A phase III study to access the safety and efficacy of prolgolimab 250 mg fixed dose administered every 3 weeks versus prolgolimab 1 mg/kg every 2 weeks in patients with metastatic melanoma (FLAT).

Background: Prolgolimab is the first Russian PD-1 inhibitor approved for the first-line treatment of unresectable or metastatic melanoma and advanced non-small cell lung cancer. It was approved in two weight-based regimens of 1 mg/kg Q2W and 3 mg/kg Q3W, but because of re-evaluation of weight-based dosing paradigm, studying of a fixed-dose regimen was considered perspective. Methods: We conducted a multicenter, single-arm, open-label efficacy, pharmacokinetics, and safety study to obtain data that would allow the approval of the new flat dosing regimen of prolgolimab in patients with previously untreated unresectable or metastatic melanoma (BCD-100-8/FLAT, NCT05783882). The primary objective was to prove the non-inferiority of prolgolimab 250 mg Q3W versus prolgolimab 1 mg/kg Q2W for the treatment of patients with unresectable or metastatic melanoma in terms of ORR according to RECIST 1.1. Patients from the MIRACULUM study (BCD-100-2/MIRACULUM, NCT03269565) comprised a historical control group. Results: One hundred fourteen patients received prolgolimab 250 mg Q3W, and 61 patients received prolgolimab (Prolgo) 1 mg/kg Q2W (historical control). Objective response was achieved by 33.3% [95% confidence interval (CI): 24.8, 42.8] of patients in the Prolgo 250 mg group compared with 32.8% (95% CI: 21.3, 46.0) of patients in the Prolgo 1 mg/kg group. Risk difference was 0.00, 95% CI (-0.12; NA), p = 0.0082. Both regimens were well tolerated, and safety profiles were comparable. The pharmacokinetic analysis (PK) showed that the regimen with the fixed dose of 250 mg Q3W was characterized by higher PK parameters. The immunogenicity study did not detect binding antibodies to prolgolimab in any of the subjects. Conclusion: The obtained results showed that the selected fixed dosing regimen of prolgolimab 250 mg Q3W is characterized by efficacy and safety parameters comparable to that observed for the 1 mg/kg Q2W regimen.

Real-World Experience with Targeted Therapy in BRAF Mutant Advanced Melanoma Patients: Results from a Multicenter Retrospective Observational Study Advanced Melanoma in Russia (Experience) (ADMIRE).

Clinical trials of targeted therapy (TT) and immunotherapy (IT) for highly aggressive advanced melanoma have shown marked improvements in response and survival rates. However, real-world data on treatment patterns and clinical outcomes for patients with advanced BRAF V600 mutant melanoma are ultimately scarce. The study was designed as an observational retrospective chart review study, which included 382 patients with advanced BRAF V600 mutant melanoma, who received TT in a real-world setting and were not involved in clinical trials. The data were collected from twelve medical centers in Russia. The objective response rates (ORRs) to combined BRAFi plus MEKi and to BRAFi mono-therapy were 57.4% and 39.8%, respectively. The median progression-free survival (PFS) and median overall survival (OS) were 9.2 months and 22.6 months, respectively, for the combined first-line therapy; 9.4 months and 16.1 months, respectively, for the combined second-line therapy; and 7.4 months and 17.1 months, respectively, for the combined third- or higher-line therapy. Analysis of treatment patterns demonstrated the effectiveness of the combined TT with BRAF plus MEK inhibitors in patients with brain metastases, rare types of BRAF mutations, and across lines of therapy, as well as a well-tolerated and manageable safety profile.

Bisphosphonates in patients with renal cell carcinoma and bone metastases: a sunitinib global expanded-access trial subanalysis.

AIM: To investigate retrospectively the effects of bone metastases and bisphosphonates in sunitinib-treated metastatic renal cell carcinoma patients. PATIENTS & METHODS: Patients in Groups (Gp) 1 and 2, but not Gp3, had bone metastases. Gp2 received bisphosphonates following standard practice. RESULTS: Gp2 had less favorable prognosis than Gp1. Gp3 had fewer metastases and the best prognosis. More serious adverse events occurred in Gp2 versus Gp1. The difference in overall survival between Gp1 and Gp2 was not significant after adjusting for covariates. Significantly shorter overall survival in Gp1 versus Gp3 persisted after adjusting for covariates. CONCLUSION: Bone metastases may have a negative prognostic impact in metastatic renal cell carcinoma. Bisphosphonates may have delayed early disease progression for prognostically worse sunitinib/bisphosphonate-treated patients.

Phase II, multicenter, uncontrolled trial of single-agent capecitabine in patients with non-clear cell metastatic renal cell carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Although significant progress has been made for metastatic renal cell carcinoma (MRCC), very little progress has been achieved for non-clear cell MRCC. Thus, we performed a phase II, multicenter trial of capecitabine in patients with non-clear cell MRCC. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Adult patients with MRCC containing <50% of clear cells were eligible. All patients received oral capecitabine (1,250 mg/m) twice daily for 14 days, followed by 14 days of rest. Primary end point was objective response rate. On the basis of Chen and Ng 2-stage accrual design, maximum planned enrollment was 51 patients. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01182142. RESULTS: Fifty-one patients enrolled between February 2006 and January 2009. Most patients were men (72.5%), who had papillary RCC (76.5%), Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center intermediate prognosis (86%), and had not been treated earlier (92%). The objective response rate was 26%. Two patients (4%) had a complete response. Stable disease was achieved in 24 (47%) patients. The median progression-free survival was 10.1 months [95% confidence interval (CI), 8.7-11.5], and overall survival was 18.3 months (95% CI, 15.5-21.1). The 1-year overall survival was 71% (95% CI, 63%-79%). Major grades 3 to 4, treatment-related toxicities included diarrhea (2%), esophageal mucosal inflammation (2%), hand-foot syndrome (4%), thrombocytopenia (9.8%), and neutropenia (8%). No patients were withdrawn because of laboratory abnormalities. CONCLUSIONS: Capecitabine has clinical activity in MRCC patients who have non-clear cell histology and a good or intermediate prognosis. Additional prospective randomized trial comparing capecitabine with placebo is required.

Optimizing treatment for patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma in the Central and Eastern European region.

INTRODUCTION: Belarus, Bulgaria, Croatia, Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Republic of Moldova, Romania, Russian Federation, Serbia, Slovakia, Slovenia and the Ukraine represent a collection of Central and Eastern European (CEE) countries in which the epidemiology and treatment of cancer varies greatly between and within countries. Current challenges include non-adherence to current treatment guidelines, restrictions in access and reimbursement for new therapies, and a lack of basic oncology programs. Metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) is a malignancy with historically poor prognosis. In CEE countries, the incidence and mortality rates of mRCC are among the highest in the world. Fortunately, mRCC represents a cancer for which a number of new targeted therapies have recently demonstrated benefit, resulting in new evidence-based treatment guidelines. Incorporating these mRCC treatment recommendations into the routine care of patients with mRCC in CEE countries would represent a major step forward for cancer care in this region. AREAS COVERED: This review discusses the unique challenges faced by the aforementioned Eastern European countries in the treatment of metastatic renal cell cancer, in an attempt to assist health-care providers in providing the best care possible for their European patients. EXPERT OPINION: Despite a wealth of clinical trial data supporting the use of targeted therapies for first-line treatment of mRCC, cytokine-based immunotherapy is still used in some of these European countries. With implementation and adherence to existing guidelines, treatment can be clinically and economically optimized in patients with mRCC from this region.