Canadian consensus on TRK-inhibitor therapy for NTRK fusion-positive sarcoma.

Malignant sarcomas are rare accounting for <1% of all adult solid malignancies and approximately 11% to 13% of all pediatric malignancies. TRK-inhibitors have demonstrated robust and long-lasting responses in patients with NTRK fusion-positive solid tumors, including sarcoma. Access to these agents in many jurisdictions such as Canada remains limited. We undertook a modified Delphi consensus to articulate and convey the clinical importance of these agents for the Canadian sarcoma community. A systematic search of published and presented literature was conducted to identify clinical trials reporting outcomes on the use of TRK-inhibitors in relapsed/refractory NTRK fusion-positive sarcoma. Three main consensus questions were identified: (a) is there currently an unmet clinical need for systemic therapy options in relapsed/refractory sarcoma? (b) do TRK-inhibitors confer a clinical benefit to patients with NTRK fusion-positive sarcoma? (c) do phase I/II basket trials provide sufficient evidence to justify funding of TRK-inhibitors in NTRK fusion-positive sarcoma? Response rates to the first and second surveys were 57% (n = 30) and 42% (n = 22), respectively. There was strong agreement among the Canadian sarcoma community that there was unmet clinical need for effective systemic therapy options in relapsed/refractory sarcoma, that TRK-inhibitors are a safe and effective treatment option for patients with NTRK fusion-positive sarcoma, and that available phase I/II basket trials provide sufficient evidence to support funding of these agents in relapsed/refractory NTRK fusion-positive sarcoma. TRK-inhibitors are a safe and effective systemic therapy option for patients with relapsed/refractory NTRK fusion-positive sarcoma.

Study of testosterone-guided androgen deprivation therapy in management of prostate cancer.

BACKGROUND: Androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) with luteinizing hormone releasing hormone (LHRH) agonists is an effective initial therapy for men with advanced prostate cancer. LHRH agonists are usually administered indefinitely at a fixed interval. METHODS: We recruited men with advanced prostate cancer who had been on fixed-schedule injections of an LHRH agonist for ≥1 year and had castrate serum testosterone [<1.75 nmol/l (approx. 50 ng/ml)]. Testosterone levels were measured at 6-week intervals and ADT was withheld until testosterone levels were no longer in the castrate range and then reinstituted. Time to reinstitution of ADT was the primary outcome and was analyzed by the Kaplan-Meier method; Cox regression was used to identify factors predicting delay in reinstitution of treatment. Influence on quality-of-life (QoL) was evaluated by the Expanded Prostate Index Composite (EPIC). RESULTS: Forty-six evaluable men who had received LHRH agonist injections every 12 weeks were recruited. Median time to testosterone recovery (defined as testosterone outside the defined castrate level) after previous injection was >1 year. In univariable analysis, lower baseline testosterone [≤1 vs. >1 nmol/l (approx. 30 ng/dl)] and longer time on ADT (>5 vs. ≤5 years) predicted for prolonged time to testosterone recovery, but only lower baseline testosterone remained significant in multivariable analysis (Hazard Ratio = 5.2, P = 0.03). Overall EPIC scores remained stable but improvement from baseline was observed in the hormonal domain (P = 0.002). Median per-patient saving in cost was approximately USD 3,100 (1,050-6,200). CONCLUSIONS: Testosterone-guided ADT reduces exposure to LHRH agonists, with reduction in cost and improvement in some symptoms from ADT. Testosterone-guided ADT should be considered an alternative to fixed schedule treatment by physicians and policy makers.

Retreatment of men with metastatic castrate-resistant prostate cancer with abiraterone.

BACKGROUND: Abiraterone acetate (AA), oral CYP17 inhibitor, is an active agent in the treatment of metastatic castrate-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). METHODS: We (R.L.A and N.A) retrospectively evaluated outcome in 12 men who were re-treated with AA following prior treatment with AA at the Princess Margaret Cancer Centre. RESULTS: All men were heavily pre-treated for mCRPC with a median of four prior lines of therapy, one of which was AA (given either pre- or post-chemotherapy). Eleven out of 12 (92%) men stopped their first treatment course of AA due to progression and one stopped for financial reasons. Seven men had a PSA decrease ≥50% following their first AA treatment, of which three (46%) had a PSA decrease ≥50% to AA re-treatment. The responses to AA re-treatment were generally short-lived with a median biochemical progression-free survival of 2.3 months and median treatment duration of 3.2 months. No PSA responses to AA re-treatment were seen in five men who did not have an initial PSA response to AA. CONCLUSIONS: Our data suggest that AA re-challenge may have limited benefit in select men with mCRPC, and warrants further formal research.

Simple prognostic score for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer with incorporation of neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio.

BACKGROUND: The neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR), a marker of inflammation, has been reported to be a poor prognostic indicator in prostate cancer. Here we explore the use of the NLR to establish a simple prognostic score for men with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) treated with docetaxel. METHODS: In the training cohort, the NLR and other known prognostic variables were evaluated among a cohort of chemotherapy-naïve patients treated with thrice-weekly docetaxel at the Princess Margaret Cancer Centre. Significant prognostic variables identified by univariable Cox regression were evaluated by the area under the receiver operating characteristic curves. Multivariable Cox regression was then used to derive a prognostic score where 1 risk point was assigned for each significant variable. The model was externally validated in a cohort of patients treated at the Royal Marsden. RESULTS: Three hundred fifty-seven patients were analyzed in the training cohort. Median age was 71 years, 12% had liver metastasis, and median overall survival (OS) was 14.7 months. Liver metastases, hemoglobin <12 g/dL, alkaline phosphatase >2.0× upper limit of normal (ULN), lactate dehydrogenase >1.2× ULN, and NLR >3 were associated with significantly worse OS in multivariable analysis. Four risk categories were subsequently established with 0, 1, 2, and 3-5 points. Two-year OS rates for these categories were 43%, 37%, 12%, and 3%, respectively. Area under the curve for the training cohort was 0.78 (95% CI, 0.72-0.84) compared with 0.66 (95% CI, 0.58-0.74) for the 215 patients in the validation cohort. CONCLUSIONS: This simple risk score provides good prognostic and discriminatory accuracy for men with mCRPC.

Effect of multifocality and multicentricity on outcome in early stage breast cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Women with multifocal or multicentric breast tumors (multifocality henceforth) have been reported to have greater probability of nodal metastasis and relapse and worse survival than women with unifocal tumors. However, these associations have been inconsistent and multifocality is not taken into account by staging guidelines and prognostic models. A systematic review of electronic databases identified publications exploring the association between multifocality and overall survival (OS), disease-free survival (DFS), disease-specific survival (DSS), and loco-regional relapse (LRR). The hazard ratios (HRs) for OS and DFS for multifocal compared to unifocal tumors were extracted from multivariable analyses and included in a meta-analysis. For studies not reporting multivariable analyses, odds ratios (OR) were estimated from Kaplan-Meier curves for all endpoints at 5 and 10 years. Twenty-two studies comprising 67,557 women were included. Multifocality was reported in 9.5 % of patients. Classical prognostic factors were well balanced between unifocal and multifocal populations. In multivariable analyses, multifocality was associated with significantly worse OS (HR 1.65; P = 0.02), and a non-significant association with worse DFS (HR 1.96; P = 0.07). In univariable analyses, multifocality was associated with worse OS, DFS, DSS, and LRR at 5 years (OR 1.39, P = 0.02; OR 1.52, P = 0.02; OR 1.56, P = 0.03; and OR 3.23, P = 0.02, respectively). Similar estimates were observed at 10 years, but statistical significance was only reached for DSS and LRR. Mutifocality appears to be associated with a worse prognosis, however, substantial inter-study heterogeneity limits the precise determination of increased risk. Further validation of the independent prognostic impact of multifocality is warranted.

NECTIN4 Amplification Is Frequent in Solid Tumors and Predicts Enfortumab Vedotin Response in Metastatic Urothelial Cancer.

PURPOSE: The anti-NECTIN4 antibody-drug conjugate enfortumab vedotin (EV) is approved for patients with metastatic urothelial cancer (mUC). However, durable benefit is only achieved in a small, yet uncharacterized patient subset. NECTIN4 is located on chromosome 1q23.3, and 1q23.3 gains represent frequent copy number variations (CNVs) in urothelial cancer. Here, we aimed to evaluate NECTIN4 amplifications as a genomic biomarker to predict EV response in patients with mUC. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We established a NECTIN4-specific fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) assay to assess the predictive value of NECTIN4 CNVs in a multicenter EV-treated mUC patient cohort (mUC-EV, n = 108). CNVs were correlated with membranous NECTIN4 protein expression, EV treatment responses, and outcomes. We also assessed the prognostic value of NECTIN4 CNVs measured in metastatic biopsies of non-EV-treated mUC (mUC-non-EV, n = 103). Furthermore, we queried The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) data sets (10,712 patients across 32 cancer types) for NECTIN4 CNVs. RESULTS: NECTIN4 amplifications are frequent genomic events in muscle-invasive bladder cancer (TCGA bladder cancer data set: approximately 17%) and mUC (approximately 26% in our mUC cohorts). In mUC-EV, NECTIN4 amplification represents a stable genomic alteration during metastatic progression and associates with enhanced membranous NECTIN4 protein expression. Ninety-six percent (27 of 28) of patients with NECTIN4 amplifications demonstrated objective responses to EV compared with 32% (24 of 74) in the nonamplified subgroup (P < .001). In multivariable Cox analysis adjusted for age, sex, and Bellmunt risk factors, NECTIN4 amplifications led to a 92% risk reduction for death (hazard ratio, 0.08 [95% CI, 0.02 to 0.34]; P < .001). In the mUC-non-EV, NECTIN4 amplifications were not associated with outcomes. TCGA Pan-Cancer analysis demonstrated that NECTIN4 amplifications occur frequently in other cancers, for example, in 5%-10% of breast and lung cancers. CONCLUSION: NECTIN4 amplifications are genomic predictors of EV responses and long-term survival in patients with mUC.

Benefit and harms of new anti-cancer drugs.

Phase III randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assess clinically important differences in endpoints that reflect benefit to and harm of patients. Defining benefit of cancer drugs can be difficult. Overall survival and quality of life are the most relevant primary endpoints, but difficulty in measuring these mean that other endpoints are often used, although their surrogacy or clinical relevance has not always been established. In general, advances in drug development have led to numerous new drugs to enter the market. Pivotal RCT of several new drugs have shown that benefit appeared greater for targeted anticancer agents than for chemotherapeutic agents. This effect seems particularly evident with targeted agents evaluated in biomarker-driven studies. Unfortunately, new therapies have also shown an increase in toxicity. Such toxicity is not always evident in the initial reports of RCTs. This may be a result of a statistical inability to detect differences between arms of RCTs, or occasionally due to biased reporting. There are several examples where reports of new toxicities could only be found in drug labels. In some cases, the small improvement in survival has come at a cost of substantial excess toxicity, leading some to consider such therapy as having equipoise.

A real-world retrospective analysis of the management of metastatic castrate-resistant prostate cancer in Ontario, Canada from 2010 - 2018.

PURPOSE: We sought to quantify mCRPC patient treatment patterns and survival across multiple lines of therapy after prior androgen-receptor-axis-targeted therapy (ARAT) failure. METHODS: Individuals diagnosed with prostate cancer between 2010 and 2018 were identified in the Ontario Cancer Registry (OCR). An algorithm was created to identify patients with mCRPC that was aligned to Prostate Cancer Clinical Trials Working Group 3 criteria (PCWG3) and validated with Canadian clinical experts. In the mCRPC setting, treatment patterns were assessed by line of therapy, and survival was calculated from treatment initiation until death or lost to follow-up. RESULTS: 64,484 men were diagnosed withprostate cancer in Ontario between 2010 and 2018with 5,588 men assessed to have mCRPC and 2,970 (53%) of those received first-line systemic treatment. Across the first-, second- and third-line of therapy, ARATs (abiraterone and enzalutamide) were the most used therapies. Survival for mCRPC patients treated with ARATs in first-, second- and third-line were 13.0 (95% CI, 11.6 - 14.5), 11.5 (95% CI, 10.1 - 13.4) and 8.9 (95% CI, 7.4 - 10.2) months, respectively. Survival for mCRPC patients treated with taxanes in first, second- and third-line were 16.7 (95% CI, 14.8 - 18.0), 11.3 (95% CI, 10.1 - 12.5) and 7.8 (95% CI, 6.5 - 10.6) months, respectively. No statistical difference in overall survival was found between taxanes and ARATs. CONCLUSION: In this analysis of a large retrospective cohort of Canadian men with mCRPC, we found that survival in patients treated with ARATs and taxanes was fairly similar across all lines of therapy. Importantly, this trend was maintained in ARAT-exposed patients, where sequential ARAT and taxanes offered similar survival. These data may help inform optimal sequencing of therapies in mCRPC.

Can Oncogenic Driver Alterations be Responsible for the Lack of Immunotherapy Efficacy in First-line Advanced Urothelial Carcinoma?

Urothelial carcinoma (UC) harbors many oncogenic alterations and the limited efficacy of first-line immunotherapy in this setting suggests that oncogenic alterations could have potential as a predictive biomarker for treatment decision-making. Antibody-drug conjugates (ADCs) may offer new avenues for biomarker-driven treatment in advanced UC, especially for patients with oncogenic alterations.

Complete response and survival outcomes in patients with advanced cancer on immune checkpoint inhibitors.

Aim: To evaluate overall survival in advanced cancer patients who achieved complete response (CR) with immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) therapy. Methods: This retrospective study included patients with advanced unresectable or metastatic cancer who received at least one cycle of palliative-intent ICI. Best overall response was used to define response groups. Results: 21 (7%) of 322 patients achieved CR. Multivariate analysis demonstrated that CR was independently associated with better overall survival compared with disease progression (hazard ratio: 0.012; 95% CI: 0.002-0.090) and stable disease (hazard ratio: 0.063; 95% CI: 0.009-0.464) as well as a nonsignificant trend toward better overall survival compared with partial response (hazard ratio: 0.169; 95% CI: 0.023-1.252) regardless of cancer type, ICI regimen or ICI line. Conclusion: Patients who achieved CR had longer survival compared with patients who did not achieve CR.

Primary results of STRONG: An open-label, multicenter, phase 3b study of fixed-dose durvalumab monotherapy in previously treated patients with urinary tract carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Prior durvalumab (anti-PD-L1 agent) studies in platinum-refractory metastatic urothelial carcinoma evaluated a dose of 10 mg/kg administered every two weeks. The nonrandomised phase 3b STRONG study (NCT03084471) evaluated the safety and efficacy of fixed-dose durvalumab at a more convenient dosing schedule in a previously treated patient population, more similar to a real-world clinical setting. PATIENTS AND METHODS: 867 patients with urothelial or nonurothelial urinary tract carcinoma (UTC) who progressed on or after platinum or nonplatinum chemotherapy were treated with durvalumab 1500 mg every four weeks; 87% had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (ECOG PS) of 0-1, and 13% had an ECOG PS of 2. The primary end-point was the incidence of adverse events of special interest (AESIs), including immune-mediated AEs (imAEs). Secondary and exploratory end-points included overall survival (OS), objective response rate (ORR) and disease control rate (at six and 12 months) (DCR). RESULTS: AESIs of any grade were reported in 51% of patients (8% grade ≥ 3). The incidence of imAEs was 11% (2% grade ≥ 3). The median OS was 7.0 months (95% confidence interval [CI]: 6.4-8.2) and ORR was 18% (95% CI: 14.8-20.6), with complete responses in 5% of patients and a DCR at six months of 19% (95% CI: 16.1-22.1). CONCLUSION: Fixed-dose durvalumab monotherapy every four weeks has an acceptable safety profile and yields durable clinical activity in previously chemotherapy-treated patients with UTC. Safety and efficacy are consistent with previous durvalumab studies and other anti-PD-1/PD-L1 agents in this setting. CLINICALTRIALS. GOV IDENTIFIER: NCT03084471https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03084471.

Adjuvant Immune Checkpoint Inhibition in Muscle-invasive Bladder Cancer: Is It Ready for Prime Time?

We discuss results from the Checkmate-274 and IMvigor010 trials on adjuvant immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) therapy in muscle-invasive bladder cancer (MIBC) with or without neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC), and conclude that adjuvant ICI (nivolumab but not atezolizumab) should be considered for patients with resected high-risk MIBC, especially for those who have received NAC.

Treatment and Patient Selection for Patients with Metastatic Castration-resistant Prostate After Progression on Docetaxel and Abiraterone/Enzalutamide: When to Play Your CARD and When to Do Your PARP.

For patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) progressing after an androgen receptor axis-targeted therapy and docetaxel, poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors and chemotherapy with cabazitaxel have shown promise. We address the trials for the two approaches and consider possible sequencing of these drugs. We suggest that only patients with a BRCA2 mutation should receive a PARP inhibitor, and docetaxel or cabazitaxel should be favored in the absence of BRCA2 alterations, provided the patient is naïve to these drugs.

A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Dual Therapy in Patients With Advanced Renal Cell Carcinoma of Favourable Risk.

OBJECTIVE: To define the impact of first-line dual therapy involving immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) on survival outcomes in patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma (aRCC) of International Metastatic RCC Database Consortium favourable-risk. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Systematic review of Medline, EMBASE, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled trials were conducted to select all phase II/III randomized clinical trials involving first-line, palliative-intent dual therapy in aRCC patients of favourable-risk. Inverse-variance with random-effects model was used for meta-analysis. Sensitivity analysis with exclusion of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI)-ICI combination was conducted. Study outcomes were overall survival (OS) and progression free survival (PFS). RESULTS: Seven phase II/III randomized controlled trials (N = 1214) were included in the meta-analysis. There were no significant OS differences detected in the favourable-risk group on dual therapy in comparison to sunitinib monotherapy (HR 0.96, 95%CI 0.73-1.26, P = .79). Sensitivity analysis also did not show significant OS benefit when excluding ICI-ICI regimen (HR 0.99, 95%CI 0.69-1.43, P = .96). PFS was not shown to have significant benefit for dual therapy in the favourable-risk group (HR 0.75, 95%CI 0.50-1.13, P = .17), but it met statistical significance when ICI-ICI regimen was excluded from the analysis (HR 0.63, 95%CI 0.50-0.79, P <.001). CONCLUSION: There was no OS benefit when comparing dual therapy vs sunitinib monotherapy in aRCC favourable-risk group. Longer follow-up would be required to definitively detect potential OS benefit, if any. Careful patient-clinician discussion of alternative management options are required prior to initiating dual-therapy in all aRCC favourable-risk group.

Fibroblast Growth Factor Receptor 3 Mutation as a Prognostic Indicator in Patients with Urothelial Carcinoma: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Fibroblast growth factor receptor 3 (FGFR3) mutations have been implicated in urothelial tumorigenesis. FGFR3 inhibitors are being explored in clinical trials. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to study the association between FGFR3 mutations and survival in urothelial carcinoma. DESIGN SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: We performed a systematic literature search of PubMed, Cochrane, Ovid, and Web of Science from January 1985 to October 2018. The search terms were as follows: targeted therapies, FGFR and its subtypes, urothelial, bladder, and cancer. We included case-control or cohort studies of FGFR3 mutations in urothelial carcinoma. We included studies reporting hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for outcomes comparing FGFR3 mutations with FGFR3 wild type. Two reviewers performed article selection. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: We assessed heterogeneity among study-specific HRs using I 2 statistic. We used a random effect model to obtain HR and 95% CI for event-free survival (EFS), composed of recurrence-free and progression-free survival. Statistical tests were two sided. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: Eleven studies (seven retrospective and four prospective) comprising 2162 patients were included. Analysis was performed for two groups. The first group included 1651 patients with non-muscle-invasive (NMI) urothelial carcinomas (886 [53.6%] had FGFR3 mutations). Compared with FGFR3 wild type, FGFR3 mutation did not influence EFS (HR = 0.99, CI = 0.77-1.28, p =  0.96). There was no significant heterogeneity (I 2 = 25%). The second group included 511 patients with NMI and muscle-invasive (MI) urothelial carcinomas (151 [30%] had FGFR3 mutations). FGFR3 mutation was not prognostic (HR = 1.54, CI = 0.41-5.81, p =  0.52). There was heterogeneity (I 2 = 91%). CONCLUSIONS: There is no association between FGFR3 mutation and EFS in NMI urothelial carcinoma, and in NMI and MI urothelial carcinoma groups. PATIENT SUMMARY: Fibroblast growth factor receptor 3 (FGFR3) mutation is not associated with a worse survival outcome in urothelial carcinoma. This is important as FGFR inhibitors are emerging as a new treatment option.

PD-L1 expression and clinical outcomes in patients with advanced urothelial carcinoma treated with checkpoint inhibitors: A meta-analysis.

CONTEXT: Five checkpoint inhibitors have been approved as 1st line (cisplatin-ineligible) or 2nd line therapies for patients with metastatic urothelial carcinoma of the bladder. As only about 30% of patients respond, the need for a biomarker for patient selection exists. OBJECTIVE: To determine if PD-L1 expression is a prognostic factor of objective response rate (ORR) and overall survival (OS) in patients with urothelial carcinoma being treated with checkpoint inhibitors. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: A search of PubMed and major conference proceedings identified trials of PD-L1 inhibitors as first- or second-line therapies for metastatic bladder cancer. Odds ratios (OR) for ORR and OS compared PD-L1 positive and PD-L1 negative patients. Data were weighted and pooled in a meta-analysis, and subgroup analyses compared PD-L1 status cut-offs. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: Ten studies comprising 2755 patients were identified, of which 2030 patients (74%) received immune checkpoint inhibitors. Eight studies were eligible for ORR analysis (1530 patients) and five studies for OS (829 patients). PD-L1 patients had a significantly higher ORR than PD-L1 negative patients (1.82, 95%CI 1.18-2.77; p = 0.007). Weighted mean OS was 11.5 months (range 8.7-15.9 months). PD-L1 status was not prognostic for 12 month OS (OR = 0.81, 95%CI 0.47-1.40; p = 0.45). CONCLUSION: In patients treated with PD-L1 inhibitors for metastatic urothelial carcinoma, PD-L1 status is prognostic for ORR but not OS. Our findings warrant additional investigation. PATIENT SUMMARY: Five immunotherapy drugs are approved for bladder cancer therapy. PD-L1 expression predicts higher ORR but not OS. More data is needed to identify the patient population most benefitted by immunotherapy.

Adjuvant Radiation Therapy After Radical Nephrectomy in Patients with Localized Renal Cell Carcinoma: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

CONTEXT: Adjuvant radiation therapy has been recommended for patients at higher risk of relapse from renal cell carcinoma (RCC) to improve disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) after radical nephrectomy. OBJECTIVE: To quantify the benefit of adjuvant radiation therapy. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: A systematic review of electronic databases identified publications exploring the association between adjuvant radiation therapy and locoregional recurrence (LRR), DFS, and OS among patients after radical nephrectomy for early-stage RCC. Hazard ratios for DFS were weighted and pooled using the generic inverse variance and random effects model. Odds ratios for LRR, DFS, and OS at 5yr were weighted and pooled in a meta-analysis using Mantel-Haenszel random-effects modeling. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: Twelve studies comprising 1624 patients were included in the analysis. Ten studies were retrospective and two were randomized controlled trials. Adjuvant radiation therapy was delivered to 37% of patients. The median follow-up was 49mo. Adjuvant radiation therapy was not associated with better DFS or OS at 5yr, but was associated with less LRR. CONCLUSIONS: With the caveat that confounding by indication may result from pooling data from predominantly nonrandomized studies, adjuvant radiation after radical nephrectomy was not associated with improved DFS or OS but was associated with less LRR. PATIENT SUMMARY: Radiation therapy after resection of renal cell carcinoma with a high risk of relapse may reduce the risk of local recurrence but not the risk of disease recurrence or death after 5yr.

Perioperative chemotherapy for urothelial carcinoma of the upper urinary tract: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Upper tract urothelial carcinomas are rare malignancies with differences in anatomy and biology requiring therapeutic strategies that differ from bladder cancer. The role of perioperative systemic therapy in this disease remains uncertain with limited data to support its use. A systematic review of the literature and meta-analysis was therefore undertaken to provide more information and guide clinical practice. METHODS: A literature search was performed using Embase and Medline databases with additional searches performed manually using terms associated with upper tract urothelial malignancies. Data was extracted from studies of patients that underwent nephrouretectomy for the management of upper tract urothelial carcinoma and received either neoadjuvant or adjuvant systemic therapy. Overall survival (OS), disease-free survival (DFS), and cancer-specific survival (CSS) were summated and analyzed using Cochrane Revman software Version 5.3. RESULTS: There were 13 comparative studies and no randomized studies identified for data extraction; 11 adjuvant and 2 neoadjuvant with 1170 patients receiving perioperative systemic therapy and 3472 controls that did not. Perioperative chemotherapy was associated with improved OS (HR 0.75, 95%CI 0.57-0.99), DFS (HR 0.54, 95%CI 0.32-0.92), and CSS (HR 0.69, 95%CI 0.42-1.15). CONCLUSIONS: The available data suggests that perioperative systemic therapy is associated with improved survival in patients with upper tract urothelial cancer.

Epidermal growth factor receptor overexpression and outcomes in early breast cancer: A systematic review and a meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: The epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) is a member of the ErbB family of membrane tyrosine-kinase receptors. Studies exploring the prognostic role of EGFR-overexpression in early breast cancer have shown variable results, and the true prognostic value of EGFR is unknown. METHODS: A systematic review of identified publications exploring the association between EGFR-overexpression (as defined from different techniques and cut-offs) and outcomes [disease-free (DFS) and, overall survival (OS)] in women with early breast cancer. The hazard ratios (HR) for DFS and OS were weighted and pooled in a meta-analysis using generic inverse variance and random effects modeling. RESULTS: Fifty-three studies comprising 21,418 women were included. EGFR-overexpression was found in 27% of the patients. Primary analysis included studies reporting HRs from multivariable analyses (10 studies including 4857 patients with HRs for OS and 17 studies comprising 8747 patients with HRs for DFS), EGFR-overexpression was associated with worse OS (HR 1.98, 95% CI: 1.59-2.47, p < .001) and DFS (HR 1.59, 95% CI 1.30-1.95, p < .001). The influence of EGFR overexpression on DFS was greater in women with triple negative tumors compared to women with non-triple negative tumors (HR 2.35 versus HR 1.45, respectively; p = .01). Analysis looking at odd ratios for both 5-year and 10-year for DFS and OS showed similar results. CONCLUSION: EGFR-overexpression appears to be associated with reduced OS and DFS in women with early breast cancer. Patients with triple negative and EGFR-overexpression have poorer OS and DFS than those with triple negative tumors and normal EGFR expression.