Targeted therapy for advanced anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK)-rearranged non-small cell lung cancer.

BACKGROUND: Targeted therapies directed at specific driver oncogenes have improved outcomes for individuals with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Approximately 5% of lung adenocarcinomas, the most common histologic subtype of NSCLC, harbour rearrangements in the anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) gene leading to constitutive activity of the ALK kinase. Crizotinib was the first tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) demonstrated to be effective in advanced NSCLC. Next-generation ALK TKIs have since been developed including ceritinib, alectinib, brigatinib, ensartinib, and lorlatinib, and have been compared with crizotinib or chemotherapy in randomised controlled trials (RCTs). These ALK-targeted therapies are currently used in clinical practice and are endorsed in multiple clinical oncology guidelines. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the safety and efficacy of ALK inhibitors given as monotherapy to treat advanced ALK-rearranged NSCLC. SEARCH METHODS: We conducted electronic searches in the Cochrane Lung Cancer Group Specialised Register, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, and Embase. We also searched conference proceedings from the American Society for Clinical Oncology (ASCO), European Society of Medical Oncology (ESMO), and International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer (IASLC) World Conference on Lung Cancer, as well as the reference lists of retrieved articles. All searches were conducted from 2007 until 7 January 2021. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included RCTs comparing ALK inhibitors with cytotoxic chemotherapy or another ALK inhibitor in individuals with incurable locally advanced or metastatic pathologically confirmed ALK-rearranged NSCLC. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently assessed studies for eligibility, extracted study characteristics and outcome data, and assessed risk of bias using the Cochrane risk of bias tool for each included study. We assessed the certainty of evidence using GRADE. Primary outcomes were progression-free survival (PFS) and adverse events (AE); secondary outcomes were overall survival (OS), OS at one year, overall response rate (ORR) by RECIST (Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours) criteria, and health-related quality of life (HRQoL). We performed a meta-analysis for all outcomes, where appropriate, using the fixed-effect model. We reported hazard ratios (HR) for PFS, OS, and a composite HRQoL of life outcome (time to deterioration), and risk ratios (RR) for AE, ORR, and one-year OS. We presented 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs) and used the I² statistic to investigate heterogeneity. We planned comparisons of 'ALK inhibitor versus chemotherapy' and 'next-generation ALK inhibitor versus crizotinib' with subgroup analysis by type of ALK inhibitor, line of treatment, and baseline central nervous system involvement. MAIN RESULTS: Eleven studies (2874 participants) met our inclusion criteria: six studies compared an ALK inhibitor (crizotinib, ceritinib, and alectinib) to chemotherapy, and five studies compared a next-generation ALK inhibitor (alectinib, brigatinib, and lorlatinib) to crizotinib. We assessed the evidence for most outcomes as of moderate to high certainty. Most studies were at low risk for selection, attrition, and reporting bias; however, no RCTs were blinded, resulting in a high risk of performance and detection bias for outcomes reliant on subjective measurement. ALK inhibitor versus chemotherapy Treatment with ALK inhibitors resulted in a large increase in PFS compared to chemotherapy (HR 0.45, 95% CI 0.40 to 0.52, 6 RCTs, 1611 participants, high-certainty evidence). This was found regardless of line of treatment. ALK inhibitors may result in no difference in overall AE rate when compared to chemotherapy (RR 1.01, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.03, 5 RCTs, 1404 participants, low-certainty evidence). ALK inhibitors slightly improved OS (HR 0.84, 95% CI 0.72 to 0.97, 6 RCTs, 1611 participants, high-certainty evidence), despite most included studies having a significant number of participants crossing over from chemotherapy to receive an ALK inhibitor after the study period. ALK inhibitors likely increase ORR (RR 2.43, 95% CI 2.16 to 2.75, 6 RCTs, 1611 participants, moderate-certainty evidence) including in measurable baseline brain metastases (RR 4.88, 95% CI 2.18 to 10.95, 3 RCTs, 108 participants) when compared to chemotherapy. ALK inhibitors result in a large increase in the HRQoL measure, time to deterioration (HR 0.52, 95% CI 0.44 to 0.60, 5 RCTs, 1504 participants, high-certainty evidence) when compared to chemotherapy. Next-generation ALK inhibitor versus crizotinib Next-generation ALK inhibitors resulted in a large increase in PFS (HR 0.39, 95% CI 0.33 to 0.46, 5 RCTs, 1263 participants, high-certainty evidence), particularly in participants with baseline brain metastases. Next-generation ALK inhibitors likely result in no difference in overall AE (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.98 to 1.01, 5 RCTs, 1263 participants, moderate-certainty evidence) when compared to crizotinib. Next-generation ALK inhibitors likely increase OS (HR 0.71, 95% CI 0.56 to 0.90, 5 RCTs, 1263 participants, moderate-certainty evidence) and slightly increase ORR (RR 1.18, 95% CI 1.10 to 1.25, 5 RCTs, 1229 participants, moderate-certainty evidence) including a response in measurable brain metastases (RR 2.45, 95% CI 1.7 to 3.54, 4 RCTs, 138 participants) when compared to crizotinib. Studies comparing ALK inhibitors were conducted exclusively or partly in the first-line setting. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Next-generation ALK inhibitors including alectinib, brigatinib, and lorlatinib are the preferred first systemic treatment for individuals with advanced ALK-rearranged NSCLC. Further trials are ongoing including investigation of first-line ensartinib. Next-generation inhibitors have not been compared to each other, and it is unknown which should be used first and what subsequent treatment sequence is optimal.

Mismatch repair deficiency and microsatellite instability in urothelial carcinoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Background: Mismatch repair deficiency (dMMR) and microsatellite instability-high (MSI-H) occur in a subset of cancers and have been shown to confer sensitivity to immune checkpoint inhibition (ICI); however, there is a lack of prospective data in urothelial carcinoma (UC). Methods and analysis: We performed a systematic review to estimate the prevalence of dMMR and MSI-H in UC, including survival and clinical outcomes. We searched for studies published up to 26 October 2022 in major scientific databases. We screened 1745 studies and included 110. Meta-analyses were performed if the extracted data were suitable. Results: The pooled weighted prevalences of dMMR in bladder cancer (BC) and upper tract UC (UTUC) were 2.30% (95% CI 1.12% to 4.65%) and 8.95% (95% CI 6.81% to 11.67%), respectively. The pooled weighted prevalences of MSI-H in BC and UTUC were 2.11% (95% CI 0.82% to 5.31%) and 8.36% (95% CI 5.50% to 12.53%), respectively. Comparing localised versus metastatic disease, the pooled weighted prevalences for MSI-H in BC were 5.26% (95% CI 0.86% to 26.12%) and 0.86% (95% CI 0.59% to 1.25%), respectively; and in UTUC, they were 18.04% (95% CI 13.36% to 23.91%) and 4.96% (95% CI 2.72% to 8.86%), respectively. Cumulatively, the response rate in dMMR/MSI-H metastatic UC treated with an ICI was 22/34 (64.7%) compared with 1/9 (11.1%) with chemotherapy. Conclusion: Both dMMR and MSI-H occur more frequently in UTUC than in BC. In UC, MSI-H occurs more frequently in localised disease than in metastatic disease. These biomarkers may predict sensitivity to ICI in metastatic UC and resistance to cisplatin-based chemotherapy.

Final Results From a Phase I Trial and Expansion Cohorts of Cabozantinib and Nivolumab Alone or With Ipilimumab for Advanced/Metastatic Genitourinary Tumors.

PURPOSE: Cabozantinib and nivolumab (CaboNivo) alone or with ipilimumab (CaboNivoIpi) have shown promising efficacy and safety in patients with metastatic urothelial carcinoma (mUC), metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC), and rare genitourinary (GU) tumors in a dose-escalation phase I study. We report the final data analysis of the safety, overall response rate (ORR), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS) of the phase I patients and seven expansion cohorts. METHODS: This is an investigator-initiated, multicenter, phase I trial. CaboNivo doublet expansion cohorts included (1) mUC, (2) mRCC, and (3) adenocarcinoma of the bladder/urachal; CaboNivoIpi triplet expansion cohorts included (1) mUC, (2) mRCC, (3) penile cancer, and (4) squamous cell carcinoma of the bladder and other rare GU tumors (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02496208). RESULTS: The study enrolled 120 patients treated with CaboNivo (n = 64) or CaboNivoIpi (n = 56), with a median follow-up of 49.2 months. In 108 evaluable patients (CaboNivo n = 59; CaboNivoIpi n = 49), the ORR was 38% (complete response rate 11%) and the median duration of response was 20 months. The ORR was 42.4% for mUC, 62.5% for mRCC (n = 16), 85.7% for squamous cell carcinoma of the bladder (n = 7), 44.4% for penile cancer (n = 9), and 50.0% for renal medullary carcinoma (n = 2). Grade ≥ 3 treatment-related adverse events occurred in 84% of CaboNivo patients and 80% of CaboNivoIpi patients. CONCLUSION: CaboNivo and CaboNivoIpi demonstrated clinical activity and safety in patients with multiple GU malignancies, especially clear cell RCC, urothelial carcinoma, and rare GU tumors such as squamous cell carcinoma of the bladder, small cell carcinoma of the bladder, adenocarcinoma of the bladder, renal medullary carcinoma, and penile cancer.

Emerging treatment options for prostate cancer.

INTRODUCTION: Prostate cancer treatment has rapidly evolved in the past few years. Androgen deprivation therapy has been the backbone of treatment for locally advanced and metastatic prostate cancer, but incremental benefits in survival have been shown by adding androgen-receptor pathway inhibitors (ARPI) across various spectrums of disease state. In addition, docetaxel chemotherapy remains the first-line chemotherapy regimen available with survival benefits shown with triplet therapy in those who are chemotherapy eligible. However, disease progression remains inevitable and novel agents such as radioligand therapy with lutetium have shown improvement in survival. AREAS COVERED: This review discusses the pivotal trials that led to the U.S. FDA approval of agents utilized in metastatic prostate cancer and explores the use of novel agents including prostate-specific membrane antigen-targeting agents, radioligands, cell-based therapy, chimeric antigen receptor T-cell, BiTE, and antibody drug conjugates. EXPERT OPINION: Treatment landscape for metastatic castrate-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) has evolved beyond additional agents with ARPI and/or docetaxel, including other treatments with sipuleucel-T, radium, cabazitaxel, PARP inhibitors, and lutetium, which have specific indications and roles in sequencing. Novel therapies remain critically needed after progression from lutetium.

Efficacy and safety of PARP inhibitors in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis of clinical trials.

INTRODUCTION: PARP inhibitors (PARPi) are a standard-of-care (SoC) treatment option for patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). Several clinical trials have shown the potential of combining PARPi with other anticancer agents. Therefore, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to comprehensively evaluate the efficacy and safety of PARPi in patients with metastatic prostate cancer. METHODS: MEDLINE, Cochrane CENTRAL, EMBASE, CINAHL, and Web of Science were searched on March 22nd, 2023, for phase 2 or 3 clinical trials. Efficacy (progression-free survival [PFS], overall survival [OS], PSA decline >50% [PSA50], and objective response rate [ORR]) and safety outcomes were assessed in the included studies. RESULTS: Seventeen clinical trials (PARPi monotherapy [n = 7], PARPi + androgen-receptor signaling inhibitors [ARSI] [n = 6], and PARPi + immune checkpoint inhibitors [ICI] [n = 4]) were included in the quantitative analyses. PARPi monotherapy improved radiographic PFS and OS over SoC in mCRPC patients with alterations in BRCA1 or BRCA2 genes but not in those with alterations in the ATM gene. Higher rates of PSA50 and ORR were reported in participants treated with PARPi + ARSI than in single-agent PARPi or PARPi + ICI. Although the rate of high-grade adverse events was similar across all groups, treatment discontinuation was higher in patients treated with PARPi-based combinations than PARPi monotherapy. CONCLUSION: The efficacy of PARPi is not uniform across mCRPC patients with alterations in DNA damage repair genes, and optimal patient selection remains a clinical challenge. No unexpected safety signals for this class of agents emerged from this analysis.

Signaling new therapeutic opportunities: cytokines in prostate cancer.

INTRODUCTION: Despite FDA approval of sipuleucel-T in 2010, endeavors to use immune checkpoint inhibitors in unselected prostate cancer patients have not improved clinical outcomes. These efforts include studies with anti-PD1/PD-L1 and anti-CTLA-4 alone and in combination with existing standards of care. These strategies are generally T-cell centric and disregard the broader complex and pleiotropic components of the prostate cancer tumor microenvironment such as natural killer cells, myeloid-derived suppressor cells, and tumor-associated macrophages. AREAS COVERED: We performed an online literature search and undertook a review of existing preclinical and clinical literature for cytokine-based therapy related to prostate cancer, specifically on interleukin (IL)-2, IL-15, IL-12, IL-23, IL-8, and transforming growth factor (TGF)-ß. EXPERT OPINION: Cytokine-based therapies present an alternative immune strategy to target the pleiotropic prostate cancer tumor microenvironment beyond T-cells. Future immunotherapy strategies in prostate cancer should address these immune cell populations, which may play more important roles in the prostate cancer tumor microenvironment.

Lutetium-177-PSMA-617: A Vision of the Future.

In the last decade, many life-prolonging therapeutic options have emerged for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). The recent VISION trial is the first to demonstrate a survival benefit of Lutetium-177[177Lu]Lu-PSMA-617 in post-chemotherapy mCRPC. This journal club reviews the VISION trial in the context of the earlier TheraP trial of [177Lu]Lu-PSMA-617 in mCRPC post docetaxel and androgen pathway inhibition, to provide direction for the real-world application of [177Lu]Lu-PSMA-617. Treatment in the control groups differed significantly between both trials and may have influenced outcomes: TheraP mandated cabazitaxel whereas VISION's design could not allow it. In both trials, [177Lu]Lu-PSMA-617 had a good safety profile, with common adverse events being fatigue, nausea, dry mouth, marrow suppression and diarrhea. Given its efficacy and favorable safety even in heavily pre-treated patients, [177Lu]Lu-PSMA-617 provides hope to mCRPC patients and may be applied to earlier disease stages in future investigations.

Evolving Role of Adjuvant Systemic Therapy for Kidney and Urothelial Cancers.

The role of adjuvant therapy in renal cell carcinoma and urothelial carcinoma is rapidly evolving. To date, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration has approved sunitinib and pembrolizumab in the adjuvant setting for renal cell carcinoma and nivolumab for urothelial carcinoma based on disease-free survival benefit. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration held a joint workshop with the National Cancer Institute and the Society of Urologic Oncology in 2017 to harmonize design elements, including eligibility and radiologic assessments across adjuvant trials in renal cell carcinoma and urothelial carcinoma. Considerations from the discussion at these workshops led the U.S. Food and Drug Administration to draft guidances to help inform subsequent adjuvant trial design for renal cell carcinoma and urothelial carcinoma. Patient-centered decision-making is crucial when determining therapeutic choices in the adjuvant setting; utility functions can be used to help quantify each patient's goals, values, and risk/benefit trade-offs to ensure that the decision regarding adjuvant therapy is informed by their preferences and the evolving outcomes data.

Two cycles of adjuvant carboplatin for clinical stage 1 testicular seminoma in New Zealand centres: A retrospective analysis of efficacy and long-term events.

BACKGROUND: Adjuvant carboplatin reduces relapse risk in clinical stage 1 (CS1) seminoma, though there is a paucity of long-term safety data. AIM: Our objective was to report long-term outcomes of two cycles of adjuvant carboplatin dosed at area under the time-concentration curve (AUC) of 7. METHODS AND RESULTS: We performed a retrospective analysis on treatment and outcomes of patients with CS1 seminoma who received adjuvant carboplatin from 2000 to 2016 at our centres in the Midland Region, New Zealand. Of 159 patients, median age 39 years, 153 received two cycles of carboplatin: 147 dosed at AUC7 and 6 at AUC6. Six patients had one cycle of carboplatin AUC7. One patient relapsed at 22 months and died of bleomycin pneumonitis 2 months after achieving a complete response with BEP chemotherapy. Neither RTI (present in 21.3%) nor tumor size >4 cm (in 43.3%) was predictive of relapse. Median follow-up was 106 months. At 15 years, outcomes were: relapse-free survival 99.4%, overall survival 91.4%, disease-specific survival 100%, subsequent malignant neoplasm rate 7.6%, and second testicular germ cell tumor rate 3.85%. One patient had persistent grade 1 thrombocytopenia at 46 months. CONCLUSIONS: These data add to the body of evidence that two cycles of carboplatin AUC7 is safe and effective adjuvant treatment for CS1 seminoma.

Case Report: Sustained Complete Response to PI3K Inhibition in a Patient with Metastatic Breast Cancer Harboring PIK3CA, NF1, and CDH1 Mutations.

PIK3CA mutations resulting in disinhibition of the phosphoinositide 3-kinase (PI3K) pathway are present in approximately a third of estrogen receptor (ER)-positive breast cancer. Recent clinical trials of PI3K inhibition in PIK3CA-mutated metastatic breast cancer have shown improvement in progression-free survival of up to 11 months. We report a 68-year-old woman with metastatic ER-positive breast cancer with PIK3CA mutation who despite having disease progression after four lines of endocrine therapy (ET) attained a complete response (CR) after subsequent addition of a PI3K inhibitor. Remarkably, her CR is still maintained at 5 years. We believe this may be due to the co-occurrence of an NF1 mutation, which increases sensitivity to PI3K inhibition. Our case demonstrates restoration of sensitivity to ET by additional inhibition of PI3K, which resulted in exceptional disease response, far exceeding the expected duration. Hence, we believe that PI3K inhibition in addition to ET should be considered in patients with simultaneous PIK3CA and NF1 mutations.