Prevalence of KRAS amplification in patients with metastatic cancer: Real-world next-generation sequencing analysis.

BACKGROUND: The Kirsten rat sarcoma virus (KRAS) is a prominent proto-oncogene. Several treatments for KRAS mutations have been developed. However, KRAS amplification, a KRAS alteration, is poorly understood, and there is currently no appropriate treatment other than conventional chemotherapy. This study aimed to elucidate the role of KRAS amplification in different types of cancers. METHODS: From October 2019 to June 2023, we performed next-generation sequencing using Trusight Oncology 500 on 3895 patients with 37 different cancer types at the Samsung Medical Center. We analyzed the distribution of KRAS amplification according to cancer type and its correlation with tumor mutation burden (TMB). Concomitant KRAS mutations were also identified. RESULTS: Of the total 3895 patients, 99 (2.5 %) had KRAS amplification. The highest frequency of KRAS amplification was detected in 2 % (27/1350) of patients with colorectal cancer, followed by 3.48 % (32/920) of patients with gastric cancer and 3.88 % (9/232) patients with of pancreatic cancer. MSI-High was not detected in patients with KRAS amplification. There was no correlation between KRAS copy number variation and TMB status. Among patients with KRAS amplification, 27.3 % (27/99) had a concomitant KRAS mutation. More than 50 % of patients had G12D or G12V mutations. In gastric cancer, patients with both KRAS amplification and mutation were extremely rare at 3.1 % (1/32); however, in colorectal cancer, more than half of the patients had KRAS amplification and mutation (51.9 %, 14/27). KRAS amplification and mutations are associated with mutations in tumor suppressor genes TP53, BRCA2, ARID1B, and PTCH1. CONCLUSIONS: Of the 3895 patients with metastatic solid tumors, 99 (2.5 %) had KRAS amplification, and next-generation sequencing analysis provided a deeper understanding of KRAS amplification.

Pembrolizumab in Patients with Advanced Urothelial Carcinoma with ECOG Performance Status 2: A Real-World Study from the ARON-2 Project.

BACKGROUND: The benefit of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) for poor performance status patients with advanced urothelial carcinoma (UC) remains unknown. OBJECTIVE: In the present sub-analysis of the ARON-2 study, we investigated the role of pembrolizumab for advanced UC patients with ECOG (Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group) performance status (ECOG-PS) 2. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients aged ≥ 18 years with a cytologically and/or histologically confirmed diagnosis of advanced UC progressing or recurring after platinum-based therapy and treated with pembrolizumab between 1 January 2016 to 1 April 2024 were included. In this sub-analysis we focused on patients with ECOG-PS 2. RESULTS: We included 1,040 patients from the ARON-2 dataset; of these, 167 patients (16%) presented an ECOG-PS 2. The median overall survival (OS) was 14.8 months (95% confidence interval (CI) 12.5-16.1) in the overall study population, 18.2 months (95% CI 15.8-22.2) in patients with ECOG-PS 0-1, and 3.7 months (95% CI 3.2-5.2) in subjects with ECOG-PS 2 (p < 0.001). The median progression-free survival (PFS) in the overall study population was 5.3 months (95% CI 4.3-97.1), 6.2 months (95% CI 5.5-97.1) in patients with ECOG-PS 0-1, and 2.8 months (95% CI 2.1-3.4) in patients with ECOG-PS 2. Among the latter, liver metastases and progressive disease during first-line therapy were significant predictors of OS at both univariate and multivariate analyses. For PFS, univariate and multivariate analyses showed a prognostic role for lung metastases, liver metastases, and progressive disease during first-line therapy. CONCLUSIONS: This large real-world evidence study suggests the effectiveness of second-line pembrolizumab for mUC patients with poor performance status. The presence of liver metastases and progressive disease during first-line therapy is associated with worse clinical outcomes and, thus, should be taken into account when making treatment decisions in clinical practice.

A randomized, open-label, phase 3 trial of pembrolizumab plus epacadostat versus sunitinib or pazopanib as first-line treatment for metastatic renal cell carcinoma (KEYNOTE-679/ECHO-302).

BACKGROUND: Immunotherapy-based combinations have emerged as standard therapies for patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). Pembrolizumab, a PD-1 inhibitor, combined with epacadostat, an indoleamine 2,3-deoxygenase 1 selective inhibitor, demonstrated promising antitumor activity in a phase 1 study in advanced solid tumors, including mRCC. METHODS: KEYNOTE-679/ECHO-302 was a randomized, open-label, parallel-group, multicenter, phase 3 study (NCT03260894) that compared pembrolizumab plus epacadostat with sunitinib or pazopanib as first-line treatment for mRCC. Eligible patients had histologically confirmed locally advanced or metastatic clear cell RCC and had not received systemic therapy. Patients were randomly assigned 1:1 to pembrolizumab 200 mg IV every 3 weeks plus epacadostat 100 mg orally twice daily versus sunitinib 50 mg orally once daily (4 weeks on treatment followed by 2 weeks off treatment) or pazopanib 800 mg orally once daily. Original dual primary end points were progression-free survival and overall survival. Enrollment was stopped when a phase 3 study in melanoma of pembrolizumab plus epacadostat compared with pembrolizumab monotherapy did not meet its primary end point. This protocol was amended, and primary end point was changed to investigator-assessed objective response rate (ORR) per RECIST 1.1. RESULTS: One-hundred-twenty-nine patients were randomly assigned to receive pembrolizumab plus epacadostat (n = 64) or sunitinib/pazopanib (n = 65). Median (range) follow-up, defined as time from randomization to data cutoff, was 10.3 months (2.2-14.3) and 10.3 months (2.7-13.8) in the pembrolizumab plus epacadostat and sunitinib/pazopanib arms, respectively. ORRs were similar between pembrolizumab plus epacadostat (31.3% [95% CI 20.2-44.1] and sunitinib/pazopanib (29.2% [18.6-41.8]). Grade 3-5 treatment-related adverse events occurred in 34.4% and 42.9% of patients in the pembrolizumab plus epacadostat and sunitinib/pazopanib arms, respectively. One patient in the sunitinib/pazopanib arm died of septic shock (not treatment-related). Circulating kynurenine levels decreased in the pembrolizumab plus epacadostat arm, but not to levels observed in healthy subjects. CONCLUSIONS: ORRs were similar between pembrolizumab plus epacadostat and sunitinib/pazopanib as first-line treatment in patients with mRCC. Safety and tolerability appeared similar between treatment arms; no new safety concerns were identified. Antitumor responses observed in patients with RCC receiving pembrolizumab plus epacadostat may be driven primarily by pembrolizumab. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov; NCT03260894 .

Drosophila HCN mediates gustatory homeostasis by preserving sensillar transepithelial potential in sweet environments.

Establishing transepithelial ion disparities is crucial for sensory functions in animals. In insect sensory organs called sensilla, a transepithelial potential, known as the sensillum potential (SP), arises through active ion transport across accessory cells, sensitizing receptor neurons such as mechanoreceptors and chemoreceptors. Because multiple receptor neurons are often co-housed in a sensillum and share SP, niche-prevalent overstimulation of single sensory neurons can compromise neighboring receptors by depleting SP. However, how such potential depletion is prevented to maintain sensory homeostasis remains unknown. Here, we find that the Ih-encoded hyperpolarization-activated cyclic nucleotide-gated (HCN) channel bolsters the activity of bitter-sensing gustatory receptor neurons (bGRNs), albeit acting in sweet-sensing GRNs (sGRNs). For this task, HCN maintains SP despite prolonged sGRN stimulation induced by the diet mimicking their sweet feeding niche, such as overripe fruit. We present evidence that Ih-dependent demarcation of sGRN excitability is implemented to throttle SP consumption, which may have facilitated adaptation to a sweetness-dominated environment. Thus, HCN expressed in sGRNs serves as a key component of a simple yet versatile peripheral coding that regulates bitterness for optimal food intake in two contrasting ways: sweet-resilient preservation of bitter aversion and the previously reported sweet-dependent suppression of bitter taste.

Sex and survival outcomes in patients with renal cell carcinoma receiving first-line immune-based combinations.

BACKGROUND: There is an ongoing debate as to whether sex could be associated with immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) benefit. Existing literature data reveal contradictory results, and data on first-line immune combinations are lacking. METHOD: This was a real-world, multicenter, international, observational study to determine the sex effects on the clinical outcomes in metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) patients treated with immuno-oncology combinations as first-line therapy. RESULTS: A total of 1827 mRCC patients from 71 cancer centers in 21 countries were included. The median OS was 38.7 months (95% CI 32.7-44.2) in the overall study population: 40.0 months (95% CI 32.7-51.6) in males and 38.7 months (95% CI 26.4-41.0) in females (p = 0.202). The median OS was higher in males vs. females in patients aged 18-49y (36.9 months, 95% CI 29.0-51.6, vs. 24.8 months, 95% CI 16.8-40.4, p = 0.426, with + 19% of 2y-OS rate, 72% vs. 53%, p = 0.006), in the clear cell histology subgroup (44.2 months, 95% CI 35.8-55.7, vs. 38.7 months, 95% CI 26.0-41.0, p = 0.047), and in patients with sarcomatoid differentiation (34.4 months, 95% CI 26.4-59.0, vs. 15.3 months, 95% CI 8.9-41.0, p < 0.001). Sex female was an independent negative prognostic factor in the sarcomatoid population (HR 1.72, 95% CI 1.15 - 2.57, p = 0.008). CONCLUSIONS: Although the female's innate and adaptive immunity has been observed to be more active than the male's, women in the subgroup of clear cell histology, sarcomatoid differentiation, and those under 50 years of age showed shorter OS than males.

Avelumab first-line maintenance treatment in patients with locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma: real-world results from a Korean expanded access program.

Background: The JAVELIN Bladder 100 phase 3 trial demonstrated the efficacy and safety of avelumab administered as first-line (1L) maintenance treatment in patients with advanced urothelial carcinoma (UC) without disease progression after 1L platinum-based chemotherapy. This study provides the first real-world data from Korea regarding avelumab 1L maintenance treatment, comprising data obtained from a nationwide expanded access program (EAP). Methods: This open-label EAP was conducted at five centers from September 2021 until June 2023. Eligible patients had unresectable locally advanced or metastatic UC and were progression free after 1L platinum-based chemotherapy. Patients received avelumab 10 mg/kg intravenously every 2 weeks per local prescribing information. Safety and effectiveness were assessed by treating physicians according to routine practice. Results: Overall, 30 patients were enrolled. At initial UC diagnosis, 20 patients (66.7%) had stage 4 disease and 12 (40.0%) had visceral metastases. The most common 1L chemotherapy regimen was gemcitabine + cisplatin (21 patients; 70.0%). All but one patient (96.7%) had received 4-6 cycles of 1L chemotherapy. The median interval from end of 1L chemotherapy to start of avelumab was 4.4 weeks. Median duration of avelumab treatment was 6.2 months (range, 0.9-20.7); nine patients (30.0%) received >12 months of treatment. Adverse events related to avelumab occurred in 21 patients (70.0%) and were grade ≥3 or classified as serious in three patients (10.0%). Median progression-free survival was 7.9 months (95% CI, 4.3-13.1). Overall survival was not analyzed because only one patient died. Conclusion: Results from this EAP demonstrated the clinical activity and acceptable safety of avelumab 1L maintenance treatment in Korean patients with advanced UC, consistent with previous studies.

Overall Survival with Adjuvant Pembrolizumab in Renal-Cell Carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Adjuvant pembrolizumab therapy after surgery for renal-cell carcinoma was approved on the basis of a significant improvement in disease-free survival in the KEYNOTE-564 trial. Whether the results regarding overall survival from the third prespecified interim analysis of the trial would also favor pembrolizumab was uncertain. METHODS: In this phase 3, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, we randomly assigned (in a 1:1 ratio) participants with clear-cell renal-cell carcinoma who had an increased risk of recurrence after surgery to receive pembrolizumab (at a dose of 200 mg) or placebo every 3 weeks for up to 17 cycles (approximately 1 year) or until recurrence, the occurrence of unacceptable toxic effects, or withdrawal of consent. A significant improvement in disease-free survival according to investigator assessment (the primary end point) was shown previously. Overall survival was the key secondary end point. Safety was a secondary end point. RESULTS: A total of 496 participants were assigned to receive pembrolizumab and 498 to receive placebo. As of September 15, 2023, the median follow-up was 57.2 months. The disease-free survival benefit was consistent with that in previous analyses (hazard ratio for recurrence or death, 0.72; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.59 to 0.87). A significant improvement in overall survival was observed with pembrolizumab as compared with placebo (hazard ratio for death, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.44 to 0.87; P = 0.005). The estimated overall survival at 48 months was 91.2% in the pembrolizumab group, as compared with 86.0% in the placebo group; the benefit was consistent across key subgroups. Pembrolizumab was associated with a higher incidence of serious adverse events of any cause (20.7%, vs. 11.5% with placebo) and of grade 3 or 4 adverse events related to pembrolizumab or placebo (18.6% vs. 1.2%). No deaths were attributed to pembrolizumab therapy. CONCLUSIONS: Adjuvant pembrolizumab was associated with a significant and clinically meaningful improvement in overall survival, as compared with placebo, among participants with clear-cell renal-cell carcinoma at increased risk for recurrence after surgery. (Funded by Merck Sharp and Dohme, a subsidiary of Merck; KEYNOTE-564 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03142334.).

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.).

Physical Properties of Paste Synthesized from Wet- and Dry-Processed Silver Powders.

This study compares the characteristics and low-temperature curing properties of pastes prepared from silver (Ag) powders synthesized by either wet powder (WP) or dry powder (DP) processing. The WP synthesis of electrode particles has the advantage of controlling the average particle size and particle size distribution but the disadvantage of producing low-purity, crystalline particles because they are synthesized through chemical reduction at less than 100 °C. Conversely, the DP synthesis of electrode particles has the advantage of producing pure, highly crystalline particles (due to synthesis at high temperatures) but the disadvantage of a high processing cost. WP and DP were used to manufacture pastes for low-temperature curing, and the physical properties of the pastes and the electrode characteristics after low-temperature curing were compared between powder types. Shear stress as a function of the shear rate shows that the WP paste is a plastic fluid, whereas the DP paste is a pseudoplastic fluid, closer to a Newtonian fluid. Screen printing the Ag pastes and curing for 30 min at 130 °C produces a nonconductive WP paste, whereas it produces a DP paste with a conductivity of 61 mΩ/sq, indicating that the highly crystalline DP paste is advantageous for low-temperature curing.

Neoadjuvant Cisplatin-Based Chemotherapy Followed by Selective Bladder Preservation Chemoradiotherapy in Muscle-Invasive Urothelial Carcinoma of the Bladder: Post Hoc Analysis of Two Prospective Studies.

PURPOSE: Bladder preservation chemoradiotherapy (CRT) in patients with a clinical complete response (cCR) following cisplatin-based neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) is a promising treatment strategy for muscle-invasive bladder urothelial carcinoma (MIBC). A combined analysis of raw data from two prospective phase II studies was performed to better evaluate the feasibility of selective bladder preservation CRT. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The analysis was based on primary efficacy data from two independent studies, including 76 MIBC patients receiving NAC followed by bladder preservation CRT. The efficacy data included metastasis-free survival (MFS) and disease-free survival (DFS). For the present analysis, starting point of survival was defined as the date of commencing CRT. RESULTS: Among 76 patients, 66 had a cCR following NAC. Sixty-four patients received gemcitabine and cisplatin (GC) combination chemotherapy in neoadjuvant setting, and 12 received nivolumab plus GC. Bladder preservation CRT following NAC was generally well-tolerated, with low urinary tract symptoms being the most common late complication. With a median follow-up of 64 months, recurrence was recorded in 43 patients (57%): intravesical only (n=20), metastatic only (n=16), and both (n=7). In 27 patients with intravesical recurrence, transurethral resection, and Bacillus Calmette-Guerin treatment was given to 17 patients. Salvage cystectomy was performed in 10 patients. Median DFS was 46.3 (95% confidence interval [CI], 25.1 to 67.5) months, and the median MFS was not reached. Neither DFS nor MFS appeared to be affected by any of the baseline characteristics. However, DFS was significantly longer in patients with a cCR than in those without (hazard ratio, 0.465; 95% CI, 0.222 to 0.976). CONCLUSION: The strategy of NAC followed by selective bladder preservation CRT based on the cCR is feasible in the treatment of MIBC. A standardized definition of cCR is needed to better assess disease status post-NAC.

Health-related Quality of Life in Patients with Previously Treated Advanced Urothelial Carcinoma from EV-301: A Phase 3 Trial of Enfortumab Vedotin Versus Chemotherapy.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: In comparison to chemotherapy, enfortumab vedotin (EV) prolonged overall survival in patients with previously treated advanced urothelial carcinoma in EV-301. The objective of the present study was to assess patient experiences of EV versus chemotherapy using patient-reported outcome (PRO) analysis of health-related quality of life (HRQoL). METHODS: For patients in the phase 3 EV-301 trial randomized to EV or chemotherapy we assessed responses to the validated European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire Core 30 (QLQ-C30) at baseline, weekly for the first 12 wk, and then every 12 wk until discontinuation. We analyzed the QLQ-C30 change from baseline to week 12, the confirmed improvement rate, and the time to improvement or deterioration. KEY FINDINGS AND LIMITATIONS: Baseline PRO compliance rates were 91% for the EV arm (n = 301) and 89% for the chemotherapy arm (n = 307); the corresponding average rates from baseline to week 12 were 70% and 67%. Patients receiving EV versus chemotherapy had reduced pain (difference in change from baseline to week 12: -5.7, 95% confidence interval [CI] -10.8 to -0.7; p = 0.027) and worsening appetite loss (7.3, 95% CI 0.90-13.69; p = 0.026). Larger proportions of patients in the EV arm reported HRQoL improvement from baseline than in the chemotherapy arm; the odds of a confirmed improvement across ten QLQ-C30 function/symptom scales were 1.67 to 2.76 times higher for EV than for chemotherapy. Patients in the EV arm had a shorter time to first confirmed improvement in global health status (GHS)/QoL, fatigue, pain, and physical, role, emotional, and social functioning (all p < 0.05). EV delayed the time to first confirmed deterioration in GHS/QoL (p = 0.027), but worsening appetite loss occurred earlier (p = 0.009) in comparison to chemotherapy. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: HRQoL with EV was maintained, and deterioration in HRQoL was delayed with EV in comparison to chemotherapy. Better results with EV were reported for some scales, with the greatest difference observed for pain. These findings reinforce the EV safety and efficacy outcomes and benefits observed in EV-301. PATIENT SUMMARY: Patients with previously treated advanced cancer of the urinary tract receiving the drug enfortumab vedotin maintained their HRQoL in comparison to patients treated with chemotherapy. The EV-301 trial is registered on ClinicalTrials.gov as NCT03474107 and on EudraCT as 2017-003344-21.

Patient-derived tumor spheroid-induced angiogenesis preclinical platform for exploring therapeutic vulnerabilities in cancer.

This study addresses the demand for research models that can support patient-treatment decisions and clarify the complexities of a tumor microenvironment by developing an advanced non-animal preclinical cancer model. Based on patient-derived tumor spheroids (PDTS), the proposed model reconstructs the tumor microenvironment with emphasis on tumor spheroid-driven angiogenesis. The resulting microfluidic chip system mirrors angiogenic responses elicited by PDTS, recapitulating patient-specific tumor conditions and providing robust, easily quantifiable outcomes. Vascularized PDTS exhibited marked angiogenesis and tumor proliferation on the microfluidic chip. Furthermore, a drug that targets the vascular endothelial growth factor receptor 2 (VEGFR2, ramucirumab) was deployed, which effectively inhibited angiogenesis and impeded tumor invasion. This innovative preclinical model was used for investigating distinct responses for various drug combinations, encompassing HER2 inhibitors and angiogenesis inhibitors, within the context of PDTS. This integrated platform could potentially advance precision medicine by harmonizing diverse data points within the tumor microenvironment with a focus on the interplay between cancer and the vascular system.

Adjuvant Chemotherapy for Upper Tract Urothelial Carcinoma: A Real-World, Retrospective Study.

PURPOSE: The aim of this retrospective study was to evaluate the efficacy of adjuvant cisplatin-based chemotherapy in patients with locally advanced upper tract urothelial carcinoma (UTUC), administered following radical nephroureterectomy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients with UTUC, arising from renal pelvis or ureter, staged pT3/T4 or N+ were treated with adjuvant chemotherapy following surgery. The chemotherapy consisted of gemcitabine 1,000 mg/m2 on days 1 and 8, cisplatin 70 mg/m2 on day 1. Treatment was repeated every 3 weeks for up to 4 cycles. Endpoints included disease-free survival (DFS), metastasis-free survival (MFS), and safety. RESULTS: Among 89 eligible patients, 85 (95.5%) completed at least 3 cycles of adjuvant chemotherapy. Chemotherapy was well tolerated, the main toxicities being mild-to-moderate gastrointestinal toxic effects and pruritus. With a median follow-up of 37 months, median DFS was 30 months (95% confidence interval, 22 to 39), and the median MFS was not reached. The 3-year DFS and MFS were 44% and 56%, respectively. Multivariate analyses revealed that the main factor associated with DFS and MFS was the lymph node involvement, whereas age, T category, grade, or the primary site of UTUC were not significantly associated with DFS or MFS. CONCLUSION: Adjuvant cisplatin-based chemotherapy after radical surgery of pT3/T4 or N+ UTUC was feasible and may demonstrate benefits in DFS and MFS. Whether novel agents added to the chemotherapy regimen, as a concurrent combination or maintenance, impacts on survival or reduces the development of metastases remains to be studied.

Pembrolizumab with or Without Lenvatinib as First-line Therapy for Patients with Advanced Urothelial Carcinoma (LEAP-011): A Phase 3, Randomized, Double-Blind Trial.

BACKGROUND: Pembrolizumab plus lenvatinib has shown antitumor activity and acceptable safety in patients with platinum-refractory urothelial carcinoma (UC). OBJECTIVE: To evaluate pembrolizumab plus either lenvatinib or placebo as first-line therapy for advanced UC in the phase 3 LEAP-011 study. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Patients with advanced UC who were ineligible for cisplatin-based therapy or any platinum-based chemotherapy were enrolled. INTERVENTION: Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to pembrolizumab 200 mg intravenously every 3 wk plus either lenvatinib 20 mg or placebo orally once daily. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Dual primary endpoints were progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). An external data monitoring committee (DMC) regularly reviewed safety and efficacy data every 3 mo. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: Between June 25, 2019 and July 21, 2021, 487 patients were allocated to receive lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab (n = 245) or placebo plus pembrolizumab (n = 242). The median time from randomization to the data cutoff date (July 26, 2021) was 12.8 mo (interquartile range, 6.9-19.3). The median PFS was 4.5 mo in the combination arm and 4.0 mo in the pembrolizumab arm (hazard ratio [HR] 0.90 [95% confidence interval {CI} 0.72-1.14]). The median OS was 11.8 mo for the combination arm and 12.9 mo for the pembrolizumab arm (HR 1.14 [95% CI 0.87-1.48]). Grade 3-5 adverse events attributed to trial treatment occurred in 123 of 241 patients (51%) treated with lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab and in 66 of 242 patients (27%) treated with placebo plus pembrolizumab. This trial was terminated earlier than initially planned based on recommendation from the DMC. CONCLUSIONS: The benefit-to-risk ratio for first-line lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab was not considered favorable versus pembrolizumab plus placebo as first-line therapy in patients with advanced UC. PATIENT SUMMARY: Lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab was not more effective than pembrolizumab plus placebo in patients with advanced urothelial carcinoma.

Avelumab First-line Maintenance for Advanced Urothelial Carcinoma: Analysis from JAVELIN Bladder 100 by Duration of First-line Chemotherapy and Interval Before Maintenance.

BACKGROUND: In the JAVELIN Bladder 100 phase 3 trial, avelumab first-line maintenance + best supportive care (BSC) prolonged overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) versus BSC alone in patients with advanced urothelial carcinoma (advanced UC) without progression after first-line platinum-based chemotherapy. OBJECTIVE: To report post hoc analyses of subgroups defined by the duration of first-line chemotherapy and interval before maintenance. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Patients with advanced UC without progression after four to six cycles of platinum-based chemotherapy and a 4-10-wk interval after chemotherapy (n = 700) were randomized to receive avelumab + BSC or BSC alone. Subgroups were defined by duration (quartile [Q]) and estimated number of cycles of chemotherapy, and interval between chemotherapy and maintenance. The median follow-up was >19 mo in both arms. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: OS (primary endpoint), PFS, and safety were assessed. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: Hazard ratios (95% confidence interval) for OS with avelumab + BSC versus BSC alone were as follows: by chemotherapy duration-Q3: 0.63 (0.39-1.00); by number of cycles-four cycles: 0.69 (0.48-1.00), five cycles: 0.98 (0.57-1.71), and six cycles: 0.66 (0.47-0.92); and by interval-4-<6 wk: 0.75 (0.54-1.04), 6-<8 wk: 0.67 (0.43-1.06), and 8-10 wk: 0.69 (0.47-1.02). Results were similar for PFS. Safety was similar across subgroups. All analyses were exploratory. CONCLUSIONS: Post hoc analyses of OS and PFS in subgroups defined by first-line chemotherapy duration and interval before maintenance were generally consistent with the results in the overall population, with similar safety findings. Prospective trials are warranted to confirm these findings. PATIENT SUMMARY: Avelumab maintenance treatment helped patients with advanced urothelial cancer without disease progression after at least four cycles of prior chemotherapy, and who started maintenance treatment at least 4 wk after chemotherapy, to live longer.

Patient-Reported Outcomes in KEYNOTE-564: Adjuvant Pembrolizumab Versus Placebo for Renal Cell Carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: In patients with renal cell carcinoma (RCC) enrolled in the phase III KEYNOTE-564 trial (NCT03142334), disease-free survival (DFS) following nephrectomy was prolonged with use of adjuvant pembrolizumab therapy versus placebo. Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) provide an important measure of health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and can complement efficacy and safety results. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In KEYNOTE-564, 994 patients were randomly assigned to receive pembrolizumab 200 mg (n = 496) or placebo (n = 498) intravenously every 3 weeks for ≤17 cycles. Patients who received ≥1 dose of treatment and completed ≥1 HRQoL assessment were included in this analysis. HRQoL end points were assessed using the EORTC QLQ-C30, FKSI-DRS, and EQ VAS. Prespecified and exploratory PRO end points were mean change from baseline in EORTC QLQ-C30 GHS/QoL score, EORTC QLQ-C30 physical function subscale score, and FKSI-DRS score. RESULTS: No clinically meaningful difference in least squares mean scores for pembrolizumab versus placebo were observed at week 52 for EORTC QLQ-C30 GHS/QoL (-2.5; 95% CI -5.2 to 0.1), EORTC QLQ-C30 physical functioning (-0.87; 95% CI -2.7 to 1.0), and FKSI-DRS (-0.7; 95% CI -1.2 to -0.1). Most PRO scores remained stable or improved for the EORTC QLQ-C30 GHS/QoL (pembrolizumab, 54.3%; placebo, 67.5%), EORTC QLQ-C30 physical functioning (pembrolizumab, 64.7%; placebo, 68.8%), and FKSI-DRS (pembrolizumab, 58.2%; placebo, 66.3%). CONCLUSIONS: Adjuvant treatment with pembrolizumab did not result in deterioration of HRQoL. These findings together with the safety and efficacy findings support adjuvant pembrolizumab treatment following nephrectomy. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT03142334.

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

BACKGROUND: IMvigor130 demonstrated statistically significant investigator-assessed progression-free survival benefit with first-line atezolizumab plus platinum-based chemotherapy (group A) versus placebo plus platinum-based chemotherapy (group C) in patients with locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma. Overall survival was not improved in interim analyses. Here we report the final overall analysis for group A versus group C. METHODS: In this global, partially blinded, randomised, controlled, phase 3 study, patients (aged ≥18 years) with previously untreated locally advanced or metastatic urothelial cancer and who had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-2 were enrolled at 221 hospitals and oncology centres in 35 countries. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1:1), with a permuted block method (block size of six) and an interactive voice and web response system, stratified by PD-L1 status, Bajorin risk factor score, and investigator's choice of platinum-based chemotherapy, to receive atezolizumab plus platinum-based chemotherapy (group A), atezolizumab monotherapy (group B), or placebo plus platinum-based chemotherapy (group C). Sponsors, investigators, and patients were masked to assignment to atezolizumab or placebo (ie, group A and group C) and atezolizumab monotherapy (group B) was open label. For groups A and C, all patients received gemcitabine (1000 mg/m2 intravenously; day 1 and day 8 of each 21-day cycle), plus investigator's choice of carboplatin (area under curve 4·5 mg/mL per min or 5 mg/mL per min; intravenously) or cisplatin (70 mg/m2 intravenously), plus either atezolizumab (1200 mg intravenously) or placebo on day 1 of each cycle. Co-primary endpoints of the study were investigator-assessed progression-free survival and overall survival for group A versus group C in the intention-to-treat (ITT) population (ie, all randomised patients), and overall survival for group B versus group C, tested hierarchically. Final overall survival and updated safety outcomes (safety population; all patients who received any amount of any study treatment component) for group A versus group C are reported here. The final prespecified boundary for significance of the overall survival analysis was one-sided p=0·021. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02807636, and is active but no longer recruiting. FINDINGS: Between July 15, 2016, and July 20, 2018, 1213 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to treatment, of whom 851 were assigned to group A (n=451) and group C (n=400). 338 (75%) patients in group A and 298 (75%) in group C were male, 113 (25%) in group A and 102 (25%) in group C were female, and 346 (77%) in group A and 304 (76%) in group C were White. At data cutoff (Aug 31, 2022), after a median follow up of 13·4 months (IQR 6·2-30·8), median overall survival was 16·1 months (95% CI 14·2-18·8; 336 deaths) in group A versus 13·4 months (12·0-15·3; 310 deaths) in group C (stratified hazard ratio 0·85 [95% CI 0·73-1·00]; one-sided p=0·023). The most common grade 3-4 treatment-related adverse events were anaemia (168 [37%] of 454 patients who received atezolizumab plus chemotherapy vs 133 [34%] of 389 who received placebo plus chemotherapy), neutropenia (167 [37%] vs 115 [30%]), decreased neutrophil count (98 [22%] vs 95 [24%]), thrombocytopenia (95 [21%] vs 70 [18%]), and decreased platelet count (92 [20%] vs 92 [24%]). Serious adverse events occurred in 243 (54%) patients who received atezolizumab plus chemotherapy and 196 (50%) patients who received placebo plus chemotherapy. Treatment-related deaths occurred in nine (2%; acute kidney injury, dyspnoea, hepatic failure, hepatitis, neutropenia, pneumonitis, respiratory failure, sepsis, and thrombocytopenia [n=1 each]) patients who received atezolizumab plus chemotherapy and four (1%; unexplained death, diarrhoea, febrile neutropenia, and toxic hepatitis [n=1 each]) who received placebo plus chemotherapy. INTERPRETATION: Progression-free survival benefit with first-line combination of atezolizumab plus platinum-based chemotherapy did not translate into a significant improvement in overall survival in the ITT population of IMvigor130. Further research is needed to understand which patients might benefit from first-line combination treatment. No new safety signals were observed. FUNDING: F Hoffmann-La Roche.

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

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

Prevalence of RAF1 Aberrations in Metastatic Cancer Patients: Real-World Data.

PURPOSE: Therapeutic targeting of RAF1 is a promising cancer treatment, but the relationship between clinical features and RAF1 aberrations in terms of the MAPK signaling pathway is poorly understood in various solid tumors. METHODS: Between October 2019 and June 2023 at Samsung Medical Center, 3895 patients with metastatic solid cancers underwent next-generation sequencing (NGS) using TruSight Oncology 500 (TSO500) assays as routine clinical practice. We surveyed the incidence of RAF1 aberrations including mutations (single-nucleotide variants [SNVs]), amplifications (copy number variation), and fusions. RESULTS: Among the 3895 metastatic cancer patients, 77 (2.0%) exhibited RAF1 aberrations. Of these 77 patients, 44 (1.1%) had RAF1 mutations (SNV), 25 (0.6%) had RAF1 amplifications, and 10 (0.3%) had RAF1 fusions. Among the 10 patients with RAF1 fusions, concurrent RAF1 amplifications and RAF1 mutations were detected in one patient each. The most common tumor types were bladder cancer (11.5%), followed by ampulla of Vater (AoV) cancer (5.3%), melanoma (3.0%), gallbladder (GB) cancer (2.6%), and gastric (2.3%) cancer. Microsatellite instability high (MSI-H) tumors were observed in five of 76 patients (6.6%) with RAF1 aberrations, while MSI-H tumors were found in only 2.1% of patients with wild-type RAF1 cancers (p < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: We demonstrated that approximately 2.0% of patients with metastatic solid cancers have RAF1 aberrations according to NGS of tumor specimens.

Patient-derived exosomes facilitate therapeutic targeting of oncogenic MET in advanced gastric cancer.

Gastric cancer (GC) with peritoneal metastases and malignant ascites continues to have poor prognosis. Exosomes mediate intercellular communication during cancer progression and promote therapeutic resistance. Here, we report the significance of exosomes derived from malignant ascites (EXOAscites) in cancer progression and use modified exosomes as resources for cancer therapy. EXOAscites from patients with GC stimulated invasiveness and angiogenesis in an ex vivo three-dimensional autologous tumor spheroid microfluidic system. EXOAscites concentration increased invasiveness, and blockade of their secretion suppressed tumor progression. In MET-amplified GC, EXOAscites contain abundant MET; their selective delivery to tumor cells enhanced angiogenesis and invasiveness. Exosomal MET depletion substantially reduced invasiveness; an additive therapeutic effect was induced when combined with MET and/or VEGFR2 inhibition in a patient-derived MET-amplified GC model. Allogeneic MET-harboring exosome delivery induced invasion and angiogenesis in a MET non-amplified GC model. MET-amplified patient tissues showed higher exosome concentration than their adjacent normal tissues. Manipulating exosome content and production may be a promising complementary strategy against GC.