SEOM-GG clinical guidelines for the management of germ-cell testicular cancer (2023).

Testicular germ cell tumors are the most common tumors in adolescent and young men. They are curable malignancies that should be treated with curative intent, minimizing acute and long-term side effects. Inguinal orchiectomy is the main diagnostic procedure, and is also curative for most localized tumors, while patients with unfavorable risk factors for recurrence, or those who are unable or unwilling to undergo close follow-up, may require adjuvant treatment. Patients with persistent markers after orchiectomy or advanced disease at diagnosis should be staged and classified according to the IGCCCG prognostic classification. BEP is the most recommended chemotherapy, but other schedules such as EP or VIP may be used to avoid bleomycin in some patients. Efforts should be made to avoid unnecessary delays and dose reductions wherever possible. Insufficient marker decline after each cycle is associated with poor prognosis. Management of residual masses after chemotherapy differs between patients with seminoma and non-seminoma tumors. Patients at high risk of relapse, those with refractory tumors, or those who relapse after chemotherapy should be managed by multidisciplinary teams in experienced centers. Salvage treatment for these patients includes conventional-dose chemotherapy (TIP) and/or high-dose chemotherapy, although the best regimen and strategy for each subgroup of patients is not yet well established. In late recurrences, early complete surgical resection should be performed when feasible. Given the high cure rate of TGCT, oncologists should work with patients to prevent and identify potential long-term side effects of the treatment. The above recommendations also apply to extragonadal retroperitoneal and mediastinal tumors.

Atezolizumab plus chemotherapy versus placebo plus chemotherapy in untreated locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma (IMvigor130): final overall survival analysis results from a randomised, controlled, phase 3 study.

BACKGROUND: IMvigor130 demonstrated statistically significant investigator-assessed progression-free survival benefit with first-line atezolizumab plus platinum-based chemotherapy (group A) versus placebo plus platinum-based chemotherapy (group C) in patients with locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma. Overall survival was not improved in interim analyses. Here we report the final overall analysis for group A versus group C. METHODS: In this global, partially blinded, randomised, controlled, phase 3 study, patients (aged ≥18 years) with previously untreated locally advanced or metastatic urothelial cancer and who had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-2 were enrolled at 221 hospitals and oncology centres in 35 countries. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1:1), with a permuted block method (block size of six) and an interactive voice and web response system, stratified by PD-L1 status, Bajorin risk factor score, and investigator's choice of platinum-based chemotherapy, to receive atezolizumab plus platinum-based chemotherapy (group A), atezolizumab monotherapy (group B), or placebo plus platinum-based chemotherapy (group C). Sponsors, investigators, and patients were masked to assignment to atezolizumab or placebo (ie, group A and group C) and atezolizumab monotherapy (group B) was open label. For groups A and C, all patients received gemcitabine (1000 mg/m2 intravenously; day 1 and day 8 of each 21-day cycle), plus investigator's choice of carboplatin (area under curve 4·5 mg/mL per min or 5 mg/mL per min; intravenously) or cisplatin (70 mg/m2 intravenously), plus either atezolizumab (1200 mg intravenously) or placebo on day 1 of each cycle. Co-primary endpoints of the study were investigator-assessed progression-free survival and overall survival for group A versus group C in the intention-to-treat (ITT) population (ie, all randomised patients), and overall survival for group B versus group C, tested hierarchically. Final overall survival and updated safety outcomes (safety population; all patients who received any amount of any study treatment component) for group A versus group C are reported here. The final prespecified boundary for significance of the overall survival analysis was one-sided p=0·021. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02807636, and is active but no longer recruiting. FINDINGS: Between July 15, 2016, and July 20, 2018, 1213 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to treatment, of whom 851 were assigned to group A (n=451) and group C (n=400). 338 (75%) patients in group A and 298 (75%) in group C were male, 113 (25%) in group A and 102 (25%) in group C were female, and 346 (77%) in group A and 304 (76%) in group C were White. At data cutoff (Aug 31, 2022), after a median follow up of 13·4 months (IQR 6·2-30·8), median overall survival was 16·1 months (95% CI 14·2-18·8; 336 deaths) in group A versus 13·4 months (12·0-15·3; 310 deaths) in group C (stratified hazard ratio 0·85 [95% CI 0·73-1·00]; one-sided p=0·023). The most common grade 3-4 treatment-related adverse events were anaemia (168 [37%] of 454 patients who received atezolizumab plus chemotherapy vs 133 [34%] of 389 who received placebo plus chemotherapy), neutropenia (167 [37%] vs 115 [30%]), decreased neutrophil count (98 [22%] vs 95 [24%]), thrombocytopenia (95 [21%] vs 70 [18%]), and decreased platelet count (92 [20%] vs 92 [24%]). Serious adverse events occurred in 243 (54%) patients who received atezolizumab plus chemotherapy and 196 (50%) patients who received placebo plus chemotherapy. Treatment-related deaths occurred in nine (2%; acute kidney injury, dyspnoea, hepatic failure, hepatitis, neutropenia, pneumonitis, respiratory failure, sepsis, and thrombocytopenia [n=1 each]) patients who received atezolizumab plus chemotherapy and four (1%; unexplained death, diarrhoea, febrile neutropenia, and toxic hepatitis [n=1 each]) who received placebo plus chemotherapy. INTERPRETATION: Progression-free survival benefit with first-line combination of atezolizumab plus platinum-based chemotherapy did not translate into a significant improvement in overall survival in the ITT population of IMvigor130. Further research is needed to understand which patients might benefit from first-line combination treatment. No new safety signals were observed. FUNDING: F Hoffmann-La Roche.

Atezolizumab monotherapy versus chemotherapy in untreated locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma (IMvigor130): final overall survival analysis from a randomised, controlled, phase 3 study.

BACKGROUND: The primary analysis of IMvigor130 showed a significant progression-free survival benefit with first-line atezolizumab plus platinum-based chemotherapy (group A) versus placebo plus platinum-based chemotherapy (group C) in patients with locally advanced or metastatic urothelial cancer. However, this finding did not translate into significant overall survival benefit for group A versus group C at the final analysis, precluding formal statistical testing of outcomes with atezolizumab monotherapy (group B) versus group C. Here we report the final overall survival results for group B versus group C; this report is descriptive and should be considered exploratory due to the study's statistical design. METHODS: In this global, partially blinded, randomised, controlled, phase 3 study, patients (aged ≥18 years) who had locally advanced or metastatic urothelial cancer previously untreated in the metastatic setting and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-2 were enrolled at 221 hospitals and oncology centres in 35 countries. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1:1), using a permuted block method (block size of six) and an interactive voice and web response system, stratified by PD-L1 status, Bajorin score, and investigator's choice of platinum-based chemotherapy, to receive either atezolizumab plus platinum-based chemotherapy (group A), atezolizumab alone (group B), or placebo plus platinum-based chemotherapy (group C). Sponsors, investigators, and patients were masked to assignment to atezolizumab or placebo in group A and group C; atezolizumab monotherapy in group B was open label. For groups B and C, atezolizumab (1200 mg) or placebo was administered intravenously every 3 weeks. Chemotherapy involved 21-day cycles of gemcitabine (1000 mg/m2 body surface area on day 1 and day 8 of each cycle) plus the investigator's choice of carboplatin (area under the curve 4·5 mg/mL per min or 5 mg/mL per min) or cisplatin (70 mg/m2 body surface area), administered intravenously. Co-primary endpoints were progression-free survival and overall survival in group A versus group C, and overall survival in group B versus group C, tested hierarchically, in the intention-to-treat (ITT) population, and then the populations with high PD-L1 tumour expression (immune cell [IC] expression score of IC2/3) if the results from group A versus group C were significant. Here, we report the co-primary endpoint of overall survival for group B versus group C in the ITT and IC2/3 populations. The ITT population for this analysis comprised concurrently enrolled patients in groups B and C who were randomly assigned to treatment. For the safety analysis, all patients enrolled in group B and group C who received any study treatment were included. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02807636, and is active but no longer recruiting. FINDINGS: Between July 15, 2016, and July 20, 2018, 1213 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to treatment, of whom 362 patients were assigned to group B and 400 to group C, of whom 360 and 359, respectively, were enrolled concurrently (ITT population). 543 (76%) of 719 patients were male, 176 (24%) were female, and 534 (74%) were White. As of data cutoff (Aug 31, 2022), after a median follow-up of 13·4 months (IQR 6·2-30·8), median overall survival was 15·2 months (95% CI 13·1-17·7; 271 deaths) in group B and 13·3 months (11·9-15·6; 275 deaths) in group C (stratified hazard ratio 0·98 [95% CI 0·82-1·16]). The most common grade 3-4 treatment-related adverse events were anaemia (two [1%] in patients who received atezolizumab monotherapy vs 133 [34%] in those who received placebo plus chemotherapy), neutropenia (one [<1%] vs 115 [30%]), decreased neutrophil count (0 vs 95 [24%]), and decreased platelet count (one [<1%] vs 92 [24%]). Serious adverse events occurred in 163 (46%) patients versus 196 (50%). Treatment-related deaths occurred in three (1%; n=1 each, pneumonia, interstitial lung disease, large intestinal obstruction) patients who received atezolizumab monotherapy and four (1%; n=1 each, diarrhoea, febrile neutropenia, unexplained death, toxic hepatitis) who received placebo plus chemotherapy. INTERPRETATION: The final analysis from IMvigor130 did not show a significant improvement in overall survival with first-line atezolizumab monotherapy compared with platinum-based chemotherapy in the intention-to-treat population. The safety profile of atezolizumab monotherapy remained acceptable after extended follow-up, with no new safety signals. FUNDING: F Hoffmann-La Roche.

Exploratory analyses of treatment subgroup interaction by PD-L1 status and according to PD-L1 expression in the JAVELIN Bladder 100 trial.

PURPOSE: Post hoc analysis of the JAVELIN Bladder 100 trial of avelumab maintenance in locally advanced/metastatic urothelial carcinoma (la/mUC) to determine the interaction by programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) status for overall survival (OS), and additional analyses of survival per a different PD-L1 expression cutoff of ≥ 1% in tumor cells or immune cells (TC/IC). METHODS: JAVELIN Bladder 100 data were used for the analysis of the interaction by PD-L1 status (per cutoff used in the trial) for OS and, additionally, OS and progression-free survival (PFS) analyses per a different ≥ 1% TC/IC PD-L1 expression cutoff (Ventana SP263 assay). RESULTS: No significant interaction between treatment and PD-L1 status was observed for OS. Clinically meaningful and robust survival data were observed in favor of avelumab using the different ≥ 1% TC/IC PD-L1 expression cutoff. CONCLUSIONS: These results demonstrate the benefit of avelumab maintenance in la/mUC regardless of PD-L1 expression, consistent with approved labels.

Prognostic Factor Risk Groups for Clinical Stage I Seminoma: An Individual Patient Data Analysis by the European Association of Urology Testicular Cancer Guidelines Panel and Guidelines Office.

BACKGROUND: The relapse rate in patients with clinical stage I (CSI) seminomatous germ cell tumor of the testis (SGCTT) who were undergoing surveillance after radical orchidectomy is 4-30%, depending on tumor size and rete testis invasion (RTI). However, the level of evidence supporting the use of both risk factors in clinical decision-making is low. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to identify the most important prognostic factors for relapse in CSI SGCTT patients. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Individual patient data for 1016 CSI SGCTT patients diagnosed between 1994 and 2019 with normal postorchidectomy serum tumor marker levels and undergoing surveillance were collected from nine institutions. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Multivariable Cox proportional hazard regression models were fit to identify the most important prognostic factors. The primary endpoint was the time to first relapse by imaging and/or markers. Relapse probabilities were estimated by the Kaplan-Meier method. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: After a median follow-up of 7.7 yr, 149 (14.7%) patients had relapsed. Categorical tumor size (≤2, >2-5, and >5 cm), presence of RTI, and lymphovascular invasion were used to form three risk groups: low (56.4%), intermediate (41.3%), and high (2.3%) risks with 5-yr cumulative relapse probabilities of 8%, 20%, and 44%, respectively. The model outperformed the currently used model with tumor size ≤4 versus >4 cm and presence of RTI (Harrell's C index 0.65 vs 0.61). The low- and intermediate-risk groups were validated successfully in an independent cohort of 285 patients. CONCLUSIONS: The risk of relapse after radical orchidectomy in CSI SGCTT patients under surveillance is low. We propose a new risk stratification model that outperformed the current model and identified a small subgroup with a high risk of relapse. PATIENT SUMMARY: The risk of relapse after radical orchidectomy in patients with clinical stage I seminomatous germ cell tumor of the testis is low. We propose a new risk stratification model that outperformed the current model and identified a small subgroup with a high risk of relapse.

Outcomes of relapsed clinical stage I versus de novo metastatic testicular cancer patients: an analysis of the IGCCCG Update database.

BACKGROUND: Active surveillance after orchiectomy is the preferred management in clinical stage I (CSI) germ-cell tumours (GCT) associated with a 15 to 30% relapse rate. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In the IGCCCG Update database, we compared the outcomes of gonadal disseminated GCT relapsing from initial CSI to outcomes of patients with de novo metastatic GCT. RESULTS: A total of 1014 seminoma (Sem) [298 (29.4%) relapsed from CSI, 716 (70.6%) de novo] and 3103 non-seminoma (NSem) [626 (20.2%) relapsed from CSI, 2477 (79.8%) de novo] were identified. Among Sem, no statistically significant differences in PFS and OS were found between patients relapsing from CSI and de novo metastatic disease [5-year progression-free survival (5y-PFS) 87.6% versus 88.5%; 5-year overall survival (5y-OS) 93.2% versus 96.1%). Among NSem, PFS and OS were higher overall in relapsing CSI patients (5y-PFS 84.6% versus 80.0%; 5y-OS 93.3% versus 88.7%), but there were no differences within the same IGCCCG prognostic groups (HR = 0.89; 95% CI: 0.70-1.12). Relapses in the intermediate or poor prognostic groups occurred in 11/298 (4%) Sem and 112/626 (18%) NSem. CONCLUSION: Relapsing CSI GCT patients expect similar survival compared to de novo metastatic patients of the same ICCCCG prognostic group. Intermediate and poor prognosis relapses from initial CSI expose patients to unnecessary toxicity from more intensive treatments.

A Risk-benefit Analysis of Prophylactic Anticoagulation for Patients with Metastatic Germ Cell Tumours Undergoing First-line Chemotherapy.

BACKGROUND: It remains unclear which patients with metastatic germ cell tumours (mGCTs) need prophylactic anticoagulation to prevent venous thromboembolic events (VTEs). OBJECTIVE: To assess the risk and onset of VTEs stratified by risk factors. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This multi-institutional retrospective dataset included mGCT patients treated with first-line platinum-based chemotherapy. INTERVENTION: Patients with prophylactic anticoagulation were excluded. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: A regression analysis was performed to select risk factors for VTEs. The simulated number needed to treat (NNT) and the number needed to harm (NNH) with prophylactic anticoagulation were calculated based on the cumulative incidences retrieved from this study and hazard rates of recently published trials describing the efficacy of prophylactic anticoagulation to prevent VTEs and the risk of bleeding events. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: From 1120 patients, 121 (11%) had a VTE, which occurred prior to chemotherapy in 49 (4%) and on or after chemotherapy in 72 (6%). Six patients (<1%) had a bleeding event without anticoagulation. After backward regression, the one risk factor for a VTE during or after chemotherapy was the use of a venous access device. The simulated cumulative VTE incidence from prophylactic anticoagulation for patients on or after chemotherapy would translate into an NNT of 45 (95% confidence interval [CI] 36-56) and an NNH of 186 (95% CI 87-506). Limitations are mainly related to the retrospective nature of the study. CONCLUSIONS: The mGCTs associated VTEs are most common before and during, but not after, chemotherapy. Avoiding venous access device and/or prophylactic anticoagulation with an acceptable risk-benefit profile may decrease VTE occurring on chemotherapy. PATIENT SUMMARY: We found that venous thromboembolic events (VTEs) occur rarely after chemotherapy. Based on experience of prophylactic anticoagulation in other cancers, we conclude that the risk of VTE in men undergoing chemotherapy for metastatic germ cell tumours can be decreased by thromboprophylaxis with a reasonable risk-benefit profile and by avoidance of venous access devices.

Correction to: DNA methylation-based reclassification of olfactory neuroblastoma.

In the original publication, the second name of the twentieth author was incorrect. It should read as 'Miguel Sáinz-Jaspeado'. The original publication of the article has been updated to reflect the change. This correction was authored by Ulrich Schüller on behalf of all authors of the original publication.

DNA methylation-based reclassification of olfactory neuroblastoma.

Olfactory neuroblastoma/esthesioneuroblastoma (ONB) is an uncommon neuroectodermal neoplasm thought to arise from the olfactory epithelium. Little is known about its molecular pathogenesis. For this study, a retrospective cohort of n = 66 tumor samples with the institutional diagnosis of ONB was analyzed by immunohistochemistry, genome-wide DNA methylation profiling, copy number analysis, and in a subset, next-generation panel sequencing of 560 tumor-associated genes. DNA methylation profiles were compared to those of relevant differential diagnoses of ONB. Unsupervised hierarchical clustering analysis of DNA methylation data revealed four subgroups among institutionally diagnosed ONB. The largest group (n = 42, 64%, Core ONB) presented with classical ONB histology and no overlap with other classes upon methylation profiling-based t-distributed stochastic neighbor embedding (t-SNE) analysis. A second DNA methylation group (n = 7, 11%) with CpG island methylator phenotype (CIMP) consisted of cases with strong expression of cytokeratin, no or scarce chromogranin A expression and IDH2 hotspot mutation in all cases. T-SNE analysis clustered these cases together with sinonasal carcinoma with IDH2 mutation. Four cases (6%) formed a small group characterized by an overall high level of DNA methylation, but without CIMP. The fourth group consisted of 13 cases that had heterogeneous DNA methylation profiles and strong cytokeratin expression in most cases. In t-SNE analysis, these cases mostly grouped among sinonasal adenocarcinoma, squamous cell carcinoma, and undifferentiated carcinoma. Copy number analysis indicated highly recurrent chromosomal changes among Core ONB with a high frequency of combined loss of chromosome 1-4, 8-10, and 12. NGS sequencing did not reveal highly recurrent mutations in ONB, with the only recurrently mutated genes being TP53 and DNMT3A. In conclusion, we demonstrate that institutionally diagnosed ONB are a heterogeneous group of tumors. Expression of cytokeratin, chromogranin A, the mutational status of IDH2 as well as DNA methylation patterns may greatly aid in the precise classification of ONB.

Ramucirumab plus docetaxel versus placebo plus docetaxel in patients with locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma after platinum-based therapy (RANGE): a randomised, double-blind, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Few treatments with a distinct mechanism of action are available for patients with platinum-refractory advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma. We assessed the efficacy and safety of treatment with docetaxel plus either ramucirumab-a human IgG1 VEGFR-2 antagonist-or placebo in this patient population. METHODS: We did a randomised, double-blind, phase 3 trial in patients with advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma who progressed during or after platinum-based chemotherapy. Patients were enrolled from 124 sites in 23 countries. Previous treatment with one immune-checkpoint inhibitor was permitted. Patients were randomised (1:1) using an interactive web response system to receive intravenous docetaxel 75 mg/m2 plus either intravenous ramucirumab 10 mg/kg or matching placebo on day 1 of repeating 21-day cycles, until disease progression or other discontinuation criteria were met. The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed progression-free survival, analysed by intention-to-treat in the first 437 randomised patients. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02426125. FINDINGS: Between July, 2015, and April, 2017, 530 patients were randomly allocated either ramucirumab plus docetaxel (n=263) or placebo plus docetaxel (n=267). Progression-free survival was prolonged significantly in patients allocated ramucirumab plus docetaxel versus placebo plus docetaxel (median 4·07 months [95% CI 2·96-4·47] vs 2·76 months [2·60-2·96]; hazard ratio [HR] 0·757, 95% CI 0·607-0·943; p=0·0118). A blinded independent central analysis was consistent with these results. An objective response was achieved by 53 (24·5%, 95% CI 18·8-30·3) of 216 patients allocated ramucirumab and 31 (14·0%, 9·4-18·6) of 221 assigned placebo. The most frequently reported treatment-emergent adverse events, regardless of causality, in either treatment group (any grade) were fatigue, alopecia, diarrhoea, decreased appetite, and nausea. These events occurred predominantly at grade 1-2 severity. The frequency of grade 3 or worse adverse events was similar for patients allocated ramucirumab and placebo (156 [60%] of 258 vs 163 [62%] of 265 had an adverse event), with no unexpected toxic effects. 63 (24%) of 258 patients allocated ramucirumab and 54 (20%) of 265 assigned placebo had a serious adverse event that was judged by the investigator to be related to treatment. 38 (15%) of 258 patients allocated ramucirumab and 43 (16%) of 265 assigned placebo died on treatment or within 30 days of discontinuation, of which eight (3%) and five (2%) deaths were deemed related to treatment by the investigator. Sepsis was the most common adverse event leading to death on treatment (four [2%] vs none [0%]). One fatal event of neutropenic sepsis was reported in a patient allocated ramucirumab. INTERPRETATION: To the best of our knowledge, ramucirumab plus docetaxel is the first regimen in a phase 3 study to show superior progression-free survival over chemotherapy in patients with platinum-refractory advanced urothelial carcinoma. These data validate inhibition of VEGFR-2 signalling as a potential new therapeutic treatment option for patients with urothelial carcinoma. FUNDING: Eli Lilly and Company.

Dovitinib in patients with gastrointestinal stromal tumour refractory and/or intolerant to imatinib.

BACKGROUND: This multicentre phase II trial (DOVIGIST) evaluated the antitumour activity of dovitinib as second-line treatment of patients with gastrointestinal stromal tumour (GIST) refractory to imatinib or who do not tolerate imatinib. METHODS: Patients received oral dovitinib 500 mg day-1, 5 days on/2 days off, until GIST progression or unacceptable toxicity, with an objective to evaluate efficacy, assessed as the disease control rate (DCR) at 12 weeks. Tumour assessment and response to dovitinib therapy were evaluated by Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumours (RECIST v1.1) and the Choi criteria. Secondary objectives included assessment of progression-free survival (PFS), safety and tolerability, and DCR at the end of treatment. RESULTS: Thirty-eight of the 39 patients enrolled had histologically confirmed GIST. The DCR at 12 weeks was 52.6% (90% confidence interval (CI), 38.2-66.7%) meeting the preset efficacy criterion for the primary end point. The objective response rate (complete response+partial response) was 2.6% (1 of 38; 90% CI, 0.1-11.9%), and 5.3% (n=2; 90% CI, 0.9-15.7%) at the end of the study. The median PFS was 4.6 months (90% CI, 2.8-7.4 months). Dose interruption was required in 26 patients (66.7%), of which 18 (69.2%) were due to adverse events. The most frequently observed grade 3 adverse events included hypertension (n=7), fatigue (n=5), vomiting (n=4), hypertriglyceridaemia (n=4), and γ-glutamyltransferase increase (n=4). CONCLUSIONS: Dovitinib is an active treatment for patients with GIST who are intolerant to imatinib or whose GIST progresses on imatinib.

Consensus Recommendations from the Spanish Germ Cell Cancer Group on the Use of High-dose Chemotherapy in Germ Cell Cancer.

BACKGROUND: High-dose chemotherapy (HDCT) has been studied in several clinical scenarios in advanced germ cell cancer (GCC). OBJECTIVE: To establish a clinical practice guideline for HDCT use in the treatment of GCC patients. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: An expert panel reviewed information available from the literature. The panel addressed relevant issues concerning and related to HDCT. The guideline was externally reviewed by two international experts. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: The efficacy of HDCT has been demonstrated in selected GCC patients. The most conclusive evidence comes from retrospective analyses that need to be interpreted with caution. HDCT can cure a significant proportion of heavily treated GCC patients. When indicated, sequential HDCT with regimens containing carboplatin and etoposide, as well as peripheral stem-cell support, is recommended. There is no conclusive evidence to recommend HDCT as first-line therapy. According to a multinational retrospective pooled analysis, HDCT might be superior to conventional CT as first salvage treatment in selected patients. There is an urgent need for prospective clinical trials addressing the value of HDCT in GCC patients who experience failure on first-line cisplatin-based CT. In patients who progress on conventional-dose salvage CT, HDCT should be considered. Treatment of these patients at experienced centers is strongly recommended. CONCLUSIONS: It has been demonstrated that HDCT cures selected GCC patients who experience disease progression on conventional rescue regimens. The panel recommends the inclusion of GCC patients in randomized clinical trials including HDCT. PATIENT SUMMARY: This consensus establishes clinical practice guidelines for the use and study of high-dose chemotherapy in patients with germ cell cancer.

Novel potential predictive markers of sunitinib outcomes in long-term responders versus primary refractory patients with metastatic clear-cell renal cell carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Several potential predictive markers of efficacy of targeted agents in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) have been identified. Interindividual heterogeneity warrants further investigation. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Multicenter, observational, retrospective study in patients with clear-cell mRCC treated with sunitinib. Patients were classified in two groups: long-term responders (LR) (progression-free survival (PFS)≥22 months and at least stable disease), and primary refractory (PR) (progressive disease within 3-months of sunitinib onset). Objectives were to compare baseline clinical factors in both populations and to correlate tumor expression of selected signaling pathways components with sunitinib PFS. RESULTS: 123 patients were analyzed (97 LR, 26 PR). In the LR cohort, overall response rate was 79% and median duration of best response was 30 months. Median PFS and overall survival were 43.2 (95% confidence intervals[CI]:37.2-49.3) and 63.5 months (95%CI:55.1-71.9), respectively. At baseline PR patients had a significantly lower proportion of nephrectomies, higher lactate dehydrogenase and platelets levels, lower hemoglobin, shorter time to and higher presence of metastases, and increased Fuhrman grade. Higher levels of HEYL, HEY and HES1 were observed in LR, although only HEYL discriminated populations significantly (AUC[ROC]=0.704; cut-off=34.85). Increased levels of hsa-miR-27b, hsa-miR-23b and hsa-miR-628-5p were also associated with prolonged survival. No statistical significant associations between hsa-miR-23b or hsa-miR-27b and the expression of c-Met were found. CONCLUSIONS: Certain mRCC patients treated with sunitinib achieve extremely long-term responses. Favorable baseline hematology values and longer time to metastasis may predict longer PFS. HEYL, hsa-miR-27b, hsa-miR-23b and hsa-miR-628-5p could be potentially used as biomarkers of sunitinib response.

Phosphorylated-insulin growth factor I receptor (p-IGF1R) and metalloproteinase-3 (MMP3) expression in advanced gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GIST). A GEIS 19 study.

BACKGROUND: Most GISTs have mutations in KIT or PDGFRA. Patients with advanced GIST with KIT exon 9, PDGFRA mutation or WT for KIT and PDGFRA have a worse progression-free survival (PFS) compared to patients with KIT exon 11 mutated tumors. We evaluated the immunohistochemical (IHC) expression of p-IGF1R (Y1316) and MMP3 as predictors of PFS or overall survival (OS). METHODS: Ninety-two advanced GIST patients included in GEIS-16 study with KIT and PDGFRA mutational information were examined for p-IGF1R (Y1316) and MMP3 expression in a tissue micro-array. To study activation of the IGF1R system, we have used an antibody (anti-pY1316) that specifically recognizes the active phosphorylated form of the IGF1R. DNA was extracted from paraffin-embedded tissues and intronic PCR primers were used to amplify exons 9, 11, 13 and 17 of KIT, 12 and 18 of PDGFRA. Bidirectional sequencing with specific primers was performed on a ABI3100 sequencer using the Big Dye Terminator v3.1 kit. Multivariate model was built using a stepwise automated variable selection approach with criterion to enter the variable in the model of p < 0.10 and criterion to keep the variable in the model of p < 0.05. PFS was computed as the date of imatinib initiation to progression or death. Overall survival was defined as the time from imatinib initiation to death. RESULTS: Phospho-IGF1R was expressed only in 9 % (2/22) of cases without KIT mutation. MMP3 expression was detected in 2/5 patients (40 %) with PDGFRA mutation, 1/16 patients (6 %) with WT genotype and 7/71 patients (10 %) of KIT mutant patients. At univariate analysis KIT exon 11/13 mutation had better PFS than patients with exon 9 mutation, PDGFRA mutation or WT genotype (p = 0.021; HR: 0.46; 95 %CI (0.28-0.76). Less than 24 months disease free-interval (HR 24.2, 95 % CI 10.5-55.8), poor performance status (PS) (HR 6.3, 95 % CI 2.5-15.9), extension of disease; >1 organ (HR 1.89; 95 % CI 1.03-3.4) and genotype analysis (HR 0.57, 95 % CI 0.37-0.97) but not immunophenotype analysis (HR 1.53; 95 % CI 0.76-3.06) were the strongest prognostic factors for PFS in the multivariate analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Our results do not support p-IGF-1R and MMP3 evaluation in non-selected GIST patients but evaluation of this immunophenotype in WT and mutant PDGFR mutation in larger group of GIST patients, deserve merits.

Caveolin-1 is down-regulated in alveolar rhabdomyosarcomas and negatively regulates tumor growth.

Rhabdomyosarcoma is the most common soft tissue sarcoma of childhood and adolescence. Despite advances in therapy, patients with histological variant of rhabdomyosarcoma known as alveolar rhabdomyosarcoma (ARMS) have a 5-year survival of less than 30%. Caveolin-1 (CAV1), encoding the structural component of cellular caveolae, is a suggested tumor suppressor gene involved in cell signaling. In the present study we report that compared to other forms of rhabdomyosarcoma (RMS) CAV1 expression is either undetectable or very low in ARMS cell lines and tumor samples. DNA methylation analysis of the promoter region and azacytidine-induced re-expression suggest the involvement of epigenetic mechanisms in the silencing of CAV1. Reintroduction of CAV1 in three of these cell lines impairs their clonogenic capacity and promotes features of muscular differentiation. In vitro, CAV1-expressing cells show high expression of Caveolin-3 (CAV3), a muscular differentiation marker. Blockade of MAPK signaling is also observed. In vivo, CAV1-expressing xenografts show growth delay, features of muscular differentiation and increased cell death. In summary, our results suggest that CAV1 could function as a potent tumor suppressor in ARMS tumors. Inhibition of CAV1 function therefore, could contribute to aberrant cell proliferation, leading to ARMS development.

GEIS 2013 guidelines for gastrointestinal sarcomas (GIST).

Gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GIST) are the most common mesenchymal soft tissue sarcoma of the gastrointestinal tract. Correct diagnosis with thorough use of pathologic and molecular tools of GIST mutations has been of the foremost importance. GIST are usually (95 %) KIT positive and harbor frequent KIT or platelet-derived growth factor receptor α-activating mutations. This deep molecular understanding has allowed the correct classification into risk groups with implications regarding prognosis, essential use in the development of targeted therapies and even response prediction to this drugs. Treatment has been evolving and an update to include lessons learned from recent trials in advanced disease as well as controversies in the adjuvant setting that are changing daily practice, is reviewed here. An effort from the Spanish Group for Sarcoma Research with investigators from the group has been undertaken to launch this third version of the GIST guidelines and provide a practical means for the different disciplines that treat this complex disease.

Effectivity of pazopanib treatment in orthotopic models of human testicular germ cell tumors.

BACKGROUND: Cisplatin (CDDP) resistance in testicular germ cell tumors (GCTs) is still a clinical challenge, and one associated with poor prognosis. The purpose of this work was to test pazopanib, an anti-tumoral and anti-angiogenic multikinase inhibitor, and its combination with lapatinib (an anti-ErbB inhibitor) in mouse orthotopic models of human testicular GCTs. METHODS: We used two different models of human testicular GCTs orthotopically grown in nude mice; a CDDP-sensitive choriocarcinoma (TGT38) and a new orthotopic model generated from a metastatic GCT refractory to first-line CDDP chemotherapy (TGT44). Nude mice implanted with these orthotopic tumors were treated with the inhibitors and the effect on tumoral growth and angiogenesis was evaluated. RESULTS: TGT44 refractory tumor had an immunohistochemical profile similar to the original metastasis, with characteristics of yolk sac tumor. TGT44 did not respond when treated with cisplatin. In contrast, pazopanib had an anti-angiogenic effect and anti-tumor efficacy in this model. Pazopanib in combination with lapatinib in TGT38, an orthotopic model of choriocarcinoma had an additive effect blocking tumor growth. CONCLUSIONS: We present pazopanib as a possible agent for the alternative treatment of CDDP-sensitive and CDDP-refractory GCT patients, alone or in combination with anti-ErbB therapies.

EphA2-induced angiogenesis in ewing sarcoma cells works through bFGF production and is dependent on caveolin-1.

Angiogenesis is the result of the combined activity of the tumor microenvironment and signaling molecules. The angiogenic switch is represented as an imbalance between pro- and anti-angiogenic factors and is a rate-limiting step in the development of tumors. Eph receptor tyrosine kinases and their membrane-anchored ligands, known as ephrins, constitute the largest receptor tyrosine kinase (RTK) subfamily and are considered a major family of pro-angiogenic RTKs. Ewing sarcoma (EWS) is a highly aggressive bone and soft tissue tumor affecting children and young adults. As other solid tumors, EWS are reliant on a functional vascular network for the delivery of nutrients and oxygen and for the removal of waste. Based on the biological roles of EphA2 in promoting angiogenesis, we explored the functional role of this receptor and its relationship with caveolin-1 (CAV1) in EWS angiogenesis. We demonstrated that lack of CAV1 results in a significant reduction in micro vascular density (MVD) on 3 different in vivo models. In vitro, this phenomenon correlated with inactivation of EphA2 receptor, lack of AKT response and downregulation of bFGF. We also demonstrated that secreted bFGF from EWS cells acted as chemoattractant for endothelial cells. Furthermore, interaction between EphA2 and CAV1 was necessary for the right localization and signaling of the receptor to produce bFGF through AKT and promote migration of endothelial cells. Finally, introduction of a dominant-negative form of EphA2 into EWS cells mostly reproduced the effects occurred by CAV1 silencing, strongly suggesting that the axis EphA2-CAV1 participates in the promotion of endothelial cell migration toward the tumors favoring EWS angiogenesis.

Management of localized gastrointestinal stromal tumors and adjuvant therapy with imatinib.

This review provides an overview of the use of the protein tyrosine kinase inhibitor imatinib as adjuvant therapy in patients with gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs) at risk of recurrence after surgery. GISTs are the most common mesenchymal tumors of the gastrointestinal tract, and are characterized by the detection of KIT expression by immunohistochemistry in ~95% of the cases. The recommended treatment for localized GISTs is surgical excision, although there is a significant risk of recurrence after surgery. Accurate staging is an important step in identifying patients most at risk of tumor recurrence after surgery, and is based on a combination of tumor size, mitotic rate, and location. Other factors, including tumor rupture and the presence of mutations in the KIT and PDGFRA genes, also play an important role in the assessment of prognosis. A significant number of phase II studies have shown that 1 year of adjuvant therapy with 400 mg/day imatinib significantly reduces the recurrence of GISTs following surgery and extends recurrence-free survival, with evidence from the SSGXVIII/AIO study showing that extending the duration of adjuvant therapy to 3 years further increases recurrence-free and overall survival. Two currently ongoing trials, the EORTC 62024 and the PERSIST-5 trials, aim to strengthen the evidence that extending the duration of imatinib therapy beyond 1 year provides further benefits to patients in terms of reducing disease recurrence and increasing survival. In conclusion, imatinib significantly increases survival and reduces recurrence of GISTs in the adjuvant setting.

Recommendations for the optimal management of early and advanced urothelial carcinoma.

The field of urothelial carcinoma has shown considerable advances in terms of diagnosis, staging, and treatment. The increasing knowledge of molecular pathways and genes involved in the occurrence of this tumor has encouraged the search for new, more effective and less toxic therapies, and has prompted the design and development of clinical trials. However, the speed at which results are published makes it difficult for clinicians to cover the vast amount of information available. Moreover, in clinical practice some gaps remain concerning treatment options for patients who have progressed after first-line cisplatin-based combinations, who cannot tolerate cisplatin-based chemotherapy, or who have received platinum-based neoadjuvant or adjuvant therapy, and thus cannot be offered this option on disease progression. The purpose of this review is to issue a series of recommendations on the optimal management of early and advanced urothelial carcinoma based on current evidence and the available updated guidelines.