PRESTO: A Phase III, Open-Label Study of Intensification of Androgen Blockade in Patients With High-Risk Biochemically Relapsed Castration-Sensitive Prostate Cancer (AFT-19).

PURPOSE: Patients with biochemically recurrent prostate cancer (BRPC) after radical prostatectomy and a short PSA doubling time are at risk for distant metastases. Apalutamide, an androgen receptor antagonist, and abiraterone acetate plus prednisone (AAP) prolong survival in the metastatic setting. We evaluated whether intensification of androgen-deprivation therapy (ADT) improves outcomes in BRPC. PATIENTS AND METHODS: PRESTO is a randomized phase III, open-label trial in patients with BRPC and PSA doubling time ≤9 months (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03009981). Patients were randomly assigned 1:1:1 to receive a finite 52-week treatment course with ADT control, ADT + apalutamide, or ADT + apalutamide + AAP. The primary end point was PSA progression-free survival (PSA-PFS), defined as serum PSA >0.2 ng/mL after treatment completion. RESULTS: Five hundred three patients were enrolled. The median PSA was 1.8 ng/mL (IQR, 1.0-3.6). At the first planned interim analysis, both experimental arms significantly prolonged PSA-PFS compared with the control arm (median, 24.9 months for ADT + apalutamide v 20.3 months for ADT; hazard ratio [HR], 0.52 [95% CI, 0.35 to 0.77]; P = .00047; median, 26.0 months for ADT + apalutamide + AAP v 20.0 months for ADT; HR, 0.48 [95% CI, 0.32 to 0.71]; P = .00008). Median time to testosterone recovery did not differ across treatment arms. The most common grade ≥3 adverse event was hypertension (7.5%, 7.4%, and 18% in ADT, ADT + apalutamide, and ADT + apalutamide + AAP arms, respectively). CONCLUSION: Intensified AR blockade for a finite duration prolongs PSA-PFS with a manageable safety profile, without adversely affecting time to testosterone recovery. The addition of apalutamide to ADT should be considered in patients with high-risk BRPC.

Phase I Dose-Escalation Study of the Safety and Pharmacokinetics of AGS15E Monotherapy in Patients with Metastatic Urothelial Carcinoma.

PURPOSE: Effective treatment of locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma (mUC) remains an unmet need. Antibody-drug conjugates (ADC) providing targeted drug delivery have shown antitumor activity in this setting. AGS15E is an investigational ADC that delivers the cytotoxic drug monomethyl auristatin E to cells expressing SLITRK6, a UC-associated antigen. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This was a multicenter, single-arm, phase I dose-escalation and expansion trial of AGS15E in patients with mUC (NCT01963052). During dose escalation, AGS15E was administered intravenously at six levels (0.10, 0.25, 0.50, 0.75, 1.00, 1.25 mg/kg), employing a continual reassessment method to determine dose-limiting toxicities (DLT) and the recommended phase II dose (RP2D) for the dose-expansion cohort. The primary objective was to evaluate the safety and pharmacokinetics of AGS15E in patients with and without prior chemotherapy and with prior checkpoint inhibitor (CPI) therapy. Best overall response was also examined. RESULTS: Ninety-three patients were recruited, including 33 patients previously treated with CPI. The most common treatment-emergent adverse events were fatigue (54.8%), nausea (37.6%), and decreased appetite (35.5%). Peripheral neuropathy and ocular toxicities occurred at doses of ≥0.75 mg/kg. AGS15E increased in a dose-proportional manner after single- and multiple-dose administration; accumulation was low. Five DLT occurred from 0.50 to 1.25 mg/kg. The RP2D was assessed at 1.00 mg/kg; the objective response rate (ORR) was 35.7% at this dose level. The ORR in the total population and CPI-exposed subgroup were 18.3% and 27.3%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: DLT with AGS15E were observed at 0.75, 1.00, and 1.25 mg/kg, with an RP2D of 1.00 mg/kg being determined.

A Phase 2 Study of Sitravatinib in Combination with Nivolumab in Patients with Advanced or Metastatic Urothelial Carcinoma.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Checkpoint inhibitor therapy (CPI) has demonstrated survival benefits in urothelial carcinoma (UC); however, not all patients benefit from CPI due to resistance. Combining sitravatinib, a multitargeted receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitor of TYRO3, AXL, and MERTK (TAM) receptors and VEGFR2, with CPI may improve antitumor responses. Our objective was to assess the efficacy and safety of sitravatinib plus nivolumab in patients with advanced/metastatic UC. METHODS: The 516-003 trial (NCT03606174) is an open-label, multicohort phase 2 study evaluating sitravatinib plus nivolumab in patients with advanced/metastatic UC enrolled in eight cohorts depending on prior treatment with CPI, platinum-based chemotherapy (PBC), or antibody-drug conjugate (ADC). Overall, 244 patients were enrolled and treated with sitravatinib plus nivolumab (median follow-up 14.1-38.2 mo). Sitravatinib (free-base capsules 120 mg once daily [QD] or malate capsule 100 mg QD) plus nivolumab (240 mg every 2 wk/480 mg every 4 wk intravenously). KEY FINDINGS AND LIMITATIONS: The primary endpoint was objective response rate (ORR; RECIST v1.1). The secondary endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS) and safety. The Predictive probability design and confidence interval methods were used. Among patients previously treated with PBC, ORR, and median PFS were 32.1% and 3.9 mo in CPI-naïve patients (n = 53), 14.9% and 3.9 mo in CPI-refractory patients (n = 67), and 5.4% and 3.7 mo in CPI- and ADC-refractory patients (n = 56), respectively. Across all cohorts, grade 3 treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) occurred in 51.2% patients and grade 4 in 3.3%, with one treatment-related death (cardiac failure). Immune-related adverse events occurred in 50.4% patients. TRAEs led to sitravatinib/nivolumab discontinuation in 6.1% patients. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: Sitravatinib plus nivolumab demonstrated a manageable safety profile but did not result in clinically meaningful ORRs in patients with advanced/metastatic UC in the eight cohorts studied. PATIENT SUMMARY: In this study, the combination of two anticancer drugs, sitravatinib and nivolumab, resulted in manageable side effects but no meaningful responses in patients with bladder cancer.

Phase I Study of Single-Agent Anti-Programmed Death-1 (MDX-1106) in Refractory Solid Tumors: Safety, Clinical Activity, Pharmacodynamics, and Immunologic Correlates.

PURPOSE: Programmed death-1 (PD-1), an inhibitory receptor expressed on activated T cells, may suppress antitumor immunity. This phase I study sought to determine the safety and tolerability of anti-PD-1 blockade in patients with treatment-refractory solid tumors and to preliminarily assess antitumor activity, pharmacodynamics, and immunologic correlates. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Thirty-nine patients with advanced metastatic melanoma, colorectal cancer (CRC), castrate-resistant prostate cancer, non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), or renal cell carcinoma (RCC) received a single intravenous infusion of anti-PD-1 (MDX-1106) in dose-escalating six-patient cohorts at 0.3, 1, 3, or 10 mg/kg, followed by a 15-patient expansion cohort at 10 mg/kg. Patients with evidence of clinical benefit at 3 months were eligible for repeated therapy. RESULTS: Anti-PD-1 was well tolerated: one serious adverse event, inflammatory colitis, was observed in a patient with melanoma who received five doses at 1 mg/kg. One durable complete response (CRC) and two partial responses (PRs; melanoma, RCC) were seen. Two additional patients (melanoma, NSCLC) had significant lesional tumor regressions not meeting PR criteria. The serum half-life of anti-PD-1 was 12 to 20 days. However, pharmacodynamics indicated a sustained mean occupancy of > 70% of PD-1 molecules on circulating T cells ≥ 2 months following infusion, regardless of dose. In nine patients examined, tumor cell surface B7-H1 expression appeared to correlate with the likelihood of response to treatment. CONCLUSION: Blocking the PD-1 immune checkpoint with intermittent antibody dosing is well tolerated and associated with evidence of antitumor activity. Exploration of alternative dosing regimens and combinatorial therapies with vaccines, targeted therapies, and/or other checkpoint inhibitors is warranted.

Association between baseline body mass index and survival in men with metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer: ECOG-ACRIN CHAARTED E3805.

BACKGROUND: E3805 (CHAARTED) is a phase 3 trial demonstrating improved survival for men with metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC) randomized to treatment with docetaxel (D) and androgen-deprivation therapy (ADT) versus ADT alone. We assessed the association of baseline body mass index (BMI) and metformin exposure with quality of life (QOL) and prostate cancer outcomes including survival in patients enrolled in the CHAARTED study. METHODS: We performed a posthoc exploratory analysis of the CHAARTED trial of men with mHSPC randomized to treatment with ADT with or without D between 2006 and 2012. Cox proportional hazards models and Kruskal-Wallis test were used to evaluate the association between BMI with QOL and prostate cancer outcomes and between metformin exposure and survival. RESULTS: In 788 of 790 enrolled patients with prospectively recorded baseline BMI and metformin exposure status, lower BMI was not associated with survival, but was associated with high volume disease (p < 0.0001) and poorer baseline QOL on functional assessment of cancer therapy-prostate (p = 0.008). Only 68 patients had prevalent metformin exposure at baseline in the CHAARTED trial. Four groups were identified: ADT + D + metformin (n = 39); ADT + D (n = 357); ADT + metformin (n = 29); and ADT alone (n = 363). Baseline clinicopathologic characteristics were similar between groups. In this small exploratory multivariable analysis, metformin exposure was not associated with survival (hazard ratio: 1.15; 95% confidence interval: 0.81-1.63, p = 0.44). CONCLUSIONS: There was no link between baseline BMI and survival, but lower baseline BMI was associated with features of greater cancer burden and poorer QOL.

Association Between Local Radiation Therapy to the Primary Bladder Tumor and Overall Survival for Patients with Metastatic Urothelial Cancer Receiving Systemic Chemotherapy.

There are limited data on the role of local therapy for metastatic urothelial carcinoma of the bladder (mUC). In this retrospective cohort analysis, we queried the National Cancer Data Base for patients with newly diagnosed mUC (cT1-4 N0-3 M1). Overall survival (OS) was compared between treatment with chemotherapy (CT) alone (n = 4122) and CT plus bladder-directed radiation therapy (CT + RT; n = 337). Multivariable Cox proportional-hazards analyses and matching and landmark analyses were performed. CT + RT was independently associated with better OS (hazard ratio 0.70, 95% confidence interval 0.62-0.79; p < 0.0001) and this result persisted in matched and landmark analyses. These findings are hypothesis-generating and limited by inherent confounding factors; however, a prospective trial evaluating the impact of bladder RT in mUC is warranted. PATIENT SUMMARY: For patients with bladder cancer that has already spread to other parts of the body, it is unclear if radiation therapy directed at the primary bladder tumor would provide any improvement in survival. In this study, we found that aggressive radiation therapy directed at the bladder combined with chemotherapy may provide a survival benefit in some patients with metastatic bladder cancer compared to chemotherapy alone.

Tissue based biomarkers in non-clear cell RCC: Correlative analysis from the ASPEN clinical trial.

Biomarkers are needed in patients with non-clear cell renal cell carcinomas (NC-RCC), particularly papillary renal cell carcinoma, in order to inform on initial treatment selection and identify potentially novel targets for therapy. We enrolled 108 patients in ASPEN, an international randomized open-label phase 2 trial of patients with metastatic papillary, chromophobe, or unclassified NC-RCC treated with the mTOR inhibitor everolimus (n=57) or the vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) receptor inhibitor sunitinib (n=51), stratified by MSKCC risk and histology. The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS) and secondary efficacy endpoints for this exploratory biomarker analysis were radiographic progression-free survival (rPFS) defined by intention-to-treat using the RECIST 1.1 criteria and radiographic response rates. Tissue biomarkers (n=78) of mTOR pathway activation (phospho-S6 and -Akt, c-kit) and VEGF pathway activation (HIF-1α, c-MET) were prospectively explored in tumor tissue by immunohistochemistry prior to treatment and associated with clinical outcomes. We found that S6 activation was more common in poor risk NC-RCC tumors and S6/Akt activation was associated with worse PFS and OS outcomes with both everolimus and sunitinib, while c-kit was commonly expressed in chromophobe tumors and associated with improved outcomes with both agents. C-MET was commonly expressed in papillary tumors and was associated with lower rates of radiographic response but did not predict PFS for either agent. In multivariable analysis, both pAkt and c-kit were statistically significant prognostic biomarkers of OS. No predictive biomarkers of treatment response were identified for clinical outcomes. Most biomarker subgroups had improved outcomes with sunitinib as compared to everolimus.

Phase 1 study combining alisertib with nab-paclitaxel in patients with advanced solid malignancies.

AIM: Aurora kinase A (AURKA) is a pleiotropic serine/threonine kinase that orchestrates mitotic progression. Paclitaxel stabilises microtubules and disrupts mitotic spindle assembly. The combination of AURKA inhibitor (alisertib) plus paclitaxel may be synergistic in rapidly proliferative cancers. We evaluated the safety and maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of alisertib in combination with nab-paclitaxel and its preliminary efficacy in patients with refractory high-grade neuroendocrine tumours (NETs). METHOD: This is a two-part, Phase 1 study. In Part A (dose escalation), a standard 3 + 3 design was used to determine MTD. In Part B (dose expansion), patients with predominantly refractory high-grade NETs were enrolled. RESULTS: In total, 31 patients were enrolled and treated (16 in Part A and 15 in Part B). The MTD of alisertib was 40 mg BID on D1-3 per week and nab-paclitaxel 100mg/m2 weekly: 3 weeks, 1 week off. Dose-limiting toxicity was neutropenia, and other common side-effects included fatigue, mucositis, and diarrhoea. In Part A, a patient with small-cell lung cancer with partial response (PR) was treated for more than 2 years, whereas four other patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (one patient), small cell lung cancer (SCLC) (two patients), or high-grade NET (one patient) achieved stable disease (SD). In Part B, 13 of 15 enrolled patients had high-grade NETs. Of these, one had PR, and four had SD for more than 10 months. CONCLUSIONS: The combination of alisertib and nab-paclitaxel has manageable side-effect profile and showed promising preliminary efficacy in high-grade NETs, warranting further testing. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01677559.

Phase I Study of Docetaxel and Temsirolimus in Refractory Solid Tumors.

INTRODUCTION: The mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) is a downstream mediator in the phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase/Akt signaling pathway, and plays a central role in cell proliferation, growth, differentiation, migration, and survival. Temsirolimus (CCI-779), a selective inhibitor of the mTOR, is an ester analog of rapamycin (sirolimus) with improved aqueous solubility and pharmacokinetic (PK) properties. Preclinical studies have confirmed additive and synergistic antitumor activity in cancer cell lines (breast, prostate cancer) with combinations of taxanes and mTOR inhibitors. We conducted a phase I open-label, dose-escalation study to determine the maximal tolerated dose (MTD) of docetaxel in combination with temsirolimus in patients with refractory solid tumors. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Eligible patients had a diagnosis of a refractory solid malignancy, measurable disease, and adequate organ function. Patients were sequentially enrolled in 4 dose level intravenous combinations of docetaxel and temsirolimus. Temsirolimus was administered weekly with docetaxel administered every 3 weeks. Laboratory data for tumor markers and radiologic imaging were conducted prestudy and then after every 2 cycles of the treatment. Radiologic response was assessed by Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) criteria. Blood samples for PK and pharmacodynamic analysis were planned to be drawn at MTD. Apart from the traditional 3+3 design, we also implemented Bayesian Optimal Interval design which uses isotonic regression method to select MTD. We proceeded with isotonic regression analysis by using 20% dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) rate as target. RESULTS: Twenty-six patients were treated in this study in 4 cohorts and dose levels. Fourteen males and 12 females were enrolled with a median age of 50 years (range of 27 to 72 y) and median Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance score of 1. Tumor histologies included pancreas (6), colon (5), rectum (3), gallbladder (2), non-small cell lung (2), endometrium (1), neuroendocrine (1), esophagus (1), stomach (1), pharynx (1), small intestine (1), and duodenum (1). Stable disease was observed in 2/4 (50%), 3/7 (43%), 4/10 (40%), and 3/5 (60%) patients in cohorts 1, 2, 3, and 4, respectively. Dose escalation in cohorts 2, 3, and 4 was complicated by DLTs such as grade 4 neutropenia and grade 3 diarrhea and an inability for patients to tolerate treatments during and beyond cycle 1 without dose reductions. Therefore, we could not determine an MTD or recommended phase II dose using the traditional 3+3 study analysis. Blood samples for PK and pharmacodynamic analysis were not collected since MTD was not determined. By using 20% DLT rate closest to the target, isotonic regression analysis showed identical estimated DLT rates in dose -1 (docetaxel 50 mg/m2 and temsirolimus 15 mg/m2) and dose level 1 (docetaxel 60mg/m2 and temsirolimus 15 mg/m2). CONCLUSIONS: Dose escalation of docetaxel and temsirolimus was limited by severe myelosuppressive toxicity in this phase I study. Most of the DLTs occurred after cycle 1 of therapy hence, we were unable to determine MTD or collect blood samples for PK and pharmacodynamic analysis. Our trial did not meet its objectives due to significant DLTs with this chemotherapy combination. Although our novel use of Bayesian Optimal Interval design using isotonic regression method to select MTD showed identical estimated DLT rates in dose levels 1 and -1, clinically our patients were not able to complete 2 cycles of this regimen without dose reductions due to myelosuppressive toxicity in either of these dose levels, and hence, escaped clinical validity. This combination regimen should not be studied further at the dose levels and schedules tested in our study.

Randomized Phase III Trial of Gemcitabine and Cisplatin With Bevacizumab or Placebo in Patients With Advanced Urothelial Carcinoma: Results of CALGB 90601 (Alliance).

PURPOSE: The combination of gemcitabine and cisplatin (GC) is a standard therapy for metastatic urothelial carcinoma. Based on data that angiogenesis plays a role in urothelial carcinoma growth and progression, a randomized placebo-controlled trial was performed with the primary objective of testing whether patients treated with GC and bevacizumab (GCB) have superior overall survival (OS) than patients treated with GC and placebo (GCP). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Between July 2009 and December 2014, 506 patients with metastatic urothelial carcinoma without prior chemotherapy for metastatic disease and no neoadjuvant or adjuvant chemotherapy within 12 months were randomly assigned to receive either GCB or GCP. The primary end point was OS, with secondary end points of progression-free survival, objective response, and toxicity. RESULTS: With a median follow-up of 76.3 months among alive patients, the median OS was 14.5 months for patients treated with GCB and 14.3 months for patients treated with GCP (hazard ratio for death = 0.87; 95% CI, 0.72 to 1.05; two-sided stratified log-rank P = .14). The median progression-free survival was 8.0 months for GCB and 6.7 months for GCP (hazard ratio = 0.77; 95% CI, 0.63 to 0.95; P = .016). The proportion of patients with grade 3 or greater adverse events did not differ significantly between both arms, although increased bevacizumab-related toxicities such as hypertension and proteinuria occurred in the bevacizumab-treated arm. CONCLUSION: The addition of bevacizumab to GC did not result in improved OS. The observed median OS of about 14 months is consistent with prior phase III trials of cisplatin-based chemotherapy.

Vorolanib (X-82), an oral anti-VEGFR/PDGFR/CSF1R tyrosine kinase inhibitor, with everolimus in solid tumors: results of a phase I study.

Background Anti-vascular endothelial growth factor receptor (VEGFR) tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKI) combined with mTOR inhibitors, like everolimus, result in significant responses and prolonged progression-free survival (PFS) among patients with renal cell carcinoma (RCC) [1]. However, everolimus doses >5 mg are often not tolerated when combined with other TKIs2,3. Vorolanib (X-82), an oral anti-VEGFR/platelet derived growth factor receptor (PDGFR)/colony stimulating factor 1 receptor (CSF1R) multitarget TKI, has a short half-life and limited tissue accumulation. We conducted a Phase 1 study of vorolanib with everolimus (10 mg daily) in patients with solid tumors. Methods A 3 + 3 dose escalation design was utilized to determine dose limiting toxicities (DLT) and recommended Phase 2 dose (RP2D) of vorolanib/everolimus. Oral vorolanib at 100, 150, 200, 300, or 400 mg was combined with 10 mg oral everolimus daily. The phase 2 portion was terminated after enrolling two patients due to funding. Results Eighteen patients were evaluable for DLT among 22 treated subjects. Observed DLTs were grade 3 fatigue, hypophosphatemia, and mucositis. The RP2D is vorolanib 300 mg with everolimus 10 mg daily. In 15 patients evaluable for response, three had partial response (PR; 2 RCC, 1 neuroendocrine tumor [NET]) and eight had stable disease (SD; 2 RCC, 6 NET). Conclusions Vorolanib can safely be combined with everolimus. Encouraging activity is seen in RCC and NET. Further studies are warranted. Trial Registration Number: NCT01784861.

Angiokines Associated with Targeted Therapy Outcomes in Patients with Non-Clear Cell Renal Cell Carcinoma.

PURPOSE: Biomarkers are needed in patients with non-clear cell renal cell carcinomas (NC-RCC) to inform treatment selection but also to identify novel therapeutic targets. We thus sought to profile circulating angiokines in the context of a randomized treatment trial of everolimus versus sunitinib. PATIENTS AND METHODS: ASPEN (NCT01108445) was an international, randomized, open-label phase II trial of patients with metastatic papillary, chromophobe, or unclassified NC-RCC with no prior systemic therapy. Patients were randomized to everolimus or sunitinib and treated until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. The primary endpoint was radiographic progression-free survival (PFS) defined by RECIST 1.1. Plasma angiokines were collected at baseline, cycle 3, and progression and associated with PFS and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: We enrolled 108 patients, 51 received sunitinib and 57 everolimus; of these, 99 patients had evaluable plasma for 23 angiokines. At the final data cutoff, 94 PFS and 64 mortality events had occurred. Angiokines that were independently adversely prognostic for OS were osteopontin (OPN), TIMP-1, thrombospondin-2 (TSP-2), hepatocyte growth factor (HGF), and VCAM-1, and these were also associated with poor-risk disease. Stromal derived factor 1 (SDF-1) was associated with improved survival. OPN was also significantly associated with worse PFS. No statistically significant angiokine-treatment outcome interactions were observed for sunitinib or everolimus. Angiopoeitin-2 (Ang-2), CD-73, HER-3, HGF, IL6, OPN, PIGF, PDGF-AA, PDGF-BB, SDF-1, TGF-b1-b2, TGFb-R3, TIMP-1, TSP-2, VCAM-1, VEGF, and VEGF-R1 levels increased with progression on everolimus, while CD-73, ICAM-1, IL6, OPN, PlGF, SDF-1, TGF-b2, TGFb-R3, TIMP-1, TSP-2, VEGF, VEGF-D, and VCAM-1 increased with progression on sunitinib. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with metastatic NC-RCC, we identified several poor prognosis angiokines and immunomodulatory chemokines during treatment with sunitinib or everolimus, particularly OPN.

Management of Muscle-Invasive Bladder Cancer During a Pandemic: Impact of Treatment Delay on Survival Outcomes for Patients Treated With Definitive Concurrent Chemoradiotherapy.

INTRODUCTION: During the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, providers and patients must engage in shared decision making to ensure that the benefit of early intervention for muscle-invasive bladder cancer exceeds the risk of contracting COVID-19 in the clinical setting. It is unknown whether treatment delays for patients eligible for curative chemoradiation (CRT) compromise long-term outcomes. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We used the National Cancer Data Base to investigate whether there is an association between a ≥ 90-day delay from transurethral resection of bladder tumor (TURBT) in initiating CRT and overall survival. We included patients with cT2-4N0M0 muscle-invasive bladder cancer from 2004 to 2015 who underwent TURBT and curative-intent concurrent CRT. Patients were grouped on the basis of timing of CRT: ≤ 89 days after TURBT (earlier) vs. ≥ 90 and < 180 days after TURBT (delayed). RESULTS: A total of 1387 (87.5%) received earlier CRT (median, 45 days after TURBT; interquartile range, 34-59 days), and 197 (12.5%) received delayed CRT (median, 111 days after TURBT; interquartile range, 98-130 days). Median overall survival was 29.0 months (95% CI, 26.0-32.0) versus 27.0 months (95% CI, 19.75-34.24) for earlier and delayed CRT (P = .94). On multivariable analysis, delayed CRT was not associated with an overall survival difference (hazard ratio, 1.05; 95% CI, 0.87-1.27; P = .60). CONCLUSION: Although these results are limited and require validation, short, strategic treatment delays during a pandemic can be considered on the basis of clinician judgment.

Cell-free DNA alterations in the AR enhancer and locus predict resistance to AR-directed therapy in patients with metastatic prostate cancer.

PURPOSE: Cell-free DNA (cfDNA) and circulating tumor cell (CTC) based liquid biopsies have emerged as potential tools to predict responses to androgen receptor (AR)-directed therapy in metastatic prostate cancer. However, due to complex mechanisms and incomplete understanding of genomic events involved in metastatic prostate cancer resistance, current assays (e.g. CTC AR-V7) demonstrate low sensitivity and remain underutilized. The recent discovery of AR enhancer amplification in >80% of metastatic patients and its association with disease resistance presents an opportunity to improve upon current assays. We hypothesized that tracking AR/enhancer genomic alterations in plasma cfDNA would detect resistance with high sensitivity and specificity. METHODS: We developed a targeted sequencing and analysis method as part of a new assay called Enhancer and neighboring loci of Androgen Receptor Sequencing (EnhanceAR-Seq). We applied EnhanceAR-Seq to plasma collected from 40 patients with metastatic prostate cancer treated with AR-directed therapy to monitor AR/enhancer genomic alterations and correlate these events with therapy resistance, progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: EnhanceAR-Seq identified genomic alterations in the AR/enhancer locus in 45% of cases, including a 40% rate of AR enhancer amplification. Patients with AR/enhancer alterations had significantly worse PFS and OS than those without (6-month PFS: 30% vs. 71%, P=0.0002; 6-month OS: 59% vs. 100%, P=0.0015). AR/enhancer alterations in plasma cfDNA detected 18 of 23 resistant cases (78%) and outperformed the CTC AR-V7 assay which was also run on a subset of patients. CONCLUSION: cfDNA-based AR locus alterations, including of the enhancer, are strongly associated with resistance to AR-directed therapy and significantly worse survival. cfDNA analysis using EnhanceAR-Seq may enable more precise risk stratification and personalized therapeutic approaches for metastatic prostate cancer.

Pemphigus foliaceus in a patient with gastrointestinal stromal tumor treated with adjuvant imatinib mesylate.

Pemphigus is an autoimmune bullous disease with a number of described associations, including medications, which have been grouped into three structural categories - thiol drugs, phenol drugs, and drugs with neither functional group [1]. Discontinuation of the offending medication is considered a mainstay of therapy. We report a patient in whom the onset of pemphigus foliaceus was associated with initiation of imatinib mesylate adjuvant therapy in a patient with resected gastrointestinal stromal tumor (GIST). Imatinib was continued because of the survival benefit to the patient with a resected, high risk GIST. Treatment with rituximab resulted in near resolution of his blistering rash and follow up enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) demonstrated reference range immunoreactivity for both desmoglein 1 and desmoglein 3. After dose increase of imatinib therapy owing to tumor growth, the patient subsequently again developed a similar eruption. Re-biopsy and ELISA were consistent with recurrence of pemphigus. In conclusion, although the patient's pemphigus was cleared with a single cycle of rituximab infusions while continuing imatinib therapy, the disease returned after imatinib dose was increased a year later, suggesting a dose-response relationship.

Randomized Double-Blind Phase II Study of Maintenance Pembrolizumab Versus Placebo After First-Line Chemotherapy in Patients With Metastatic Urothelial Cancer.

PURPOSE: Platinum-based chemotherapy for first-line treatment of metastatic urothelial cancer is typically administered for a fixed duration followed by observation until progression. "Switch maintenance" therapy with PD-1 blockade at the time of chemotherapy cessation may be attractive for mechanistic and pragmatic reasons. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with metastatic urothelial cancer achieving at least stable disease on first-line platinum-based chemotherapy were enrolled. Patients were randomly assigned double-blind 1:1 to switch maintenance pembrolizumab 200 mg intravenously once every 3 weeks versus placebo for up to 24 months. Patients with disease progression on placebo could cross over to pembrolizumab. The primary objective was to determine the progression-free survival. Secondary objectives included determining overall survival as well as treatment outcomes according to PD-L1 combined positive score (CPS). RESULTS: Between December 2015 and November 2018, 108 patients were randomly assigned to pembrolizumab (n = 55) or placebo (n = 53). The objective response rate was 23% with pembrolizumab and 10% with placebo. Treatment-emergent grade 3-4 adverse events occurred in 59% receiving pembrolizumab and 38% of patients receiving placebo. Progression-free survival was significantly longer with maintenance pembrolizumab versus placebo (5.4 months [95% CI, 3.1 to 7.3 months] v 3.0 months [95% CI; 2.7 to 5.5 months]; hazard ratio, 0.65; log-rank P = .04; maximum efficiency robust test P = .039). Median overall survival was 22 months (95% CI, 12.9 months to not reached) with pembrolizumab and 18.7 months (95% CI, 11.4 months to not reached) with placebo. There was no significant interaction between PD-L1 CPS ≥ 10 and treatment arm for progression-free survival or overall survival. CONCLUSION: Switch maintenance pembrolizumab leads to additional objective responses in patients achieving at least stable disease with first-line platinum-based chemotherapy and prolongs progression-free survival in patients with metastatic urothelial cancer.

Testicular Cancer, Version 2.2020, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology.

Testicular cancer is relatively uncommon and accounts for <1% of all male tumors. However, it is the most common solid tumor in men between the ages of 20 and 34 years, and the global incidence has been steadily rising over the past several decades. Several risk factors for testicular cancer have been identified, including personal or family history of testicular cancer and cryptorchidism. Testicular germ cell tumors (GCTs) comprise 95% of malignant tumors arising in the testes and are categorized into 2 main histologic subtypes: seminoma and nonseminoma. Although nonseminoma is the more clinically aggressive tumor subtype, 5-year survival rates exceed 70% with current treatment options, even in patients with advanced or metastatic disease. Radical inguinal orchiectomy is the primary treatment for most patients with testicular GCTs. Postorchiectomy management is dictated by stage, histology, and risk classification; treatment options for nonseminoma include surveillance, systemic therapy, and nerve-sparing retroperitoneal lymph node dissection. Although rarely occurring, prognosis for patients with brain metastases remains poor, with >50% of patients dying within 1 year of diagnosis. This selection from the NCCN Guidelines for Testicular Cancer focuses on recommendations for the management of adult patients with nonseminomatous GCTs.

Cabozantinib Versus Sunitinib for Untreated Patients with Advanced Renal Cell Carcinoma of Intermediate or Poor Risk: Subgroup Analysis of the Alliance A031203 CABOSUN trial.

Cabozantinib treatment prolonged progression-free survival (PFS) and improved objective response rate (ORR) compared with sunitinib in patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC) of intermediate or poor risk by International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium (IMDC) criteria in the phase II CABOSUN trial (NCT01835158). In the trial, 157 patients were randomized 1:1 to receive cabozantinib or sunitinib, stratified by IMDC risk group and presence of bone metastases. Here, PFS and ORR, both determined by independent radiology committee (IRC), were analyzed by subgroups of baseline characteristics. Cabozantinib treatment was generally associated with improved PFS and ORR versus sunitinib across subgroups, including in groups defined by IMDC risk group, bone metastases, age, and tumor burden. Clinical trial identification number NCT01835158.

Phase II trial of levocetirizine with capecitabine and bevacizumab to overcome the resistance of antiangiogenic therapies in refractory metastatic colorectal cancer.

BACKGROUND: Despite the clinical success of vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) blockade in metastatic colorectal cancers (mCRC), resistance to anti-angiogenic drugs invariably develops. IL-8 and other cytokines have been implicated in development of resistance to anti-angiogenic therapy. Levocetirizine is a second generation H1 antihistamine with anti-inflammatory and IL-8 suppression properties. We conducted a phase II trial combining levocetirizine with capecitabine and bevacizumab to potentially overcome anti-angiogenic therapy resistance in patients with refractory mCRC. METHODS: This was a single-center open-label prospective trial in refractory mCRC patients. Treatment consisted of oral capecitabine 850 mg/m2 twice daily administered as 7 days on and 7 days off, intravenous (IV) bevacizumab 5 mg/kg every 14 days and oral levocetirizine 5 mg daily. The primary end point was progression free survival (PFS) and secondary endpoints included objective response rate (ORR) and tolerability. An exploratory endpoint included correlation of PFS with cytokine levels. A sample size of 36 evaluable patients could identify a median PFS of 3.4 months at a 0.05 significance level. To examine cytokine changes related to levocetirizine treatment, patients were randomized to Arm A where levocetirizine was started 7 days after starting chemotherapy and to Arm B where levocetirizine was started 7 days prior to chemotherapy. Cytokine levels were measured at baseline and with each cycle of chemotherapy (up to three cycles). RESULTS: Forty-seven patients were enrolled in the trial to have 36 evaluable patients. Arm A enrolled 23 patients and Arm B enrolled 24 patients. Fifty percent of patients had progressive disease and 62% of patients had stable disease in each arm as best response. There was no demonstrable difference in PFS between the two arms (log-rank test P=0.83). Median time to progression was 3.4 months in Arm A and 3.5 months in Arm B. CONCLUSIONS: Median PFS in the trial was comparable to and appeared to be better than other regimens used in the refractory setting (e.g., median PFS of 1.9 months for regorafenib). Cytokine measurement with IL-8 levels did not show any correlation with progression free survival but patients with stable disease showed overall lower levels of IL-8 as compared to patients with progressive disease in the cytokine analysis.