Protocol for a phase II study to evaluate the efficacy and safety of nivolumab as a postoperative adjuvant therapy for patients with esophageal cancer treated with preoperative docetaxel, cisplatin plus 5-fluorouracil treatment (PENTAGON trial).

BACKGROUND: In Japan, preoperative adjuvant chemotherapy followed by surgical resection is the standard treatment for patients with locally advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma. However, the risk of recurrence after surgical resection remains high. Although a randomized controlled trial evaluating the efficacy of nivolumab, a fully human monoclonal anti-programmed death 1 antibody, as postoperative adjuvant therapy after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy and surgery established its superior efficacy as adjuvant therapy, the efficacy for patients who received preoperative adjuvant chemotherapy has not been demonstrated. This study aims to elucidate the efficacy and safety of nivolumab as postoperative adjuvant therapy for patients with esophageal squamous cell carcinoma after preoperative adjuvant chemotherapy with docetaxel and cisplatin plus 5-fluorouracil followed by surgical resection. METHODS: This study is a multi-institutional, single-arm, Phase II trial. We plan to recruit 130 esophageal squamous cell carcinoma patients, who have undergone preoperative adjuvant chemotherapy with docetaxel and cisplatin plus 5-fluorouracil followed by surgical resection. If the patient did not have a pathological complete response, nivolumab is started as a postoperative adjuvant therapy within 4-16 weeks after surgery. The nivolumab dose is 480 mg/day every four weeks. Nivolumab is administered for up to 12 months. The primary endpoint is disease-free survival; the secondary endpoints are overall survival, distant metastasis-free survival, and incidence of adverse events. DISCUSSION: To our knowledge this study is the first trial establishing the efficacy of nivolumab as postoperative adjuvant therapy for patients with esophageal squamous cell carcinoma after preoperative adjuvant chemotherapy with docetaxel and cisplatin plus 5-fluorouracil followed by surgical resection. In Japan, preoperative adjuvant chemotherapy followed by surgery is a well-established standard treatment for resectable, locally advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma. Therefore, developing an effective postoperative adjuvant therapy has been essential for improving oncological outcomes.

Recent advances and remaining challenges in lung cancer therapy.

ABSTRACT: Lung cancer remains the most common cause of cancer death. Given the continued research into new drugs and combination therapies, outcomes in lung cancer have been improved, and clinical benefits have been expanded to a broader patient population. However, the overall cure and survival rates for lung cancer patients remain low, especially in metastatic cases. Among the available lung cancer treatment options, such as surgery, radiation therapy, chemotherapy, targeted therapies, and alternative therapies, immunotherapy has shown to be the most promising. The exponential progress in immuno-oncology research and recent advancements made in the field of immunotherapy will further increase the survival and quality of life for lung cancer patients. Substantial progress has been made in targeted therapies using tyrosine kinase inhibitors and monoclonal antibody immune checkpoint inhibitors with many US Food And Drug Administration (FDA)-approved drugs targeting the programmed cell death ligand-1 protein (e.g., durvalumab, atezolizumab), the programmed cell death-1 receptor (e.g., nivolumab, pembrolizumab), and cytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated antigen 4 (e.g., tremelimumab, ipilimumab). Cytokines, cancer vaccines, adoptive T cell therapies, and Natural killer cell mono- and combinational therapies are rapidly being studied, yet to date, there are currently none that are FDA-approved for the treatment of lung cancer. In this review, we discuss the current lung cancer therapies with an emphasis on immunotherapy, including the challenges for future research and clinical applications.

Clinical Utility of Inflammatory and Nutritious Index as Therapeutic Prediction of Nivolumab plus Ipilimumab in Advanced Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer.

INTRODUCTION: Biomarkers for predicting the outcome of ipilimumab plus nivolumab (Nivo-Ipi) treatment in cancer patients have not been identified. Herein, we investigated the prognostic significance of inflammatory and nutritional markers in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) receiving Nivo-Ipi. METHODS: Our study retrospectively analyzed 101 patients with advanced NSCLC who received Nivo-Ipi at a single institution. Inflammatory and nutritional indices were correlated with patient outcomes and included the neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio (NLR), platelet to lymphocyte ratio (PLR), systemic immune-inflammation index (SII), prognostic nutritional index (PNI), advanced lung cancer inflammation index (ALI), and Glasgow prognostic score (GPS). RESULTS: The NLR significantly correlated with the PLR, SII, PNI, ALI, and GPS. Regarding therapeutic efficacy, the NLR, SII, and PNI predicted a partial response, and all indices predicted progressive disease. In subgroup analyses, the SII, PNI, and ALI predicted the outcome of patients with adenocarcinoma, whereas only the PNI predicted the outcome of patients with non-adenocarcinoma. The PNI and SII were the most useful indices in patients with a programmed death ligand-1 expression level of <1% and ≥1%, respectively. CONCLUSION: The NLR, PLR, SII, PNI, ALI, and GPS were significantly associated with the outcome of Nivo-Ipi treatment in patients with NSCLC. The PNI was the most suitable marker regardless of histological type. The SII and PNI were the most promising markers for patients with and without PD-L1 expression, respectively.

Evaluation of mycophenolic acid exposure in a patient with immune-related hepatotoxicity caused by nivolumab and ipilimumab therapy for malignant melanoma: a case report.

BACKGROUND: Guidelines such as the National Comprehensive Cancer Network recommend mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) for the treatment of severe steroid-refractory immune-related hepatotoxicity. Mycophenolic acid (MPA) is an active form of MMF that suppresses T- and B-lymphocyte proliferation and immune-related adverse events caused by immune checkpoint inhibitors. MPA has a narrow therapeutic range (37-70 µg·h/mL) and overexposure increases the risk of leukopenia in transplantation. However, the optimal use of MMF in oncology has not yet been established; thus, monitoring plasma MPA concentrations is necessary to avoid excessive immunosuppression in oncology practice. CASE PRESENTATION: We evaluated plasma MPA concentration in a 75-year-old man with immune-related hepatotoxicity following nivolumab and ipilimumab combination therapy for malignant melanoma. The patient developed severe hepatotoxicity after immunotherapy, and immunosuppressant therapy with corticosteroids was initiated. The patient then developed steroid-refractory immune-related hepatotoxicity; therefore, MMF (1,000 mg twice daily) was co-administered. Seven days after the administration of MMF, the plasma MPA concentration was measured using an enzyme multiplied immunoassay technique. The area under the plasma concentration-time curve for MPA from 0 to 12 h was 41.0 µg·h/mL, and the same dose of MMF was continued. Grade 2 lymphocytopenia, which could be attributed to MMF, was observed during the administration period. Unfortunately, the patient was infected with SARS-CoV-2 and died from respiratory failure. CONCLUSION: Our patient did not exceed the upper limit of MPA levels as an index of the onset of side effects of kidney transplantation and achieved rapid improvement in liver function. Prompt initiation of MMF after assessment of the steroid effect leads to adequate MPA exposure. Therapeutic drug monitoring should be considered when MMF is administered, to avoid overexposure.

First-line nivolumab plus ipilimumab for unresectable MPM in China: a cost-effectiveness analysis.

BACKGROUND: The regimen of nivolumab plus ipilimumab (NI) has been recommended by the National Comprehensive Cancer Network Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology-Malignant Pleural Mesothelioma (Version 1.2022) and Chinese Guidelines for the Clinical Diagnosis and Treatment of Malignant Pleural Mesothelioma (2021 edition) as the first-line treatment for Malignant Pleural Mesothelioma (MPM). But whether immunotherapy has a financial advantage over conventional chemotherapy (pemetrexed plus cisplatin/carboplatin, C) is uncertain. METHODS: Based on survival and safety data from the CheckMate 743 clinical trial (NCT02899299), a partitioned survival model was constructed using TreeAge Pro2022 software. The model cycle was set to 1 month and the study period was 10 years. The output indicators included total cost, quality-adjusted life year (QALY) and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were used to assess the robustness of the results, considering only direct medical costs. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION: The ICER for group NI versus Group C was $375,656/QALY in all randomized patients, $327,943/QALY in patients with epithelioid histology, and $115,495/QALY in patients with non-epithelioid histology. The ICERs of all three different populations all exceeded the willingness-to-pay threshold (three times the per capita gross domestic product of China in 2021). The results of univariate sensitivity analysis showed that the price of pemetrexed and nivolumab had great influence on the analysis results. The results of the probabilistic sensitivity analysis show that the probability of the NI scheme being more economical in all three different populations was 0. WHAT IS NEW AND CONCLUSION: From the perspective of the Chinese healthcare system, in patients with unresectable MPM, NI has no economic advantage over C.

SEOM SOGUG clinical guideline for treatment of kidney cancer (2022).

Renal cancer is the seventh most common cancer in men and the tenth in women. The aim of this article is to review the diagnosis, treatment, and follow-up of renal carcinoma accompanied by recommendations with new evidence and treatment algorithms. A new pathologic classification of RCC by the World Health Organization (WHO) was published in 2022 and this classification would be considered a "bridge" to a future molecular classification. For patients with localized disease, surgery is the treatment of choice with nephron-sparing surgery recommended when feasible. Adjuvant treatment with pembrolizumab is an option for intermediate-or high-risk cases, as well as patients after complete resection of metastatic disease. More data are needed in the future, including positive overall survival data. Clinical prognostic classification, preferably IMDC, should be used for treatment decision making in mRCC. Cytoreductive nephrectomy should not be deemed mandatory in individuals with intermediate-poor IMDC/MSKCC risk who require systemic therapy. Metastasectomy can be contemplated in selected subjects with a limited number of metastases or long metachronous disease-free interval. For the population of patients with metastatic ccRCC as a whole, the combination of pembrolizumab-axitinib, nivolumab-cabozantinib, or pembrolizumab-lenvatinib can be considered as the first option based on the benefit obtained in OS versus sunitinib. In cases that have an intermediate IMDC and poor prognosis, the combination of ipilimumab and nivolumab has demonstrated superior OS compared to sunitinib. As for individuals with advanced RCC previously treated with one or two antiangiogenic tyrosine-kinase inhibitors, nivolumab and cabozantinib are the options of choice. When there is progression following initial immunotherapy-based treatment, we recommend treatment with an antiangiogenic tyrosine-kinase inhibitor. While no clear sequence can be advocated, medical oncologists and patients should be aware of the recent advances and new strategies that improve survival and quality of life in the setting of metastatic RC.

Cost-effectiveness of nivolumab versus sorafenib as first-line treatment for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Nivolumab improves overall survival (OS) and is associated with less adverse events (AE) compared with sorafenib in the first-line treatment of advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). But which approach is the most cost-effective remains uncertain. This study aimed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of nivolumab vs sorafenib as first-line therapy for patients with advanced HCC from the perspective of Chinese healthcare system. METHODS: A partitioned survival mode was constructed to evaluate the health and economic outcomes of nivolumab vs sorafenib as first-line treatment for advanced HCC. The clinical data and outcomes were obtained from CheckMate 459 trial. Medical costs and utilities were collected from published sources. Quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) were calculated. One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were used to examine model uncertainty. Additional subgroup and scenario analyses were performed. RESULTS: Treatment with nivolumab yielded an additional 0.27 QALYs with an incremental cost of $65,579.19 compared with sorafenib, leading to an ICER of $236,765.93/QALY in China. One-way sensitivity analysis found the model outputs to be most affected for hazard ratio (HR) of OS and the cost of nivolumab. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis showed that the probability of nivolumab being cost-effective was 0% at the willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of $38,201.19/QALY. The scenario analyses indicated altering the time horizon of the model did not reverse the economic results. CONCLUSION: Nivolumab as first-line treatment could gain more health benefits for advanced HCC compared with sorafenib, but was estimated not to be cost-effective at the commonly adopted WTP threshold of China.

Real-World Outcomes of Latinx Versus Non-Latinx Patients Treated With First-Line Immunotherapy for Metastatic Renal-Cell Carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: There are limited data regarding the impact of ethnicity among patients receiving immune checkpoint inhibitors. We evaluated real-world outcomes between Latinx and non-Latinx patients with metastatic renal-cell carcinoma (mRCC) treated with first-line nivolumab/ipilimumab within 2 different healthcare settings. METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis of patients with mRCC who received nivolumab/ipilimumab within the Los Angeles County Department of Health Services (LAC-DHS), a safety-net healthcare system, and the City of Hope Comprehensive Cancer Center (COH), a tertiary oncology center, between January 1, 2015 and December 31, 2021. Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were determined using the Kaplan-Meier method and covariates were adjusted using multivariate Cox proportional hazards regression. RESULTS: Of 94 patients, 40 patients (43%) were Latinx while the remainder were non-Latinx (44 pts [46%] White, 7 pts [7%] Asian, and 3 pts [3%] Other). Fifty (53%) and 44 (47%) patients received their care at COH and LAC-DHS, respectively. Most Latinx patients (95%) were treated at LAC-DHS, and most non-Latinx patients (89%) were treated at COH. Pooled analysis by ethnicity demonstrated significantly shorter PFS in Latinx versus non-Latinx patients (10.1 vs. 25.2 months, hazard ratios [HR] 3.61, 95% CI 1.96-6.66, P ≤ .01). Multivariate analysis revealed a HR of 3.41 (95% CI 1.31-8.84; P = .01). At a median follow-up of 11.0 months, the median OS was not reached in either arm at the time of data cutoff. CONCLUSION: Latinx patients with mRCC had a shorter PFS treated with frontline nivolumab/ipilimumab compared to their non-Latinx counterparts. No difference was observed in OS although these data were immature. Larger studies are needed to further interrogate the social and economic determinants of ethnicity on clinical outcomes in mRCC.

Perioperative Nivolumab and Chemotherapy in Stage III Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Approximately 20% of patients with non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) receive a diagnosis of stage III disease. There is no current consensus regarding the most appropriate treatment for these patients. METHODS: In this open-label, phase 2 trial, we randomly assigned patients with resectable stage IIIA or IIIB NSCLC to receive neoadjuvant nivolumab plus platinum-based chemotherapy (experimental group) or chemotherapy alone (control group), followed by surgery. Patients in the experimental group who had R0 resections received adjuvant treatment with nivolumab for 6 months. The primary end point was a pathological complete response (0% viable tumor in resected lung and lymph nodes). Secondary end points included progression-free survival and overall survival at 24 months and safety. RESULTS: A total of 86 patients underwent randomization; 57 were assigned to the experimental group and 29 were assigned to the control group. A pathological complete response occurred in 37% of the patients in the experimental group and in 7% in the control group (relative risk, 5.34; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.34 to 21.23; P = 0.02). Surgery was performed in 93% of the patients in the experimental group and in 69% in the control group (relative risk, 1.35; 95% CI, 1.05 to 1.74). Kaplan-Meier estimates of progression-free survival at 24 months were 67.2% in the experimental group and 40.9% in the control group (hazard ratio for disease progression, disease recurrence, or death, 0.47; 95% CI, 0.25 to 0.88). Kaplan-Meier estimates of overall survival at 24 months were 85.0% in the experimental group and 63.6% in the control group (hazard ratio for death, 0.43; 95% CI, 0.19 to 0.98). Grade 3 or 4 adverse events occurred in 11 patients in the experimental group (19%; some patients had events of both grades) and 3 patients in the control group (10%). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with resectable stage IIIA or IIIB NSCLC, perioperative treatment with nivolumab plus chemotherapy resulted in a higher percentage of patients with a pathological complete response and longer survival than chemotherapy alone. (Funded by Bristol Myers Squibb and others; NADIM II ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03838159; EudraCT number, 2018-004515-45.).

Patient-reported outcomes in metastatic renal cell carcinoma trials using combinations versus sunitinib as first-line treatment.

Over the past 5 years, several new immunotherapy treatments have been tested for metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). Clinical trials assessing combinations of different immunotherapies, or of an immunotherapy with a tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI), have reported improved clinical outcomes compared with the standard of care - that is, treatments using TKIs alone. However, to understand the holistic impact of new treatments on patients, physicians must also consider effects on health-related quality of life (HRQoL). As patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) on HRQoL are often treated as a secondary outcome in clinical trials, their collection and reporting are non-standardized and, therefore, difficult to compare and interpret. However, results from six clinical trials indicate that two immunotherapy treatments overwhelmingly outperform sunitinib in HRQoL measurements: nivolumab plus cabozantinib (CheckMate 9ER) and atezolizumab plus bevacizumab (IMmotion151). An additional two treatments generally outperform sunitinib: nivolumab plus ipilimumab (CheckMate 214) and lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab (CLEAR). Of three studies that reported no difference from sunitinib, two suffered design flaws that might have obscured HRQoL benefits (JAVELIN Renal 101 and KEYNOTE-426). To ensure future HRQoL data are of the highest quality and comparable across trials, future studies should adopt best practices for the design, analysis and reporting of PROMs.

Sintilimab plus chemotherapy for first-line treatment of advanced or metastatic nonsquamous non-small-cell lung cancer: network meta-analysis.

Aim: This systematic literature review and network meta-analysis evaluated the efficacy and safety of sintilimab + pemetrexed + platinum versus US FDA-approved/National Comprehensive Cancer Network-recommended immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) combination therapies for untreated advanced/metastatic non-squamous non-small-cell lung cancer without EGFR/ALK aberrations. Methods: Bayesian network meta-analysis was the base-case analysis and included assessment of fixed and random effects, and independent and simultaneous models, adjusting for baseline risk (placebo response). Chemotherapy was the common comparator. Results: Sintilimab + pemetrexed + platinum was associated with significantly longer progression-free survival than atezolizumab + platinum + nab-paclitaxel (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.57; 95% credible interval [CrI]: 0.40-0.82) and nivolumab + ipilimumab + pemetrexed + platinum (HR: 0.66; 95% CrI: 0.48-0.92). Sintilimab + pemetrexed + platinum and pembrolizumab + pemetrexed + platinum showed comparable progression-free survival (HR: 0.96; 95% CrI: 0.71-1.30). There was no significant difference in overall survival (HR range: 0.61-0.81) or overall response rates (odds ratio [OR] range: 0.29-0.75) between sintilimab + pemetrexed + platinum and the other ICI combinations. The incidence of high-grade adverse events was higher with sintilimab + pemetrexed + platinum than with nivolumab + ipilimumab (OR: 0.46; 95% CrI: 0.33-0.64) or without chemotherapy (OR: 0.25; 95% CrI: 0.19-0.34), with no significant difference between sintilimab + pemetrexed + platinum and the other ICI combinations. Conclusion: Sintilimab + pemetrexed + platinum showed comparable efficacy and safety versus US standard-of-care first-line ICI combinations for advanced/metastatic non-squamous non-small-cell lung cancer.

Sintilimab is an immunotherapy drug that was successfully developed and tested in China to treat a kind of lung cancer that has spread, called advanced non-squamous non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). The ORIENT-11 clinical study showed that adding sintilimab to two types of chemotherapy (pemetrexed and platinum) as the first treatment for people in China with advanced non-squamous NSCLC was safe and effective in reducing the risk of cancer spreading, growing or getting worse, compared with chemotherapy alone. Our study combined and analyzed the results from 11 clinical studies to look at how well sintilimab with chemotherapy may work compared with immunotherapy drugs approved in the USA. The results showed that sintilimab with chemotherapy is as effective and safe as immunotherapy drugs approved in the USA to treat people with advanced non-squamous NSCLC. These results may help doctors and payers when deciding how to treat people with this disease.

Cost Effectiveness of Treatment Sequences in Advanced Renal Cell Carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: The treatment landscape for metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) has significantly evolved in recent years. Without direct comparator trials, factors such as cost effectiveness (CE) are important to guide decision-making. OBJECTIVE: To assess the CE of guideline-recommended approved first- and second-line treatment regimens. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A comprehensive Markov model was developed to analyze the CE of the five current National Comprehensive Cancer Network-recommended first-line therapies with appropriate second-line therapy for patient cohorts with International Metastatic RCC Database Consortium favorable and intermediate/poor risk. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Life years, quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), and total accumulated costs were estimated using a willingness-to-pay threshold of $150 000 per QALY. One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: In patients with favorable risk, pembrolizumab + lenvatinib followed by cabozantinib added $32 935 in costs and yielded 0.28 QALYs, resulting in an incremental CE ratio (ICER) of $117 625 per QALY in comparison to pembrolizumab + axitinib followed by cabozantinib. In patients with intermediate/poor risk, nivolumab + ipilimumab followed by cabozantinib added $2252 in costs and yielded 0.60 QALYs compared to cabozantinib followed by nivolumab, yielding an ICER of $4184. Limitations include differences in median follow-up duration between treatments. CONCLUSIONS: Pembrolizumab + lenvatinib followed by cabozantinib, and pembrolizumab + axitinib followed by cabozantinib were cost-effective treatment sequences for patients with favorable-risk mRCC. Nivolumab +ipilimumab followed by cabozantinib was the most cost-effective treatment sequence for patients with intermediate-/poor-risk mRCC, dominating all preferred treatments. PATIENT SUMMARY: Because new treatments for kidney cancer have not been compared head to head, comparison of their cost and efficacy can help in making decisions about the best treatments to use first. Our model showed that patients with a favorable risk profile are most likely to benefit from pembrolizumab and lenvatinib or axitinib followed by cabozantinib, while patients with an intermediate or poor risk profile will probably benefit most from nivolumab and ipilimumab followed by cabozantinib.

Comparison of nivolumab and sorafenib for first systemic therapy in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma and Child-Pugh B cirrhosis.

BACKGROUND: Patients with decompensated cirrhosis are excluded or underrepresented in clinical trials of systemic therapies for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and comparisons of available therapies are lacking. We aimed to compare overall survival for patients with HCC and Child-Pugh B cirrhosis treated with nivolumab or sorafenib as first systemic treatment. METHODS: We performed a retrospective cohort study in patients with HCC and Child-Pugh B cirrhosis treated at Veterans Affairs medical centers to compare overall survival, adverse events, and reason for discontinuation of therapy between patients treated with nivolumab or sorafenib as first systemic treatment. All statistical tests were 2-sided. RESULTS: Of those meeting inclusion criteria, 431 patients were treated with sorafenib and 79 with nivolumab. Median OS was 4.0 months (95% CI 3.5-4.8) in the sorafenib cohort and 5.0 months (95% CI 3.3-6.8) in the nivolumab cohort. In the multivariable Cox proportional hazards model, nivolumab was associated with a significantly reduced hazard of death compared to sorafenib (HR 0.69; 95% CI 0.52-0.91; p = 0.008). In a secondary analysis using propensity score methods, results did not reach statistical significance (HR 0.77; 95% CI 0.55-1.06; p = 0.11). Treatment was discontinued due to toxicity in 12% of patients receiving nivolumab compared to 36% receiving sorafenib (p = 0.001). CONCLUSION: In patients with HCC and Child-Pugh B cirrhosis, nivolumab treatment may be associated with improved overall survival and improved tolerability compared to sorafenib and should be considered for the first systemic treatment in this population.

Sorafenib versus nivolumab after lenvatinib treatment failure in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: An optimal sequential anti-hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) agent that can be used after failed lenvatinib treatment has not been established. Here, we compared the outcomes of sorafenib and nivolumab as second-line agents after failed lenvatinib treatment in patients with advanced HCC. METHODS: Patients with advanced HCC who had received sorafenib or nivolumab as second-line agents after failed lenvatinib treatment were recruited from two Korean tertiary institutions between November 2018 and June 2020. RESULTS: The median age of the 60 participants (52 treated with sorafenib and eight treated with nivolumab) at baseline was 56.8 years. The demographic, laboratory and tumor variables, as well as lenvatinib treatment duration, were similar between the two groups. The median durations of sorafenib and nivolumab treatment were 1.2 and 2.6 months, respectively ( P = 0.164). Twenty-four (40.0%) patients died during the follow-up period (median, 15.8 months). The median overall survival (OS) of the study population was 5.8 months. The median OS of patients treated with sorafenib was significantly longer than the median OS of patients treated with nivolumab (8.7 vs. 3.0 months; P = 0.046). Sorafenib treatment (vs. nivolumab) was independently associated with a lower risk of mortality (hazard ratio = 0.194; 95% confidence interval, 0.053-0.708; P = 0.013). Worse Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status, larger maximal tumor size, lymph node metastases and higher total bilirubin levels were independently associated with increased mortality risk (all P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Lenvatinib-sorafenib sequential treatment resulted in significantly better survival did than lenvatinib-nivolumab sequential treatment in patients with advanced HCC. Larger studies are needed to validate our results.

Durable Responses in Patients With Advanced Cholangiocarcinoma on Sequential Dual-agent Immunotherapy After Progressing on Single-agent Immunotherapy.

OBJECTIVES: Biliary tract tumors have a poor prognosis despite advancements in targeted therapies. More recent studies have started to investigate the use of combination immunotherapy in advanced biliary cancers. However, currently, there are no clinical trials investigating the use of dual-agent immunotherapy with ipilimumab and nivolumab as a sequential treatment after patients have progressed on single-agent immunotherapy. In this case series, we discussed 3 patients with advanced cholangiocarcinoma who have an objective response to dual-agent immunotherapy with ipilimumab and nivolumab after having disease progression on pembrolizumab and multiple other failed lines of treatment. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A case series, including 3 patients treated at the University of California, Irvine Chao Family Comprehensive Cancer Center, was completed. RESULTS: Although none of the 3 patients had microsatellite instability or high tumor-mutation burden and were not necessarily predicted to have a response to dual-agent immunotherapy, all 3 patients had an objective radiographic and/or tumor-marker response to a combination of ipilimumab and nivolumab. CONCLUSIONS: This case series serves as proof of the concept that sequential immunotherapy can be beneficial after progression on single-agent immunotherapy for patients with advanced cholangiocarcinoma. This study can also serve as the foundation to build further tests on the true effectiveness and ideal duration of sequential therapy with dual immunotherapy agents.

Therapeutic efficacy of nivolumab plus sorafenib therapy in patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy is the backbone of numerous combination regimens for improving the therapeutic response of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). We aimed to investigate the therapeutic efficacy of nivolumab plus sorafenib therapy in patients with unresectable HCC. METHODS: Patients with unresectable HCC who received sorafenib and followed at Taipei Tzu Chi Hospital from January 2016 to May 2022 were selected for this study, and those treated with nivolumab plus sorafenib and those with sorafenib alone were propensity score matched. The primary outcome was overall survival (OS) presented as a hazard ratio calculated using Cox proportional hazards regression models. RESULTS: In the analysis, 36 patients receiving nivolumab plus sorafenib and 36 receiving sorafenib alone were propensity score matched. The median OS for those receiving nivolumab plus sorafenib and sorafenib alone were 3.6 years and 1.2 years, respectively (p = 0.031). The hazard ratio of OS for nivolumab plus sorafenib compared to sorafenib alone was 0.36 (95 %CI, 0.19-0.70; p = 0.003). Furthermore, patients receiving nivolumab plus sorafenib with a baseline α-fetoprotein(AFP) < 10 ng/mL and early reduction in AFP had a 100 % objective response rate and disease control rate. CONCLUSION: In patients with unresectable HCC, nivolumab plus sorafenib resulted in better OS outcomes than sorafenib.

Progressive loss of the thyroid tissue integrity visualised by serial CT scans.

A man in his 70s developed thyrotoxicosis due to painless thyroiditis after starting nivolumab, which was subsequently followed by severe hypothyroidism. We diagnosed him as chronic thyroiditis, initiated levothyroxine supplementation and treated appropriately. Retrospective CT images of the thyroid gland during the clinical course revealed that the CT attenuation value was high at first but gradually decreased. The high-density signal of the normal thyroid tissues reflects its function of concentrating inorganic iodine, and the progressive decrease of the CT density in the present case can be viewed as a reflection of the thyroid destruction and progressive loss of iodine during the clinical course of the development of chronic thyroiditis. Considering the high incidence rate of functional thyroid disease in patients treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors, CT density of the thyroid gland needs to be paid attention to as the first sign of thyroiditis in this patient population.

[Metastatic Renal Cancer with Stevens-Johnson Syndrome after Nivolumab Treatment : A Case Report].

A 65-year-old male was admitted to our hospital with an abscess on his buttocks. Computed tomography (CT) on admission incidentally revealed left kidney cancer, and retroperitoneal nephrectomy was performed. Pathological examination confirmed a diagnosis of renal cell carcinoma. One month after surgery, CT showed findings suggesting primary liver cancer or liver metastasis along with retroperitoneal metastasis. Although metastatic kidney cancer was suspected, the possibility of primary liver cancer could not be ruled out. Therefore, we initiated treatment using sorafenib, which is indicated for both types of cancer, as first-line treatment for intermediate-risk based on the International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium (IMDC) risk classification. After three months of sorafenib treatment, the patient showed hyponatremia, anemia, and hand-foot syndrome and was admitted to the hospital. CT showed an enlarged area that appeared to be a metastatic site, after which we suspended sorafenib. Four months after sorafenib treatment, nivolumab was initiated as a second-line treatment. However, on day 28 after the administration of nivolumab eruptions appeared all over the patient's body. The patient was diagnosed with Stevens-Johnson syndrome due to nivolumab. We initiated corticosteroid therapy, and the eruptions gradually improved. Prednisolone was gradually reduced to 5mg/day, after which the patient was discharged. Six months after discharge, the eruptions had generally become epithelialized and no metastatic lesions had grown. The patient remained under observation without proceeding to third-line treatment. It is crucial to carefully monitor the patient's condition, especially in cases involving serious immune-related adverse events.

C-reactive protein and immune-related adverse events as prognostic biomarkers in immune checkpoint inhibitor treated metastatic renal cell carcinoma patients.

BACKGROUND: There is an ongoing need to identify biomarkers for correct patient selection for immune-oncology treatments in metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). The aim of our study was to evaluate the prognostic role of elevated C-reactive protein (CRP) values and immune-related adverse events (irAEs) to indicate immune checkpoint inhibitors' (ICIs) efficacy in nivolumab-treated mRCC patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Data from 96 mRCC patients treated with nivolumab at Comprehensive Cancer Center, Helsinki University Hospital in a real-life setting were collected between 2006 and 2020 retrospectively. Patients' baseline CRP, on-treatment (<12 weeks) CRP, and reported irAE association to median survival and outcome were analyzed using Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression. RESULTS: Patients with elevated baseline CRP were associated with worse overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) when compared with normal baseline CRP. This significant correlation was also observed with patients with elevated on-treatment CRP. In multivariate survival analyses both elevated baseline and on-treatment CRP had shorter OS and PFS than patients with normal CRP: hazard ratio (HR) 2.84 (95% CI 1.48-5.42), HR 3.68 (95% CI 1.92-7.03) and PFS: HR 1.77 (95% CI 1.06-2.97), HR 2.88 (95% CI 1.75-4.73), respectively. A significant difference in OS was also seen between patients without irAE and with irAE during treatment. In multivariate survival analyses, patients without irAE had shorter OS HR 1.93 (95% CI 1.03-3.62) compared with patients with reported irAE. CONCLUSIONS: Elevated baseline CRP, on-treatment CRP, and absence of irAE correlate with poor outcome in nivolumb-treated mRCC patients. These results suggest that monitoring CRP values as well as potential irAEs during treatment may be of use in clinical decision making.

Case report: pathological complete response in an IIIB non-small cell lung cancer patient after preoperative neoadjuvant nivolumab therapy combined with chemotherapy.

RATIONALE: For locally advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), the neoadjuvant therapy strategy of preoperative nivolumab combined with chemotherapy has great potential, especially for locally advanced NSCLC which are initially unresectable. They may be cured after neoadjuvant immunotherapy, and this may become a new direction of treatment. We hope that this representative medical record and literature review can provide some assistance for clinicians using immune checkpoint inhibitors to treat lung cancer. PATIENT CONCERNS: A 50-year-old male patient was admitted to Zhongshan Hospital of Traditional Chinese Medicine on April 27, 2020 due to "coughing for more than one month.". The patient had nothing of note in either his medical history or that of his family, and no history of smoking. DIAGNOSIS: The diagnosis was cT4N2M0IIIB stage right lower lung NSCLC with right hilar and mediastinal lymph node metastasis. The stage was inoperable stage IIIB NSCLC, but the patient had a strong willingness for doing surgery. INTERVENTIONS: The patient received 3 rounds of the neoadjuvant nivolumab therapy combined with TP (paclitaxel plus cisplatin) regimen, on 5-14-21, 06-07-21 and 07-07-21. OUTCOMES: The tumor's area shrunk. Then the patient underwent thoracoscopic radical resection of the cancer in the right upper lung and postoperative pathology achieved pathological complete response (pCR). LESSONS: In this case, combined with the wishes of the patient and the latest research results, we confirmed pCR by radical surgery after 3 rounds of the neoadjuvant nivolumab therapy combined with chemotherapy. This may be a modality to cure more lung cancer patients in the future.