NCCN Guidelines® Insights: Kidney Cancer, Version 2.2024.

The NCCN Guidelines for Kidney Cancer provide multidisciplinary recommendations for diagnostic workup, staging, and treatment of patients with renal cell carcinoma (RCC). These NCCN Guidelines Insights focus on the systemic therapy options for patients with advanced RCC and summarize the new clinical data evaluated by the NCCN panel for the recommended therapies in Version 2.2024 of the NCCN Guidelines for Kidney Cancer.

Acquired Radiation Resistance Induces Thiol-dependent Cisplatin Cross-resistance.

Resistance to radiation remains a significant clinical challenge in non-small cell lung carcinoma (NSCLC). It is therefore important to identify the underlying molecular and cellular features that drive acquired resistance. We generated genetically matched NSCLC cell lines to investigate characteristics of acquired resistance. Murine Lewis lung carcinoma (LLC) and human A549 cells acquired an approximate 1.5-2.5-fold increase in radiation resistance as compared to their parental match, which each had unique intrinsic radio-sensitivities. The radiation resistance (RR) was reflected in higher levels of DNA damage and repair marker γH2AX and reduced apoptosis induction after radiation. Morphologically, we found that radiation resistance A549 (A549-RR) cells exhibited a greater nucleus-to-cytosol (N/C) ratio as compared to its parental counterpart. Since the N/C ratio is linked to the differentiation state, we next investigated the epithelial-to-mesenchymal transition (EMT) phenotype and cellular plasticity. We found that A549 cells had a greater radiation-induced plasticity, as measured by E-cadherin, vimentin and double-positive (DP) modulation, as compared to LLC. Additionally, migration was suppressed in A549-RR cells, as compared to A549 cells. Subsequently, we confirmed in vivo that the LLC-RR and A549-RR cells are also more resistance to radiation than their isogenic-matched counterpart. Moreover, we found that the acquired radiation resistance also induced resistance to cisplatin, but not carboplatin or oxaliplatin. This cross-resistance was attributed to induced elevation of thiol levels. Gamma-glutamylcysteine synthetase inhibitor buthionine sulfoximine (BSO) sensitized the resistant cells to cisplatin by decreasing the amount of thiols to levels prior to obtaining acquired radiation resistance. By generating radiation-resistance genetically matched NSCLC we were able to identify and overcome cisplatin cross-resistance. This is an important finding arguing for combinatorial treatment regimens including glutathione pathway disruptors in patients with the potential of improving clinical outcomes in the future.

A linearly decreasing deterministic annealing algorithm for the multi-vehicle dial-a-ride problem.

Dial a ride problem (DARP) is a complex version of the pick-up and delivery problem with many practical applications in the field of transportation. This study proposes an enhanced deterministic annealing algorithm for the solution of large-scale multi-vehicle DARPs. The proposed method always explores the feasible search space; therefore, a feasible solution is guaranteed at any point of termination. This method utilises advanced local search operators to accelerate the search for optimal solutions and it relies on a linearly decreasing deterministic annealing schedule to limit poor jumps during the course of search. This study puts forward a systematic series of experiments to compare the performance of solution methods from various angles. The proposed method is compared with the most efficient methods reported in the literature i.e., the Adaptive Large Neighbourhood Search (ALNS), Evolutionary Local Search (ELS), and Deterministic Annealing (DA) using standard benchmarks. The results suggest that the proposed algorithm is on average faster than the state-of-the-art algorithms in reaching competitive objective values across the range of benchmarks.

A Comprehensive Review of Immunotherapy Clinical Trials for Metastatic Urothelial Carcinoma: Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors Alone or in Combination, Novel Antibodies, Cellular Therapies, and Vaccines.

Urothelial cancer is an immune-responsive cancer, but only a subset of patients benefits from immune checkpoint inhibition. Currently, single-agent immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) and the combination of pembrolizumab with the antibody-drug conjugate enfortumab vedotin are approved to treat patients with metastatic UC (mUC). Approval of first-line nivolumab in combination with gemcitabine and cisplatin is expected imminently. Many treatment approaches are being investigated to better harness the immune system to fight mUC. In this review, we summarize the landmark clinical trials of ICIs that led to their incorporation into the current standard of care for mUC. We further discuss recent and ongoing clinical trials in mUC, which are investigating ICIs in combination with other agents, including chemotherapy, antibody-drug conjugates, tyrosine kinase inhibitors, and novel antibodies. Lastly, we review novel approaches utilizing bispecific antibodies, cellular therapies, and vaccines. The landscape of immunotherapy for mUC is rapidly evolving and will hopefully lead to better outcomes for patients.

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.

Emerging Immunotherapy Approaches for Treating Prostate Cancer.

Immunotherapy has emerged as an important approach for cancer treatment, but its clinical efficacy has been limited in prostate cancer compared to other malignancies. This review summarizes key immunotherapy strategies under evaluation for prostate cancer, including immune checkpoint inhibitors, bispecific T cell-engaging antibodies, chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T cells, therapeutic vaccines, and cytokines. For each modality, the rationale stemming from preclinical studies is discussed along with outcomes from completed clinical trials and strategies to improve clinical efficacy that are being tested in ongoing clinical trials. Imperative endeavors include biomarker discovery for patient selection, deciphering resistance mechanisms, refining cellular therapies such as CAR T cells, and early-stage intervention were reviewed. These ongoing efforts instill optimism that immunotherapy may eventually deliver significant clinical benefits and expand treatment options for patients with advanced prostate cancer.

Metastatic renal cell carcinoma to the pancreas and other sites-a multicenter retrospective study.

Background: Metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) is a heterogenous disease with poor 5-year overall survival (OS) at 14%. Patients with mRCC to endocrine organs historically have prolonged OS. Pancreatic metastases are uncommon overall, with mRCC being the most common etiology of pancreatic metastases. In this study, we report the long-term outcomes of patients with mRCC to the pancreas in two separate cohorts. Methods: We performed a multicenter, international retrospective cohort study of patients with mRCC to the pancreas at 15 academic centers. Cohort 1 included 91 patients with oligometastatic disease to the pancreas. Cohort 2 included 229 patients with multiples organ sites of metastases including the pancreas. The primary endpoint for Cohorts 1 and 2 was median OS from time of metastatic disease in the pancreas until death or last follow up. Findings: In Cohort 1, the median OS (mOS) was 121 months with a median follow up time of 42 months. Patients who underwent surgical resection of oligometastatic disease had mOS of 100 months with a median follow-up time of 52.5 months. The mOS for patients treated with systemic therapy was not reached. In Cohort 2, the mOS was 90.77 months. Patients treated with first-line (1L) VEGFR therapy had mOS of 90.77 months; patients treated with IL immunotherapy (IO) had mOS of 92 months; patients on 1L combination VEGFR/IO had mOS of 74.9 months. Interpretations: This is the largest retrospective cohort of mRCC involving the pancreas. We confirmed the previously reported long-term outcomes in patients with oligometastatic pancreas disease and demonstrated prolonged survival in patients with multiple RCC metastases that included the pancreas. In this retrospective study with heterogeneous population treated over 2 decades, mOS was similar when stratified by first-line therapy. Future research will be needed to determine whether mRCC patients with pancreatic metastases require a different initial treatment strategy. Funding: Statistical analyses for this study were supported in part by the University of Colorado Cancer Center Support Grant from the NIH/NCI, P30CA046934-30.

Outcomes of Second-Line Therapies in Patients With Metastatic de Novo and Treatment-Emergent Neuroendocrine Prostate Cancer: A Multi-Institutional Study.

BACKGROUND: De novo neuroendocrine prostate cancer (NEPC) and treatment-emergent neuroendocrine prostate cancer (T-NEPC) are rare diseases with a poor prognosis. After first-line platinum chemotherapy, there is no consensus on second-line treatments. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with a pathologic diagnosis of de novo NEPC or T-NEPC between 2000 and 2020 who received first-line platinum and any second-line systemic therapy were selected and standardized clinical data was collected via the electronic health record at each institution. The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS) based on second-line therapy. Secondary endpoints included objective response rate (ORR) to second-line therapy, PSA response, and time on treatment. RESULTS: Fifty-eight patients (32 de novo NEPC, 26 T-NEPC) from 8 institutions were included. At de novo NEPC or T-NEPC diagnosis, the overall cohort had a median age of 65.0 years (IQR 59.2-70.3) and median PSA of 3.0 ng/dL (IQR 0.6-17.9). Following first-line platinum chemotherapy, 21 patients (36.2%) received platinum chemotherapy, 10 (17.2%) taxane monotherapy, 11 (19.0%) immunotherapy, 10 (17.2%) other chemotherapy, and 6 (16.2%) other systemic therapy. Among 41 evaluable patients, the ORR was 23.5%. The mOS after start of second-line therapy was 7.4 months (95% CI 6.1-11.9). CONCLUSIONS: In this retrospective study, patients with de novo NEPC or T-NEPC who received second-line therapy were treated with wide variety of treatment regimens, reflecting the lack of consensus in this setting. Most patients received chemotherapy-based treatments. Overall prognosis was poor and ORR was low in the second line regardless of treatment choice.

Clinical guideline highlights for the hospitalist: Management of immune-related adverse events in patients treated with immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy.

GUIDELINE TITLE: Management of Immune-Related Adverse Events in Patients Treated with Immune Checkpoint Inhibitor Therapy: ASCO Guideline Update RELEASE DATE: November 1, 2021 PRIOR VERSION(S): February 14, 2018 DEVELOPER: American Society of Clinical Oncology FUNDING SOURCE: American Society of Clinical Oncology TARGET POPULATION: Adult patients with cancer receiving treatment with immune checkpoint blockade inhibitors alone.

A multicenter study assessing survival in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma receiving immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy with and without cytoreductive nephrectomy.

BACKGROUND: Cytoreductive nephrectomy (CN) for the treatment of metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) was called into question following the publication of the CARMENA trial. While previous retrospective studies have supported CN alongside targeted therapies, there is minimal research establishing its role in conjunction with immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) therapy. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the association between CN and oncological outcomes in patients with mRCC treated with immunotherapy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A multicenter retrospective cohort study of patients diagnosed with mRCC between 2000 and 2020 who were treated at the Seattle Cancer Care Alliance and The Ohio State University and who were treated with ICI systemic therapy (ST) at any point in their disease course. Overall survival (OS) was estimated using Kaplan Meier analyses. Multivariable Cox proportional hazards models evaluated associations with mortality. RESULTS: The study cohort consisted of 367 patients (CN+ST n = 232, ST alone n = 135). Among patients undergoing CN, 30 were deferred. Median survivor follow-up was 28.4 months. ICI therapy was first-line in 28.1%, second-line in 17.4%, and third or subsequent line (3L+) in 54.5% of patients. Overall, patients who underwent CN+ST had longer median OS (56.3 months IQR 50.2-79.8) compared to the ST alone group (19.1 months IQR 12.8-23.8). Multivariable analyses demonstrated a 67% reduction in risk of all-cause mortality in patients who received CN+ST vs. ST alone (P < 0.0001). Similar results were noted when first-line ICI therapy recipients were examined as a subgroup. Upfront and deferred CN did not demonstrate significant differences in OS. CONCLUSIONS: CN was independently associated with longer OS in patients with mRCC treated with ICI in any line of therapy. Our data support consideration of CN in well selected patients with mRCC undergoing treatment with ICI.

Emerging Immunotherapy Approaches for Advanced Clear Cell Renal Cell Carcinoma.

The most common subtype of renal cell carcinoma is clear cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC). While localized ccRCC can be cured with surgery, metastatic disease has a poor prognosis. Recently, immunotherapy has emerged as a promising approach for advanced ccRCC. This review provides a comprehensive overview of the evolving immunotherapeutic landscape for metastatic ccRCC. Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) like PD-1/PD-L1 and CTLA-4 inhibitors have demonstrated clinical efficacy as monotherapies and in combination regimens. Combination immunotherapies pairing ICIs with antiangiogenic agents, other immunomodulators, or novel therapeutic platforms such as bispecific antibodies and chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy are areas of active research. Beyond the checkpoint blockade, additional modalities including therapeutic vaccines, cytokines, and oncolytic viruses are also being explored for ccRCC. This review discusses the mechanisms, major clinical trials, challenges, and future directions for these emerging immunotherapies. While current strategies have shown promise in improving patient outcomes, continued research is critical for expanding and optimizing immunotherapy approaches for advanced ccRCC. Realizing the full potential of immunotherapy will require elucidating mechanisms of response and resistance, developing predictive biomarkers, and rationally designing combination therapeutic regimens tailored to individual patients. Advances in immunotherapy carry immense promise for transforming the management of metastatic ccRCC.

Neoadjuvant Atezolizumab With Gemcitabine and Cisplatin in Patients With Muscle-Invasive Bladder Cancer: A Multicenter, Single-Arm, Phase II Trial.

PURPOSE: Neoadjuvant gemcitabine and cisplatin (GC) followed by radical cystectomy (RC) is standard for patients with muscle-invasive bladder cancer (MIBC). On the basis of the activity of atezolizumab (A) in metastatic BC, we tested neoadjuvant GC plus A for MIBC. METHODS: Eligible patients with MIBC (cT2-T4aN0M0) received a dose of A, followed 2 weeks later by GC plus A every 21 days for four cycles followed 3 weeks later by a dose of A before RC. The primary end point was non-muscle-invasive downstaging to < pT2N0. RESULTS: Of 44 enrolled patients, 39 were evaluable. The primary end point was met, with 27 of 39 patients (69%) < pT2N0, including 16 (41%) pT0N0. No patient with < pT2N0 relapsed and four (11%) with ≥ pT2N0 relapsed with a median follow-up of 16.5 months (range: 7.0-33.7 months). One patient refused RC and two developed metastatic disease before RC; all were considered nonresponders. The most common grade 3-4 adverse event (AE) was neutropenia (n = 16; 36%). Grade 3 immune-related AEs occurred in five (11%) patients with two (5%) requiring systemic steroids. The median time from last dose of chemotherapy to surgery was 7.8 weeks (range: 5.1-17 weeks), and no patient failed to undergo RC because of AEs. Four of 39 (10%) patients had programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1)-positive tumors and were all < pT2N0. Of the patients with PD-L1 low or negative tumors, 23 of 34 (68%) achieved < pT2N0 and 11 of 34 (32%) were ≥ pT2N0 (P = .3 for association between PD-L1 and < pT2N0). CONCLUSION: Neoadjuvant GC plus A is a promising regimen for MIBC and warrants further study. Patients with < pT2N0 experienced improved relapse-free survival. The PD-L1 positivity rate was low compared with published data, which limits conclusions regarding PD-L1 as a predictive biomarker.

Cabozantinib plus Nivolumab Phase I Expansion Study in Patients with Metastatic Urothelial Carcinoma Refractory to Immune Checkpoint Inhibitor Therapy.

PURPOSE: This study investigated the efficacy and tolerability of cabozantinib plus nivolumab (CaboNivo) in patients with metastatic urothelial carcinoma (mUC) that progressed on checkpoint inhibition (CPI). PATIENTS AND METHODS: A phase I expansion cohort of patients with mUC who received prior CPI was treated with cabozantinib 40 mg/day and nivolumab 3 mg/kg every 2 weeks until disease progression/unacceptable toxicity. The primary goal was objective response rate (ORR) per RECIST v.1.1. Secondary objectives included progression-free survival (PFS), duration of response (DoR), overall survival (OS), safety, and tolerability. RESULTS: Twenty-nine out of 30 patients enrolled were evaluable for efficacy. Median follow-up was 22.2 months. Most patients (86.7%) received prior chemotherapy and all patients received prior CPI (median seven cycles). ORR was 16.0%, with one complete response and three partial responses (PR). Among 4 responders, 2 were primary refractory, 1 had a PR, and 1 had stable disease on prior CPI. Median DoR was 33.5 months [95% confidence interval (CI), 3.7-33.5], median PFS was 3.6 months (95% CI, 2.1-5.5), and median OS was 10.4 months (95% CI, 5.8-19.5). CaboNivo decreased immunosuppressive subsets such as regulatory T cells (Tregs) and increased potential antitumor immune subsets such as nonclassical monocytes and effector T cells. A lower percentage of monocytic myeloid-derived suppressor cells (M-MDSC) and polymorphonuclear MDSCs, lower CTLA-4 and TIM-3 expression on Tregs, and higher effector CD4+ T cells at baseline were associated with better PFS and/or OS. CONCLUSIONS: CaboNivo was clinically active, well tolerated, and favorably modulated peripheral blood immune subsets in patients with mUC refractory to CPI.

Kidney Cancer, Version 3.2022, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology.

The NCCN Guidelines for Kidney Cancer focus on the screening, diagnosis, staging, treatment, and management of renal cell carcinoma (RCC). Patients with relapsed or stage IV RCC typically undergo surgery and/or receive systemic therapy. Tumor histology and risk stratification of patients is important in therapy selection. The NCCN Guidelines for Kidney Cancer stratify treatment recommendations by histology; recommendations for first-line treatment of ccRCC are also stratified by risk group. To further guide management of advanced RCC, the NCCN Kidney Cancer Panel has categorized all systemic kidney cancer therapy regimens as "Preferred," "Other Recommended Regimens," or "Useful in Certain Circumstances." This categorization provides guidance on treatment selection by considering the efficacy, safety, evidence, and other factors that play a role in treatment selection. These factors include pre-existing comorbidities, nature of the disease, and in some cases consideration of access to agents. This article summarizes surgical and systemic therapy recommendations for patients with relapsed or stage IV RCC.

Management of adverse events associated with cabozantinib plus nivolumab in renal cell carcinoma: A review.

Tyrosine kinase inhibitors have been successfully developed in combination with immune checkpoint inhibitors to treat advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC), further advancing treatment. While safety profiles are generally manageable with combination regimens, overlapping adverse events (AEs) and immune-related AEs can make treatment more complex. The CheckMate 9ER study evaluated the tyrosine kinase inhibitor cabozantinib in combination with the anti-programmed cell death protein-1 antibody nivolumab in patients with previously untreated advanced RCC. Cabozantinib + nivolumab demonstrated superiority over sunitinib for progression-free survival, overall survival, and objective response rate. These outcomes supported the approval of cabozantinib + nivolumab as a first-line therapy for advanced RCC. The safety profile was manageable with prophylaxis, supportive care, dose holds and reductions for cabozantinib, and dose holds and immunosuppressive therapy for nivolumab. This review discusses the safety results of CheckMate 9ER and provides guidance on managing some of the more clinically relevant AEs with a focus on overlapping AEs, including diarrhea, elevated amylase/lipase, hepatotoxicity, dermatologic reactions, fatigue, endocrine disorders, and nephrotoxicity. We discuss AE management strategies (prophylaxis, supportive care, dose modification, and immunosuppressive therapy), and provide recommendations for identifying the causative agent of overlapping AEs and for consulting specialists about organ-specific immune-related AEs. Optimizing AE management can maintain tolerability and should be a priority with cabozantinib + nivolumab treatment.

Population Pharmacokinetic Analysis from First-in-Human Data for HDAC Inhibitor, REC-2282 (AR-42), in Patients with Solid Tumors and Hematologic Malignancies: A Case Study for Evaluating Flat vs. Body Size Normalized Dosing.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: REC-2282 is a novel histone deacetylase inhibitor that has shown antitumor activity in in vitro and in vivo models of malignancy.  The aims of this study were to characterize the population pharmacokinetics of REC-2282 (AR-42) from the first-in-human (NCT01129193) and phase I acute myeloid leukemia trials (NCT01798901) and to evaluate potential sources of variability. Additionally, we sought to understand alternate body size descriptors as sources of inter-individual variability (IIV), which was significant for dose-normalized maximum observed concentration and area under the concentration-time curve (AUC). METHODS: Datasets from two clinical trials were combined, and population pharmacokinetic analysis was performed using NONMEM and R softwares; patient demographics were tested as covariates. RESULTS: A successful population pharmacokinetic model was constructed. The pharmacokinetics of REC-2282 were best described by a two-compartment model with one transit compartment for absorption, first-order elimination and a proportional error model. Fat-free mass (FFM) was retained as a single covariate on clearance (CL), though it explained < 3% of the observed variability on CL. Tumor type and formulation were retained as covariates on lag time, and a majority of variability, attributed to absorption, remained unexplained. Computed tomography (CT)-derived lean body weight estimates were lower than estimated lean body weight and fat-free mass measures in most patients. Analysis of dose-normalized AUC vs. body size descriptors suggests flat dosing is most appropriate for REC-2282. CONCLUSIONS: FFM was identified as a significant covariate on CL; however, it explained only a very small portion of the IIV; major factors contributing significantly to REC-2282 pharmacokinetic variability remain unidentified.

Early phase clinical studies of AR-42, a histone deacetylase inhibitor, for neurofibromatosis type 2-associated vestibular schwannomas and meningiomas.

OBJECTIVES: Two pilot studies of AR-42, a pan-histone deacetylase inhibitor, in human neurofibromatosis type 2 (NF2), vestibular schwannomas (VS), and meningiomas are presented. Primary endpoints included safety, and intra-tumoral pharmacokinetics (PK) and pharmacodynamics (PD). METHODS: Pilot 1 is a subset analysis of a phase 1 study of AR-42 in solid tumors, which included NF2 or sporadic meningiomas. Tumor volumes and treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) are reported (NCT01129193).Pilot 2 is a phase 0 surgical study of AR-42 assessing intra-tumoral PK and PD. AR-42 was administered for 3 weeks pre-operatively. Plasma and tumor drug concentrations and p-AKT expression were measured (NCT02282917). RESULTS: Pilot 1: Five patients with NF2 and two with sporadic meningiomas experienced a similar incidence of TRAEs to the overall phase I trial. The six evaluable patients had 15 tumors (8 VS, 7 meningiomas). On AR-42, tumor volume increased in six, remained stable in eight, and decreased in one tumor. The annual percent growth rate decreased in eight, remained stable in three, and increased in four tumors. Pilot 2: Four patients with sporadic VS and one patient with meningioma experienced no grade 3/4 toxicities. Expression of p-AKT decreased in three of four VS. All tumors had higher AR-42 concentrations than plasma. CONCLUSIONS: AR-42 is safe. Tumor volumes showed a mixed response, but most slowed growth. On a 40-mg regimen, drug concentrated in tumors and growth pathways were suppressed in most tumors, suggesting this may be a well-tolerated and effective dose. A phase 2 study of AR-42 for NF2-associated tumors appears warranted. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 1b, 4.

Clinical Activity and Safety of Cabozantinib for Brain Metastases in Patients With Renal Cell Carcinoma.

IMPORTANCE: Patients with brain metastases from renal cell carcinoma (RCC) have been underrepresented in clinical trials, and effective systemic therapy is lacking. Cabozantinib shows robust clinical activity in metastatic RCC, but its effect on brain metastases remains unclear. OBJECTIVE: To assess the clinical activity and toxic effects of cabozantinib to treat brain metastases in patients with metastatic RCC. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This retrospective cohort study included patients with metastatic RCC and brain metastases treated in 15 international institutions (US, Belgium, France, and Spain) between January 2014 and October 2020. Cohort A comprised patients with progressing brain metastases without concomitant brain-directed local therapy, and cohort B comprised patients with stable or progressing brain metastases concomitantly treated by brain-directed local therapy. EXPOSURES: Receipt of cabozantinib monotherapy at any line of treatment. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Intracranial radiological response rate by modified Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors, version 1.1, and toxic effects of cabozantinib. RESULTS: Of the 88 patients with brain metastases from RCC included in the study, 33 (38%) were in cohort A and 55 (62%) were in cohort B; the majority of patients were men (n = 69; 78%), and the median age at cabozantinib initiation was 61 years (range, 34-81 years). Median follow-up was 17 months (range, 2-74 months). The intracranial response rate was 55% (95% CI, 36%-73%) and 47% (95% CI, 33%-61%) in cohorts A and B, respectively. In cohort A, the extracranial response rate was 48% (95% CI, 31%-66%), median time to treatment failure was 8.9 months (95% CI, 5.9-12.3 months), and median overall survival was 15 months (95% CI, 9.0-30.0 months). In cohort B, the extracranial response rate was 38% (95% CI, 25%-52%), time to treatment failure was 9.7 months (95% CI, 6.0-13.2 months), and median overall survival was 16 months (95% CI, 12.0-21.9 months). Cabozantinib was well tolerated, with no unexpected toxic effects or neurological adverse events reported. No treatment-related deaths were observed. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: In this cohort study, cabozantinib showed considerable intracranial activity and an acceptable safety profile in patients with RCC and brain metastases. Support of prospective studies evaluating the efficacy of cabozantinib for brain metastases in patients with RCC is critical.

Effect of Cisplatin and Gemcitabine With or Without Berzosertib in Patients With Advanced Urothelial Carcinoma: A Phase 2 Randomized Clinical Trial.

IMPORTANCE: Preclinical studies suggest that inhibition of single-stranded DNA repair by ataxia telangiectasia and Rad3 (ATR) may enhance the cytotoxicity of cisplatin, gemcitabine, and other chemotherapeutic agents. Cisplatin with gemcitabine remains the standard up-front therapy for treatment in patients with metastatic urothelial cancer. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether the use of the selective ATR inhibitor, berzosertib, could augment the activity of cisplatin with gemcitabine. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: In a phase 2 randomized clinical trial, 87 patients across 23 centers in the National Cancer Institute Experimental Therapeutics Clinical Trials Network were randomized to receive either cisplatin with gemcitabine alone (control arm) or cisplatin with gemcitabine plus berzosertib (experimental arm). Key eligibility criteria included confirmed metastatic urothelial cancer, no prior cytotoxic therapy for metastatic disease, 12 months or more since perioperative therapy, and eligibility for cisplatin receipt based on standard criteria. The study was conducted from January 27, 2017, to December 15, 2020. INTERVENTIONS: In the control arm, cisplatin, 70 mg/m2, was given on day 1 and gemcitabine, 1000 mg/m2, was given on days 1 and 8 of a 21-day cycle. In the experimental arm, cisplatin, 60 mg/m2, was given on day 1; gemcitabine, 875 mg/m2, on days 1 and 8; and berzosertib, 90 mg/m2, on days 2 and 9 of a 21-day cycle. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The primary end point of the study was progression-free survival. The analysis was on all patients who started therapy. RESULTS: Of the total of 87 patients randomized, 41 patients received cisplatin with gemcitabine alone and 46 received cisplatin with gemcitabine plus berzosertib. Median age was 67 (range, 32-84) years, and 68 patients (78%) were men. Median progression-free survival was 8.0 months for both arms (Bajorin risk-adjusted hazard ratio, 1.22; 95% CI, 0.72-2.08). Median overall survival was shorter with cisplatin with gemcitabine plus berzosertib compared with cisplatin with gemcitabine alone (14.4 vs 19.8 months; Bajorin risk-adjusted hazard ratio, 1.42; 95% CI, 0.76-2.68). Higher rates of grade 3 vs grade 4 thrombocytopenia (59% vs 39%) and neutropenia (37% vs 27%) were observed with cisplatin with gemcitabine and berzosertib compared with cisplatin with gemcitabine alone; consequently, more dose reductions were needed in the experimental arm. Patients in the experimental arm received a median cisplatin dose of 250 mg/m2, which was significantly lower than the median dose of 370 mg/m2 in the control arm (P < .001). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: The addition of berzosertib to cisplatin with gemcitabine did not prolong progression-free survival relative to cisplatin with gemcitabine alone in patients with metastatic urothelial cancer, and a trend toward inferior survival was observed with this combination. Berzosertib plus cisplatin with gemcitabine was associated with significantly higher hematologic toxicities despite attenuated dosing of cisplatin with gemcitabine. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02567409.