Genomic ancestry in kidney cancer: Correlations with clinical and molecular features.

INTRODUCTION: Genetic ancestry (GA) refers to population hereditary patterns that contribute to phenotypic differences seen among race/ethnicity groups, and differences among GA groups may highlight unique biological determinants that add to our understanding of health care disparities. METHODS: A retrospective review of patients with renal cell carcinoma (RCC) was performed and correlated GA with clinicopathologic, somatic, and germline molecular data. All patients underwent next-generation sequencing of normal and tumor DNA using Memorial Sloan Kettering-Integrated Mutation Profiling of Actionable Cancer Targets, and contribution of African (AFR), East Asian (EAS), European (EUR), Native American, and South Asian (SAS) ancestry was inferred through supervised ADMIXTURE. Molecular data was compared across GA groups by Fisher exact test and Kruskal-Wallis test. RESULTS: In 953 patients with RCC, the GA distribution was: EUR (78%), AFR (4.9%), EAS (2.5%), SAS (2%), Native American (0.2%), and Admixed (12.2%). GA distribution varied by tumor histology and international metastatic RCC database consortium disease risk status (intermediate-poor: EUR 58%, AFR 88%, EAS 74%, and SAS 73%). Pathogenic/likely pathogenic germline variants in cancer-predisposition genes varied (16% EUR, 23% AFR, 8% EAS, and 0% SAS), and most occurred in CHEK2 in EUR (3.1%) and FH in AFR (15.4%). In patients with clear cell RCC, somatic alteration incidence varied with significant enrichment in BAP1 alterations (EUR 17%, AFR 50%, SAS 29%; p = .01). Comparing AFR and EUR groups within The Cancer Genome Atlas, significant differences were identified in angiogenesis and inflammatory pathways. CONCLUSION: Differences in clinical and molecular data by GA highlight population-specific variations in patients with RCC. Exploration of both genetic and nongenetic variables remains critical to optimize efforts to overcome health-related disparities.

The impact of immunosuppressive agents on immune checkpoint inhibitor efficacy in patients with advanced melanoma: A real-world, multicenter, retrospective study.

BACKGROUND: Immune-related adverse events (irAEs) associated with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) are often managed via immunosuppressive agents (ISAs); however, their impact on ICI efficacy is not well studied. The impact of the use of ISAs on ICI efficacy in patients with advanced melanoma was therefore investigated. METHODS: This is a real-world, multicenter, retrospective cohort study of patients with advanced melanoma who received ICIs (n = 370). Overall survival (OS) and time to treatment failure (TTF) from the time of ICI initiation were compared among patients in subgroups of interest by unadjusted and 12-week landmark sensitivity-adjusted analyses. The association of irAEs and their management with OS and TTF were evaluated using univariate and multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression models. RESULTS: Overall, irAEs of any grade and of grade ≥3 occurred in 57% and 23% of patients, respectively. Thirty-seven percent of patients received steroids, and 3% received other ISAs. Median OS was longest among patients receiving both (not reached [NR]), shorter among those receiving only systemic steroids (SSs) (84.2 months; 95% CI, 40.2 months to NR), and shortest among those who did not experience irAEs (10.3 months; 95% CI, 6-20.1 months) (p < .001). Longer OS was significantly associated with the occurrence of irAEs and the use of SSs with or without ISAs upon multivariable-adjusted analysis (p < .001). Similar results were noted with anti-programmed death 1 (PD-1) monotherapy and combination anti-PD-1 plus anti-cytotoxic T-lymphocyte antigen 4 (CTLA-4) therapy, and with 12-week landmark sensitivity analysis (p = .01). CONCLUSIONS: These findings in patients with melanoma who were treated with ICIs suggest that the use of SSs or ISAs for the management of irAEs is not associated with inferior disease outcomes, which supports the use of these agents when necessary.

The Risk of Opportunistic Infections and the Role of Antibiotic Prophylaxis in Patients on Checkpoint Inhibitors Requiring Steroids.

BACKGROUND: Immune-related adverse events (irAEs) often require treatment with high-dose systemic steroids (SS) and other immunosuppressive agents (ISAs). NCCN Guidelines recommend prophylactic antibiotics for Pneumocystis jirovecii pneumonia (PJP) for patients receiving prolonged SS/ISAs. However, there is a paucity of evidence regarding the incidence of opportunistic infections (OIs) and non-OIs and the role of prophylactic antibiotics in patients on SS/ISAs for irAEs. METHODS: A retrospective analysis was conducted of patients treated using immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) therapy at 5 MedStar Health hospitals from January 2011 to April 2018. OIs were defined per the Infectious Diseases Society of America guidelines for the prevention and treatment of OIs in patients with HIV. The study cohort included patients who received ≥20 mg daily of a prednisone equivalent for ≥4 weeks to manage irAEs. RESULTS: The study cohort identified 112 (15%) of 758 total patients treated using ICIs. Baseline characteristics included the following: median age was 64 years, 74% (n=82) of patients were White, 89% (n=100) had an ECOG performance status ≤1, 61% (n=68) had melanoma, 19% (n=21) had non-small cell lung cancer, 45% (n=50) were treated using an anti-PD-(L)1 ICI, and 33% (n=37) were treated using an anti-PD-1/anti-CTLA-4 combination. The median starting SS dose was 100 mg of a prednisone equivalent, and 25% of patients required additional ISAs, with infliximab (n=15) and mycophenolate mofetil (n=9) being the most common. We found that 20% (n=22) of patients developed any infection, including 7% (n=8) with OIs (oral candidiasis [n=4], nondisseminated varicella zoster infection [n=2], PJP [n=1], and Listeria monocytogenes endophthalmitis [n=1]) and 13% (n=14) with non-OIs (most common: Clostridium difficile and pneumonia [n=5 each]). PJP prophylaxis with sulfamethoxazole/trimethoprim was given to 13% (n=14) patients, of whom 43% (n=6) developed OIs/non-OIs. CONCLUSIONS: Our study highlights the fundamental issues for patients on ICI therapy who require SS/ISAs for irAEs: the degree of immunosuppression and the relative risk of OI. We noted a low incidence of OIs overall and breakthrough infections despite PJP prophylaxis. We question whether PJP prophylaxis is efficacious or necessary. Prospective trials are required to answer these questions.

Artificial Intelligence-Assisted Cancer Status Detection in Radiology Reports.

Cancer research is dependent on accurate and relevant information of patient's medical journey. Data in radiology reports are of extreme value but lack consistent structure for direct use in analytics. At Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center (MSKCC), the radiology reports are curated using gold-standard approach of using human annotators. However, the manual process of curating large volume of retrospective data slows the pace of cancer research. Manual curation process is sensitive to volume of reports, number of data elements and nature of reports and demand appropriate skillset. In this work, we explore state of the art methods in artificial intelligence (AI) and implement end-to-end pipeline for fast and accurate annotation of radiology reports. Language models (LM) are trained using curated data by approaching curation as multiclass or multilabel classification problem. The classification tasks are to predict multiple imaging scan sites, presence of cancer and cancer status from the reports. The trained natural language processing (NLP) model classifiers achieve high weighted F1 score and accuracy. We propose and demonstrate the use of these models to assist in the manual curation process which results in higher accuracy and F1 score with lesser time and cost, thus improving efforts of cancer research. SIGNIFICANCE: Extraction of structured data in radiology for cancer research with manual process is laborious. Using AI for extraction of data elements is achieved using NLP models' assistance is faster and more accurate.

Cabozantinib Plus Nivolumab in Patients with Non-Clear Cell Renal Cell Carcinoma: Updated Results from a Phase 2 Trial.

Treatment options are limited for patients with non-clear cell renal cell carcinoma (nccRCC). Patients with nccRCC experienced a favorable objective response rate (ORR) in a phase 2 trial of cabozantinib plus nivolumab. We now report updated efficacy and safety results at median follow-up of 34 mo for patients with papillary, unclassified, or translocation-associated RCC. Cabozantinib and nivolumab were administered at standard doses to patients with metastatic nccRCC that had progressed on zero or one line of systemic therapy. The primary endpoint was the ORR according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors v1.1. Secondary endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and adverse events. Forty patients were treated. At median follow-up of 34 mo for survivors, the ORR was 48% (95% confidence interval [CI] 31.5-63.9%). Median PFS was 13 mo (95% CI 7-16); the 12-mo and 24-mo PFS rates were 51% (95% CI 34-65%) and 23% (95% CI 11-37%), respectively. Median OS was 28 mo (95% CI 23-43); the 18-mo and 36-mo OS rates were 70% (95% CI 53-82%) and 44% (95% CI 28-60%), respectively. No new safety signals were seen with cabozantinib and nivolumab. This extended follow-up analysis demonstrates promising efficacy, and highlights the potential for sustained responses with cabozantinib plus nivolumab in patients with metastatic nccRCC. PATIENT SUMMARY: We evaluated outcomes for patients with metastatic kidney cancer of the non-clear cell (NCC) type who were treated with cabozantinib + nivolumab. We found that 48% of the patients responded to the treatment, and there were no unexpected side effects. Among patients who responded to the treatment, the response lasted for a median of 17 months. We conclude that cabozantinib + nivolumab is a safe and effective treatment for NCC kidney cancer.

Clinical Outcomes of Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors in Unique Cohorts Underrepresented in Clinical Trials.

Regulatory approval of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) was based on results of large, randomized clinical trials, resulting in limited outcomes data in patient cohorts typically underrepresented in such trials. The objective of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of ICIs in these unique patient cohorts. This is a multicenter, retrospective analysis of real-world data at six academic and community clinics in the United States from 1 January 2011 to 1 April 2018. Patients were included if they had received at least one cycle of ICI treatment. Unique patient cohorts included age > 75 years, non-White race, positive smoking history, ECOG performance status (PS) ≥ 2, BMI ≥ 30 kg/m2, autoimmune diseases (AIDs), chronic viral infections (CVI), extensive prior lines of therapy (LOTs), or >three metastatic sites. Immune-related adverse events (irAEs), overall survival (OS), and time to treatment failure were evaluated in the entire cohort and in NSCLC patients treated with PD-(L)1 monotherapy. Outcomes and their association with unique patient cohorts were compared on univariate analysis and multivariate analysis to those without a particular characteristic in the entire NSCLC PD-(L)1 monotherapy cohorts. In total, 1453 patients were included: 56.5%-smokers, 30.4%-non-White, 22.8%-elderly, 20.8%-ECOG PS ≥ 2, 15.7%-history of AIDs, and 4.7%-history of CVI. The common ICIs were nivolumab (37.1%) and pembrolizumab (22.2%). Black patients, compared to White patients, experienced fewer irAEs (OR 0.54, p < 0.001). An ECOG PS of ≥2 (HR = 2.01, p < 0.001) and an increased number of previous LOTs were associated with poor OS (the median OS of 26.2 vs. 16.2 vs. 9.6 months for one vs. two vs. three prior LOTs, p < 0.001). The above results were confirmed in anti-PD-(L)1 monotherapy non-small cell lung cancer patients (n = 384). Overall, ICIs were safe and efficacious in these typically underrepresented patient cohorts. We noted ECOG PS ≥ 2 and an increased prior LOTs were associated with poor ICI efficacy, and Black patients, compared to White patients, experienced fewer irAEs.

IL12/23 Blockade with Ustekinumab as a Treatment for Immune-Related Cutaneous Adverse Events.

Background: Immune-related cutaneous adverse events (ircAEs) are frequent and may reduce quality of life and consistent dosing. IL12/23 has been implicated in psoriasis, which is reminiscent of the psoriasiform/lichenoid ircAE phenotype. We report the use of ustekinumab as a therapeutic option. Methods: Patients at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, who received immune checkpoint inhibitors and were treated with ustekinumab or had the keywords "ustekinumab" or "Stelara" in their clinical notes between 1 March 2017 and 1 December 2022 were retrospectively identified via a database query. Documentation from initial and follow-up visits was manually reviewed, and response to ustekinumab was categorized into complete cutaneous response (CcR, decrease to CTCAE grade 0), partial cutaneous response (PcR, any decrease in CTCAE grade exclusive of decrease to grade 0), and no cutaneous response (NcR, no change in CTCAE grade or worsening). Labs including complete blood count (CBC), cytokine panels, and IgE were obtained in a subset of patients as standard of care. Skin biopsies were reviewed by a dermatopathologist. Results: Fourteen patients with psoriasiform (85.7%), maculopapular (7.1%), and pyoderma gangrenosum (7.1%) ircAEs were identified. Ten (71.4%) receiving ustekinumab had a positive response to treatment. Among these 10 responders, 4 (40%) demonstrated partial cutaneous response and 6 (60%) demonstrated complete cutaneous resolution. Six patients (42.9%) experienced interruptions to their checkpoint inhibitor treatment as a result of intolerable ircAEs, and following ircAE management with ustekinumab, two (33.3%) were successfully rechallenged with their checkpoint inhibitors. On histopathology, patients primarily had findings of interface or psoriasiform dermatitis. No patients reported an adverse event related to ustekinumab. Conclusions: Ustekinumab showed a benefit in a subset of patients with psoriasiform/lichenoid ircAEs. No safety signals were identified. However, further prospective randomized controlled trials are needed to confirm our findings.

Real-world clinical outcomes of patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma receiving pembrolizumab + axitinib vs. ipilimumab + nivolumab.

BACKGROUND: Immune-Oncology (IO) therapies have changed first-line (1L) treatment paradigm for metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) in last few years with robust clinical trial data. We examined clinical outcomes among clear cell mRCC (mccRCC) patients who received pembrolizumab + axitinib (pembro-axi) or ipilimumab + nivolumab (ipi-nivo) in the US community oncology setting. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study utilized data from electronic health records and chart review within The US Oncology Network to identify adult patients with mccRCC initiating 1L pembro-axi or ipi-nivo from January 01, 2019 to December 31, 2020 and followed through March 31, 2021. Physician-recorded response (real-world overall response rate [rwORR] and real-world disease control rate [rwDCR]) was assessed descriptively. Real-world progression-free survival (rwPFS), real-world time to next treatment (rwTTNT) and time on treatment (rwToT) were estimated using Kaplan-Meier analysis. Association of 1L systemic treatment with time-to-event outcomes was examined using multivariable cox proportional hazards models. RESULTS: Study included 331 mccRCC patients (pembro-axi:44%, ipi-nivo:56%). Median age was 65 years, 75.5% were male, and 82.5% had intermediate/poor (I/P) IMDC risk score. RwORR and rwDCR were 71.0% and 80.0% for pembro-axi and 45.2% and 58.6% for ipi-nivo. In multivariable analysis, pembro-axi was associated with longer rwToT (aHR, 0.53 [95% CI, 0.40, 0.71]), rwTTNT (aHR, 0.60 [95% CI, 0.42, 0.87]), and rwPFS (aHR, 0.70 [95% CI, 0.49, 0.99]) compared to ipi-nivo (P < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Our study provides insight into newer mccRCC treatment tolerability and effectiveness in the real-world US community setting. Our real-world results were comparable to data from clinical trials, which is encouraging for mccRCC patients.

Progression-free Survival After Second Line of Therapy for Metastatic Clear Cell Renal Cell Carcinoma in Patients Treated with First-line Immunotherapy Combinations.

Immunotherapy (IO)-based combinations used to treat metastatic clear cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC) include dual immune checkpoint inhibition with ipilimumab and nivolumab (IO/IO) and several combinations of vascular endothelial growth factor receptor-targeting tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) with an immune checkpoint inhibitor (TKI/IO). IO/IO and TKI/IO approaches have not been compared directly, and it is unknown whether patients who do not respond to first-line IO/IO can salvage long-term survival by receiving a second-line TKI. Progression-free survival after second-line therapy (PFS-2) evaluates the ability to be salvaged by second-line therapy. We retrospectively evaluated 173 patients treated with first-line IO/IO or TKI/IO for metastatic ccRCC at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center and report PFS-2, overall survival, and response to second line of therapy (ORR2nd) for groups defined by first-line category. Although ORR2nd was significantly higher with IO/IO than with TKI/IO (47% vs 13%, p < 0.001), there was no significant difference in median PFS-2 for TKI/IO versus IO/IO (44 vs 23 mo, log-rank p = 0.1) or restricted mean survival time (RMST) for PFS-2 when adjusted for propensity score (33 vs 30 mo; difference 2.6 mo [95% confidence interval {CI}: -2.6, 7.9]; p = 0.3). There was also no significant difference in RMST for overall survival when adjusted for propensity score (38 vs 37 mo; group difference 1.0 mo [95% CI: -3.4, 5.5]; p = 0.7). These findings do not support a change in current utilization practices for IO/IO and TKI/IO treatment strategies for ccRCC. PATIENT SUMMARY: In cases of metastatic clear cell renal cell carcinoma, no significant difference was observed in progression-free survival after second line of therapy between patients receiving ipilimumab plus nivolumab and those receiving a combination of a tyrosine kinase inhibitor and an immune checkpoint inhibitor.

Real-world Treatment Patterns and Clinical Outcomes for Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma in the Current Treatment Era.

Background: Immuno-oncology (IO) agents and tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) have revolutionized the treatment paradigm for metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). Data on real-world usage and outcomes are limited. Objective: To examine real-world treatment patterns and clinical outcomes for mRCC. Design setting and participants: This retrospective cohort study included 1538 patients with mRCC who received first-line treatment with pembrolizumab + axitinib (P + A; n = 279, 18%), ipilimumab + nivolumab (I + N; n = 618, 40%), or TKI monotherapy (TKIm; cabozantinib, sunitinib, pazopanib, or axitinib; n = 641, 42%) between January 1, 2018 and September 30, 2020 in US Oncology Network/non-network practices. Outcome measurements and statistical analysis: The relationship with outcomes, time on treatment (ToT), time to next treatment (TTNT), and overall survival (OS) was analyzed using multivariable Cox proportional-hazards models. Results and limitations: The median age of the cohort was 67 yr (interquartile range 59.5-74.4), 70% were male, 79% had clear cell RCC, and 87% had an intermediate or poor International mRCC Database Consortium risk score. The median ToT was 13.6 for P + A versus 5.8 for I + N versus 3.4 mo for TKIm (p < 0.001) and the median TTNT was 16.4 for P + A versus 8.3 for I + N versus 8.4 mo for TKIm (p < 0.001) . Median OS was not reached for P + A, 27.6 mo for I + N, and 26.9 mo for TKIm (p = 0.237). On adjusted multivariable analysis, treatment with P + A was associated with better ToT (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 0.59, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.47-0.72 vs I + N; 0.37, 95% CI, 0.30-0.45 vs TKIm; p < 0.0001) and better TTNT (aHR 0.61, 95% CI 0.49-0.77 vs I + N; 0.53, 95% CI 0.42-0.67 vs TKIm; p < 0.0001). Limitations include the retrospective design and the limited follow-up for characterization of survival. Conclusions: We noted substantial uptake of IO-based therapies in the first-line community oncology setting since their approval. In addition, the study provides insights into clinical effectiveness, tolerability, and/or compliance of IO-based therapies. Patient summary: We examined the use of immunotherapy for patients with metastatic kidney cancer. The findings suggest rapid implementation of these new treatments by oncologists working in the community setting, which is reassuring for patients with this disease.

A Phase 2 Trial of Talazoparib and Avelumab in Genomically Defined Metastatic Kidney Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Although different kidney cancers represent a heterogeneous group of malignancies, multiple subtypes including Von Hippel-Lindau (VHL)-altered clear cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC), fumarate hydratase (FH)- and succinate dehydrogenase (SDH)-deficient renal cell carcinoma (RCC), and renal medullary carcinoma (RMC) are affected by genomic instability. Synthetic lethality with poly ADP-ribose polymerase inhibitors (PARPis) has been suggested in preclinical models of these subtypes, and paired PARPis with immune checkpoint blockade (ICB) may achieve additive and/or synergistic effects in patients with previously treated advanced kidney cancers. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate combined PARPi + ICB in treatment-refractory metastatic kidney cancer. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: We conducted a single-center, investigator-initiated phase 2 trial in two genomically selected advanced kidney cancer cohorts: (1) VHL-altered RCC with at least one prior ICB agent and one vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) inhibitor, and (2) FH- or SDH-deficient RCC with at least one prior ICB agent or VEGF inhibitor and RMC with at least one prior line of chemotherapy. INTERVENTION: Patients received talazoparib 1 mg daily plus avelumab 800 mg intravenously every 14 d in 28-d cycles. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: The primary endpoint was objective response rate (ORR) by Immune Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors at 4 mo, and the secondary endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival, and safety. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: Cohort 1 consisted of ten patients with VHL-altered ccRCC. All patients had previously received ICB. The ORR was 0/9 patients; one patient was not evaluable due to missed doses. In this cohort, seven patients achieved stable disease (SD) as the best response. The median PFS was 3.5 mo (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.0, 3.9 mo). Cohort 2 consisted of eight patients; four had FH-deficient RCC, one had SDH-deficient RCC, and three had RMC. In this cohort, six patients had previously received ICB. The ORR was 0/8 patients; two patients achieved SD as the best response and the median PFS was 1.2 mo (95% CI 0.4, 2.9 mo). The most common treatment-related adverse events of all grades were fatigue (61%), anemia (28%), nausea (22%), and headache (22%). There were seven grade 3-4 and no grade 5 events. CONCLUSIONS: The first clinical study of combination PARPi and ICB therapy in advanced kidney cancer did not show clinical benefit in multiple genomically defined metastatic RCC cohorts or RMC. PATIENT SUMMARY: We conducted a study to look at the effect of two medications, talazoparib and avelumab, in patients with metastatic kidney cancer who had disease progression on standard treatment. Talazoparib blocks the normal activity of molecules called poly ADP-ribose polymerase, which then prevents tumor cells from repairing themselves and growing, while avelumab helps the immune system recognize and kill cancer cells. We found that the combination of these agents was safe but not effective in specific types of kidney cancer.

Safety and Activity of Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors in People Living With HIV and Cancer: A Real-World Report From the Cancer Therapy Using Checkpoint Inhibitors in People Living With HIV-International (CATCH-IT) Consortium.

PURPOSE: Compared with people living without HIV (PWOH), people living with HIV (PWH) and cancer have traditionally been excluded from immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) trials. Furthermore, there is a paucity of real-world data on the use of ICIs in PWH and cancer. METHODS: This retrospective study included PWH treated with anti-PD-1- or anti-PD-L1-based therapies for advanced cancers. Kaplan-Meier method was used to estimate overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). Objective response rates (ORRs) were measured per RECIST 1.1 or other tumor-specific criteria, whenever feasible. Restricted mean survival time (RMST) was used to compare OS and PFS between matched PWH and PWOH with metastatic NSCLC (mNSCLC). RESULTS: Among 390 PWH, median age was 58 years, 85% (n = 331) were males, 36% (n = 138) were Black; 70% (n = 274) received anti-PD-1/anti-PD-L1 monotherapy. Most common cancers were NSCLC (28%, n = 111), hepatocellular carcinoma ([HCC]; 11%, n = 44), and head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC; 10%, n = 39). Seventy percent (152/216) had CD4+ T cell counts ≥200 cells/µL, and 94% (179/190) had HIV viral load <400 copies/mL. Twenty percent (79/390) had any grade immune-related adverse events (irAEs) and 7.7% (30/390) had grade ≥3 irAEs. ORRs were 69% (nonmelanoma skin cancer), 31% (NSCLC), 16% (HCC), and 11% (HNSCC). In the matched mNSCLC cohort (61 PWH v 110 PWOH), 20% (12/61) PWH and 22% (24/110) PWOH had irAEs. Adjusted 42-month RMST difference was -0.06 months (95% CI, -5.49 to 5.37; P = .98) for PFS and 2.23 months (95% CI, -4.02 to 8.48; P = .48) for OS. CONCLUSION: Among PWH, ICIs demonstrated differential activity across cancer types with no excess toxicity. Safety and activity of ICIs were similar between matched cohorts of PWH and PWOH with mNSCLC.

Contribution of the Skin-Gut Axis to Immune-Related Adverse Events with Multi-System Involvement.

Immune-related adverse events (irAEs) frequently complicate treatment with immune checkpoint blockade (ICB) targeting CTLA-4, PD-1, and PD-L1, which are commonly used to treat solid and hematologic malignancies. The skin and gastrointestinal (GI) tract are most frequently affected by irAEs. While extensive efforts to further characterize organ-specific adverse events have contributed to the understanding and management of individual toxicities, investigations into the relationship between multi-organ toxicities have been limited. Therefore, we aimed to conduct a characterization of irAEs occurring in both the skin and gut. A retrospective analysis of two cohorts of patients treated with ICB at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center was conducted, including a cohort of patients with cutaneous irAEs (ircAEs) confirmed by dermatologists (n = 152) and a cohort of patients with biopsy-proven immune-related colitis (n = 246). Among both cohorts, 15% (61/398) of patients developed both skin and GI irAEs, of which 72% (44/61) patients had ircAEs preceding GI irAEs (p = 0.00013). Our study suggests that in the subset of patients who develop both ircAEs and GI irAEs, ircAEs are likely to occur first. Further prospective studies with larger sample sizes are needed to validate our findings, to assess the overall incidence of co-incident irAEs, and to determine whether ircAEs are predictors of other irAEs. This analysis highlights the development of multi-system dermatologic and gastrointestinal irAEs and underscores the importance of oncologists, gastroenterologists, and dermatologists confronted with an ircAE to remain alert for additional irAEs.

Correction: Zhang et al. Association between Body Mass Index and Immune-Related Adverse Events (irAEs) among Advanced-Stage Cancer Patients Receiving Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors: A Pan-Cancer Analysis. Cancers 2021, 13, 6109.

Subha Madhavan (S.M.) and Anas Belouali (A.B.) were not included as authors in the published article [...].

The Impact of Androgen Deprivation Therapy on COVID-19 Illness in Men With Prostate Cancer.

BACKGROUND: TMPRSS2, a cell surface protease regulated by androgens and commonly upregulated in prostate cancer (PCa), is a necessary component for SARS-CoV-2 viral entry into respiratory epithelial cells. Previous reports suggested a lower risk of SARS-CoV-2 among PCa patients on androgen deprivation therapy (ADT). However, the impact of ADT on severe COVID-19 illness is poorly understood. METHODS: We performed a multicenter study across 7 US medical centers and evaluated patients with PCa and SARS-CoV-2 detected by polymerase-chain-reaction between March 1, 2020, and May 31, 2020. PCa patients were considered on ADT if they had received appropriate ADT treatment within 6 months of COVID-19 diagnosis. We used multivariable logistic and Cox proportional-hazard regression models for analysis. All statistical tests were 2-sided. RESULTS: We identified 465 PCa patients (median age = 71 years) with a median follow-up of 60 days. Age, body mass index, cardiovascular comorbidity, and PCa clinical disease state adjusted overall survival (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.16, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.68 to 1.98, P = .59), hospitalization status (HR = 0.96, 95% CI = 0.52 to 1.77, P = .90), supplemental oxygenation (HR 1.14, 95% CI = 0.66 to 1.99, P = .64), and use of mechanical ventilation (HR = 0.81, 95% CI = 0.25 to 2.66, P = .73) were similar between ADT and non-ADT cohorts. Similarly, the addition of androgen receptor-directed therapy within 30 days of COVID-19 diagnosis to ADT vs ADT alone did not statistically significantly affect overall survival (androgen receptor-directed therapy: HR = 1.27, 95% CI = 0.69 to 2.32, P = .44). CONCLUSIONS: In this retrospective cohort of PCa patients, the use of ADT was not demonstrated to influence severe COVID-19 outcomes, as defined by hospitalization, supplemental oxygen use, or death. Age 70 years and older was statistically significantly associated with a higher risk of developing severe COVID-19 disease.

Matched Molecular Profiling of Cell-Free DNA and Tumor Tissue in Patients With Advanced Clear Cell Renal Cell Carcinoma.

PURPOSE: The clinical utility of cell-free DNA (cfDNA) as a biomarker for advanced clear cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC) remains unclear. We evaluated the validity of cfDNA-based genomic profiling in a large cohort of patients with ccRCC with matched next-generation sequencing (NGS) from primary tumor tissues. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We performed paired NGS of tumor DNA and plasma cfDNA using the MSK-IMPACT platform in 110 patients with metastatic ccRCC. Tissues were profiled for variants and copy number alterations with germline comparison. Manual cross-genotyping between cfDNA and tumor tissue was performed. Deep sequencing with a higher sensitivity platform, MSK-ACCESS, was performed on a subset of cfDNA samples. Clinical data and radiographic tumor volumes were assessed to correlate cfDNA yield with treatment response and disease burden. RESULTS: Tumor tissue MSK-IMPACT testing identified 582 genomic alterations (GAs) across the cohort. Using standard thresholds for de novo variant calling in cfDNA, only 24 GAs were found by MSK-IMPACT in cfDNA in 7 of 110 patients (6%). With manual cross-genotyping, 210 GAs were detectable below thresholds in 74 patients (67%). Intrapatient concordance with tumor tissue was limited, including VHL (31.6%), PBRM1 (24.1%), and TP53 (52.9%). cfDNA profiling did not identify 3p loss because of low tumor fractions. Tumor volume was associated with cfDNA allele frequency, and VHL concordance was superior for patients with greater disease burden. CONCLUSION: cfDNA-based NGS profiling yielded low detection rates in this metastatic ccRCC cohort. Concordance with tumor profiling was low, even for truncal mutations such as VHL, and some findings in peripheral blood may represent clonal hematopoiesis. Routine cfDNA panel testing is not supported, and its application in biomarker efforts must account for these limitations.

Phase II Trial of Cabozantinib Plus Nivolumab in Patients With Non-Clear-Cell Renal Cell Carcinoma and Genomic Correlates.

PURPOSE: To assess the efficacy and safety of cabozantinib plus nivolumab in a phase II trial in patients with non-clear-cell renal cell carcinoma (RCC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients had advanced non-clear-cell renal carcinoma who underwent 0-1 prior systemic therapies excluding prior immune checkpoint inhibitors. Patients received cabozantinib 40 mg once daily plus nivolumab 240 mg once every 2 weeks or 480 mg once every 4 weeks. Cohort 1 enrolled patients with papillary, unclassified, or translocation-associated RCC; cohort 2 enrolled patients with chromophobe RCC. The primary end point was objective response rate (ORR) by RECIST 1.1; secondary end points included progression-free survival, overall survival, and safety. Next-generation sequencing results were correlated with response. RESULTS: A total of 47 patients were treated with a median follow-up of 13.1 months. Objective response rate for cohort 1 (n = 40) was 47.5% (95% CI, 31.5 to 63.9), with median progression-free survival of 12.5 months (95% CI, 6.3 to 16.4) and median overall survival of 28 months (95% CI, 16.3 to not evaluable). In cohort 2 (n = 7), no responses were observed; one patient had stable disease > 1 year. Grade 3/4 treatment-related adverse events were observed in 32% treated patients. Cabozantinib and nivolumab were discontinued because of toxicity in 13% and 17% of patients, respectively. Common mutations included NF2 and FH in cohort 1 and TP53 and PTEN in cohort 2. Objective responses were seen in 10/12 patients with either NF2 or FH mutations. CONCLUSION: Cabozantinib plus nivolumab showed promising efficacy in most non-clear-cell RCC variants tested in this trial, particularly those with prominent papillary features, whereas treatment effects were limited in chromophobe RCC. Genomic findings in non-clear-cell RCC variants warrant further study as predictors of response.

Automated Identification of Patients With Immune-Related Adverse Events From Clinical Notes Using Word Embedding and Machine Learning.

PURPOSE: Although immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have substantially improved survival in patients with advanced malignancies, they are associated with a unique spectrum of side effects termed immune-related adverse events (irAEs). To ensure treatment safety, research efforts are needed to comprehensively detect and understand irAEs. Retrospective analysis of data from electronic health records can provide knowledge to characterize these toxicities. However, such information is not captured in a structured format within the electronic health record and requires manual chart review. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this work, we propose a natural language processing pipeline that can automatically annotate clinical notes and determine whether there is evidence that a patient developed an irAE. Seven hundred eighty-one cases were manually reviewed by clinicians and annotated for irAEs at the patient level. A dictionary of irAEs keywords was used to perform text reduction on clinical notes belonging to each patient; only sentences with relevant expressions were kept. Word embeddings were then used to generate vector representations over the reduced text, which served as input for the machine learning classifiers. The output of the models was presence or absence of any irAEs. Additional models were built to classify skin-related toxicities, endocrine toxicities, and colitis. RESULTS: The model for any irAE achieved an average F1-score = 0.75 and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve = 0.85. This outperformed a basic keyword filtering approach. Although the classifier of any irAEs achieved good accuracy, individual irAE classification still has room for improvement. CONCLUSION: We demonstrate that patient-level annotations combined with a machine learning approach using keywords filtering and word embeddings can achieve promising accuracy in classifying irAEs in clinical notes. This model may facilitate annotation and analysis of large irAEs data sets.