Long-Term Outcomes of Dose-Escalated Pelvic Lymph Node Intensity-Modulated Radiation Therapy (IMRT) With a Simultaneous Hypofractionated Boost to the Prostate for Very High-Risk Adenocarcinoma of the Prostate: A Prospective Phase II Clinical Trial.

PURPOSE: There remains limited data as to the feasibility, safety, and efficacy of higher doses of elective radiation therapy to the pelvic lymph nodes in men with high-risk prostate cancer. We conducted a phase II study to evaluate moderate dose escalation to the pelvic lymph nodes using a simultaneous integrated boost to the prostate. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Patients were eligible with biopsy-proven adenocarcinoma of the prostate, a calculated lymph node risk of at least 25%, Karnofsky performance scale ≥70, and no evidence of M1 disease. Acute and late toxicity were prospectively collected at each follow-up using Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 4.0 (CTCAE v4.0). The pelvic lymph nodes were treated to a dose of 56 Gy over 28 fractions with a simultaneous integrated boost to the prostate to a total dose of 70 Gy over 28 fractions using intensity-modulated radiation therapy. RESULTS: Thirty patients were prospectively enrolled from October 2010 to August 2014. Median patient age was 70 years (57-83), pretreatment prostate-specific antigen was 11.5 ng/mL (3.23-111.5), T stage was T2c (T1c-T3b), and Gleason score was 9 (6-9). CTCAE v4.0 rate of any grade 1 or 2 genitourinary and gastrointestinal toxicity were 55% and 44%, respectively, and there was 1 reported acute grade 3 genitourinary and gastrointestinal toxicity, both unrelated to protocol therapy. With a median follow-up of 6.4 years, the biochemical failure free survival rate was 80.2%, and mean biochemical progression free survival was 8.3 years (95% confidence interval [CI], 7.2-9.4). The prostate cancer specific survival was 95.2%, and mean prostate cancer specific survival was 8.7 years (95% CI, 8.0-9.4). Five-year distant metastases free survival was 96%. Medians were not reached. CONCLUSIONS: In this single arm, small, prospective feasibility study, nodal radiation therapy dose escalation was safe, feasible, and seemingly well tolerated. Rates of progression free survival are highly encouraging in this population of predominately National Comprehensive Cancer Network very high-risk patients.

Double-blind, randomized, phase 2 trial of maintenance sunitinib versus placebo after response to chemotherapy in patients with advanced urothelial carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Angiogenesis contributes to the progression of urothelial carcinoma (UC). In the current study, the authors investigated the role of maintenance sunitinib in patients with advanced UC. METHODS: Patients with locally recurrent/metastatic UC and adequate organ function who achieved stable disease or a partial or complete response after 4 to 6 chemotherapy cycles were randomized to sunitinib at a dose of 50 mg/day (28 days on and 14 days off) or placebo. The primary endpoint was the 6-month progression rate. Secondary endpoints were safety, survival, change in serum vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF)/soluble VEGF receptor-2 (sVEGFR2), and the activity of sunitinib in patients who developed disease progression while receiving placebo. A total of 38 eligible patients per treatment arm were required to select better therapy with 90% probability (α = .05). RESULTS: A total of 54 eligible patients were randomized to either the sunitinib arm (26 patients) or the placebo arm (28 patients). The median number of cycles received was 2 cycles per treatment arm. The most common grade 3 to 4 adverse events (graded according to version 3.0 of the National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events) among patients receiving sunitinib were thrombocytopenia, diarrhea, mucositis, fatigue, and hypertension. There were no grade 3 or 4 adverse events noted among > 5% of patients receiving placebo. The 6-month progression rate was 72% versus 64%. The median progression-free survival (PFS) was 2.9 months (range, 0.5 months-32.5 months) versus 2.7 months (range, 0.8 months -65 months) for the sunitinib versus placebo arms, respectively. Patients receiving placebo were found to have no changes in their serum VEGF/sVEGFR2 levels over time. Patients treated with sunitinib had no significant change in their VEGF level, but the sVEGFR2 level significantly decreased after cycles 1 and 2 (P < .0001) and at the time of disease progression (P = .0002). A baseline VEGF level that was at or greater than the median was found to be correlated with a longer PFS. Sixteen patients who were receiving placebo received sunitinib at the time of disease progression, with the best responses being 1 partial response (6.3%), 6 cases of stable disease (37.5%), and 5 cases of progressive disease (31.3%); 4 patients were not evaluable for response. The median PFS was 3.7 months (range, 0.1 months-22 months). CONCLUSIONS: The current multicenter study was limited by premature closure and a small sample size. Maintenance sunitinib did not appear to improve the 6-month progression rate. Open-label sunitinib was found to have only modest activity. The sVEGFR2 level decreased among patients receiving sunitinib.

Phase II trial of carboplatin and paclitaxel in papillary renal cell carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Cytotoxic chemotherapy has not been well investigated in non-clear-cell renal cell carcinoma (RCC). A phase II study was thus conducted to assess the efficacy of carboplatin and paclitaxel in such patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients were treated with carboplatin (area under the curve of 6) and paclitaxel 225 mg/m2 every 21 days and assessed for measurable disease response every 2 cycles. An initial 20 patients were planned to be enrolled to rule out a null hypothesized 15% response rate. RESULTS: Seventeen patients were enrolled, of which 16 patients had papillary and 1 had collecting duct histology. The patient with collecting duct histology had a complete response, but no responses were observed in patients with papillary histology and the trial was thus terminated early. Toxicities were as expected for the carboplatin and paclitaxel regimen. CONCLUSION: Carboplatin and paclitaxel is not an active regimen in patients with metastatic papillary RCC. Future studies should explore the role of this or similar regimens in collecting duct carcinoma.