NTRK fusion events and targeted treatment of advanced radioiodine refractory thyroid cancer.

PURPOSE: Pathogenic fusion events involving neurotrophic receptor tyrosine kinase (NTRK) have been described in ~ 2% of differentiated thyroid cancer (DTC). The selective tropomyosin receptor kinase (TRK) inhibitors entrectinib and larotrectinib have been approved in a tumor agnostic manner based on phase 1/2 clinical trials. In a real-world setting at five referral centers, we aimed to describe the prevalence of NTRK gene fusions and the efficacy and safety of TRK inhibitor treatment for non-medullary, advanced thyroid cancer (TC). METHODS: A total of 184 TC patients with testing for NTRK gene fusions were included. Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) probabilities were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method in six patients with NTRK fusion-positive TC who underwent TRK inhibitor therapy. RESULTS: 8/184 (4%) patients harbored NTRK gene fusions. Six patients with radioiodine (RAI)-refractory TC harboring NTRK1 (n = 4) and NTRK3 (n = 2) gene fusions were treated with larotrectinib. Five patients (83%) had received ≥ 1 prior systemic therapy and one patient did not receive prior systemic therapy. All patients had morphologically progressive disease before treatment initiation. Objective response rate was 83%, including two complete remissions. Median PFS from start of TRK inhibitor treatment was 23 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 0-57.4) and median OS was not reached (NR) (95% CI, NR). Adverse events were of grade 1-3. CONCLUSION: The prevalence of NTRK gene fusions in our cohort of RAI-refractory TC is slightly higher than reported for all TC patients. Larotrectinib is an effective treatment option in the majority of NTRK gene fusion-positive advanced TC patients after prior systemic treatment and has a favorable safety profile.

A Podcast Discussion on the Current Treatment Landscape for Renal Cell Carcinoma.

During the last 15 years, tremendous efforts have been made in the medical treatment of metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). Immune-oncological (IO) combinations are the current standard of care in the first-line setting of mRCC. Here, the current phase 3 trials CM214 (nivolumab/ipilimumab vs. sunitinib), KN426 (axitinib/pembrolizumab vs. sunitinib), Javelin-ren-101 (axitinib/avelumab vs. sunitinib), CM9ER (cabozantinib/nivolumab vs. sunitinib), and CLEAR (lenvatinib/pembrolizumab vs. sunitinib) were discussed. In the mentioned phase 3 trials, primary and secondary endpoints were discussed. Strengths and weaknesses of each trial were reflected in terms of overall survival, progression-free survival, objective remission, health quality of life, and safety. Reflecting on the data, as well as the current ESMO guidelines, we discuss choosing the appropriate medical treatment for patients' individualized treatment journey and relay the strength and weaknesses of each combination-starting with the appropriate first-line therapy.

First Line Medical Treatment of Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma: A Podcast on Choosing Wisely and Managing Safely.

During the last 15 years, tremendous efforts have been made toward medical treatment of metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). Checkpoint inhibitors (CPI) and tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKI) dominate the therapeutic armamentarium, as a combination of either CPIs or CPI/TKI, while the value of TKI monotherapy is decreasing. With increasing efficiency, however, toxicity also increases. Appropriate management of adverse events is therefore pivotal. Recognizing adverse events, judging their etiology and appropriate management, and sometimes expanding the diagnostics of adverse events are mandatory and demand experience and vigilance. Ultimately, appropriate safety management achieves optimal oncological outcomes and maintains patient quality of life.