Nivolumab plus cabozantinib for advanced renal cell carcinoma.

Advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC) remains a challenging oncologic disease to treat despite advancements in therapeutics. Nonetheless, the development of tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) and immunotherapy has drastically altered the treatment landscape for advanced RCC over the past decade. The current standard-of-care treatment for advanced RCC involves combination TKI and immunotherapy regimens including cabozantinib and nivolumab as studied in the CheckMate 9ER trial. This review summarizes the preclinical and clinical evidence that led to the CheckMate 9ER study, as well as pertinent study aspects such as treatment efficacy, adverse events and patient-related outcomes.

Kidney cancer that has spread to organs and other parts of the body outside of the kidney remains a challenging disease to treat. The treatment of advanced kidney cancer has changed over the past decade with the approval of oral therapies called tyrosine kinase inhibitors and more recently immunotherapy, which utilizes the immune system to treat cancer. A new combination therapy employing cabozantinib and nivolumab has been shown to help patients with advanced kidney cancer live longer and have improvements in quality of life. This new combination therapy is now commonly used to treat advanced kidney cancer.

Isavuconazole in the Treatment of Coccidioidal Meningitis.

Patients with coccidioidal meningitis require lifelong antifungal therapy. Cumulative toxicity and lack of antifungal efficacy require salvage therapy in the treatment of some patients. In a retrospective review of nine patients with coccidioidal meningitis treated with isavuconazole, successful therapy was seen in three patients and stable disease was confirmed in six patients. Isavuconazole may be a useful addition to the therapeutic choices currently available for coccidioidal meningitis.

The safety and efficacy of single-agent pemetrexed in platinum-resistant advanced urothelial carcinoma: a large single-institution experience.

BACKGROUND: Pemetrexed is a commonly used treatment for platinum-resistant advanced urothelial carcinoma (UC) based on objective response rates of 8% and 28% in two small phase II studies. To address the discrepancy in reported response rates and to assess efficacy and toxicity outside of a clinical trial setting, we performed a large retrospective analysis of pemetrexed use at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center. We also investigated candidate prognostic factors for overall survival in this setting to explore whether the neutrophil-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) had independent prognostic significance. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients receiving pemetrexed for platinum-resistant advanced UC between 2008 and 2013 were identified. The Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST, version 1.1) were used to determine response rate. Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression analyses were used to examine the association of various factors with efficacy and survival outcomes. Hematologic toxicity and laboratory abnormalities were recorded. RESULTS: One hundred and twenty-nine patients were treated with pemetrexed. The objective response rate was 5% (95% confidence interval: 1%-9%), and the median duration of response was 8 months. Median progression-free survival (PFS) was 2.4 months, and the 6-month PFS rate was 14%. There was no significant difference in response rate by age, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status, or number of prior therapies. On multivariable analysis, ECOG performance status (p < .01), liver metastases (p = .02), and NLR (p < .01) had independent prognostic significance for overall survival. CONCLUSION: This 129-patient series is the largest reported data set describing pemetrexed use in advanced UC. Activity was modest, although discovery of molecular biomarkers predictive of response would be valuable to identify the small subset of patients who do gain significant benefit. Overall, the data highlight the urgent need to develop novel therapies for these patients.

Cost effectiveness of immunotherapy combination therapies for endometrial cancer.

Over the past five years (2019-2023), several new targeted therapies and immunotherapy has been approved in treating relapsed cervical, ovarian, and endometrial cancers. Concurrently, there has been growing recognition of financial toxicity associated with cancer care during this time period. As such, we reviewed FDA approvals from 2019 to 2013 and identified the following approvals in gynecologic oncology: pembrolizumab plus lenvatinib, pembrolizumab for recurrent endometrial cancer that is MSI-H/dMMR, tisotumab vedotin, dostarlimab as single-agent therapy, and dostarlimab plus chemotherapy. We focused on approvals for endometrial cancer, and conducted a cost-effectiveness analysis for combination options approved in treating recurrent or advanced endometrial cancer (i.e. pembrolizumab plus lenvatinib versus placebo; dostarlimab plus chemotherapy versus placebo), and found neither regimen was cost-effective at a willingness-to-pay of $100,000 per Equal Value of Life Years Gained (evLYG). While these costs may not necessarily be translated to an individual patient, these costs are absorbed by healthcare systems and insurance providers on a larger scale with downstream effects on individuals contributing to healthcare costs a whole.

The Overall Survival Benefit in EV-302: Is Enfortumab Vedotin plus Pembrolizumab the New Frontline Standard of Care for Metastatic Urothelial Carcinoma?

Recent findings reported for the phase 3 EV-302 trial indicate a survival benefit from enfortumab vedotin plus pembrolizumab versus chemotherapy in metastatic urothelial carcinoma. We discuss several key points regarding post-protocol therapies, extending the duration of therapy, toxicity, and costs, all of which may have a bearing on how physicians and patients balance the benefit against the potential harms associated with this regimen.

Social media engagement of supportive care publications in oncology.

IMPORTANCE: There is an increasing number of cancer 'survivors' and increasing research into supportive care. However, it is unknown how patterns of attention and citation differ between supportive and non-supportive cancer care research. We sought to estimate the engagement of high-impact studies of supportive compared to non-supportive cancer care papers. METHODS: In a cross-sectional review of top oncology journals (2016-2023), we reviewed studies examining supportive care strategies and a frequency-matched random sampling of studies on non-supportive interventions. We compared data on social engagement metrics, as represented by Altmetric scores and citations and funding status, by supportive care or non-supportive care articles. RESULTS: We found overall Altmetric scores were no different between articles that did not test supportive care and those that did, with a numerically higher score for supportive care articles (86.0 vs 102; p=0.416). Other bibliometric statistics (such as the number of blogs, number of X users, and the number of X posts) obtained from Altmetric did not differ significantly between the two groups. Non-supportive cancer care papers had a significantly higher number of citations than supportive cancer care papers (45.6 in supportive care vs 141 in non-supportive care papers; p<0.001). A greater proportion of non-supportive cancer care papers were also supported by pharmaceutical companies compared to supportive cancer care papers (54.2 % vs 15.3 %; p<0.001). CONCLUSION: Though social media engagement is similar between supportive and non-supportive cancer care papers in high-impact journals, there is a significant difference in support from pharmaceutical companies and the number of citations.

Cardiovascular/anti-inflammatory drugs repurposed for treating or preventing cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials.

BACKGROUND: Due to encouraging pre-clinical data and supportive observational studies, there has been growing interest in applying cardiovascular drugs (including aspirin, angiotensin-converting enzyme [ACE] inhibitors, statins, and metformin) approved to treat diseases such as hypertension, hyperlipidemia, and diabetes mellitus to the field of oncology. Moreover, given growing costs with cancer care, these medications have offered a potentially more affordable avenue to treat or prevent recurrence of cancer. We sought to investigate the anti-cancer effects of drugs repurposed from cardiology or anti-inflammatories to treat cancer. We specifically evaluated the following drug classes: HMG-CoA reductase inhibitors (statins), cyclo-oxygenase inhibitors, aspirin, metformin, and both angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) and angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors. We also included non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) because they exert a similar mechanism to aspirin by blocking prostaglandins and reducing inflammation that is thought to promote the development of cancer. METHODS: We performed a systematic literature review using PubMed and Web of Science with search terms including "aspirin," "NSAID," "statin" (including specific statin drug names), "metformin," "ACE inhibitors," and "ARBs" (including specific anti-hypertensive drug names) in combination with "cancer." Searches were limited to human studies published between 2000 and 2023. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The number and percentage of studies reported positive results and pooled estimates of overall survival, progression-free survival, response, and disease-free survival. RESULTS: We reviewed 3094 titles and included 67 randomized clinical trials. The most common drugs that were tested were metformin (n = 21; 30.9%), celecoxib (n = 20; 29.4%), and simvastatin (n = 8; 11.8%). There was only one study that tested cardiac glycosides and none that studied ACE inhibitors. The most common tumor types were non-small-cell lung cancer (n = 19; 27.9%); breast (n = 8; 20.6%), colorectal (n = 7; 10.3%), and hepatocellular (n = 6; 8.8%). Most studies were conducted in a phase II trial (n = 38; 55.9%). Most studies were tested in metastatic cancers (n = 49; 72.1%) and in the first-line setting (n = 36; 521.9%). Four studies (5.9%) were stopped early because of difficulty with accrual. The majority of studies did not demonstrate an improvement in either progression-free survival (86.1% of studies testing progression-free survival) or in overall survival (94.3% of studies testing overall survival). Progression-free survival was improved in five studies (7.4%), and overall survival was improved in three studies (4.4%). Overall survival was significantly worse in two studies (3.8% of studies testing overall survival), and progression-free survival was worse in one study (2.8% of studies testing progression-free survival). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Despite promising pre-clinical and population-based data, cardiovascular drugs and anti-inflammatory medications have overall not demonstrated benefit in the treatment or preventing recurrence of cancer. These findings may help guide future potential clinical trials involving these medications when applied in oncology.

A remnant never forgotten: the utility of circulating tumor DNA in treatment guidance of urachal cancer.

Urachal cancer is a rare malignancy of the urachus that is treated with surgical resection if localized and systemic chemotherapy for metastatic disease. Circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) is a single-stranded or double-stranded DNA released by tumor cells into the blood and harbored the mutations of the original tumor, shedding new light on molecular diagnosis and monitoring of cancer. We report a case of resected localized urachal cancer with clear surgical margins and negative lymph node dissection but elevated ctDNA that progressed to metastatic disease. We also highlight the possibility of using ctDNA levels to assist in adjuvant therapy.

Supplement Use and Increased Risks of Cancer: Unveiling the Other Side of the Coin.

There is a rising trend in the consumption of dietary supplements, especially among adults, with the purpose of improving health. While marketing campaigns tout the potential health benefits of using dietary supplements, it is critical to evaluate the potential harmful effects associated with these supplements as well. The majority of the scarce research on the potential harmful effects of vitamins focuses on the acute or chronic toxicities associated with the use of dietary supplements. Quality research is still required to further investigate the risks of long-term use of dietary supplements, especially the risk of developing cancers. The present review concentrates on studies that have investigated the association between the risk of developing cancers and associated mortality with the risk of dietary supplements. Such an association has been reported for several vitamins, minerals, and other dietary supplements. Even though several of these studies come with their own shortcomings and critics, they must draw attention to further investigate long-term adverse effects of dietary supplements and advise consumers and healthcare providers to ponder the extensive use of dietary supplements.

A narrative review on perioperative systemic therapy in non-small cell lung cancer.

Non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) that is operable still carries a high risk of recurrence, approaching 50% of all operable cases despite adding adjuvant chemotherapy. However, the utilization of immunotherapy and targeted therapy moving beyond the metastatic NSCLC setting and into early-stage perioperative management has generated tremendous enthusiasm and has been practice-changing. Adjuvant atezolizumab in NSCLC first demonstrated a clinical benefit with an immune checkpoint inhibitor. Then, with studies studying a significant benefit in major pathologic response in surgical patients treated preoperatively with immunotherapy compared to only chemotherapy, neoadjuvant nivolumab and chemotherapy were evaluated and showed significant event-free survival benefit leading to subsequent studies evaluating perioperative immunotherapy and chemotherapy. Meanwhile, with regards to targeted therapies, adjuvant osimertinib in EGFR-mutated NSCLC and adjuvant alectinib in ALK-rearranged NSCLC have both received regulatory approvals following demonstrated clinical benefit in clinical trials. With rapidly evolving changes in the field, new combinations such as multiple immunotherapy agents and antibody-drug conjugates in development, perioperative NSCLC management has quickly become complicated with different pathways to perioperative treatment. Furthermore, circulating tumor DNA and studies looking at better tools to prognosticate immunotherapy response will help with decision-making regarding which patients should receive immunotherapy and if so, either only pre-operatively or both pre- and post-operatively. In this review, we look at the evolution of systemic therapy in the perioperative setting from adjuvant chemotherapy to adjuvant immunotherapy to perioperative immunotherapy and look at perioperative targeted therapy while looking ahead to future considerations.

Implications of genetic testing and informed consent before and after genetic testing in individuals with cancer.

Recent advancements in next generation sequencing have allowed for genetic information become more readily available in the clinical setting for those affected by cancer and by treating clinicians. Given the lack of access to geneticists, medical oncologists and other treating physicians have begun ordering and interpreting genetic tests for individuals with cancer through the process of "mainstreaming". While this process has allowed for quicker access to genetic tests, the process of "mainstreaming" has also brought several challenges including the dissemination of variants of unknown significance results, ordering of appropriate tests, and accurate interpretation of genetic results with appropriate follow-up testing and interventions. In this editorial, we seek to explore the process of informed consent of individuals before obtaining genetic testing and offer potential solutions to optimize the informed consent process including categorization of results as well as a layered consent model.

A comparative study of spinal cord compression management in metastatic prostate cancer: Teaching versus non-teaching hospitals in the United States.

BACKGROUND: Spinal cord compression (SCC) in metastatic prostate cancer (MPC) is a critical complication and multiple factors influence the optimal therapeutic strategy. We investigated the differences in practice patterns between teaching hospitals (TH) and non-teaching hospitals (NTH) across the United States. METHOD: Using the National Inpatient Sample Database (NIS), we performed a retrospective study on hospitalizations with MPC and SCC between 2016 and 2020 in US. We compared demographic factors, comorbidities, treatment modalities, duration of hospitalization, financial expenditures, and mortality between TH and NTH. We also examined the patients' characteristics and outcomes in TH and NTH based on their chosen therapeutic strategy. RESULTS: We identified 11,380 admissions with metastatic prostate cancer and SCC; 9610 in TH and 1770 in NTH. The median cost of hospitalization was $21,922 in TH and $15,141 in NTH. Although the median age and Charlson comorbidity score did not differ between two groups, patients in TH were more likely to receive intervention (radiation or surgery) compared to NTH (Surgery: 28.2% in TH vs. 23.0% in NTH & Radiation: 12.1% in TH vs. 8.2% in NTH). Mortality was lower in TH than NTH (4.5% vs. 7.9%). In both TH and NTH, a higher proportion of patients with private insurance underwent surgery (TH: Surgery 25.1% vs. Radiation 18.8% & NTH: Surgery 27.0% vs. 6.9%). Black patients were more likely to receive radiation than surgery in TH (34.2% vs. 26.8%). CONCLUSION: This study showed a greater percentage of patients underwent surgical intervention at TH compared to NTH. Additionally, the type of insurance and racial background were associated with distinctive treatment approaches.

The evolving posology and administration of immune checkpoint inhibitors: subcutaneous formulations.

Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have transformed cancer care. Recently, atezolizumab gained its first global approval in a subcutaneous (SC) formulation by the UK medicines regulator, being notable as the first time an FDA- and/or European Medicines Agency (EMA)-approved ICI has been licensed via this administration route. Here, we discuss this approval, other SC ICIs in development, and the benefits and challenges of this administration route, including potential implications for patient care.