A multi-institutional phase I study of acetazolamide with temozolomide in adults with newly diagnosed MGMT-methylated malignant glioma.

Background: A significant unmet need exists for the treatment of glioblastoma, IDH-wildtype (GBM). Preclinical work shows that acetazolamide sensitizes GBM to temozolomide (TMZ) by overcoming TMZ resistance due to BCL-3-dependent upregulation of carbonic anhydrase. Acetazolamide is Food and Drug Administration-approved for the treatment of altitude sickness. Drug repurposing enables the application of drugs to diseases beyond initial indications. This multi-institutional, open-label, phase I trial examined a combination of acetazolamide and TMZ in patients with MGMT promoter-methylated high-grade glioma. Methods: A total of 24 patients (GBM, IDH-wildtype = 22; Grade 4 astrocytoma, IDH-mutant = 1; Grade 3 astrocytoma, IDH-mutant = 1) were accrued over 17 months. All patients received oral acetazolamide (250 mg BID for 7 days increased to 500 mg BID for Days 8-21 of each 28-day cycle) during the adjuvant phase of TMZ for up to 6 cycles. Results: No patient had a dose-limiting toxicity. Adverse events were consistent with known sequelae of acetazolamide and TMZ. In the 23 WHO Grade 4 patients, the median overall survival (OS) was 30.1 months and the median progression-free survival was 16.0 months. The 2-year OS was 60.9%. In total 37% of the study population had high BCL-3 staining and trended toward shorter OS (17.2 months vs N.R., P = .06). Conclusions: The addition of acetazolamide is safe and tolerable in GBM patients receiving standard TMZ. Survival results compare favorably to historical data from randomized trials in patients with MGMT promoter-methylated GBM and support examination of acetazolamide in a randomized trial. BCL-3 expression is a potential biomarker for prognosis in GBM or for patients more likely to benefit from TMZ.

Leveraging external control data in the design and analysis of neuro-oncology trials: Pearls and perils.

BACKGROUND: Randomized controlled trials have been the gold standard for evaluating medical treatments for many decades but they are often criticized for requiring large sample sizes. Given the urgent need for better therapies for glioblastoma, it has been argued that data collected from patients treated with the standard regimen can provide high-quality external control data to supplement or replace concurrent control arm in future glioblastoma trials. METHODS: In this article, we provide an in-depth appraisal of the use of external control data in the context of neuro-oncology trials. We describe several clinical trial designs with particular attention to how external information is utilized and address common fallacies that may lead to inappropriate adoptions of external control data. RESULTS: Using 2 completed glioblastoma trials, we illustrate the use of an assessment tool that lays out a blueprint for assembling a high-quality external control data set. Using statistical simulations, we draw caution from scenarios where these approaches can fall short on controlling the type I error rate. CONCLUSIONS: While this approach may hold promise in generating informative data in certain settings, this sense of optimism should be tampered with a healthy dose of skepticism due to a myriad of design and analysis challenges articulated in this review. Importantly, careful planning is key to its successful implementation.

Long-term Outcomes of Chemoradiation for Muscle-invasive Bladder Cancer in Noncystectomy Candidates. Final Results of NRG Oncology RTOG 0524-A Phase 1/2 Trial of Paclitaxel + Trastuzumab with Daily Radiation or Paclitaxel Alone with Daily Irradiation.

BACKGROUND: Chemo-radiation is a well-established alternative to radical cystectomy in patients with muscle-invasive bladder cancer. Many patients due to age or medical comorbidity are unfit for either radical cystectomy, or standard cisplatin- or 5-fluorouracil-based chemoradiation, and do not receive appropriate treatment with curative intent. We treated patients with a less aggressive protocol employing seven weekly doses of paclitaxel and daily irradiation. In those whose tumors showed overexpression of her2/neu, seven weekly doses of trastuzumab were also administered. OBJECTIVE: To report the long-term survival outcomes and toxicity results of the of NRG Oncology RTOG 0524 study. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Seventy patients were enrolled and 65 (median age: 76 yr) were deemed eligible. Patients were assigned to daily radiation and weekly paclitaxel + trastuzumab (group 1, 20 patients) or to daily radiation plus weekly paclitaxel (group 2, 45 patients) based on tumor her2/neu overexpression. Radiation was delivered in 1.8 Gy fractions to a total dose of 64.8 Gy. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: The primary endpoint was unresolved treatment-related toxicity. The secondary endpoints were complete response rate, protocol completion rate, and disease-free and overall survival. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: Protocol therapy was completed by 60% (group 1) and 76% (group 2); complete response rates at 12 wk were 62% in each group. Acute treatment-related adverse events (AEs) of grade ≥3 were observed in 80% in group 1 and 58% in group 2. There was one treatment-related grade 5 AE in group 1. Unresolved acute treatment-related toxicity was 35% in group 1 and 31% in group 2. The median follow-up was 2.3 yr in all patients and 7.2 yr in surviving patients. Overall survival at 5 yr was 25.0% in group 1 and 37.8% in group 2 (33.8% overall). At 5 yr, disease-free survival was 15.0% in group 1 and 31.1% in group 2. CONCLUSIONS: In a cohort of patients with muscle-invasive bladder cancer who are not candidates for cystectomy or cisplatin chemotherapy, chemoradiation therapy offers a treatment with a significant response rate and 34% 5-yr overall survival. While there were many AEs in this medically fragile group, there were few grade 4 events and one grade 5 event attributable to therapy. PATIENT SUMMARY: Patients with invasive bladder cancer who cannot tolerate surgery were treated with radiation and systemic therapy without surgically removing their bladders. Most patients tolerated the treatment, were able to keep their bladders, and showed a significant treatment response rate.

Underlying intracranial atherosclerotic disease is associated with worse outcomes in acute large vessel occlusion undergoing endovascular thrombectomy.

BACKGROUND: Data on large vessel occlusion (LVO) management due to intracranial atherosclerotic disease (ICAD) are scarce. OBJECTIVE: To compare clinical outcomes between patients with ICAD and those without ICAD following mechanical thrombectomy (MT). METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis of consecutive patients who underwent MT for LVO in a large academic comprehensive stroke center, and compared in-hospital mortality, 90-day mortality, favorable functional outcome at 90 days, and symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (ICH) using chi-squared tests and multivariate logistic regression analyses. We defined ICAD as observable plaque at occlusion site post-thrombectomy. RESULTS: Among 215 patients (mean age 67.1 ± 16.0 years; 60.5% female; 83.6% Black, median NIHSS score 16), ICAD was present in 38 patients (17.7%). Diabetes and dyslipidemia were more common in those with ICAD (57.9% vs. 38.4%, p = 0.027 and 29.0% vs. 14.7%, p = 0.035, respectively). Substantial reperfusion (TICI ≥2b) was achieved less often (84.2% vs. 94.4%, p = 0.031) but symptomatic ICH was also less common in ICAD patients (0% vs. 9.0%, p = 0.081). In-hospital and 90-day mortality were more common (36.8% vs. 15.8%, p = 0.003 and 52.6% vs. 26.6%, p = 0.002, respectively) and favorable functional outcome (mRS 0-2) at 90 days was less common (7.9% vs. 33.9%, p = 0.001) in ICAD patients. After adjusting for prognostic variables, ICAD was independently associated with in-hospital mortality (OR=4.1, 95% CI 1.7-9.7), 90-day mortality (OR=3.7, 95% CI 1.6-8.6), and poor functional outcome at 90 days (OR=5.5, 95% CI 1.6-19.4). CONCLUSION: Symptomatic ICAD in a predominantly African American cohort is associated with increased odds of mortality and poor functional outcome at 90 days in patients with LVO undergoing MT.

Partial tumor irradiation plus pembrolizumab in treating large advanced solid tumor metastases.

BACKGROUNDWe previously demonstrated the safety of stereotactic body radiotherapy followed by pembrolizumab (SBRT+P) in patients with advanced solid tumors. This phase I clinical trial was expanded to study the safety of partial tumor irradiation (partial-Rx). We assessed irradiated local failure (LF) and clinical outcomes with correlations to biomarkers including CD8+ T cell radiomics score (RS) and circulating cytokines.METHODSPatients received SBRT to 2-4 metastases and pembrolizumab for up to 7 days after SBRT. Tumors measuring up to 65 cc received the full radiation dose (complete-Rx), whereas tumors measuring more than 65 cc received partial-Rx. Landmark analysis was used to assess the relationship between tumor response and overall survival (OS). Multivariable analysis was performed for RS and circulating cytokines.RESULTSIn the combined (expansion plus original) cohort, 97 patients (219 metastases) were analyzed and received SBRT+P. Forty-six (47%) patients received at least 1 partial-Rx treatment. There were 7 (7.2%)dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs). 1-year LF was 7.6% overall, and 13.3% and 5.4% for partial-Rx and complete-Rx tumors, respectively (HR 2.32, 95% CI 0.90-5.97, P = 0.08). The overall, unirradiated, and irradiated objective response rates were 22%, 12%, and 34%, respectively. Irradiated tumor response to SBRT+P was associated with prolonged OS; 1-year OS was 71% (responders), 42% (mixed-responders), and 0% (nonresponders) (P < 0.01). High-RS was significantly associated with improved LF, progression-free survival (PFS), and OS. Elevated circulating IL-8 was independently associated with inferior PFS and OS.CONCLUSIONSBRT+P is safe in patients with large, advanced solid tumors. Additional studies are warranted to assess noninferiority of complete versus partial irradiation of tumors in the setting of immunotherapy.TRIAL REGISTRATIONClinicaltrials.gov NCT02608385FUNDINGMerck Investigator Studies Program; Hillman Fellows for Innovative Cancer Research Program; NIH grants UM1CA186690-06, P50CA254865-01A1, P30CA047904-32, and R01DE031729-01A1.

Genomic Classifier Performance in Intermediate-Risk Prostate Cancer: Results From NRG Oncology/RTOG 0126 Randomized Phase 3 Trial.

PURPOSE: Intermediate-risk prostate cancer is a heterogeneous disease state with diverse treatment options. The 22-gene Decipher genomic classifier (GC) retrospectively has shown to improve risk stratification in these patients. We assessed the performance of the GC in men with intermediate-risk disease enrolled in NRG Oncology/RTOG 01-26 with updated follow-up. METHODS AND MATERIALS: After National Cancer Institute approval, biopsy slides were collected from NRG Oncology/RTOG 01-26, a randomized phase 3 trial of men with intermediate-risk prostate cancer randomized to 70.2 Gy versus 79.2 Gy of radiation therapy without androgen deprivation therapy. RNA was extracted from the highest-grade tumor foci to generate the locked 22-gene GC model. The primary endpoint for this ancillary project was disease progression (composite of biochemical failure, local failure, distant metastasis, prostate cancer-specific mortality, and use of salvage therapy). Individual endpoints were also assessed. Fine-Gray or cause-specific Cox multivariable models were constructed adjusting for randomization arm and trial stratification factors. RESULTS: Two-hundred fifteen patient samples passed quality control for analysis. The median follow-up was 12.8 years (range, 2.4-17.7). On multivariable analysis, the 22-gene GC (per 0.1 unit) was independently prognostic for disease progression (subdistribution hazard ratio [sHR], 1.12; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.00-1.26; P = .04), biochemical failure (sHR, 1.22; 95% CI, 1.10-1.37; P < .001), distant metastasis (sHR, 1.28; 95% CI, 1.06-1.55; P = .01), and prostate cancer-specific mortality (sHR, 1.45; 95% CI, 1.20-1.76; P < .001). Ten-year distant metastasis in GC low-risk patients was 4% compared with 16% for GC high-risk patients. In patients with lower GC scores, the 10-year difference in metastasis-free survival rate between arms was -7%, compared with 21% for higher GC patients (P-interaction = .04). CONCLUSIONS: This study represents the first validation of a biopsy-based gene expression classifier, assessing both its prognostic and predictive value, using data from a randomized phase 3 trial of intermediate-risk prostate cancer. Decipher improves risk stratification and can aid in treatment decision-making in men with intermediate-risk disease.

Androgen Deprivation and Radiotherapy with or Without Docetaxel for Localized High-risk Prostate Cancer: Long-term Follow-up from the Randomized NRG Oncology RTOG 0521 Trial.

BACKGROUND: Intensification of therapy may improve outcomes for patients with high-risk localized prostate cancer. OBJECTIVE: To provide long-term follow-up data from phase III RTOG 0521, which compared a combination of androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) + external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) + docetaxel with ADT + EBRT. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: High-risk localized prostate cancer patients (>50% of patients had Gleason 9-10 disease) were prospectively randomized to 2 yr of ADT + EBRT or ADT + EBRT + six cycles of docetaxel. A total of 612 patients were accrued, and 563 were eligible and included in the modified intent-to-treat analysis. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS). Analyses with Cox proportional hazards were performed as prespecified in the protocol; however, there was evidence of nonproportional hazards. Thus, a post hoc analysis was performed using the restricted mean survival time (RMST). The secondary endpoints included biochemical failure, distant metastasis (DM) as detected by conventional imaging, and disease-free survival (DFS). RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: After 10.4 yr of median follow-up among survivors, the hazard ratio (HR) for OS was 0.89 (90% confidence interval [CI] 0.70-1.14; one-sided log-rank p = 0.22). Survival at 10 yr was 64% for ADT + EBRT and 69% for ADT + EBRT + docetaxel. The RMST at 12 yr was 0.45 yr and not statistically significant (one-sided p = 0.053). No differences were detected in the incidence of DFS (HR = 0.92, 95% CI 0.73-1.14), DM (HR = 0.84, 95% CI 0.73-1.14), or prostate-specific antigen recurrence risk (HR = 0.97, 95% CI 0.74-1.29). Two patients had grade 5 toxicity in the chemotherapy arm and zero patients in the control arm. CONCLUSIONS: After a median follow-up of 10.4 yr among surviving patients, no significant differences are observed in clinical outcomes between the experimental and control arms. These data suggest that docetaxel should not be used for high-risk localized prostate cancer. Additional research may be warranted using novel predictive biomarkers. PATIENT SUMMARY: No significant differences in survival were noted after long-term follow-up for high-risk localized prostate cancer patients in a large prospective trial where patients were treated with androgen deprivation therapy + radiation to the prostate ± docetaxel.

Efficacy of checkpoint inhibition after CAR-T failure in aggressive B-cell lymphomas: outcomes from 15 US institutions.

Checkpoint inhibitor (CPI) therapy with anti-PD-1 antibodies has been associated with mixed outcomes in small cohorts of patients with relapsed aggressive B-cell lymphomas after CAR-T failure. To define CPI therapy efficacy more definitively in this population, we retrospectively evaluated clinical outcomes in a large cohort of 96 patients with aggressive B-cell lymphomas receiving CPI therapy after CAR-T failure across 15 US academic centers. Most patients (53%) had diffuse large B-cell lymphoma, were treated with axicabtagene ciloleucel (53%), relapsed early (≤180 days) after CAR-T (83%), and received pembrolizumab (49%) or nivolumab (43%). CPI therapy was associated with an overall response rate of 19% and a complete response rate of 10%. Median duration of response was 221 days. Median progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were 54 and 159 days, respectively. Outcomes to CPI therapy were significantly improved in patients with primary mediastinal B-cell lymphoma. PFS (128 vs 51 days) and OS (387 vs 131 days) were significantly longer in patients with late (>180 days) vs early (≤180 days) relapse after CAR-T. Grade ≥3 adverse events occurred in 19% of patients treated with CPI. Most patients (83%) died, commonly because of progressive disease. Only 5% had durable responses to CPI therapy. In the largest cohort of patients with aggressive B-cell lymphoma treated with CPI therapy after CAR-T relapse, our results reveal poor outcomes, particularly among those relapsing early after CAR-T. In conclusion, CPI therapy is not an effective salvage strategy for most patients after CAR-T, where alternative approaches are needed to improve post-CAR-T outcomes.

Dose-Escalated Radiation Alone or in Combination With Short-Term Total Androgen Suppression for Intermediate-Risk Prostate Cancer: Patient-Reported Outcomes From NRG/Radiation Therapy Oncology Group 0815 Randomized Trial.

PURPOSE: To report patient-reported outcomes (PROs) of a phase III trial evaluating total androgen suppression (TAS) combined with dose-escalated radiation therapy (RT) for patients with intermediate-risk prostate cancer. METHODS: Patients with intermediate-risk prostate cancer were randomly assigned to dose-escalated RT alone (arm 1) or RT plus TAS (arm 2) consisting of luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone agonist/antagonist with oral antiandrogen for 6 months. The primary PRO was the validated Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite (EPIC-50). Secondary PROs included Patient-Reported Outcome Measurement Information System (PROMIS)-fatigue and EuroQOL five-dimensions scale questionnaire (EQ-5D). PRO change scores, calculated for each patient as the follow-up score minus baseline score (at the end of RT and at 6, 12, and 60 months), were compared between treatment arms using a two-sample t test. An effect size of 0.50 standard deviation was considered clinically meaningful. RESULTS: For the primary PRO instrument (EPIC), the completion rates were ≥86% through the first year of follow-up and 70%-75% at 5 years. For the EPIC hormonal and sexual domains, there were clinically meaningful (P < .0001) deficits in the RT + TAS arm. However, there were no clinically meaningful differences by 1 year between arms. There were also no clinically meaningful differences at any time points between arms for PROMIS-fatigue, EQ-5D, and EPIC bowel/urinary scores. CONCLUSION: Compared with dose-escalated RT alone, adding TAS demonstrated clinically meaningful declines only in EPIC hormonal and sexual domains. However, even these PRO differences were transient, and there were no clinically meaningful differences between arms by 1 year.

Dose-Escalated Radiotherapy Alone or in Combination With Short-Term Androgen Deprivation for Intermediate-Risk Prostate Cancer: Results of a Phase III Multi-Institutional Trial.

PURPOSE: It remains unknown whether or not short-term androgen deprivation (STAD) improves survival among men with intermediate-risk prostate cancer (IRPC) treated with dose-escalated radiotherapy (RT). METHODS: The NRG Oncology/Radiation Therapy Oncology Group 0815 study randomly assigned 1,492 patients with stage T2b-T2c, Gleason score 7, or prostate-specific antigen (PSA) value >10 and ≤20 ng/mL to dose-escalated RT alone (arm 1) or with STAD (arm 2). STAD was 6 months of luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone agonist/antagonist therapy plus antiandrogen. RT modalities were external-beam RT alone to 79.2 Gy or external beam (45 Gy) with brachytherapy boost. The primary end point was overall survival (OS). Secondary end points included prostate cancer-specific mortality (PCSM), non-PCSM, distant metastases (DMs), PSA failure, and rates of salvage therapy. RESULTS: Median follow-up was 6.3 years. Two hundred nineteen deaths occurred, 119 in arm 1 and 100 in arm 2. Five-year OS estimates were 90% versus 91%, respectively (hazard ratio [HR], 0.85; 95% CI, 0.65 to 1.11]; P = .22). STAD resulted in reduced PSA failure (HR, 0.52; P <.001), DM (HR, 0.25; P <.001), PCSM (HR, 0.10; P = .007), and salvage therapy use (HR, 0.62; P = .025). Other-cause deaths were not significantly different (P = .56). Acute grade ≥3 adverse events (AEs) occurred in 2% of patients in arm 1 and in 12% for arm 2 (P <.001). Cumulative incidence of late grade ≥3 AEs was 14% in arm 1 and 15% in arm 2 (P = .29). CONCLUSION: STAD did not improve OS rates for men with IRPC treated with dose-escalated RT. Improvements in metastases rates, prostate cancer deaths, and PSA failures should be weighed against the risk of adverse events and the impact of STAD on quality of life.

A phase I study of selinexor combined with weekly carfilzomib and dexamethasone in relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma.

We performed a phase I study of weekly selinexor, carfilzomib, and dexamethasone (wSKd) in patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (MM). The primary objective was to identify the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of wSKd. Secondary endpoints included overall response rate (ORR), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS). Prior exposure/refractoriness to carfilzomib was permitted. Thirty patients were enrolled; 26 (87%) had triple-class exposed disease and 6 (20%) received chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy. Dose level 2 (carfilzomib 70 mg/m2 Intravenous [IV] on Days 1, 8, and 15; selinexor 100 mg PO on Days 1, 8, 15, 22; dexamethasone 40 mg on Days 1, 8, 15, 22 of 28-day cycles) was chosen as the MTD, with no DLTs having occurred. The most common hematologic adverse events (AE) were thrombocytopenia (83%), anemia (70%), lymphopenia (50%), and neutropenia (50%). The most common nonhematologic AE were fatigue (70%), nausea (70%), diarrhea (53%), and anorexia (47%). The ORR was 21/30 (70%) overall and 18/23 (78%) at the MTD. At a median follow-up of 12.3 months, the median PFS was 5.3 months and median OS 23.3 months. Responses were similar in carfilzomib naïve and exposed patients. Long-term efficacy of wSKd is modest; wSKd could be employed as a bridging strategy to immunotherapies.

Pembrolizumab for the treatment of disease relapse after allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation.

A failed graft-versus-tumor (GVT) effect is a common mechanism of relapse after allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (alloHCT). Although targeting the PD-1/PD-L1 axis may restore GVT effects, PD-1 blockade exacerbates graft-versus-host disease (GVHD) in murine models, and severe GVHD can occur in patients treated with anti-PD-1 therapy after alloHCT. Therefore, we developed a prospective study to assess the safety and efficacy of pembrolizumab in patients relapsing after alloHCT. Eligible patients received pembrolizumab (200 mg every 3 weeks) for up to 2 years. Twelve patients were enrolled (8 patients with acute myeloid leukemia, 1 patient with myelodysplastic syndrome, 1 patient with classical Hodgkin lymphoma, and 2 patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma [DLBCL]). All participants received reduced-intensity preparative regimens with in vivo T-cell depletion. The median time from alloHCT to enrollment was 587 days (range, 101-4211). Three participants (25%) experienced grade 3 to 4 immune-related adverse events (irAE) (pneumonitis, 2 patients; hyperthyroidism, 1 patient), all occurring after 1 to 2 cycles, and resolving after pembrolizumab discontinuation and corticosteroid treatment. irAEs of any grade occurred in 5 patients (42%). No treatment-emergent GVHD was observed. Overall and complete response (CR) rates were 22% (2/9). Both patients achieving CRs had PD-L1 gene-amplified lymphomas and diffuse PD-L1 expression on pretreatment biopsies. An acquired EZH2 mutation was identified at relapse in a patient with DLBCL who achieved an initial CR to pembrolizumab, which was associated with downregulated HLA expression on malignant B cells, implicating EZH2 mutations as a potential immune escape mechanism after PD-1-blockade therapy. In conclusion, after alloHCT, treatment with pembrolizumab is feasible and associated with objective responses in relapsed lymphoid malignancies but can induce severe irAEs, requiring vigilant monitoring. This trial was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT02981914.

A Randomized Multi-institutional Phase II Trial of Everolimus as Adjuvant Therapy in Patients with Locally Advanced Squamous Cell Cancer of the Head and Neck.

PURPOSE: Investigate whether adjuvant everolimus, an mTOR inhibitor, improves progression-free survival (PFS) in advanced-stage head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) and provide outcomes related to correlative biological factors associated with disease control. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This was a prospective, randomized, double-blind phase II trial of patients with advanced-stage HNSCC from 13 institutions who were confirmed disease-free post-definitive therapy and enrolled between December 2010 and March 2015. Patients received adjuvant everolimus or placebo daily (10 mg, oral) for a maximum of 1 year. p16 IHC as a surrogate marker for human papillomavirus infection and whole-exome sequencing were performed. Cox proportional hazard models estimated hazard rates. Log-rank tests evaluated differences in survival. The primary endpoint was PFS. Secondary endpoints and objectives included overall survival (OS) and toxicity assessment. RESULTS: 52 patients [median (range) age, 58 (37-76) years; 43 men (83%), 9 women (17%)] were randomized to placebo (n = 24) or everolimus (n = 28). PFS favored everolimus, but was not significant [log-rank P = 0.093; HR = 0.44; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.17-1.17]. There was no difference in OS (P = 0.29; HR = 0.57; 95% CI, 0.20-16.2). Everolimus resulted in significant improvement in PFS for p16-negative patients (n = 31; P = 0.031; HR = 0.26; 95% CI, 0.07-0.97), although subgroup analysis showed no difference for p16-positive patients (n = 21; P = 0.93). Further, PFS was significantly higher in TP53-mutated (TP53mut) patients treated with everolimus compared with placebo (log-rank P = 0.027; HR = 0.24; 95% CI, 0.06-0.95). No treatment difference was seen in patients with TP53 wild-type tumors (P = 0.79). CONCLUSIONS: p16-negative and TP53mut patients may benefit from adjuvant treatment with everolimus.

Building Programs to Eradicate Toxoplasmosis Part I: Introduction and Overview.

Purpose of Review: Review building of programs to eliminate Toxoplasma infections. Recent Findings: Morbidity and mortality from toxoplasmosis led to programs in USA, Panama, and Colombia to facilitate understanding, treatment, prevention, and regional resources, incorporating student work. Summary: Studies foundational for building recent, regional approaches/programs are reviewed. Introduction provides an overview/review of programs in Panamá, the United States, and other countries. High prevalence/risk of exposure led to laws mandating testing in gestation, reporting, and development of broad-based teaching materials about Toxoplasma. These were tested for efficacy as learning tools for high-school students, pregnant women, medical students, physicians, scientists, public health officials and general public. Digitized, free, smart phone application effectively taught pregnant women about toxoplasmosis prevention. Perinatal infection care programs, identifying true regional risk factors, and point-of-care gestational screening facilitate prevention and care. When implemented fully across all demographics, such programs present opportunities to save lives, sight, and cognition with considerable spillover benefits for individuals and societies. Supplementary Information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s40124-022-00269-w.

Elotuzumab and Weekly Carfilzomib, Lenalidomide, and Dexamethasone in Patients With Newly Diagnosed Multiple Myeloma Without Transplant Intent: A Phase 2 Measurable Residual Disease-Adapted Study.

Importance: Treatment of newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM) with a quadruplet regimen consisting of a monoclonal antibody, proteasome inhibitor, immunomodulatory imide, and corticosteroid has been associated with improved progression-free survival (PFS) compared with triplet regimens. The optimal quadruplet combination, and whether this obviates the need for frontline autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT), remains unknown. We evaluated elotuzumab and weekly carfilzomib, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone (Elo-KRd) without ASCT in NDMM. Objective: To investigate the efficacy of Elo-KRd using a measurable residual disease (MRD)-adapted design in NDMM regardless of ASCT eligibility. Design, Setting, and Participants: This multicenter, single-arm, phase 2 study enrolled patients between July 2017 and February 2021. Median follow-up was 29 months. Interventions: Twelve to 24 cycles of Elo-KRd; consecutive MRD-negative results at 10-6 by next-generation sequencing (NGS) after cycles 8 (C8) and 12 determined the duration of Elo-KRd. This was followed by Elo-Rd (no carfilzomib) maintenance therapy until disease progression. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point was the rate of stringent complete response (sCR) and/or MRD-negativity (10-5) after C8 Elo-KRd. Secondary end points included safety, rate of response, MRD status, PFS, and overall survival (OS). As an exploratory analysis, MRD was assessed using liquid chromatography mass spectrometry (MS) on peripheral blood samples. Results: Forty-six patients were enrolled (median age 62 years, 11 [24%] aged >70 years). Overall, 32 (70%) were White, 6 (13%) were Black, 3 (6%) were more than 1 race, and 5 (11%) were of unknown race. Thirty-three (72%) were men and 13 (28%) were women. High-risk cytogenetic abnormalities were present in 22 (48%) patients. The rate of sCR and/or MRD-negativity after C8 was 26 of 45 (58%), meeting the predefined statistical threshold for efficacy. Responses deepened over time, with the MRD-negativity (10-5) rate increasing to 70% and MS-negativity rate increasing to 65%; concordance between MRD by NGS and MS increased over time. The most common (>10%) grade 3 or 4 adverse events were lung and nonpulmonary infections (13% and 11%, respectively). There was 1 grade 5 myocardial infarction. The estimated 3-year PFS was 72% overall and 92% for patients with MRD-negativity (10-5) at C8. Conclusions and Relevance: An MRD-adapted design using elotuzumab and weekly KRd without ASCT showed a high rate of sCR and/or MRD-negativity and durable responses. This approach provides support for further evaluation of MRD-guided deescalation of therapy to decrease treatment exposure while sustaining deep responses. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02969837.

Evaluation of Provider Preferences in First-Line Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma: Comparison Between Dual Immunotherapy vs. Immunotherapy/Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitors.

INTRODUCTION: Dual immunotherapy (ipilimumab/nivolumab, IO/IO) and immunotherapy/tyrosine kinase inhibitor (IO/TKI) combinations (e.g. pembrolizumab/axitinib) are approved for the first-line treatment of intermediate/poor risk metastatic renal cell carcinoma (RCC), but there is limited comparative data between these two options. We sought to understand how oncologists decide between IO/IO vs. IO/TKI. METHODS: We sent a 10-question electronic survey centered on a patient scenario of intermediate/poor risk metastatic RCC to 294 academic/disease-focused and general oncologists in the US. RESULTS: We received 105 responses (36% response rate): 61% (64) of providers chose IO/IO, 39% (41) chose IO/TKI. 78% (82) of oncologists were academic or disease-focused, 22% (23) were general. Academic/disease-focused oncologists were significantly more likely to choose IO/IO (56/82, 68%) than general oncologists (8/23, 35%), P = .004. Among those who chose IO/IO, the perceived main issue with IO/TKI was: long-term toxicities - 31% (20), short-term toxicities - 28% (18), less effective - 28% (18), less convenient - 8% (5). Among those who chose IO/TKI, the perceived main issue with IO/IO was: short-term toxicities - 43% (17), less effective - 28% (11), long-term toxicities - 15% (6), and risk of death - 10% (4). 88% (92) of providers would be comfortable enrolling patients into a phase III trial comparing IO/IO vs. IO/TKI. We found no associations between therapy chosen by a provider and participation as PI in a trial of IO/IO or IO/TKI, or receipt of outside funding from an IO/IO or IO/TKI company. CONCLUSION: In response to a patient scenario of intermediate/poor risk metastatic RCC, 61% of providers chose IO/IO, 39% chose IO/TKI. There was a significant association between type of practice and choice of therapy, with academic/disease-focused oncologists more likely to choose IO/IO. The majority of oncologists would be comfortable enrolling patients into a phase III trial comparing IO/IO vs. IO/TKI.

Efficacy of post-induction therapy for high-risk neuroblastoma patients with end-induction residual disease.

BACKGROUND: High-risk neuroblastoma patients with end-induction residual disease commonly receive post-induction therapy in an effort to increase survival by improving the response before autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT). The authors conducted a multicenter, retrospective study to investigate the efficacy of this approach. METHODS: Patients diagnosed between 2008 and 2018 without progressive disease with a partial response or worse at end-induction were stratified according to the post-induction treatment: 1) no additional therapy before ASCT (cohort 1), 2) post-induction "bridge" therapy before ASCT (cohort 2), and 3) post-induction therapy without ASCT (cohort 3). χ2 tests were used to compare patient characteristics. Three-year event-free survival (EFS) and overall survival (OS) were estimated by the Kaplan-Meier method and survival curves were compared by log-rank test. RESULTS: The study cohort consisted of 201 patients: cohort 1 (n = 123), cohort 2 (n = 51), and cohort 3 (n = 27). Although the end-induction response was better for cohort 1 than cohorts 2 and 3, the outcomes for cohorts 1 and 2 were not significantly different (P = .77 for EFS and P = .85 for OS). Inferior outcomes were observed for cohort 3 (P < .001 for EFS and P = .06 for OS). Among patients with end-induction stable metastatic disease, 3-year EFS was significantly improved for cohort 2 versus cohort 1 (P = .04). Cohort 3 patients with a complete response at metastatic sites after post-induction therapy had significantly better 3-year EFS than those with residual metastatic disease (P = .01). CONCLUSIONS: Prospective studies to confirm the benefits of bridge treatment and the prognostic significance of metastatic response observed in this study are warranted.