Treatment Patterns and Attrition With Lines of Therapy for Advanced Urothelial Carcinoma in the US.

Importance: The treatment paradigm for advanced urothelial carcinoma (aUC) has undergone substantial transformation due to the introduction of effective, novel therapeutic agents. However, outcomes remain poor, and little is known about current treatment approaches and attrition rates for patients with aUC. Objectives: To delineate evolving treatment patterns and attrition rates in patients with aUC using a US-based patient-level sample. Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective cohort study used patient-level data from the nationwide deidentified electronic health record database Flatiron Health, originating from approximately 280 oncology clinics across the US. Patients included in the analysis received treatment for metastatic or local aUC at a participating site from January 1, 2011, to January 31, 2023. Patients receiving treatment for 2 or more different types of cancer or participating in clinical trials were excluded from the analysis. Main Outcomes and Measures: Frequencies and percentages were used to summarize the (1) treatment received in each line (cisplatin-based regimens, carboplatin-based regimens, programmed cell death 1 and/or programmed cell death ligand 1 [PD-1/PD-L1] inhibitors, single-agent nonplatinum chemotherapy, enfortumab vedotin, erdafitinib, sacituzumab govitecan, or others) and (2) attrition of patients with each line of therapy, defined as the percentage of patients not progressing to the next line. Results: Of the 12 157 patients within the dataset, 7260 met the eligibility criteria and were included in the analysis (5364 [73.9%] men; median age at the start of first-line treatment, 73 [IQR, 66-80] years). All patients commenced first-line treatment; of these, only 2714 (37.4%) progressed to receive second-line treatment, and 857 (11.8%) advanced to third-line treatment. The primary regimens used as first-line treatment contained carboplatin (2241 [30.9%]), followed by PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors (2174 [29.9%]). The PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors emerged as the predominant choice in the second- and third-line (1412 of 2714 [52.0%] and 258 of 857 [30.1%], respectively) treatments. From 2019 onward, novel therapeutic agents were increasingly used in second- and third-line treatments, including enfortumab vedotin (219 of 2714 [8.1%] and 159 of 857 [18.6%], respectively), erdafitinib (39 of 2714 [1.4%] and 28 of 857 [3.3%], respectively), and sacituzumab govitecan (14 of 2714 [0.5%] and 34 of 857 [4.0%], respectively). Conclusions and Relevance: The findings of this cohort study suggest that approximately two-thirds of patients with aUC did not receive second-line treatment. Most first-line treatments do not include cisplatin-based regimens and instead incorporate carboplatin- or PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitor-based therapies. These data warrant the provision of more effective and tolerable first-line treatments for patients with aUC.

Differential Tumor Gene Expression Profiling of Patients With Prostate Adenocarcinoma on the Basis of BMI.

PURPOSE: An increased BMI is linked to increased prostate adenocarcinoma incidence and mortality. Baseline tumor gene expression profiling (GEP) can provide a comprehensive picture of the biological processes related to treatment response and disease progression. We interrogate and validate the underlying differences in tumor GEP on the basis of BMI in patients with prostate adenocarcinoma. METHODS: The inclusion criteria consisted of histologically confirmed prostate adenocarcinoma and the availability of RNA sequencing data obtained from treatment-naïve primary prostate tissue. RNA sequencing was performed by a Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments-certified laboratory (Tempus or Caris Life Sciences). The Tempus cohort was used for interrogation and the Caris cohort for validation. Patients were stratified on the basis of BMI at the time of prostate cancer diagnosis: BMI-high (BMIH; BMI ≥30) and BMI-low (BMIL; BMI <30). Differential gene expression analysis between the two cohorts was conducted using the DEseq2 pipeline. The resulting GEPs were further analyzed using Gene Set Enrichment software to identify pathways that exhibited enrichment in each cohort. RESULTS: Overall, 102 patients were eligible, with 60 patients in the Tempus cohort (BMIL = 38, BMIH = 22) and 42 patients in the Caris cohort (BMIL = 24, BMIH = 18). Tumor tissues obtained from patients in the BMIL group exhibited higher expression of genes associated with inflammation pathways. BMIH displayed increased expression of genes involved in pathways such as heme metabolism and androgen response. CONCLUSION: Our study shows the upregulation of distinct genomic pathways in BMIL compared with BMIH patients with prostate cancer. These hypothesis-generating data could explain different survival outcomes in both groups and guide personalized therapy for men with prostate cancer.

Differences in Tumor Gene Expression Profiles Between De Novo Metastatic Castration-sensitive Prostate Cancer and Metastatic Relapse After Prior Localized Therapy.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: It has been reported that patients with de novo metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer (dn-mCSPC) have worse prognosis and outcomes than those whose cancer relapses after prior local therapy (PLT-mCSPC). Our aim was to interrogate and validate underlying differences in tumor gene expression profiles between dn-mCSPC and PLT-mCSPC. METHODS: The inclusion criteria were histologically confirmed prostate adenocarcinoma and the availability of RNA sequencing data for treatment-naïve primary prostate tissue. RNA sequencing was performed by Tempus or Caris Life Sciences, both of which have Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments certification. The Tempus cohort was used for interrogation, while the Caris cohort was used for validation. Differential gene expression analysis between the cohorts was conducted using the DEseq2 pipeline. The resulting gene expression profiles were further analyzed using Gene Set Enrichment software to identify pathways with enrichment in each cohort. KEY FINDINGS AND LIMITATIONS: Overall, 128 patients were eligible, of whom 78 were in the Tempus cohort (dn-mCSPC 37, PLT-mCSPC 41) and 50 were in the Caris cohort (dn-mCSPC 30, PLT-mCSPC 20). Tumor tissues from patients with dn-mCSPC had higher expression of genes associated with inflammation pathways, while tissues from patients with PLT-mCSPC had higher expression of genes involved in oxidative phosphorylation, fatty acid metabolism, and androgen response pathways. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: Our study revealed upregulation of distinct genomic pathways in dn-mCSPC in comparison to PLT-mCSPC. These hypothesis-generating data could guide personalized therapy for men with prostate cancer and explain different survival outcomes for dn-mCSPC and PLT-mCSPC. PATIENT SUMMARY: We measured gene expression levels in tumors from patients with metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer. In patients with metastatic disease at first diagnosis, inflammatory pathways were upregulated. In patients whose metastasis occurred on relapse after treatment, androgen response pathways were upregulated. These findings could help in personalizing therapy for prostate cancer and explaining differences in survival.

Cabozantinib with immune checkpoint inhibitor versus cabozantinib monotherapy in patients with metastatic clear cell renal cell carcinoma progressing after prior immune checkpoint inhibitor.

INTRODUCTION: Rechallenge with antibodies targeting programmed cell death protein-1 or its ligand (PD-1/L1) after discontinuation or disease progression in solid tumors following a prior PD-1/L1 treatment is often practiced in clinic. This study aimed to investigate if adding PD-1/L1 inhibitors to cabozantinib, the most used second-line treatment in real-world patients with metastatic clear cell renal cell carcinoma (mccRCC), offers additional benefits. METHODS: Using de-identified patient-level data from a large real-world US-based database, patients diagnosed with mccRCC, who received any PD-1/L1-based combination in first-line (1L) setting, followed by second-line (2L) therapy with either cabozantinib alone or in combination with PD-1/L1 inhibitors were included. Patients given a cabozantinib-containing regimen in 1L were excluded. The study end points were real-world time to next therapy (rwTTNT) and real-world overall survival (rwOS) by 2L. RESULTS: Of 12,285 patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma in the data set, 348 patients met eligibility and were included in the analysis. After propensity score matching weighting, cabozantinib with PD-1/L1 inhibitors versus cabozantinib (ref.) had similar rwTTNT and rwOS in the 2L setting. Hazard ratios and 95% confidence interval (CI) for rwTTNT and rwOS are 0.74 (95% CI, 0.49-1.12) and 1.15 (95% CI, 0.73-1.79), respectively. CONCLUSION: In this study, the results align with the phase 3 CONTACT-03 trial results, which showed no additional benefit of adding PD-L1 inhibitor to cabozantinib compared to cabozantinib alone in 2L following PD-1/L1-based therapies in 1L. These results from real-world patients strengthen the evidence regarding the futility of rechallenge with PD-1/L1 inhibitors.

Impact of Synchronous versus Metachronous Metastasis on Outcomes in Patients with Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Treated with First-line Immune Checkpoint Inhibitor-based Combinations.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: The impact of time of metastasis onset with respect toprimary renal cell carcinoma (RCC) diagnosis on survival outcomes is not well characterized in the era of immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI)-based combinations. Herein, we assessed differences in clinical outcomes between synchronous and metachronous metastatic RCC (mRCC). METHODS: Data for patients with mRCC treated with first-line ICI-based combination therapies between 2014 and 2023 were retrospectively collected. Patients were categorized as having synchronous metastasis if present within 3 mo of RCC diagnosis; metachronous metastasis was defined as metastasis >3 mo after primary diagnosis. Time to treatment failure (TTF), overall survival (OS), and the disease control rate (DCR) were assessed. KEY FINDINGS AND LIMITATIONS: Our analysis included 223 eligible patients (126 synchronous and 97 metachronous). Median TTF did not significantly differ between the synchronous and metachronous groups (9 vs 19.8 mo; p = 0.063). Median OS was significantly shorter in the synchronous group (28.0 vs 50.9 mo; p = 0.001). Similarly, patients with synchronous metachronous metastasis (58.7% vs. 78.4%; p = 0.002). On multivariable analyses, synchronous metastasis remained independently associated with worse OS and DCR. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: In this hypothesis-generating study, patients with mRCC with synchronous metastasis who were treated with first-line ICI-based combinations have a poorer OS and worse DCR than those with metachronous mRCC. If these results are externally validated, time to metastasis could be included in prognostic models for mRCC. PATIENT SUMMARY: Our study demonstrates that patients treated with current first-line immunotherapies, who present with metastasis at the initial diagnosis of kidney cancer have worse overall survival compared to those who develop metastasis later. These results can help physicians and patients understand life expectancy.

Impact of smoking status on clinical outcomes in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma treated with first-line immune checkpoint inhibitor-based regimens.

BACKGROUND: Current tobacco smoking is independently associated with decreased overall survival (OS) among patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) treated with targeted monotherapy (VEGF-TKI). Herein, we assess the influence of smoking status on the outcomes of patients with mRCC treated with the current first-line standard of care of immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI)-based regimens. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Real-world data from the International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium (IMDC) were collected retrospectively. Patients with mRCC who received either dual ICI therapy or ICI with VEGF-TKI in the first-line setting were included and were categorized as current, former, or nonsmokers. The primary outcomes were OS, time to treatment failure (TTF), and objective response rate (ORR). OS and TTF were compared between groups using the log-rank test and multivariable Cox regression models. ORR was assessed between the 3 groups using a multivariable logistic regression model. RESULTS: A total of 989 eligible patients were included in the analysis, with 438 (44.3%) nonsmokers, 415 (42%) former, and 136 (13.7%) current smokers. Former smokers were older and included more males, while other baseline characteristics were comparable between groups. Median follow-up for OS was 21.2 months. In the univariate analysis, a significant difference between groups was observed for OS (P = .027) but not for TTF (P = .9), with current smokers having the worse 2-year OS rate (62.8% vs 70.8% and 73.1% in never and former smokers, respectively). After adjusting for potential confounders, no significant differences in OS or TTF were observed among the 3 groups. However, former smokers demonstrated a higher ORR compared to never smokers (OR 1.45, P = .02). CONCLUSION: Smoking status does not appear to independently influence the clinical outcomes to first-line ICI-based regimens in patients with mRCC. Nonetheless, patient counseling on tobacco cessation remains a crucial aspect of managing patients with mRCC, as it significantly reduces all-cause mortality.

Natural course of metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer in the era of intensified androgen deprivation therapy in the hormone-sensitive setting.

BACKGROUND: Androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) intensification (ADTi) (i.e., ADT with androgen receptor pathway inhibitor or docetaxel, or both) has significantly improved survival outcomes of patients with metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC). However, the impact of prior ADTi in the mHSPC setting on the disease presentation and survival outcomes in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) is not well characterized. In this study, our objective was to compare the disease characteristics and survival outcomes of patients with new mCRPC with respect to receipt of intensified or nonintensified ADT in the mHSPC setting. METHODS: In this institutional review board-approved retrospective study, eligibility criteria were as follows: patients diagnosed with mCRPC, treated with an approved first-line mCRPC therapy, and who received either intensified or nonintensified ADT in the mHSPC setting. Progression-free survival (PFS) was defined from the start of first-line therapy for mCRPC to progression per Prostate Cancer Working Group 2 criteria or death, and overall survival (OS) was defined from the start of first-line therapy for mCRPC to death or censored at the last follow-up. A multivariable analysis using the Cox proportional hazards model was used, adjusting for potential confounders. RESULTS: Patients (n = 387) treated between March 20, 2008, and August 18, 2022, were eligible and included: 283 received nonintensified ADT, whereas 104 were treated with ADTi. At mCRPC diagnosis, patients in the ADTi group were significantly younger, had more visceral metastasis, lower baseline prostate-specific antigen (all p < 0.01), and lower hemoglobin (p = 0.027). Furthermore, they had significantly shorter PFS (median 4.8 vs. 8.4 months, adjusted hazard ratio [HR]: 1.46, 95% confidence interval [95% CI]: 1.07-2, p = 0.017) and OS (median 21.3 vs. 33.1 months, adjusted HR: 1.53, 95% CI: 1.06-2.21, p = 0.022) compared to patients in the nonintensified ADT group. CONCLUSION: Patients treated with ADTi in the mHSPC setting and experiencing disease progression to mCRPC had more aggressive disease features of mCRPC (characterized by a higher number of poor prognostic factors at mCRPC presentation). They also had shorter PFS on first-line mCRPC treatment and shorter OS after the onset of mCRPC compared to those not receiving ADTi in the mHSPC setting. Upon external validation, these findings may impact patient counseling, prognostication, treatment selection, and design of future clinical trials in the mCRPC setting. There remains an unmet need to develop novel life-prolonging therapies with new mechanisms of action to improve mCRPC prognosis in the current era.

Histologic patterns in prostatic adenocarcinoma are not predictive of mutations in the homologous recombination repair pathway.

Somatic or germline homologous recombination repair (HRR) pathway gene mutations are commonly detected in prostate cancer, especially in advanced disease, and are associated with response to poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors. In this study, we evaluated whether histological patterns are predictive of HRR pathway gene mutations. The study population comprised 130 patients with advanced prostate carcinoma who underwent comprehensive genomic profiling (CGP) of tumor tissue at a CLIA-certified laboratory. HRR genes in the study included BRCA1, BRCA2, ATM, BARD1, BRIP, CHEK2, MRE11A, NBN, PALB2, RAD51C, RAD51D, EMSY, ATR, CHEK1, and FAM175A. Overall, 38 patients had mutations in BRCA1/2, 36 in other HRR genes, and 56 were negative for HRR mutations. All cases were re-reviewed and quantified by two genitourinary pathologists blinded to mutational status for the following histological patterns of prostate carcinoma: cribriform, ductal, intraductal carcinoma (IDC), small cell carcinoma, signet ring-like pattern, and lobular carcinoma-like pattern. Discordances were resolved by consensus review. Histologic patterns were analyzed for any correlation with mutations in HRR pathway genes (grouped as BRCA1/2 mutated or non-BRCA1/2 mutated) compared to tumors without mutations in HRR genes by Chi-square testing. Patterns with >20 % and >30 % of tumor volume were additionally evaluated for correlation with mutational status. We found no significant association between HRR pathway mutations and cribriform pattern, IDC, ductal carcinoma, small cell carcinoma, signet ring-like pattern, or lobular carcinoma-like patterns. Tumors with >20 % or >30 % histologic patterns by volume also demonstrated no significant association with mutational status. This study suggests that histopathologic examination alone is insufficient to distinguish prostate cancer with germline or somatic mutations in HRR pathway genes, highlighting the continuing importance of ancillary molecular diagnostics in guiding therapy selection for prostate cancer patients who may benefit from PARP inhibitors.

Impact of Initial Timing of Metastatic Disease on Survival in Patients With Newly Diagnosed Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer Treated With Androgen Receptor Pathway Inhibitors.

INTRODUCTION: Patients with synchronous (de novo) metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer appear to have worse survival outcomes and shorter time to develop castration resistance than patients with metachronous disease. However, the impact of synchronous metastasis on outcomes in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) setting is unknown in patients without prior exposure to androgen receptor pathway inhibitors (ARPIs). In this study, we assessed the impact of initial timing of metastasis (synchronous vs metachronous) on survival outcomes of patients with new-onset mCRPC in a real-world population treated with first-line abiraterone or enzalutamide. METHODS: Data were collected retrospectively from 323 patients with a confirmed diagnosis of mCRPC who received ARPIs as first-line therapy and had no prior exposure to ARPIs. The study endpoints were progression-free survival and overall survival. RESULTS: The results showed that median overall survival was significantly shorter in patients with synchronous disease than those with metachronous disease (26 vs 38.7 months, HR 1.42, 95% CI 1.09-1.86, P = .011). However, there was no difference in median progression-free survival. CONCLUSIONS: The initial presentation with synchronous metastasis remained an independent factor associated with shorter OS in the multivariable analysis. These hypothesis-generating data, after external validation, may have implications in patient counseling, prognostication, and design of future clinical trials in the new-onset mCRPC setting.

Access to Care and Healthcare Quality Metrics for Patients with Advanced Genitourinary Cancers in Urban versus Rural Areas.

Compared to the urban population, patients in rural areas face healthcare disparities and experience inferior healthcare-related outcomes. To compare the healthcare quality metrics and outcomes between patients with advanced genitourinary cancers from rural versus urban areas treated at a tertiary cancer hospital, in this retrospective study, eligible patients with advanced genitourinary cancers were treated at Huntsman Cancer Institute, an NCI-Designated Comprehensive Cancer Center in Utah. Rural-urban commuting area codes were used to classify the patients' residences as being in urban (1-3) or rural (4-10) areas. The straight line distances of the patients' residences from the cancer center were also calculated and included in the analysis. The median household income data were obtained and calculated from "The Michigan Population Studies Center", based on individual zip codes. In this study, 2312 patients were screened, and 1025 eligible patients were included for further analysis (metastatic prostate cancer (n = 679), metastatic bladder cancer (n = 184), and metastatic renal cell carcinoma (n = 162). Most patients (83.9%) came from urban areas, while the remainder were from rural areas. Both groups had comparable demographic profiles and tumor characteristics at baseline. The annual median household income of urban patients was $8604 higher than that of rural patients (p < 0.001). There were fewer urban patients with Medicare (44.9% vs. 50.9%) and more urban patients with private insurance (40.4% vs. 35.1%). There was no difference between the urban and rural patients regarding receiving systemic therapies, enrollment in clinical trials, or tumor genomic profiling. The overall survival rate was not significantly different between the two populations in metastatic prostate, bladder, and kidney cancer, respectively. As available in a tertiary cancer hospital, access to care can mitigate the difference in the quality of healthcare and clinical outcomes in urban versus rural patients.

The biology behind combining poly [ADP ribose] polymerase and androgen receptor inhibition for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer.

For about a decade, poly [ADP ribose] polymerases (PARP) inhibitors have been used almost exclusively to treat tumours that are deficient in one of the BRCA genes. In advanced prostate cancer, which is largely driven by the activity of the androgen receptor (AR), accumulating preclinical evidence has suggested an interplay between the AR and PARP, which could be therapeutically exploited independently of defects in the tumour's DNA homologous recombination repair (HRR) machinery. This includes the regulation of HRR genes by the AR, a mutual influence between the activities of PARP and the AR, and the co-localisation of BRCA2 to the retinoblastoma gene in the human genome. Based on these findings, randomised clinical trials have been initiated to study the addition of a PARP inhibitor to AR pathway inhibitor therapy. Three of four randomised studies demonstrated a significantly increased anti-tumour activity in men with metastatic prostate cancer, irrespective of HRR gene alterations. In this review, we summarise the available preclinical evidence that provides the rationale for the combination of inhibitors for PARP and the AR and discuss how it might contribute to the efficacy observed in the clinic.

Race and Treatment Outcomes in Patients With Metastatic Castration-Sensitive Prostate Cancer: A Secondary Analysis of the SWOG 1216 Phase 3 Trial.

Importance: Black patients present with more aggressive disease and experience higher mortality than White patients with prostate cancer. Race and social determinants of health influence prostate cancer-specific mortality and overall survival (OS); however, in a previous trial, Black patients did not have inferior outcomes compared with White patients, possibly because of equitable access to care available in a clinical trial setting. Objective: To compare differences in survival outcomes of patients with metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer (mCSPC) by race in a phase 3 trial with a large proportion of Black patients. Design, Setting, and Participants: This secondary analysis of patient-level data of a prospective phase 3 randomized clinical trial included patients with newly diagnosed mCSPC enrolled between March 1, 2013, and July 15, 2017. Analysis was conducted between December 2022 and February 2023. Interventions: Patients receiving androgen deprivation therapy were randomized (1:1) to receive either orteronel 300 mg orally twice daily (experimental group) or bicalutamide 50 mg orally daily (control group). Main Outcomes and Measures: OS, with progression-free survival (PFS) as a secondary end point. Results: Among 1313 participants, 135 (10%) identified as Black and 1077 (82%) as White, with an equal racial distribution between groups. Black patients were younger (median [IQR] age, 65.8 [60-70] vs 68.4 [62.5-74.1] years; P = .001) and had a higher median (IQR) baseline prostate-specific antigen response rate than White patients (54.7 [19.8-222.0] vs 26.7 [9.2-96.0] ng/mL; P < .001). At a median follow-up of 4.9 years, Black and White patients had similar median PFS (2.3 years; 95% CI, 1.8-1.4 years vs 2.9 years; 95% CI, 2.5-3.3 years; P = .71) and OS (5.5 years; 95% CI, 4.8-NR vs 6.3 years; 95% CI, 5.7-NR; P = .65). The multivariable analysis confirmed similar PFS and OS after adjusting for known prognostic factors. No interaction between race and treatment was observed. Conclusions and Relevance: In this secondary analysis of a randomized clinical trial studying androgen deprivation therapy with first- or second-generation androgen receptor pathway inhibitors, both Black and White patients demonstrated similar OS and PFS. Equitable access to care may reduce historical differences in outcomes between Black and White patients with advanced prostate cancer. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01809691.

Impact of androgen receptor alterations on cell-free DNA genomic profiling on survival outcomes in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer.

BACKGROUND: Androgen receptor (AR) gene alterations, as detected by circulating tumor cell-free DNA (cfDNA) genomic profiling, have been shown to emerge after a variable duration of androgen signaling inhibition. AR alterations were associated with inferior outcomes on treatment with androgen receptor pathway inhibitors (ARPI) in the first line metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) setting in a phase 2 trial. Here in, we assessed the impact of these AR alterations on survival outcomes in a real-world patient population of mCRPC experiencing disease progression on an ARPI. METHODS: In this IRB-approved retrospective study, consecutively seen patients with a confirmed diagnosis of mCRPC, with disease progression on a treatment with ARPIs in the first line mCRPC setting, with no prior exposure to an ARPI in the castration sensitive setting, and with available cfDNA profiling from a CLIA certified laboratory were included. Patients were categorized based on AR status: wild-type (ARwt ) or alteration-positive (AR+ ). The objective was to correlate overall survival (OS) after disease progression on the first-line ARPI with the presence or absence of AR alterations. Kaplan-Meier and Cox Regression Tests were used as implemented in R-Studio (v.4.2). RESULTS: A total of 137 mCRPC patients were eligible: 69 with ARwt versus 68 with AR+ . The median OS posttreatment with the first ARPI was significantly higher for ARwt than AR+ patients (30.1 vs. 15.2 mos; p < 0.001). Of 108 patients who received a subsequent line of therapy, 63 received an alternate ARPI (AR+ 39 vs. 24 ARwt ), while 20 received a taxane-based therapy (11 AR+ vs. 9 ARwt ). Among patients receiving an alternate ARPI, AR+ had numerically shorter OS (16.8 vs. 30.4 mos, p = 0.1). Among patients receiving taxane-based regimens, the OS was not significantly different between AR+ and ARwt (14.5 vs. 10.1 mos, p = 0.18). CONCLUSION: In this real-world study, mCRPC patients with AR alterations on cfDNA had inferior OS after disease progression on the first ARPI, compared to those who did not, and may impact outcomes on a subsequent ARPI but not on subsequent taxane-based therapy received. By providing survival estimates for patients with or without AR alterations, our data may aid in patient counseling, prognostication, treatment decision, and for designing future clinical trials in this setting.

Characterization of papillary and clear cell renal cell carcinoma through imaging mass cytometry reveals distinct immunologic profiles.

Objective: To characterize and further compare the immune cell populations of the tumor microenvironment (TME) in both clear cell and papillary renal cell carcinoma (RCC) using heavy metal-labeled antibodies in a multiplexed imaging approach (imaging mass cytometry). Materials and methods: Formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded (FFPE) baseline tumor tissues from metastatic patients with clear cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC) and papillary renal cell carcinoma (pRCC) were retrospectively requisitioned from an institutional biorepository. Pretreated FFPE samples from 33 RCC patients (10 ccRCC, 23 pRCC) were accessioned and stained for imaging mass cytometry (IMC) analysis. Clinical characteristics were curated from an institutional RCC database. FFPE samples were prepared and stained with heavy metal-conjugated antibodies for IMC. An 11-marker panel of tumor stromal and immune markers was used to assess and quantify cellular relationships in TME compartments. To validate our time-of-flight (CyTOF) analysis, we cross-validated findings with The Cancer Genome Atlas Program (TCGA) analysis and utilized the CIBERSORTx tool to examine the abundance of main immune cell types in pRCC and ccRCC patients. Results: Patients with ccRCC had a longer median overall survival than did those with pRCC (67.7 vs 26.8 mo, respectively). Significant differences were identified in the proportion of CD4+ T cells between disease subtypes (ccRCC 14.1%, pRCC 7.0%, p<0.01). Further, the pRCC cohort had significantly more PanCK+ tumor cells than did the ccRCC cohort (24.3% vs 9.5%, respectively, p<0.01). There were no significant differences in macrophage composition (CD68+) between cohorts. Our results demonstrated a significant correlation between the CyTOF and TCGA analyses, specifically validating that ccRCC patients exhibit higher levels of CD4+ T cells (ccRCC 17.60%, pRCC 15.7%, p<0.01) and CD8+ T cells (ccRCC 17.83%, pRCC 11.15%, p<0.01). The limitation of our CyTOF analysis was the large proportion of cells that were deemed non-characterizable. Conclusions: Our findings emphasize the need to investigate the TME in distinct RCC histological subtypes. We observed a more immune infiltrative phenotype in the TME of the ccRCC cohort than in the pRCC cohort, where a tumor-rich phenotype was noted. As practical predictive biomarkers remain elusive across all subtypes of RCC, further studies are warranted to analyze the biomarker potential of such TME classifications.

Association Between Time-of-Day of Immune Checkpoint Blockade Administration and Outcomes in Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Preclinical evidence demonstrating circadian rhythmicity within the immune system provides a rationale for hypothesis that immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) infusion time-of-day may serve as an actionable mechanism to improve outcomes. Herein, we explore the association between ICI time of infusion (TOI) and outcomes in metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). METHODS: Data from patients with mRCC who received nivolumab or nivolumab/ipilimumab, in first- or second-line were retrospectively collected. Patients who received < 20% of infusions after 16:30 were assigned to the early TOI sub-cohort, while the rest were assigned to the late TOI sub-cohort. Clinical outcomes were compared across the 2 groups. RESULTS: Among 135 patients included, 89 (65.9%) and 46 (34.1%) were assigned to early and late TOI sub-cohorts, respectively. Baseline characteristics were comparable across the 2 sub-cohorts. Objective response rate (ORR) was 36.0% with early TOI versus 29.5% with late TOI (P = .157). Median time to treatment failure (TTF) was 9.5 months in the early TOI sub-cohort versus 4.6 months in the late TOI sub-cohort with a hazard ratio (HR) of 1.405 (95% CI, 0.919-2.149; P = .11) in univariate analysis and 1.694 (95% CI, 1.064-2.698; P = .026) in multivariate analysis. Higher cut offs allocating patients into the late TOI sub-cohort yielded an incremental increase in the HR for TTF and overall survival (OS) that reached statistical significance. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with mRCC, early TOI yielded a numerical increase in ORR, TTF and OS, with the TTF difference reaching significance in multivariate analysis. Prospective randomized studies are warranted to examine the impact of chronomodulation on outcomes with ICIs in mRCC.

Enhancing Triage Efficiency and Accuracy in Emergency Rooms for Patients with Metastatic Prostate Cancer: A Retrospective Analysis of Artificial Intelligence-Assisted Triage Using ChatGPT 4.0.

BACKGROUND: Accurate and efficient triage is crucial for prioritizing care and managing resources in emergency rooms. This study investigates the effectiveness of ChatGPT, an advanced artificial intelligence system, in assisting health providers with decision-making for patients presenting with metastatic prostate cancer, focusing on the potential to improve both patient outcomes and resource allocation. METHODS: Clinical data from patients with metastatic prostate cancer who presented to the emergency room between 1 May 2022 and 30 April 2023 were retrospectively collected. The primary outcome was the sensitivity and specificity of ChatGPT in determining whether a patient required admission or discharge. The secondary outcomes included the agreement between ChatGPT and emergency medicine physicians, the comprehensiveness of diagnoses, the accuracy of treatment plans proposed by both parties, and the length of medical decision making. RESULTS: Of the 147 patients screened, 56 met the inclusion criteria. ChatGPT had a sensitivity of 95.7% in determining admission and a specificity of 18.2% in discharging patients. In 87.5% of cases, ChatGPT made the same primary diagnoses as physicians, with more accurate terminology use (42.9% vs. 21.4%, p = 0.02) and more comprehensive diagnostic lists (median number of diagnoses: 3 vs. 2, p < 0.001). Emergency Severity Index scores calculated by ChatGPT were not associated with admission (p = 0.12), hospital stay length (p = 0.91) or ICU admission (p = 0.54). Despite shorter mean word count (169 ± 66 vs. 272 ± 105, p < 0.001), ChatGPT was more likely to give additional treatment recommendations than physicians (94.3% vs. 73.5%, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Our hypothesis-generating data demonstrated that ChatGPT is associated with a high sensitivity in determining the admission of patients with metastatic prostate cancer in the emergency room. It also provides accurate and comprehensive diagnoses. These findings suggest that ChatGPT has the potential to assist health providers in improving patient triage in emergency settings, and may enhance both efficiency and quality of care provided by the physicians.

Real-World Outcomes of Latinx Versus Non-Latinx Patients Treated With First-Line Immunotherapy for Metastatic Renal-Cell Carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: There are limited data regarding the impact of ethnicity among patients receiving immune checkpoint inhibitors. We evaluated real-world outcomes between Latinx and non-Latinx patients with metastatic renal-cell carcinoma (mRCC) treated with first-line nivolumab/ipilimumab within 2 different healthcare settings. METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis of patients with mRCC who received nivolumab/ipilimumab within the Los Angeles County Department of Health Services (LAC-DHS), a safety-net healthcare system, and the City of Hope Comprehensive Cancer Center (COH), a tertiary oncology center, between January 1, 2015 and December 31, 2021. Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were determined using the Kaplan-Meier method and covariates were adjusted using multivariate Cox proportional hazards regression. RESULTS: Of 94 patients, 40 patients (43%) were Latinx while the remainder were non-Latinx (44 pts [46%] White, 7 pts [7%] Asian, and 3 pts [3%] Other). Fifty (53%) and 44 (47%) patients received their care at COH and LAC-DHS, respectively. Most Latinx patients (95%) were treated at LAC-DHS, and most non-Latinx patients (89%) were treated at COH. Pooled analysis by ethnicity demonstrated significantly shorter PFS in Latinx versus non-Latinx patients (10.1 vs. 25.2 months, hazard ratios [HR] 3.61, 95% CI 1.96-6.66, P ≤ .01). Multivariate analysis revealed a HR of 3.41 (95% CI 1.31-8.84; P = .01). At a median follow-up of 11.0 months, the median OS was not reached in either arm at the time of data cutoff. CONCLUSION: Latinx patients with mRCC had a shorter PFS treated with frontline nivolumab/ipilimumab compared to their non-Latinx counterparts. No difference was observed in OS although these data were immature. Larger studies are needed to further interrogate the social and economic determinants of ethnicity on clinical outcomes in mRCC.

Advances in the treatment of metastatic prostate cancer.

The field of metastatic prostate cancer (mPCa) has seen unprecedented therapeutic advances in the past decade. In the past 2 years, recent approvals include the triplet therapy regimens of androgen deprivation therapy (ADT), docetaxel, and an androgen receptor (AR) pathway inhibitor (ARPI) in the castration-sensitive setting and lutetium-177 vipivotide tetraxetan (177Lu-PSMA-617) and the combination of poly(ADP) ribose polymerase (PARP) inhibitors (PARPis) and ARPIs in the castration-resistant setting. With many agents currently undergoing investigation in registration trials, the therapeutic armamentarium will expand rapidly, making treatment selection and sequencing challenging. Herein, we review the landmark clinical trials ongoing or reported in the past 2 years, discuss the optimal approach to treatment selection, and provide insight into future directions.