 68% with VC) and febrile neutropaenia in 3% (versus 14% with VC) of patients. No major differences were observed for non-haematological AEs. DCR was 77% in both groups; overall response rate (ORR) was 44.1% versus 28.6%, with a median progression-free survival of 5.9 versus 6.1 months and median OS of 14.0 versus 12.8 months with VG and VC, respectively. CONCLUSION: Both vinflunine-based doublets offer a similar DCR, ORR and OS. The better haematological tolerance favours the VG combination, which warrants further study. CLINICALTRIALS.GOV PROTOCOL IDENTIFIER: NCT 01599013.

A prognostic index model for predicting overall survival in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer treated with abiraterone acetate after docetaxel.

BACKGROUND: Few prognostic models for overall survival (OS) are available for patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) treated with recently approved agents. We developed a prognostic index model using readily available clinical and laboratory factors from a phase III trial of abiraterone acetate (hereafter abiraterone) in combination with prednisone in post-docetaxel mCRPC. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Baseline data were available from 762 patients treated with abiraterone-prednisone. Factors were assessed for association with OS through a univariate Cox model and used in a multivariate Cox model with a stepwise procedure to identify those of significance. Data were validated using an independent, external, population-based cohort. RESULTS: Six risk factors individually associated with poor prognosis were included in the final model: lactate dehydrogenase > upper limit of normal (ULN) [hazard ratio (HR) = 2.31], Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 2 (HR = 2.19), presence of liver metastases (HR = 2.00), albumin ≤4 g/dl (HR = 1.54), alkaline phosphatase > ULN (HR = 1.38) and time from start of initial androgen-deprivation therapy to start of treatment ≤36 months (HR = 1.30). Patients were categorized into good (n = 369, 46%), intermediate (n = 321, 40%) and poor (n = 107, 13%) prognosis groups based on the number of risk factors and relative HRs. The C-index was 0.70 ± 0.014. The model was validated by the external dataset (n = 286). CONCLUSION: This analysis identified six factors used to model survival in mCRPC and categorized patients into three distinct risk groups. Prognostic stratification with this model could assist clinical practice decisions for follow-up and monitoring, and may aid in clinical trial design. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBERS: NCT00638690.

Reexamining treatment of high-grade T1 bladder cancer according to depth of lamina propria invasion: a prospective trial of 200 patients.

BACKGROUND: Management of high-grade T1 (HGT1) bladder cancer represents a major challenge. We studied a treatment strategy according to substaging by depth of lamina propria invasion. METHODS: In this prospective observational cohort study, patients received initial transurethral resection (TUR), mitomycin-C, and BCG. Subjects with shallower lamina propria invasion (HGT1a) were followed without further surgery, whereas subjects with HGT1b received a second TUR. Association of clinical and histological features with outcomes (primary: progression; secondary: recurrence and cancer-specific survival) was assessed using Cox regression. RESULTS: Median age was 71 years; 89.5% were males, with 89 (44.5%) cases T1a and 111 (55.5%) T1b. At median follow-up of 71 months, disease progression was observed in 31 (15.5%) and in univariate analysis, substaging, carcinoma in situ, tumour size, and tumour pattern predicted progression. On multivariate analysis only substaging, associated carcinoma in situ, and tumour size remained significant for progression. CONCLUSIONS: In HGT1 bladder cancer, the strategy of performing a second TUR only in T1b cases results in a global low progression rate of 15.5%. Tumours deeply invading the lamina propria (HGT1b) showed a three-fold increase in risk of progression. Substaging should be routinely evaluated, with HGT1b cases being thoroughly evaluated for cystectomy. Inclusion in the TNM system should also be carefully considered.

Association of PD-L1 expression on tumor-infiltrating mononuclear cells and overall survival in patients with urothelial carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Programmed death-1 (PD-1) receptor/PD-1 ligand (PD-L1) pathway negatively regulates T-cell-mediated responses. The prognostic impact of PD-L1 expression needs to be defined in urothelial carcinoma (UC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded tumor samples from 160 patients with UC were retrieved. PD-L1 expression was evaluated by immunohistochemistry using a mouse monoclonal anti-PD-L1 antibody (405.9A11). PD-L1 positivity on tumor cell membrane was defined as ≥5% of tumor cell membrane staining. The extent of tumor-infiltrating mononuclear cells (TIMCs) as well as PD-L1 expression on TIMCs was scored from 0 to 4. A score of 2, 3, or 4 was considered PD-L1-positive. Clinico-pathological variables were documented. The Cox regression model was used to assess the association of PD-L1 expression with overall survival (OS) in patients who developed metastases. RESULTS: TIMCs were present in 143 of the 160 patient samples. Out of 160 samples, 32 (20%) had positive PD-L1 expression in tumor cell membrane. Out of 143 samples with TIMCs, 58 (40%) had positive PD-L1 expression in TIMCs. Smoking history, prior BCG use and chromosome 9 loss did not correlate with PD-L1 expression in either tumor cell membrane or TIMCs. PD-L1 positivity was not different between non-invasive or invasive UC. In patients who developed metastases (M1) and were treated with systemic therapy (n = 100), PD-L1 positivity on tumor cell membrane was seen in 14% of patients and did not correlate with OS (P = 0.45). Out of 89 M1 patients who had evaluable PD-L1 on TIMCs, PD-L1 expression was seen in 33% of patients and was significantly associated with longer OS on multivariate analysis (P = 0.0007). CONCLUSION: PD-L1 is widely expressed in tumor cell membrane and TIMCs in UC. PD-L1 in tumor cells was not predictive of OS. However, positive PD-L1 expression in TIMCs was significantly associated with longer survival in those patients who developed metastases.

New agents for prostate cancer.

The therapeutic landscape of metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) has been revolutionized by the arrival of multiple novel agents in the past 2 years. Immunotherapy in the form of sipuleucel-T, androgen axis inhibitors, including abiraterone acetate and enzalutamide, a chemotherapeutic agent, cabazitaxel, and a radiopharmaceutical, radium-223, have all yielded incremental extensions of survival and have been recently approved. A number of other agents appear promising in early studies, suggesting that the armamentarium against castrate-resistant prostate cancer is likely to continue to expand. Emerging androgen pathway inhibitors include androgen synthesis inhibitors (TAK700), androgen receptor inhibitors (ARN-509, ODM-201), AR DNA binding domain inhibitors (EPI-001), selective AR downregulators or SARDs (AZD-3514), and agents that inhibit both androgen synthesis and receptor binding (TOK-001/galeterone). Promising immunotherapeutic agents include poxvirus vaccines and CTLA-4 inhibitor (ipilimumab). Biologic agents targeting the molecular drivers of disease are also being investigated as single agents, including cabozantinib (Met and VEGFR2 inhibitor) and tasquinimod (angiogenesis and immune modulatory agent). Despite the disappointing results seen from studies evaluating docetaxel in combination with other agents, including GVAX, anti-angiogentic agents (bevacizumab, aflibercept, lenalinomide), a SRC kinase inhibitor (dasatinib), endothelin receptor antagonists (atrasentan, zibotentan), and high-dose calcitriol (DN-101), the results from the trial evaluating docetaxel in combination with the clusterin antagonist, custirsen, are eagerly awaited. New therapeutic hurdles consist of discovering new targets, understanding resistance mechanisms, the optimal sequencing and combinations of available agents, as well as biomarkers predictive for benefit. Novel agents targeting bone metastases are being developed following the success of zoledronic acid and denosumab. Finally, all of these modalities do not appear curative, suggesting that clinical trial enrollment and a better understanding of biology remain of paramount importance.

PD-L1 expression in nonclear-cell renal cell carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Programmed death ligand-1 (PD-L1) expression in nonclear-cell RCC (non-ccRCC) and its association with clinical outcomes are unknown. METHODS: Formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded (FFPE) specimens were obtained from 101 patients with non-ccRCC. PD-L1 expression was evaluated by immunohistochemistry in both tumor cell membrane and tumor-infiltrating mononuclear cells (TIMC). PD-L1 tumor positivity was defined as ≥5% tumor cell membrane staining. For PD-L1 expression in TIMC, a combined score based on the extent of infiltrate and percentage of positive cells was used. Baseline clinico-pathological characteristics and outcome data [time to recurrence (TTR) and overall survival (OS)] were correlated with PD-L1 staining. RESULTS: Among 101 patients, 11 (10.9%) were considered PD-L1+ in tumor cells: 2/36 (5.6%) of chromophobe RCC, 5/50 (10%) of papillary RCC, 3/10 (30%) of Xp11.2 translocation RCC and 1/5 (20%) of collecting duct carcinoma. PD-L1 positivity (PD-L1+) in tumor cells was significantly associated with higher stage (P = 0.01) and grade (P = 0.03), as well as shorter OS (P < 0.001). On the other hand, PD-L1 positivity by TIMC was observed in 57 (56.4%) patients: 13/36 (36.1%) of chromophobe RCC, 30/50 (60%) of papillary RCC, 9/10 (90%) of Xp11.2 translocation RCC and 5/5 (100%) of collecting duct carcinoma. A trend toward shorter OS was observed in patients with PD-L1+ in TIMC (P = 0.08). PD-L1+ in both tumor cell membrane and TIMC cells were associated with shorter TTR (P = 0.02 and P = 0.03, respectively). CONCLUSION: In non-ccRCC, patients with PD-L1+ tumors appear to have worse clinical outcomes, although only PD-L1 positivity in tumor cells is associated with higher tumor stage and grade.

Epidemiological evolution and economic impact of the COVID-19 pandemic in the European Union and worldwide and effects of control strategies on them: An ecological study.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the epidemiological evolution and economic impact of COVID-19 pandemic in the European Union (EU) and worldwide, and the effects of control strategies on them. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We collected incidence, mortality, and gross domestic product (GDP) data between the first quarter of 2020 and of 2023. Then, we reviewed the effectiveness of the mitigation and zero-COVID control strategies. The statistical analysis was done calculating the incidence rate ratio (IRR) of two rates and its 95% confidence interval (CI). RESULTS: In the EU, COVID-19 presented six epidemic waves. The sixth one at the beginning of 2022 was the biggest. Globally, the biggest wave occurred at the beginning of 2023. Highest mortality rates were observed in the EU during 2020-2021 and globally at the beginning of 2021. In mitigation countries, mortality was much higher than in zero-COVID countries (IRR=6.82 [95% CI: 6.14-7.60]; p<0.001). A GDP reduction was observed worldwide, except in Asia. None of the eight zero-COVID countries presented a GDP growth percentage lower than the EU percentage in 2020, and 3/8 in 2022 (p=0.054). COVID-19 pandemic caused epidemic waves with high mortality rates and a negative impact on GDP. CONCLUSION: The zero-COVID strategy was more effective in avoiding mortality and potentially had a lower impact on GDP in the first pandemic year.