Evaluation of programmed cell death ligand 1 expression in a contemporary cohort of penile squamous cell carcinoma and its correlation with clinicopathologic and survival parameters: A study of 134 patients.

OBJECTIVES: Penile squamous cell carcinomas (PCs) are rare malignancies with a dismal prognosis in a metastatic setting; therefore, novel immunotherapeutic modalities are an unmet need. One such modality is the immune checkpoint molecule programmed cell death ligand 1 (PD-L1). We sought to analyze PD-L1 expression and its correlation with various clinicopathologic parameters in a contemporary cohort of 134 patients with PC. METHODS: A cohort of 134 patients with PC was studied for PD-L1 immunohistochemistry. The PD-L1 expression was evaluated using a combined proportion score with a cutoff of 1 or higher to define positivity. The results were correlated with various clinicopathologic parameters. RESULTS: Overall, 77 (57%) patients had positive PD-L1 expression. Significantly high PD-L1 expression was observed in high-grade tumors (P = .006). We found that 37% of human papillomavirus (HPV)-associated subtypes and 73% of other histotype tumors expressed PD-L1, while 63% of HPV-associated tumors and 27% of other histotype tumors did not (odds ratio, 1.35; P = .002 when compared for HPV-associated groups vs all others). Similarly, PD-L1-positive tumors had a 3.61-times higher chance of being node positive than PD-L1-negative tumors (P = .0009). In addition, PD-L1 high-positive tumors had a 5-times higher chance of being p16ink4a negative than PD-L1 low-positive tumors (P = .004). The PD-L1-positive tumors had a lower overall survival and cancer-specific survival than PD-L1-negative tumors. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, PD-L1 expression is associated with high-grade and metastatic tumors. Lower PD-L1 expression is observed more frequently in HPV-associated (warty or basaloid) subtypes than in other, predominantly HPV-independent types. As a result, PD-L1 positivity, including higher expression, portends lower overall and cancer-specific survival. These data provide a rational for further investigating PD-L1-based immunotherapeutics in PC.

SS18-SSX Expression in a Contemporary Cohort of Primary Renal Synovial Sarcoma: A Multi-Institutional Experience of Fourteen Patients.

Primary renal synovial sarcoma is a rare aggressive mesenchymal neoplasm of the kidney that accounts for less than 1% of renal sarcomas. Herein, we describe the clinicopathologic and molecular findings of 14 renal synovial sarcoma patients in one of the largest case series to date and to our knowledge, the only renal synovial sarcoma series to use novel SS18-SSX IHC. Clinicopathologic, IHC, molecular, management, and follow-up data were reviewed and analyzed. Macroscopically, the tumors had either homogeneous, tan-white, and solid (n = 10), variegated and solid (n = 3), or variegated and solid-cystic (n = 1) cut surfaces. Spindle cell (n = 10), round cell (n = 3), and round to epithelioid morphologies (n = 1) were observed. SS18-SSX IHC was positive in all 14 tumors (diffuse, n = 10; multifocal, n = 2; focal, n = 2). All the tumors harbored SS18::SSX1/2 gene rearrangement. Metastases to the liver, brain, and lung (n = 1); liver and bone (n = 1); liver and diaphragm (n = 1) were identified. Adjuvant chemotherapy was administered in 11/12 patients. Follow-up was available for 10 patients (time period range: 5 to 24 months). Four patients died of disease, and six patients are alive with no recurrence or metastasis. As SS18-SSX IHC showed an excellent concordance with the FISH results, this may reliably be used in the IHC panel of spindle/round cell sarcomas of the kidney and as a molecular surrogate for renal synovial sarcoma, particularly in a resource-limited setting. Also, the tumors with focal SS18-SSX expression had lower break apart signals in the FISH assay (19% and 23% in two tumors with focal SS18-SSX IHC positivity).

Efficacy and safety of avanafil as compared with sildenafil in the treatment of erectile dysfunction: A randomized, double blind, multicenter clinical trial.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy and safety of avanafil as compared with sildenafil in the management of patients with erectile dysfunction. METHODS: It was a prospective, randomized, double-blind, two-arm, active-controlled, parallel, multicenter, non-inferiority clinical study carried out in patients with erectile dysfunction for at least 3 months and International Index of Erectile Function - Erectile Function domain score of <26 at enrolment. RESULTS: A total of 220 patients were randomized to receive either avanafil tablets 100 mg or sildenafil tablets 50 mg in 1:1 ratio. After 4 weeks of treatment, 40.0% of patients in the avanafil group and 45.6% of patients in the sildenafil group required dose escalation to a high dose (avanafil 200 mg/sildenafil 100 mg). The difference in the mean change of International Index of Erectile Function - Erectile Function score from baseline in the two groups increased from week 4 (1.1, 95% confidence interval -0.2 to 2.5) to week 8 (1.4, 95% confidence interval 0.1-2.7) and week 12 (2.1, 95% confidence interval 0.8-3.5), showing non-inferiority at week 4, and superiority at week 8 and week 12. Avanafil showed a faster onset of action as shown by a significantly better response to modified Sexual Encounter Profile 1 in the avanafil group (84.8%) as compared with that in the sildenafil group (28.2%; P < 0.001). Both avanafil and sildenafil were well tolerated by all the patients in the study; the most common adverse event reported during the study was headache in both the groups. CONCLUSION: Avanafil is superior to sildenafil in improving the International Index of Erectile Function - Erectile Function domain score at the end of 12 weeks of treatment with the added advantage of faster onset of action.

p53 and p16ink4a As Predictive and Prognostic Biomarkers for Nodal metastasis and Survival in A Contemporary Cohort of Penile Squamous Cell Carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Human papilloma virus (HPV) infection is implicated in a proportion of invasive squamous cell carcinoma of the penis (PC). A subset of PC involves dysregulation of the p53 pathway. HPV in situ hybridization (ISH) and p16ink4a positivity are surrogate markers for HPV infection, and p53 immunohistochemistry (IHC) denotes abnormality in the p53 pathway. There remains an ambiguity with regard to the contribution of both the pathways in the prognosis of PC. We sought to analyze the clinicopathologic characteristics of a cohort of Indian PC patients with respect to p16 ink4a and p53 expression. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A cohort of 123 PC patients was studied for p16ink4aand p53IHC and HPVISH. The results of these biomarkers were correlated with various clinicopathologic parameters. RESULTS: p16ink4a and HPV ISH were positive in 47% and 53% of the tumors, respectively. The proportion of warty, basaloid, or mixed warty-basaloid tumor subtypes showed significant p16ink4apositivity (P < .0001) compared to other subtypes. Twenty-eight patients were dual negative (p53- /p16ink4a-), 32 were dual positive (p53+/p16ink4a+), 38 were p53+/p16ink4a-, and 25 were p53-/p16ink4a +. In patients where p16ink4a was negative, a p53-positive phenotype had a higher propensity for lymph node metastases (OR, 5.42; 95% CI, 1.75-16.80; P = .003). Similarly, p53 positivity dictates nodal involvement in the p16ink4a-positive subset of tumors (OR, 5.00; 95% CI, 1.23-20.17; P = .024). On multivariate analyses, pathologic subtypes (warty, warty-basaloid, and basaloid) (P < .0001), p16ink4aexpression (P < .0001), and absence of nodal metastasis (P < .0001) were significant predictors of improved overall (OS) and cancer specific survival (CSS). In Kaplan-Meier analysis, the OS was significantly longer in patients with p16ink4a + tumors (P < .0001), as was the CSS (P < .0001). Patients with dual positive tumors had a significantly higher OS (P < .001) and CSS (P = .012), in the entire cohort. In the node positive patients, dual positivity was associated with significantly higher OS (P < .0001); however, the median CSS for p53+/p16ink4a+tumors were not significantly different compared to p53- /p16ink4a- tumors (P = .064), although there was a trend towards improved CSS. CONCLUSIONS: There is a strong concordance between p16ink4aIHC and HPV ISH results. p16ink4a status is an independent predictor of survival (OS and CSS) in our cohort of PCs. p53 is a predictor of nodal metastasis irrespective of p16 status. Dual positive tumors have a significantly better outcome in comparison to dual negative tumors.