Expert Perspectives on Controversies in Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer Management: Narrative Review and Report of the First US Prostate Cancer Conference Part 2.

Background: Management strategies for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) have rapidly shifted in recent years. As novel imaging and therapeutic approaches have made their way to the clinic, providers are encountering increasingly challenging clinical scenarios, with limited guidance from the current literature. Materials and Methods: The US Prostate Cancer Conference (USPCC) is a multidisciplinary meeting of prostate cancer experts intended to address the many challenges of prostate cancer management. At the first annual USPCC meeting, areas of controversy and consensus were identified during a 2-day meeting that included expert presentations, full-panel discussions, and postdiscussion responses to questions developed by the USPCC cochairs and session moderators. Results: This narrative review covers the USPCC expert discussion and perspectives relevant to mCRPC, including neuroendocrine/aggressive-variant prostate cancer (NEPC/AVPC). Areas of broad agreement identified among USPCC experts include the benefits of poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors for patients with BRCA1/2 mutations, the use of radioligand therapy in patients with prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA)-positive mCRPC, and the need for clinical trials that address real-world clinical questions, including the performance of novel therapies when compared with modern standard-of-care treatment. Ongoing areas of controversy and uncertainty included the appropriateness of PARP inhibitors in patients with non-BRCA1/2 mutations, the optimal definition of PSMA positivity, and systemic therapies for patients with NEPC/AVPC after progression on platinum-based therapies. Conclusions: The first annual USPCC meeting identified several areas of controversy in the management of mCRPC, highlighting the urgent need for clinical trials designed to facilitate treatment selection and sequencing in this heterogeneous disease state.

Expert Perspectives on Controversies in Castration-Sensitive Prostate Cancer Management: Narrative Review and Report of the First US Prostate Cancer Conference Part 1.

Purpose: Castration-sensitive prostate cancer (CSPC) is a complex and heterogeneous condition encompassing a range of clinical presentations. As new approaches have expanded management options, clinicians are left with myriad questions and controversies regarding the optimal individualized management of CSPC. Materials and Methods: The US Prostate Cancer Conference (USPCC) multidisciplinary panel was assembled to address the challenges of prostate cancer management. The first annual USPCC meeting included experts in urology, medical oncology, radiation oncology, and nuclear medicine. USPCC co-chairs and session moderators identified key areas of controversy and uncertainty in prostate cancer management and organized the sessions with multidisciplinary presentations and discussion. Throughout the meeting, experts responded to questions prepared by chairs and moderators to identify areas of agreement and controversy. Results: The USPCC panel discussion and question responses for CSPC-related topics are presented. Key advances in CSPC management endorsed by USPCC experts included the development and clinical utilization of gene expression classifiers and artificial intelligence (AI) models for risk stratification and treatment selection in specific patient populations, the use of advanced imaging modalities in patients with clinically localized unfavorable intermediate or high-risk disease and those with biochemical recurrence, recommendations of doublet or triplet therapy for metastatic CSPC (mCSPC), and consideration of prostate and/or metastasis-directed radiation therapy in select patients with mCSPC. Conclusions: CSPC is a diverse disease with many therapeutic options and the potential for adverse outcomes associated with either undertreatment or overtreatment. Future studies are needed to validate and clinically integrate novel technologies, including genomics, AI, and advanced imaging, to optimize outcomes among patients with CSPC.

Coaches Activating, Reaching, and Engaging Patients to Engage in Advance Care Planning: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Advance care planning (ACP) remains low among patients with advanced cancer. Multilevel interventions compared with clinician-level interventions may be more effective in improving ACP. Objective: To evaluate whether a multilevel intervention could improve clinician-documented ACP compared with a clinician-level intervention alone. Design, Setting, and Participants: This randomized clinical trial, performed from September 12, 2019, through May 12, 2021, included adults with advanced genitourinary cancers at an academic, tertiary hospital. Data analysis was performed by intention to treat from May 1 to August 10, 2023. Intervention: Participants were randomized 1:1 to a 6-month patient-level lay health worker structured ACP education along with a clinician-level intervention composed of 3-hour ACP training and integration of a structured electronic health record documentation template (intervention group) or to the clinician-level intervention alone (control group). Main Outcome and Measures: The primary outcome was ACP documentation in the electronic health record by the oncology clinician within 12 months after randomization. Secondary, exploratory outcomes included shared decision-making, palliative care use, hospice use, emergency department visits, and hospitalizations within 12 months after randomization. Results: Among 402 participants enrolled in the study, median age was 71 years (range, 21-102 years); 361 (89.8%) identified as male. More intervention group participants had oncology clinician-documented ACP than control group participants (82 [37.8%] vs 40 [21.6%]; odds ratio [OR], 2.29; 95% CI, 1.44-3.64). At 12-month follow-up, more intervention than control group participants had palliative care (72 [33.2%] vs 25 [13.5%]; OR, 3.18; 95% CI, 1.91-5.28) and hospice use (49 [22.6%] vs 19 [10.3%]; OR, 2.54; 95% CI, 1.44-4.51). There were no differences in the proportion of participants between groups with an emergency department visit (65 [30.0%] vs 61 [33.0%]; OR, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.57-1.33) or hospitalization (89 [41.0%] vs 85 [46.0%]; OR, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.55-1.22). Intervention group participants had fewer hospitalizations than control group participants (mean [SD] number of hospitalizations per year, 0.87 [1.60] vs 1.04 [1.77]) and a lower risk of hospitalization (incidence rate ratio, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.65-0.98). Conclusions and Relevance: In this randomized clinical trial, a multilevel intervention improved oncology clinician-documented ACP compared with a clinician-level intervention alone for patients with genitourinary cancer. The intervention is one approach to effectively increase ACP among patients with cancer. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03856463.

Same-day post-therapy imaging with a new generation whole-body digital SPECT/CT in assessing treatment response to [177Lu]Lu-PSMA-617 in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer.

PURPOSE: Lutetium-177 [177Lu]Lu-PSMA-617 radioligand therapy (RLT) represents a significant advancement for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC), demonstrating improvements in radiographic progression free survival (rPFS) and overall survival (OS) with a low rate of associated side effects. Currently, most post-therapy SPECT/CT is conducted at 24 h after infusion. This study examines the clinical utility of a next-generation multi-detector Cadmium-Zinc-Telluride (CZT) SPECT/CT system (StarGuide) in same-day post-infusion assessment and early treatment response to [177Lu]Lu-PSMA-617. METHODS: In this retrospective study, 68 men with progressive mCRPC treated with [177Lu]Lu-PSMA-617 at our center from June 2022 to June 2023 were evaluated. Digital whole-body SPECT/CT imaging was performed after [177Lu]Lu-PSMA-617infusion (mean ± SD: 1.8 ± 0.6 h, range 1.1-4.9 h). Quantitative analysis of [177Lu]Lu-PSMA-617 positive lesions was performed in patients who underwent at least 2 post-therapy SPECT/CT, using liver parenchyma uptake as reference. Metrics including [177Lu]Lu-PSMA-617 positive total tumor volume (Lu-TTV), SUVmax and SUVmean were calculated. These quantitative metrics on post-infusion SPECT/CT images after cycles 1, 2 and 3 were correlated with overall survival (OS), prostate specific antigen-progression free survival (PSA-PFS) as defined by prostate cancer working group 3 (PCWG3), and PSA decrease over 50% (PSA50) response rates. RESULTS: 56 patients (means age 76.2 ± 8.1 years, range: 60-93) who underwent at least 2 post-therapy SPECT/CT were included in the image analysis. The whole-body SPECT/CT scans (~ 12 min per scan) were well tolerated, with 221 same-day scans performed (89%). At a median of 10-months follow-up, 33 (58.9%) patients achieved PSA50 after [177Lu]Lu-PSMA-617 treatment and median PSA-PFS was 5.0 months (range: 1.0-15 months) while median OS was not reached. Quantitative analysis of SPECT/CT images showed that 37 patients (66%) had > 30% reduction in Lu-TTV, associated with significantly improved overall survival (median not reached vs. 6 months, P = 0.008) and PSA-PFS (median 6 months vs. 1 months, P < 0.001). However, changes in SUVmax or SUVmean did not correlate with PSA-PFS or OS. CONCLUSION: We successfully implemented same-day post-therapy SPECT/CT after [177Lu]Lu-PSMA-617 infusions. Quantitation of 1-2 h post-therapy SPECT/CT images is a promising method for assessing treatment response. However, the approach is currently limited by its suboptimal detection of small tumor lesions and the necessity of incorporating a third-cycle SPECT/CT to mitigate the effects of any potential treatment-related flare-up. Further investigation in a larger patient cohort and prospective validation is essential to confirm these findings and to explore the role of SPECT/CT as a potential adjunct to PSMA PET/CT in managing mCRPC.

Prostate Cancer, Version 3.2024.

The NCCN Guidelines for Prostate Cancer include recommendations for staging and risk assessment after a prostate cancer diagnosis and for the care of patients with localized, regional, recurrent, and metastatic disease. These NCCN Guidelines Insights summarize the panel's discussions for the 2024 update to the guidelines with regard to initial risk stratification, initial management of very-low-risk disease, and the treatment of nonmetastatic recurrence.

68Ga-RM2 PET-MRI versus MRI alone for evaluation of patients with biochemical recurrence of prostate cancer: a single-centre, single-arm, phase 2/3 imaging trial.

BACKGROUND: National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines include prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA)-targeted PET for detection of biochemical recurrence of prostate cancer. However, targeting a single tumour characteristic might not be sufficient to reflect the full extent of disease. Gastrin releasing peptide receptors (GRPR) have been shown to be overexpressed in prostate cancer. In this study, we aimed to evaluate the diagnostic performance of the GRPR-targeting radiopharmaceutical 68Ga-RM2 in patients with biochemical recurrence of prostate cancer. METHODS: This single-centre, single-arm, phase 2/3 trial was done at Stanford University (USA). Adult patients (aged ≥18 years) with biochemical recurrence of prostate cancer, a Karnofsky performance status of 50 or higher, increasing prostate-specific antigen concentration 0·2 ng/mL or more after prostatectomy or 2 ng/mL or more above nadir after radiotherapy, and non-contributory conventional imaging (negative CT or MRI, and bone scan) were eligible. All participants underwent 68Ga-RM2 PET-MRI. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients with PET-positive findings on 68Ga-RM2 PET-MRI compared with MRI alone after initial therapy, at a per-patient and per-lesion level. The primary outcome would be considered met if at least 30% of patients had one or more lesions detected by 68Ga-RM2 PET-MRI and the detection by 68Ga-RM2 PET-MRI was significantly greater than for MRI. Each PET scan was interpreted by three independent masked readers using a standardised evaluation criteria. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02624518, and is complete. FINDINGS: Between Dec 12, 2015, and July 27, 2021, 209 men were screened for eligibility, of whom 100 were included in analyses. Median follow-up was 49·3 months (IQR 36·7-59·2). The primary endpoint was met; 68Ga-RM2 PET-MRI was positive in 69 (69%) patients and MRI alone was positive in 40 (40%) patients (p<0·0001). In the per-lesion analysis 68Ga-RM2 PET-MRI showed significantly higher detection rates than MRI alone (143 vs 96 lesions; p<0·0001). No grade 1 or worse events were reported. INTERPRETATION: 68Ga-RM2 PET-MRI showed better diagnostic performance than MRI alone in patients with biochemical recurrence of prostate cancer. Further prospective comparative studies with PSMA-targeted PET are needed to gain a better understanding of GRPR and PSMA expression patterns in these patients. FUNDING: The US Department of Defense.

Lay healthcare worker financial toxicity intervention: a pilot financial toxicity screening and referral program.

PURPOSE: Financial toxicity is a source of significant distress for patients with urologic cancers, yet few studies have addressed financial burden in this patient population. METHODS: We developed a financial toxicity screening program using a lay health worker (LHW) and social worker (SW) to assess and mitigate financial toxicity in a single academic medical clinic. As part of a quality improvement project, the LHW screened all newly diagnosed patients with advanced stages of prostate, kidney, or urothelial cancer for financial burden using three COST tool questions and referred patients who had significant financial burden to an SW who provided personalized recommendations. The primary outcome was feasibility defined as 80% of patients with financial burden completing the SW consult. Secondary outcomes were patient satisfaction, change in COST Tool responses, and qualitative assessment of financial resources utilized. RESULTS: The LHW screened a total of 185 patients for financial toxicity; 82% (n = 152) were male, 65% (n = 120) White, and 75% (n = 139) reported annual household income >$100,000 US Dollars; 60% (n = 114) had prostate cancer. A total of 18 (9.7%) participants screened positive for significant financial burden and were referred to the SW for consultation. All participants (100%) completed and reported satisfaction with the SW consultation and had 0.83 mean lower scores on the COST Tool post-intervention assessment compared to pre-intervention (95% confidence interval [0.26, 1.41]). CONCLUSION: This multidisciplinary financial toxicity intervention using an LHW and SW was feasible, acceptable, and associated with reduced financial burden among patients with advanced stages of urologic cancers. Future work should evaluate the effect of this intervention among cancer patients in diverse settings.

Patient-Reported Outcomes in Patients With Advanced Urothelial Cancer Who Are Ineligible for Cisplatin and Treated With First-Line Enfortumab Vedotin Alone or With Pembrolizumab.

PURPOSE: Locally advanced/metastatic urothelial cancer (la/mUC) affects patients' quality of life (QOL) and functioning. We describe the impact of first-line (1L) enfortumab vedotin (EV) alone or with pembrolizumab (P) on QOL/functioning/symptoms in patients with la/mUC who were cisplatin-ineligible from EV-103 Cohort K. METHODS: In this phase Ib/II trial, patients were randomly assigned 1:1 to EV + P or EV monotherapy (mono). Exploratory patient-reported outcomes (PROs) were assessed using the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire-Core Questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30) and Brief Pain Inventory Short Form (BPI-SF) at baseline, once per week for cycles 1-3, and then in every cycle through the end of treatment. Changes in scores from baseline to week 24, reported as least squares mean (standard error), were assessed by mixed models for repeated measures. There were no formal statistical comparisons between treatment arms. RESULTS: Of 149 patients treated, 65 (EV + P) and 63 (EV mono) comprised the PRO analysis set. For EV + P, EORTC QLQ-C30 QOL was maintained through week 24 with improvements in emotional functioning, pain, and insomnia. Clinically meaningful improvements were seen in EORTC QLQ-C30 pain after EV + P at weeks 12 (-14.41 [3.14]) and 24 (-14.99 [3.56]) and BPI-SF worst pain at week 24 (-2.07 [0.37]). For EV mono, EORTC QLQ-C30 QOL remained stable with clinically meaningful improvements in EORTC QLQ-C30 pain (-12.55 [4.27]), insomnia (-14.46 [4.69]), and constipation (-10.09 [4.35]) at week 24. There were small-to-moderate improvements in BPI-SF worst pain at week 24. CONCLUSION: EV + P in patients with la/mUC who were cisplatin-ineligible was associated with preservation or improvement of QOL/functioning/symptoms. Improvement in pain was seen in both PRO instruments and treatment arms. These data complement clinical outcomes of 1L EV + P.

A plain language summary exploring a new treatment combination for untreated locally advanced or metastatic urothelial cancer: enfortumab vedotin plus pembrolizumab.

WHAT IS THIS SUMMARY ABOUT?: This summary provides the results of a study of two treatments for cancer, enfortumab vedotin and pembrolizumab, that were studied together against locally advanced or metastatic urothelial cancer (la/mUC), a cancer that occurs most commonly in the bladder. WHAT WERE THE RESULTS?: In the 45 patients studied, around 16% did have serious side effects, but most side effects were manageable. Twenty-four percent of patients, however, stopped the study treatment because of their side effects. Within about 2 months of starting treatment, most patients' (73%) tumors were smaller and stayed smaller, on average, for more than 2 years. WHAT DO THE RESULTS MEAN?: The combination of enfortumab vedotin plus pembrolizumab is a new treatment option for patients with locally advanced or metastatic urothelial cancer when they cannot receive the typical treatment, cisplatin. Advanced or metastatic urothelial cancer is a type of cancer where the cancer has already spread outside of the bladder or urinary tract.

Prostate Cancer, Version 4.2023, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology.

The NCCN Guidelines for Prostate Cancer provide a framework on which to base decisions regarding the workup of patients with prostate cancer, risk stratification and management of localized disease, post-treatment monitoring, and treatment of recurrence and advanced disease. The Guidelines sections included in this article focus on the management of metastatic castration-sensitive disease, nonmetastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC), and metastatic CRPC (mCRPC). Androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) with treatment intensification is strongly recommended for patients with metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer. For patients with nonmetastatic CRPC, ADT is continued with or without the addition of certain secondary hormone therapies depending on prostate-specific antigen doubling time. In the mCRPC setting, ADT is continued with the sequential addition of certain secondary hormone therapies, chemotherapies, immunotherapies, radiopharmaceuticals, and/or targeted therapies. The NCCN Prostate Cancer Panel emphasizes a shared decision-making approach in all disease settings based on patient preferences, prior treatment exposures, the presence or absence of visceral disease, symptoms, and potential side effects.

Enfortumab Vedotin With or Without Pembrolizumab in Cisplatin-Ineligible Patients With Previously Untreated Locally Advanced or Metastatic Urothelial Cancer.

PURPOSE: Patients with locally advanced or metastatic urothelial cancer (la/mUC) who are ineligible for cisplatin-based therapy have limited first-line (1L) treatment options and significant need for improved therapies. Enfortumab vedotin (EV) and pembrolizumab (Pembro) individually have shown a survival benefit in urothelial cancer in second-line + la/mUC settings. Here, we present data from the pivotal trial of EV plus Pembro (EV + Pembro) in the 1L setting. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In Cohort K of the EV-103 phase Ib/II study, cisplatin-ineligible patients with previously untreated la/mUC were randomly assigned 1:1 to receive EV as monotherapy or in combination with Pembro. The primary end point was confirmed objective response rate (cORR) per blinded independent central review. Secondary end points included duration of response (DOR) and safety. There were no formal statistical comparisons between treatment arms. RESULTS: The cORR was 64.5% (95% CI, 52.7 to 75.1) and 45.2% (95% CI, 33.5 to 57.3) for patients treated with EV + Pembro (N = 76) and EV monotherapy (N = 73), respectively. The median DOR was not reached for the combination and was 13.2 months for monotherapy; 65.4% and 56.3% of patients who responded to the combination and monotherapy, respectively, maintained a response at 12 months. The most common grade 3 or higher treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) in patients treated with the combination were maculopapular rash (17.1%), fatigue (9.2%), and neutropenia (9.2%). EV TRAEs of special interest (any grade) in the combination arm included skin reactions (67.1%) and peripheral neuropathy (60.5%). CONCLUSION: EV + Pembro showed a high cORR with durable responses as 1L treatment in cisplatin-ineligible patients with la/mUC. Patients who received EV monotherapy had a response and safety profile consistent with previous studies. Adverse events for EV + Pembro were manageable, with no new safety signals observed.

Enfortumab Vedotin Plus Pembrolizumab in Previously Untreated Advanced Urothelial Cancer.

PURPOSE: Cisplatin-based combination chemotherapy remains the standard of care for locally advanced or metastatic urothelial cancer (la/mUC); however, toxicity is substantial, responses are rarely durable, and many patients with la/mUC are ineligible. Each enfortumab vedotin and pembrolizumab have shown a survival benefit versus chemotherapy in UC, are not restricted by cisplatin eligibility, and warrant investigation as a first-line (1L) combination therapy in patients ineligible for cisplatin. METHODS: In this ongoing phase Ib/II, multicenter, open-label study, 1L cisplatin-ineligible patients with la/mUC received enfortumab vedotin 1.25 mg/kg once daily on days 1 and 8 and pembrolizumab 200 mg (day 1) intravenously once daily in 3-week cycles. The primary end point was safety. Key secondary end points included confirmed objective response rate, duration of response (DOR), and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: Forty-five patients received enfortumab vedotin plus pembrolizumab. The most common treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) were peripheral sensory neuropathy (55.6%), fatigue (51.1%), and alopecia (48.9%). Twenty-nine patients (64.4%) had grade 3 or higher TRAEs; the most common were increased lipase (17.8%), maculopapular rash (11.1%), and fatigue (11.1%). One death (2.2%) was classified as a TRAE. The confirmed objective response rate after a median of nine cycles was 73.3% with a complete response rate of 15.6%. The median DOR and median OS were 25.6 months and 26.1 months, respectively. CONCLUSION: Enfortumab vedotin plus pembrolizumab showed a manageable safety profile. Most patients experienced tumor shrinkage. The median DOR and median OS exceeding 2 years in a cisplatin-ineligible patient population make this a promising combination currently under investigation in a phase III study (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT04223856).

NCCN Guidelines® Insights: Prostate Cancer, Version 1.2023.

The NCCN Guidelines for Prostate Cancer address staging and risk assessment after a prostate cancer diagnosis and include management options for localized, regional, recurrent, and metastatic disease. The NCCN Prostate Cancer Panel meets annually to reevaluate and update their recommendations based on new clinical data and input from within NCCN Member Institutions and from external entities. These NCCN Guidelines Insights summarizes much of the panel's discussions for the 4.2022 and 1.2023 updates to the guidelines regarding systemic therapy for metastatic prostate cancer.

Addressing Challenges and Controversies in the Management of Prostate Cancer with Multidisciplinary Teams.

The diagnostic and treatment landscapes of prostate cancer are rapidly evolving. This has led to several challenges and controversies regarding optimal management of the disease that outpace guidelines and clinical data. Multidisciplinary teams (MDTs) can be used to engage the array of specialists that collaborate to treat complex malignancies such as prostate cancer. While the rationale for the use of MDTs in prostate cancer is well known, ways to optimally use MDTs to address the challenges and controversies associated with prostate cancer management are less well understood. One area of MDT care that remains undefined is how MDTs can most effectively provide guidance on clinical decision-making in situations in which information from novel diagnostic testing (genetic testing, molecular imaging) is substantially different from the established clinical risk factors. In this review, we provide a clinical perspective on ways that MDTs can be used to address this and other challenges and controversies across the prostate cancer disease continuum, from diagnosis to end-of-life considerations. Beyond clinical scenarios, we also review ways in which MDTs can mitigate disparities of care in prostate cancer. Overall, MDTs play a central role in helping to address the daily vexing issues faced by clinicians related to diagnosis, risk stratification, and treatment. Given the accelerating advances in precision medicine and targeted therapy, and the new questions and controversies these will bring, the value of MDTs for prostate cancer management will only increase in the future.

Immunotherapy for Urothelial Carcinoma: Focus on Clinical Utility of Nivolumab.

Over the past decade, the emergence of immune checkpoint inhibitors has brought about significant change to the treatment landscape of bladder cancer. Nivolumab is an immune checkpoint inhibitor that has shown favorable results resulting in FDA approval for treatment of platinum-refractory locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma. More recently, it was the first (and only) immune checkpoint inhibitor to receive FDA approval for the treatment of urothelial carcinoma in the adjuvant setting after radical surgery. Multiple trials are now actively underway to further understand the nuances in which immune checkpoint inhibitors such as nivolumab can be beneficial. In this review, we explore the development of nivolumab in terms of its mechanism of action, its growing indications in the treatment of urothelial carcinoma, and potential future directions for clinical trials. Immune checkpoint inhibitors are a promising treatment for bladder cancer, but further work is needed to continue to improve outcomes for patients.

Cabozantinib in combination with atezolizumab in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer: results from an expansion cohort of a multicentre, open-label, phase 1b trial (COSMIC-021).

BACKGROUND: Patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer have few treatment options after novel hormonal therapy (eg, abiraterone or enzalutamide). We aimed to evaluate cabozantinib, a tyrosine kinase inhibitor with immunomodulatory properties, in combination with the PD-L1 inhibitor atezolizumab in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer. METHODS: COSMIC-021 is an ongoing, multicentre, open-label, phase 1b study with a dose-escalation stage followed by tumour-specific expansion stages. Expansion cohort 6 in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer was enrolled at 42 cancer research centres in France, Italy, the Netherlands, Spain, and the USA. Eligible patients were aged 18 years or older and had metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer with radiographic soft tissue progression following treatment with either enzalutamide or abiraterone, or both; measurable soft tissue disease per Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumours (RECIST) version 1.1; and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1. Patients received oral cabozantinib 40 mg per day and intravenous atezolizumab 1200 mg once every 3 weeks. Study treatment continued until progressive disease or unacceptable toxicity. All enrolled patients were assessed for efficacy and safety. The primary endpoint was objective response rate per RECIST version 1.1 as assessed by the investigator. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03170960. FINDINGS: Between April 24, 2018, and Aug 31, 2020, 132 patients were enrolled and received at least one dose of study treatment. At data cutoff (Feb 19, 2021), median duration of follow-up was 15·2 months (IQR 9·6-21·7). Objective response rate was 23% (95% CI 17-32; 31 of 132 patients), with three (2%) confirmed complete responses and 28 (21%) confirmed partial responses. 72 (55%) of 132 patients had grade 3-4 treatment-related adverse events, with the most common being pulmonary embolism (11 [8%] patients), diarrhoea (nine [7%]), fatigue (nine [7%]), and hypertension (nine [7%]). There was one grade 5 treatment-related adverse event (dehydration). 74 (56%) of 132 patients had serious adverse events of any causality. 28 (21%) of 132 patients had treatment-related adverse events leading to discontinuation of either study drug. INTERPRETATION: Cabozantinib plus atezolizumab showed promising antitumour activity in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer after novel hormonal therapy with an acceptable safety profile, supporting further evaluation of this combination. FUNDING: Exelixis.

Identification of Pathogenic Immune Cell Subsets Associated With Checkpoint Inhibitor-Induced Myocarditis.

BACKGROUND: Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) are monoclonal antibodies used to activate the immune system against tumor cells. Despite therapeutic benefits, ICIs have the potential to cause immune-related adverse events such as myocarditis, a rare but serious side effect with up to 50% mortality in affected patients. Histologically, patients with ICI myocarditis have lymphocytic infiltrates in the heart, implicating T cell-mediated mechanisms. However, the precise pathological immune subsets and molecular changes in ICI myocarditis are unknown. METHODS: To identify immune subset(s) associated with ICI myocarditis, we performed time-of-flight mass cytometry on peripheral blood mononuclear cells from 52 individuals: 29 patients with autoimmune adverse events (immune-related adverse events) on ICI, including 8 patients with ICI myocarditis, and 23 healthy control subjects. We also used multiomics single-cell technology to immunophenotype 30 patients/control subjects using single-cell RNA sequencing, single-cell T-cell receptor sequencing, and cellular indexing of transcriptomes and epitopes by sequencing with feature barcoding for surface marker expression confirmation. To correlate between the blood and the heart, we performed single-cell RNA sequencing/T-cell receptor sequencing/cellular indexing of transcriptomes and epitopes by sequencing on MRL/Pdcd1-/- (Murphy Roths large/programmed death-1-deficient) mice with spontaneous myocarditis. RESULTS: Using these complementary approaches, we found an expansion of cytotoxic CD8+ T effector cells re-expressing CD45RA (Temra CD8+ cells) in patients with ICI myocarditis compared with control subjects. T-cell receptor sequencing demonstrated that these CD8+ Temra cells were clonally expanded in patients with myocarditis compared with control subjects. Transcriptomic analysis of these Temra CD8+ clones confirmed a highly activated and cytotoxic phenotype. Longitudinal study demonstrated progression of these Temra CD8+ cells into an exhausted phenotype 2 months after treatment with glucocorticoids. Differential expression analysis demonstrated elevated expression levels of proinflammatory chemokines (CCL5/CCL4/CCL4L2) in the clonally expanded Temra CD8+ cells, and ligand receptor analysis demonstrated their interactions with innate immune cells, including monocytes/macrophages, dendritic cells, and neutrophils, as well as the absence of key anti-inflammatory signals. To complement the human study, we performed single-cell RNA sequencing/T-cell receptor sequencing/cellular indexing of transcriptomes and epitopes by sequencing in Pdcd1-/- mice with spontaneous myocarditis and found analogous expansions of cytotoxic clonal effector CD8+ cells in both blood and hearts of such mice compared with controls. CONCLUSIONS: Clonal cytotoxic Temra CD8+ cells are significantly increased in the blood of patients with ICI myocarditis, corresponding to an analogous increase in effector cytotoxic CD8+ cells in the blood/hearts of Pdcd1-/- mice with myocarditis. These expanded effector CD8+ cells have unique transcriptional changes, including upregulation of chemokines CCL5/CCL4/CCL4L2, which may serve as attractive diagnostic/therapeutic targets for reducing life-threatening cardiac immune-related adverse events in ICI-treated patients with cancer.

Cabozantinib in Combination With Atezolizumab for Advanced Renal Cell Carcinoma: Results From the COSMIC-021 Study.

PURPOSE: COSMIC-021 is evaluating cabozantinib plus atezolizumab in patients with solid tumors. We report results from patients with advanced clear cell (cc) and non-clear cell (ncc) renal cell carcinoma (RCC). METHODS: This phase Ib study (NCT03170960) enrolled patients age ≥ 18 years with advanced RCC. A dose-escalation stage was followed by expansion cohorts. For cohort expansion, prior systemic therapy was not permitted for ccRCC but allowed for nccRCC. Patients received oral cabozantinib 40 mg once a day (ccRCC and nccRCC) or 60 mg once a day (ccRCC only) plus atezolizumab (1,200 mg intravenously, once every 3 weeks). The primary end point was investigator-assessed objective response rate (ORR) per RECIST v1.1; the secondary end point was safety. RESULTS: A total of 102 patients were enrolled. Median follow-up was 25.8, 15.3, and 13.3 months for the 40-mg ccRCC, 60-mg ccRCC, and nccRCC groups, respectively. ORR was 53% (80% CI, 41 to 65) in the 40-mg ccRCC group (n = 34) and 58% (80% CI, 46 to 70) in the 60-mg ccRCC group (n = 36), 3% and 11%, respectively, with complete response; median progression-free survival (exploratory end point) was 19.5 and 15.1 months, respectively. In nccRCC (n = 32), ORR was 31% (80% CI, 20 to 44), all partial responses; median progression-free survival was 9.5 months. Grade 3 or 4 treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) were reported by 71% of patients in the 40-mg ccRCC group, 67% in the 60-mg ccRCC group, and 38% in the nccRCC group; TRAEs leading to discontinuation of both agents occurred in 15%, 6%, and 3% of patients, respectively. There were no grade 5 TRAEs. CONCLUSION: The novel combination of cabozantinib plus atezolizumab demonstrated encouraging clinical activity and acceptable tolerability in patients with advanced ccRCC and nccRCC. Disease control was observed across dose levels and histologic subtypes.