Long-term responders to nivolumab in previously treated advanced renal cell carcinoma: a sub-analysis of meet-URO15 study.

BACKGROUND: Although nivolumab prolongs overall survival (OS) in pretreated patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC), underlining clinical and biological features of long-term responses are still to be determined. This study aims to investigate clinical and pathological characteristics of mRCC patients who achieved long-term responses during nivolumab treatment. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective analysis was performed on mRCC patients receiving nivolumab as second or further therapy line between May 2016 and January 2019 in 34 Italian Oncology Centres. Outcome assessments and logistic regression were performed to evaluate factors influencing long-term responses. RESULTS: A total of 571 patients with a median age of 61 years (range 17-85) were included in the analysis. With a median follow-up of 22.1 (1.0-89.0) months, 23.1% of patients were 2-year progression-free on treatment with nivolumab, hence they were categorized as long-term responders. Baseline characteristics, including age, gender, and histology, were similar between long- and short-term responders. Karnofsky Performance Status ≥ 80% was significantly associated with long-term response (p = 0.02), while bone metastases (p = 0.03), International mRCC Database Consortium intermediate-poor risk (p < 0.01) and Neutrophil-to-Lymphocyte Ratio ≥ 3.2 (p = 0.02) were associate with short-term responses. Long-term responders exhibited a median progression-free survival of 55.0 months versus 4.0 months of the short-term responders. The median OS was not reached in long-term responders while it was 17.0 months for short*term responders. CONCLUSION: This retrospective analysis sheds light on factors associated with long-term response to nivolumab in mRCC. Understanding these clinical features will be essential for selecting patients who may mostly benefit from immunotherapy.

International multicenter real-world REGistry for patients with metastatic renAL cell carcinoma - Meet-URO 33 study (REGAL study).

BACKGROUND: Nowadays, different therapeutic options are available for the first-line treatment of metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). Immuno-combinations are the standard first-line therapy in all mRCC patients regardless of the International Metastatic RCC Database Consortium (IMDC) risk category, even though TKI monotherapy is still a therapeutic option in selected patients. However, comparisons between the different first-line treatment strategies are lacking and few real-world data are available in this setting. For this reason, the regimen choice represents an important issue in clinical practice and the optimal treatment sequence remains unclear. METHODS: The REGAL study is a multicentric prospective observational study enrolling mRCC patients treated with first-line systemic therapy according to clinical practice in a real-world setting. A retrospective cohort of mRCC patients who received first-line systemic therapy from the 1st of January 2021 will also be included. The primary objective is to identify potential prognostic and predictive factors that could help guide the treatment choice; secondary objectives included the assessment of the prognostic performance of the novel prognostic Meet-URO score (IMDC score + neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio + bone metastases) compared with the IMDC score and the comparison between treatment strategies according to response and survival outcomes and toxicity profile. DISCUSSION: Considering the high number of therapeutic first-line strategies available for mRCC, the identification of clinical prognostic and predictive factors to candidate patients to a preferable systemic therapy is still an unmet clinical need. The Meet-URO 33 study aims to provide a large-scale real-world database on mRCC patients, to identify the clinical predictive and prognostic factors and the different performances between the ICI-based combinations according to response, survival and toxicity. TRIAL REGISTRATION: CESC IOV 2023-78.

Safety and efficacy analysis of neoadjuvant pertuzumab, trastuzumab and standard chemotherapy for HER2-positive early breast cancer: real-world data from NeoPowER study.

BACKGROUND: The addition of pertuzumab (P) to trastuzumab (H) and standard chemotherapy (CT) as neoadjuvant treatment (NaT) for patients with HER2 + breast cancer (BC), has shown to increase the pathological complete response (pCR) rate, without main safety concerns. The aim of NeoPowER trial is to evaluate safety and efficacy of P + H + CT in a real-world population. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of stage II-III, HER2 + BC patients treated with NaT: who received P + H + CT (neopower group) in 5 Emilia Romagna institutions were compared with an historical group who received H + CT (control group). The primary endpoint was the safety, secondary endpoints were pCR rate, DRFS and OS and their correlation to NaT and other potential variables. RESULTS: 260 patients were included, 48% received P + H + CT, of whom 44% was given anthraciclynes as part of CT, compared to 83% in the control group. The toxicity profile was similar, excluding diarrhea more frequent in the neopower group (20% vs. 9%). Three patients experienced significant reductions in left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), all receiving anthracyclines. The pCR rate was 46% (P + H + CT) and 40% (H + CT) (p = 0.39). The addition of P had statistically correlation with pCR only in the patients receiving anthra-free regimens (OR = 3.05,p = 0.047). Preoperative use of anthracyclines (OR = 1.81,p = 0.03) and duration of NaT (OR = 1.18,p = 0.02) were statistically related to pCR. 12/21 distant-relapse events and 14/17 deaths occurred in the control group. Patients who achieve pCR had a significant increase in DRFS (HR = 0.23,p = 0.009). CONCLUSIONS: Adding neoadjuvant P to H and CT is safe. With the exception of diarrhea, rate of adverse events of grade > 2 did not differ between the two groups. P did not increase the cardiotoxicity when added to H + CT, nevertheless in our population all cardiac events occurred in patients who received anthracycline-containing regimens. Not statistically significant, higher pCR rate is achievable in patients receiving neoadjuvant P + H + CT. The study did not show a statistically significant correlation between the addition of P and long-term outcomes.

Lymphomas of the Vulva: A Review of the MITO Rare Cancer Group.

Since they are very rare tumors, lymphomas of the vulva are often not properly recognized. Patients with vulvar lymphoma are generally elderly and the classical manifestation of the disease is a vulvar mass. No significant age differences have been found between primary and secondary lymphoma. To make a correct diagnosis, it is therefore necessary to use not only histological examination but also the genetic and molecular profile in order to establish optimal therapeutic management. Literature analysis confirm the good prognosis of this disease.

Final Results from SAUL, a Single-arm International Study of Atezolizumab in Unselected Patients with Pretreated Locally Advanced/Metastatic Urinary Tract Carcinoma.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: We assessed the safety of atezolizumab in unselected patients (including understudied populations typically excluded from clinical trials) with pretreated urinary tract carcinoma (UTC). The prespecified final analysis updates previously reported safety and efficacy data. METHODS: The single-arm prospective SAUL study (NCT02928406) enrolled 1004 patients with locally advanced/metastatic urothelial/non-urothelial UTC that had progressed during/after one to three prior treatment lines for advanced UTC (or <12 mo after [neo]adjuvant therapy). Broad eligibility criteria allowed enrollment of patients with complex comorbidities approximating the real-world setting. Patients received atezolizumab 1200 mg every 3 wk until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. The primary endpoint was safety. Secondary endpoints included duration of response and overall survival (OS). KEY FINDINGS AND LIMITATIONS: The treated cohort included 10% of patients with poor performance status, 5% with creatinine clearance <30 ml/min, and 4% with autoimmune disease. At median follow-up of 55 mo, median atezolizumab duration was 2.8 mo (range 0-62); 68 patients (7%) continued atezolizumab for >4 yr. Treatment-related grade ≥3 adverse events occurred in 16% of patients (death in 1%); 8% discontinued atezolizumab for adverse events. Median OS was 8.6 mo (95% confidence interval 7.8-9.7) and 136 patients (14%) had OS longer than 4 yr. Limitations include the small sample size for some subgroups of special interest. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: Long-term safety and efficacy data continue to show a benefit of atezolizumab in unselected patients with UTC. Remarkably, 14% of patients lived for >4 yr after starting atezolizumab. These results can inform multidisciplinary team discussions and treatment decision-making for patients with UTC with complex comorbidities. PATIENT SUMMARY: The SAUL study looked at how well tolerated a drug called atezolizumab was in patients with urinary tract cancer who had already received up to three previous treatments for their cancer, including people who are usually not included in clinical trials because of other medical conditions. The length of survival after starting treatment was also assessed. Overall, the results show that atezolizumab was well tolerated. People for whom other therapies had failed lived for about 8.6 months on average after starting treatment, and 14% of the patients were still alive after 4 years.

Long-term follow-up of efficacy and safety of selinexor maintenance treatment in patients with TP53wt advanced or recurrent endometrial cancer: A subgroup analysis of the ENGOT-EN5/GOG-3055/SIENDO study.

OBJECTIVE: To report long-term efficacy and safety of selinexor maintenance therapy in adults with TP53 wild-type (TP53wt) stage IV or recurrent endometrial cancer (EC) who achieved partial remission (PR) or complete remission (CR) following chemotherapy. METHODS: Analysis of the prespecified, exploratory subgroup of patients with TP53wt EC from the phase 3 SIENDO study was performed. Progression-free survival (PFS) benefit in patients with TP53wt EC and across other patient subgroups were exploratory endpoints. Safety and tolerability were also assessed. RESULTS: Of the 263 patients enrolled in the SIENDO trial, 113 patients had TP53wt EC; 70/113 (61.9%) had TP53wt/proficient mismatch repair (pMMR) EC, and 29/113 (25.7%) had TP53wt/deficient mismatch repair (dMMR) EC. As of April 1, 2024, the median PFS (mPFS) for TP53wt patients who received selinexor compared with placebo was 28.4 versus 5.2 months (36.8-month follow-up, HR 0.44; 95% CI 0.27-0.73). A benefit in mPFS was seen with selinexor versus placebo regardless of MMR status (patients with TP53wt/pMMR EC: 39.5 vs 4.9 months, HR 0.36; 95% CI 0.19-0.71; patients with TP53wt/dMMR EC: 13.1 vs 3.7 months, HR 0.49; 95% CI 0.18-1.34). Selinexor treatment was generally manageable, with no new safety signals identified. CONCLUSION: In the phase 3 SIENDO study, selinexor maintenance therapy showed a promising efficacy signal and a manageable safety profile in the prespecified subgroup of patients with TP53wt EC who achieved a PR or CR following chemotherapy. These results are being further evaluated in an ongoing randomized phase 3 trial (NCT05611931).

New-generation androgen receptor signaling inhibitors (ARSIs) in metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC): pharmacokinetics, drug-drug interactions (DDIs), and clinical impact.

INTRODUCTION: The therapeutic scenario of metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC) has dramatically changed in recent years, with the approval of new-generation Androgen Receptor Signaling Inhibitors (ARSIs), in combination with the androgen deprivation therapy (ADT), which was the previous standard of care. Despite showing a similar clinical efficacy, ARSIs, all of which are administered orally, are different in terms of pharmacokinetic and drug-drug interactions (DDIs). AREAS COVERED: This review covers the main pharmacokinetic characteristics of ARSIs that have been approved for the first-line therapy of mHSPC patients, underlying the differences among these molecules and focusing on the known or possible interactions with other drugs. Full-text articles and abstracts were searched in PubMed. EXPERT OPINION: Since prostate cancer occurs mainly in older age, comorbidities and the consequent polypharmacy increase the DDI risk in mHSPC patients who are candidates for ARSI. Waiting for new therapeutic options, in the absence of direct comparisons, pharmacokinetic knowledge is essential to guide clinicians in prescribing ARSI in this setting.

Real-World Impact of Upfront Cytoreductive Nephrectomy in Metastatic Non-Clear Cell Renal Cell Carcinoma Treated with First-Line Immunotherapy Combinations or Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitors (A Sub-Analysis from the ARON-1 Retrospective Study).

BACKGROUND: About 20% of patients with renal cell carcinoma present with non-clear cell histology (nccRCC), encompassing various histological types. While surgery remains pivotal for localized-stage nccRCC, the role of cytoreductive nephrectomy (CN) in metastatic nccRCC is contentious. Limited data exist on the role of CN in metastatic nccRCC under current standard of care. OBJECTIVE: This retrospective study focused on the impact of upfront CN on metastatic nccRCC outcomes with first-line immune checkpoint inhibitor (IO) combinations or tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) monotherapy. METHODS: The study included 221 patients with nccRCC and synchronous metastatic disease, treated with IO combinations or TKI monotherapy in the first line. Baseline clinical characteristics, systemic therapy, and treatment outcomes were analyzed. The primary objective was to assess clinical outcomes, including progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). Statistical analysis involved the Fisher exact test, Pearson's correlation coefficient, analysis of variance, Kaplan-Meier method, log-rank test, and univariate/multivariate Cox proportional hazard regression models. RESULTS: Median OS for patients undergoing upfront CN was 36.8 (95% confidence interval [CI] 24.9-71.3) versus 20.8 (95% CI 12.6-24.8) months for those without CN (p = 0.005). Upfront CN was significantly associated with OS in the multivariate Cox regression analysis (hazard ratio 0.47 [95% CI 0.31-0.72], p < 0.001). In patients without CN, the median OS and PFS was 24.5 (95% CI 18.1-40.5) and 13.0 months (95% CI 6.6-23.5) for patients treated with IO+TKI versus 7.5 (95% CI 4.3-22.4) and 4.9 months (95% CI 3.0-8.1) for those receiving the IO+IO combination (p = 0.059 and p = 0.032, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Our study demonstrates the survival benefits of upfront CN compared with systemic therapy without CN. The study suggests that the use of IO+TKI combination or, eventually, TKI monotherapy might be a better choice than IO+IO combination for patients who are not candidates for CN regardless of IO eligibility. Prospective trials are needed to validate these findings and refine the role of CN in current mRCC management.

Papillary Renal Cell Carcinoma: Outcomes for Patients Receiving First-line Immune-based Combinations or Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitors from the ARON-1 Study.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Papillary renal cell carcinoma (pRCC) is the most frequent histological subtype of non-clear cell RCC (nccRCC). Owing to the heterogeneity of nccRCC, patients are often excluded from large phase 3 trials focused on clear cell RCC, so treatment options for nccRCC remain limited. Our aim was to investigate the efficacy of first-line treatment with tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) or immuno-oncology (IO)-based combinations in patients with pRCC. METHODS: We performed a multicenter retrospective analysis of real-world data collected for patients with advanced pRCC treated in 40 centers in 12 countries as part of the ARON-1 project (NCT05287464). The primary endpoints were overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), the overall response rate (ORR), and time to second progression (PFS2). OS, PFS, and PFS2 were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method and results were compared between the treatment groups using a log-rank test. Univariate and multivariable analyses were carried out using Cox proportional-hazard models. KEY FINDINGS AND LIMITATIONS: We included 200 patients with metastatic pRCC, of whom 73 were treated with IO-based combinations and 127 with TKIs. Median OS was 22.5 mo in the TKI group 28.8 mo in the IO group (p = 0.081). Median PFS was 6.4 mo in the TKI group and 17.4 mo in the IO group (p < 0.001). The ORR was higher in the IO group than in the TKI group (41% vs 27%; p = 0.037). CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: Our results show that IO-based combinations have superior efficacy outcomes to TKIs for first-line treatment of metastatic pRCC. PATIENT SUMMARY: The ARON-1 project collects clinical data for patients with kidney cancer treated in multiple centers worldwide to assess outcomes in the real-world setting. We analyzed data for patients with metastatic kidney cancer of a specific subtype to evaluate the efficacy of different first-line treatments. Patients treated with immune-based combinations had better outcomes than patients treated with tyrosine kinase inhibitors.

Endometriosis and endometrial cancer: A propensity score-adjusted real-world data study.

Endometriosis is a benign condition characterized by the presence of ectopic endometrial tissue. Our study investigated the effect of endometriosis on the risk of endometrial cancer (EC) and the prognosis of endometriosis-associated EC. In our study, 197,196 patients with endometriosis and without a previous diagnosis of EC were compared with 6,455,556 females encountering health services for examinations, with body mass index (BMI) data, and without endometriosis or EC. A propensity score generated 197,141 matched pairs. In the endometriosis cohort, 875 cases of EC were seen, whereas 558 were in the control group: the hazard ratio (HR) was 1.56 (95% CI 1.40-1.73, p < 0.001). Women with endometriosis were more likely to develop invasive endometrioid (p = 0.005) and clear cell (p < 0.001) EC. There was no difference in overall survival between endometriosis-associated EC and EC without endometriosis. Our epidemiological findings were consistent with the evidence of an association between endometriosis and EC.

Global real-world experiences with pembrolizumab in advanced urothelial carcinoma after platinum-based chemotherapy: the ARON-2 study.

BACKGROUND: Immune checkpoint inhibitors have changed previous treatment paradigm of advanced urothelial carcinoma (UC). The ARON-2 study (NCT05290038) aimed to assess the real-world effectiveness of pembrolizumab in patients recurred or progressed after platinum-based chemotherapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Medical records of patients with documented metastatic UC treated by pembrolizumab as second-line therapy were retrospectively collected from 88 institutions in 23 countries. Patients were assessed for overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS) and overall response rate (ORR). Cox proportional hazards models were adopted to explore the presence of prognostic factors. RESULTS: In total, 836 patients were included: 544 patients (65%) received pembrolizumab after progression to first-line platinum-based chemotherapy in the metastatic setting (cohort A) and 292 (35%) after recurring within < 12 months since the completion of adjuvant or neoadjuvant chemotherapy (cohort B). The median follow-up time was 15.3 months. The median OS and the ORR were 10.5 months and 31% in the overall study population, 9.1 months and 29% in cohort A and 14.6 months and 37% in cohort B. At multivariate analysis, ECOG-PS ≥ 2, bone metastases, liver metastases and pembrolizumab setting (cohort A vs B) proved to be significantly associated with worst OS and PFS. Stratified by the presence of 0, 1-2 or 3-4 prognostic factors, the median OS was 29.4, 12.5 and 4.1 months (p < 0.001), while the median PFS was 12.2, 6.4 and 2.8 months, respectively (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Our study confirms that pembrolizumab is effective in the advanced UC real-world context, showing outcome differences between patients recurred or progressed after platinum-based chemotherapy.

Impact of teratoma on survival probabilities of patients with metastatic non-seminomatous germ cell cancer: Results from the IGCCCG Update Consortium.

AIMS: To resolve the ongoing controversy surrounding the impact of teratoma (TER) in the primary among patients with metastatic testicular non-seminomatous germ-cell tumours (NSGCT). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Using the International Germ Cell Cancer Collaborative Group (IGCCCG) Update Consortium database, we compared the survival probabilities of patients with metastatic testicular GCT with TER (TER) or without TER (NTER) in their primaries corrected for known prognostic factors. Progression-free survival (5y-PFS) and overall survival at 5 years (5y-OS) were estimated by the Kaplan-Meier method. RESULTS: Among 6792 patients with metastatic testicular NSGCT, 3224 (47%) had TER in their primary, and 3568 (53%) did not. In the IGCCCG good prognosis group, the 5y-PFS was 87.8% in TER versus 92.0% in NTER patients (p = 0.0001), the respective 5y-OS were 94.5% versus 96.5% (p = 0.0032). The corresponding figures in the intermediate prognosis group were 5y-PFS 76.9% versus 81.6% (p = 0.0432) in TER and NTER and 5y-OS 90.4% versus 90.9% (p = 0.8514), respectively. In the poor prognosis group, there was no difference, neither in 5y-PFS [54.3% in TER patients versus 55.4% (p = 0.7472) in NTER], nor in 5y-OS [69.4% versus 67.7% (p = 0.3841)]. NSGCT patients with TER had more residual masses (65.3% versus 51.7%, p < 0.0001), and therefore received post-chemotherapy surgery more frequently than NTER patients (46.8% versus 32.0%, p < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: Teratoma in the primary tumour of patients with metastatic NSGCT negatively impacts on survival in the good and intermediate, but not in the poor IGCCCG prognostic groups.

Management of cancer treatment-induced bone loss in patients with breast and hormone sensitive prostate cancer: AIOM survey.

PURPOSE: Cancer treatment-induced bone loss is a side effect of hormonal therapy that can severely affect patients' quality of life. The aim of this survey was to obtain an updated picture of management of bone health in patients with breast cancer undergoing adjuvant hormonal therapy and in patients with hormone sensitive prostate cancer according to Italian oncologists. METHODS: Our survey was made up of 21 multiple-choice questions: the first part dealt with the respondents' characteristics, while the second with management of bone health in the described setting. An invitation to complete the survey was sent by e-mail to 2336 oncologists, members of Italian Association of Medical Oncology, in October 2022. RESULTS: Overall, 121 (5.2%) Italian oncologists completed the survey. In most cases (57%) the oncologist personally took charge of the management of bone health in patients at risk for cancer treatment-induced bone loss. At the beginning of hormonal therapy, most respondents reported to require bone health diagnostic exams, such as dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (89%), repeated with different timing. Main reported reasons (not mutually exclusive) for prescribing antiresorptive drugs were modifying fracture risk (87%), densitometry values (75%) or prognosis (34%). Answers about the management of antiresorptive therapy were heterogeneous. CONCLUSION: A heterogeneous approach on the management of cancer treatment-induced bone loss in Italy arises from this survey. This scenario highlights the need for a major consensus of the Italian scientific community on the diagnostic and therapeutic approach of cancer treatment-induced bone loss and for a greater awareness of this topic among Italian oncologists.

Treatment of bone metastases from solid tumors with bone-modifying agents: a web survey of Italian oncologists investigating patterns of practice drug prescription and prevention of side effects.

PURPOSE: Optimal use of bone-modifying agents (BMAs) in patients with bone metastases from solid tumors is uncertain in some aspects: the drug choice; the planned treatment duration and long-term therapy; the prevention and management of possible side effects, including renal toxicity, hypocalcaemia, and medication-related osteonecrosis of the jaw (MRONJ). METHODS: Italian oncologists were invited to fulfil a 24-question web survey about prescription of BMAs for bone metastases of breast cancer, prostate cancer, and other solid tumors. Prevention and management of side effects were also investigated. RESULTS: Answers of 191 oncologists were collected. BMAs are usually prescribed at the time of diagnosis of bone metastases by 87.0% (breast cancer) and 76.1% (solid tumors except breast and prostate cancers) of oncologists; the decision is more articulated for prostate cancer (endocrine-sensitive versus castration-resistant). The creatinine level (32.3%), the availability of patient venous access (15.8%), and the type of primary neoplasm (13.6%) are the most reported factors involved in choice between bisphosphonates and denosumab. Zoledronic acid every 3 months was considered as a valid alternative to monthly administration by 94% of Italian oncologists. Oncologists reported a good confidence with measures aimed to prevent MRONJ, whereas uncertainness about prevention and management of hypocalcemia was registered. CONCLUSION: Italian oncologists showed a high attitude in prescribing bisphosphonates or denosumab at the time of diagnosis of bone metastases, with a large application of preventive measures of side effects. Further studies are needed to investigate some controversial aspects, such as optimal drug treatment duration and long-term drug schedules.

Time to strategy failure and treatment beyond progression in pretreated metastatic renal cell carcinoma patients receiving nivolumab: post-hoc analysis of the Meet-URO 15 study.

Background: Immunotherapies exhibit peculiar cancer response patterns in contrast to chemotherapy and targeted therapy. Some patients experience disease response after initial progression or durable responses after treatment interruption. In clinical practice, immune checkpoint inhibitors may be continued after radiological progression if clinical benefit is observed. As a result, estimating progression-free survival (PFS) based on the first disease progression may not accurately reflect the actual benefit of immunotherapy. Methods: The Meet-URO 15 study was a multicenter retrospective analysis of 571 pretreated metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) patients receiving nivolumab. Time to strategy failure (TSF) was defined as the interval from the start of immunotherapy to definitive disease progression or death. This post-hoc analysis compared TSF to PFS and assess the response and survival outcomes between patients treatated beyond progression (TBP) and non-TBP. Moreover, we evaluated the prognostic accuracy of the Meet-URO score versus the International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium (IMDC) score based on TSF and PFS. Results: Overall, 571 mRCC patients were included in the analysis. Median TSF was 8.6 months (95% CI: 7.0 - 10.1), while mPFS was 7.0 months (95% CI: 5.7 - 8.5). TBP patients (N = 93) had significantly longer TSF (16.3 vs 5.5 months; p < 0.001) and overall survival (OS) (34.8 vs 17.9 months; p < 0.001) but similar PFS compared to non-TBP patients. In TBP patients, a median delay of 9.6 months (range: 6.7-16.3) from the first to the definitive disease progression was observed, whereas non-TBP patients had overlapped median TSF and PFS (5.5 months). Moreover, TBP patients had a trend toward a higher overall response rate (33.3% vs 24.3%; p = 0.075) and disease control rate (61.3% vs 55.5%; p = 0.31). Finally, in the whole population the Meet-URO score outperformed the IMDC score in predicting both TSF (c-index: 0.63 vs 0.59) and PFS (0.62 vs 0.59). Conclusion: We found a 2-month difference between mTSF and mPFS in mRCC patients receiving nivolumab. However, TBP patients had better outcomes, including significantly longer TSF and OS than non-TBP patients. The Meet-URO score is a reliable predictor of TSF and PFS.

177Lu-PSMA therapy in metastatic prostate cancer: An updated review of prognostic and predictive biomarkers.

177Lu-PSMA has been approved for the treatment of PSMA-positive metastatic castration-resistant (mCRPC) patients who progressed to androgen receptor pathway inhibitors (ARPIs) and taxane-based chemotherapy. However, a higher proportion of patients do not respond to this type of radioligand therapy (RLT). To date, there is a lack of validated prognostic and predictive biomarkers for 177Lu-PSMA therapy in prostate cancer. Several studies have investigated the prognostic and predictive role of clinical and molecular factors and also the metabolic features of PET imaging. In this review, we aim to take stock of the current scenario, focusing on new emerging data from retrospective/prospective series and clinical trials. Given the high costs and the possibility of primary resistance, it seems essential to identify clinical and molecular characteristics that could allow clinicians to choose the right patient to treat with 177Lu-PSMA. Biomarker-based clinical trials are urgently needed in this field.

Single-Agent Trabectedin Versus Physician's Choice Chemotherapy in Patients With Recurrent Ovarian Cancer With BRCA-Mutated and/or BRCAness Phenotype: A Randomized Phase III Trial.

PURPOSE: Literature evidence suggests that trabectedin monotherapy is effective in patients with recurrent ovarian cancer (OC) presenting BRCA mutation and/or BRCAness phenotype. METHODS: A prospective, open-label, randomized phase III MITO-23 trial evaluated the activity and safety of trabectedin 1.3 mg/m2 given once every 3 weeks (arm A) in BRCA 1/2 mutation carriers or patients with BRCAness phenotype (ie, patients who responded to ≥two previous platinum-based treatments) with recurrent OC, primary peritoneal carcinoma, or fallopian tube cancer in comparison with physician's choice chemotherapy in the control arm (arm B; pegylated liposomal doxorubicin, topotecan, gemcitabine, once-weekly paclitaxel, or carboplatin). The primary end point was overall survival (OS) evaluated in the intention-to-treat population. RESULTS: Overall, 244 patients from 21 MITO centers were randomly assigned (arm A = 122/arm B = 122). More than 70% of patients received ≥three previous chemotherapy lines and 35.7% had received a poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitor (PARPi) before enrollment. Median OS was not significantly different between the arms: arm A: 15.8 versus arm B: 17.9 months (P = .304). Median progression-free survival was 4.9 months in arm A versus 4.4 months in arm B (P = .897). Among 208 patients evaluable for efficacy, the objective response rate was 17.1% in arm A and 21.4% in arm B, with comparable median duration of response (5.62 v 5.66 months, respectively). No superior effect was observed for trabectedin in the prespecified subgroup analyses according to BRCA mutational status, chemotherapy type, and pretreatment with a PARPi and/or platinum-free interval. Trabectedin showed a higher frequency of grade ≥3 adverse events (AEs), serious AEs, and serious adverse drug reactions compared with control chemotherapy. CONCLUSION: Trabectedin did not improve median OS and showed a worse safety profile in comparison with physician's choice control chemotherapy.

Initial management approach for localized/locally advanced disease is critical to guide metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer care.

BACKGROUND: Currently, several therapies are available for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) but no specific clinical factors to personalize treatment. We first sought the prognostic value of duration on androgen-deprivation therapy (ADT) for hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (HSPC) in patients receiving androgen-receptor-signaling inhibitors (ARSI) for mCRPC. METHODS: A multicenter cohort of mCRPC patients who started ARSI between July 2011 and October 2021 was identified. Based on their initial disease burden and duration on ADT for HSPC, primary progressive (PP) men were classified into four groups: low/intermediate-risk localized disease (LOC) and high-risk localized/locally advanced disease (LAD) and short-term (ST) < 24 vs. long-term (LT) ADT ≥ 24 months, whereas de novo (DN) mHSPC were subdivided into short-time vs. long-time to CRPC. RESULTS: We included 919 mCRPC patients with a median age of 77 years [interquartile range (IQR) = 71-82)]. Median ADT duration in HSPC was 24 months (IQR = 14-40). Median follow-up was 91 months (IQR = 62-138), median OS and PFS from ARSI start were 20 (IQR 10-32) and 10 months (IQR = 5-19), respectively. In PP developing metastatic disease (n = 655, 71.3%), LOC and LAD with ST ADT had a greater than almost double-risk of death compared to LT ADT (LOC/ST: hazard ratio [HR] = 2.01; 95% CI 1.54-2.64; LAD/ST: HR = 1.73; 95% CI 1.34-2.24; p < 0.001). In the multivariate analysis including age, prognostic cohort, Gleason, ECOG, radical radiotherapy and prostatectomy, groups with ST ADT were associated with worse OS compared to LT ADT (LOC/ST: HR = 1.84; 95% CI 1.38-2.45; p < 0.001; LAD/ST: HR = 1.59; 95% CI 1.21-2.10; p < 0.001), along with ECOG > 2 (HR = 1.55; 95% CI 1.06-2.26; p = 0.03). There were also similar results of PFS. Moreover, long-time to CRPC in patients with history of DN mHSPC (n = 264, 28.7%) resulted in a better OS/PFS (HR = 0.76, 95% CI 0.56-1.02, p = 0.064 and HR = 0.74, 95% CI 0.55-0.99, p = 0.042, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Our study showed that duration on ADT for mHSPC was significantly associated with survival in mCRPC undergoing ARSI. These findings suggest a possible connection between initial management of prostate tumour and a better prognostication in mCRPC. Prospective trials are warranted.