Real-world ANASTASE study of atezolizumab+nab-paclitaxel as first-line treatment of PD-L1-positive metastatic triple-negative breast cancer.

The combination of atezolizumab and nab-paclitaxel is recommended in the EU as first-line treatment for PD-L1-positive metastatic triple-negative breast cancer (mTNBC), based on the results of phase III IMpassion130 trial. However, 'real-world' data on this combination are limited. The ANASTASE study (NCT05609903) collected data on atezolizumab plus nab-paclitaxel in PD-L1-positive mTNBC patients enrolled in the Italian Compassionate Use Program. A retrospective analysis was conducted in 29 Italian oncology centers among patients who completed at least one cycle of treatment. Data from 52 patients were gathered. Among them, 21.1% presented de novo stage IV; 78.8% previously received (neo)adjuvant treatment; 55.8% patients had only one site of metastasis; median number of treatment cycles was five (IQR: 3-8); objective response rate was 42.3% (95% CI: 28.9-55.7%). The median time-to-treatment discontinuation was 5 months (95% CI: 2.8-7.1); clinical benefit at 12 months was 45.8%. The median duration of response was 12.7 months (95% CI: 4.1-21.4). At a median follow-up of 20 months, the median progression-free survival was 6.3 months (95% CI: 3.9-8.7) and the median time to next treatment or death was 8.1 months (95% CI: 5.5-10.7). At 12 months and 24 months, the overall survival rates were 66.3% and 49.1%, respectively. The most common immune-related adverse events included rash (23.1%), hepatitis (11.5%), thyroiditis (11.5%) and pneumonia (9.6%). Within the ANASTASE study, patients with PD-L1-positive mTNBC treated with first-line atezolizumab plus nab-paclitaxel achieved PFS and ORR similar to those reported in the IMpassion130 study, with no unexpected adverse events.

Optimizing CDK4/6 inhibitors in advanced HR+/HER2- breast cancer: A personalized approach.

Cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 inhibitors (CDK4/6i) combined with endocrine therapy (ET) are now a backbone of treatment for hormone receptor-positive/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-negative advanced breast cancer. CDK4/6i plus ET is more effective than ET alone in this setting; however, the risk of grade 3-4 adverse events also increases. Approved agents in this class have similar efficacies, but important differences due to their structural and pharmacological properties. We review biomarkers and discuss determinants to inform a rational approach to therapy choice when selecting the most appropriate ET and CDK4/6i partners. We also identify subgroups that may benefit from specific ET-CDK4/6i combinations and discuss strategies to overcome resistance. This personalized approach aims to minimize treatment-related toxicities that may affect patient QoL and compliance, and ultimately therapy efficacy.

Infection rate and clinical management of cancer patients during the COVID-19 pandemic: experience from a tertiary care hospital in northern Italy.

BACKGROUND: Optimal management of patients with cancer during COVID-19 pandemic is still pending. METHODS: Our patients were advised to maintain their scheduled appointments, and planned cancer treatment was continued without unnecessary delays in an outpatient setting. Additional strict preventive infection measures were rapidly implemented at our outpatient department. When COVID-19 test became widely available, universal testing of healthcare workers and vigorous screening of all patients coming to our facility for COVID-19 infection were performed by SARS-CoV-2 real-time reverse transcription PCR on rhinopharyngeal swab. RESULTS: As of the data cut-off on 9 April 2020, a total of 156 oncology patients with a median age of 67 (range 26-86) years and 63 haematology patients (median age 69 years, range 23-89) were screened for COVID-19 during active cancer treatment. Prevalence (1.8%; 4/219) of COVID-19 in patients with cancer was significantly higher compared with a respective control group of asymptomatic counterparts (p=0.018). Outcomes of COVID-19 positive patients were good, with only one observed death due to progression of advanced metastatic disease. CONCLUSION: Our data indicate that continuation of anticancer treatment in epidemic areas during the COVID-19 pandemic seems to be safe and feasible, if adequate and strict preventive measures are vigorously and successfully carried out.

Limits of radiomic-based entropy as a surrogate of tumor heterogeneity: ROI-area, acquisition protocol and tissue site exert substantial influence.

Entropy is a promising quantitative imaging biomarker for characterizing cancer imaging phenotype. Entropy has been associated with tumor gene expression, tumor metabolism, tumor stage, patient prognosis, and treatment response. Our hypothesis states that tumor-specific biomarkers such as entropy should be correlated between synchronous metastases. Therefore, a significant proportion of the variance of entropy should be attributed to the malignant process. We analyzed 112 patients with matched/paired synchronous metastases (SM#1 and SM#2) prospectively enrolled in the MOSCATO-01 clinical trial. Imaging features were extracted from Regions Of Interest (ROI) delineated on CT-scan using TexRAD software. We showed that synchronous metastasis entropy was correlated across 5 Spatial Scale Filters: Spearman's Rho ranged between 0.41 and 0.59 (P = 0.0001, Bonferroni correction). Multivariate linear analysis revealed that entropy in SM#1 is significantly associated with (i) primary tumor type; (ii) entropy in SM#2 (same malignant process); (iii) ROI area size; (iv) metastasis site; and (v) entropy in the psoas muscle (reference tissue). Entropy was a logarithmic function of ROI area in normal control tissues (aorta, psoas) and in mathematical models (P < 0.01). We concluded that entropy is a tumor-specific metric only if confounding factors are corrected.

Is there evidence for different effects among EGFR-TKIs? Systematic review and meta-analysis of EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) versus chemotherapy as first-line treatment for patients harboring EGFR mutations.

Three EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors have been compared to standard chemotherapy as up-front treatment in patients with advanced EGFR-positive NSCLC. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis using indirect comparisons to estimate the risk/benefit associated with each drug. EGFR-TKIs fared better than chemotherapy in terms of PFS. The relative probability of overall response was gefitinib versus erlotinib 0.96 (95% CI 0.69-1.34), gefitinib versus afatinib 0.91 (95% CI 0.67-1.23), erlotinib versus afatinib 0.94 (95% CI 0.65-1.35). Indirect comparisons for safety showed the RR for diarrhea gefitinib versus erlotinib 0.80 (95% CI 0.63-1.01), gefitinib versus afatinib 0.29 (95% CI 0.20-0.41), erlotinib versus afatinib 0.36 (95% CI 0.25-0.54); for rash gefitinib versus erlotinib 1.00 (95% CI 0.82-1.22), gefitinib versus afatinib 0.41(95% CI 0.25-0.65), erlotinib versus afatinib 0.41 (95% CI 0.25-0.66); for hypertransaminasemia gefitinib versus erlotinib 2.29 (95% CI 1.63-3.23). Our analysis showed that all treatments had similar efficacy but they differ for toxicities.

Activity of the EGFR-HER2 dual inhibitor afatinib in EGFR-mutant lung cancer patients with acquired resistance to reversible EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of afatinib in EGFR-mutant metastatic NSCLC patients with acquired resistance to erlotinib or gefitinib. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed the outcome of patients with EGFR-mutant advanced NSCLC treated with afatinib after failure of chemotherapy and EGFR TKIs. RESULTS: A total of 96 individuals were included in the study. According to EGFR status, most patients (n = 63; 65.6%) harbored a deletion in exon 19, and de novo T790M mutation was detected in 2 cases (T790M and exon 19). Twenty-four (25%) patients underwent repeated biopsy immediately before starting afatinib and secondary T790M was detected in 8 (33%) samples. Among the 86 patients evaluable for efficacy, response rate was 11.6%, with a median progression free-survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) of 3.9 and 7.3 months, respectively. No significant difference in PFS and OS was observed according to type of last therapy received before afatinib, type of EGFR mutation or adherence to Jackman criteria, and patients benefiting from afatinib therapy had longer PFS and OS (P < .001). Outcome results for repeated biopsy patients were similar to the whole population, with no evidence of response in T790M-positive patients. All patients were evaluable for toxicity, and 81% experienced an AE of any grade, with grade 3 to 4 AEs, mainly diarrhea and skin toxicity, occurring in 19 (20%) patients. CONCLUSION: Our results showed that afatinib has only modest efficacy in a real life population of EGFR mutant NSCLC patients with acquired resistance to erlotinib or gefitinib.

Does immunohistochemistry affect response to therapy and survival of inoperable non-small cell lung carcinoma patients? A survey of 145 stage III-IV consecutive cases.

Whether non-small cell lung carcinoma (NSCLC) unveiled by immunohistochemistry (IHC) has the same clinical outcome as those typed by morphology is still matter of debate. A total of 145 stage III-IV, consecutive inoperable NSCLC patients treated by chemotherapy (133 cases) or EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor (12 cases) and including 100 biopsies, 11 surgical specimens, and 34 cytological samples had originally accounted for 120 adenocarcinomas (ADs), 19 squamous cell carcinomas (SQCs), and 6 adenosquamous carcinomas (ADSQCs) by integrating morphology and thyroid transcription factor-1 (TTF1)/p40 IHC. Thirty-two NSCLC-not otherwise specified (NSCLC-NOS) cases were identified by morphology revision of the original diagnoses, which showed solid growth pattern (P < .001), 22 ADs, 5 SQCs, and 5 ADSQCs by IHC profiling (P < .001), and 10 gene-altered tumors (3 EGFR, 5 KRAS, and 2 ALK). While no significant relationships were observed between response to therapy and original, morphology or IHC diagnoses, driver mutations and tumor differentiation by TTF1 expression, AD run better progression-free survival (PFS) or overall survival (OS) than other tumor types by morphology (P = .010 and P = .047) and IHC (P = .033 and P = .046), respectively. Furthermore, patients with NSCLC-NOS confirmed as AD by IHC tended to have poorer OS (P = .179) and PFS (P = .193) similar to that of ADSQC and SQC (P = .702 and P = .540, respectively). A category of less differentiated AD with poorer prognosis on therapy could be identified by IHC, while there were no differences for SQC or ADSQC. The terminology of "NSCLC-NOS, favor by IHC" is appropriate to alert clinicians toward more aggressive tumors.

Emerging toxicities in the treatment of non-small cell lung cancer: ocular disorders.

The treatment of advanced disease (stage IIIb and IV) of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is based on systemic treatment with platinum-based chemotherapy or biological compounds depending on the disease molecular profile. In the last few years, intensive investigational efforts in anticancer therapy have led to the registration of new active chemotherapeutic agents, combination regimens, and biological drugs, expanding choices for customizing individual treatment. However, the introduction of new drugs in the clinical setting has led to several new toxicities, creating some difficulties in daily management. Among these, ocular toxicity is generally overlooked as more common toxicities such as myelosuppression, stomatitis, diarrhea, vomiting, "hand-foot syndrome", and neurological alterations attract greater attention. Ophthalmic complications from cytotoxic chemotherapeutics are rare, transient, and of mild/moderate intensity but irreversible acute disorders are possible. The best way to prevent potential irreversible visual complications is an awareness of the potential for ocular toxicity because dose reductions or early drug cessation can prevent serious ocular complications in the majority of cases. However, given the novelty of many therapeutic agents and the complexity of ocular pathology, oncologists may be unfamiliar with these adverse effects of anticancer therapy. Although toxicities from chemotherapy are generally intense but short lasting, toxicities related to targeted drugs are often milder but longer lasting and can persist throughout treatment. Here we review the principal clinical presentations of ocular toxicity arising from chemotherapy [1-3], target therapies [4], and newly developed drugs and provide some recommendations for monitoring and management of ocular toxicity.

Metformin inhibits leptin-induced growth and migration of glioblastoma cells.

Metformin, a derivative of biguanide, is a first-line therapy for type 2 diabetes mellitus. Since the drug has been shown to significantly reduce the risk of various cancers and cancer mortality in diabetic patients, it is being considered as a potential anticancer therapeutic or preventive agent. In cellular models, metformin inhibits the growth of many types of cancer cells; however, its effects on glioblastoma multi-forme (GBM) are not well characterized. Here, we analyzed the effects of metformin on the growth and migration of LN18 and LN229 GBM cells cultured under basal conditions or exposed to leptin, a cytokine that has recently been implicated in GBM development. We found that 2-16 mM metformin reduced basal and leptin-stimulated growth of GBM cells in a dose-dependent manner. Furthermore, the drug significantly inhibited the migration of GBM cells. The action of metformin was mediated through the upregulation of its main signaling molecule, the adenosine monophosphate-activated protein kinase (AMPK), as well as through the downregulation of the signal transducer and activator of transcription 3 (STAT3) and the Akt/PKB serine/threonine protein kinase. In leptin-treated cells, the drug reversed the effects of the cytokine on the AMPK and STAT3 pathways, but modulated Akt activity in a cell-dependent manner. Our results suggest that metformin or similar AMPK-targeting agents with optimized blood-brain-barrier penetrability could be developed as potential treatments of GBM and could be used in conjunction with other target drugs such as leptin receptor antagonists.

Design and development of a peptide-based adiponectin receptor agonist for cancer treatment.

BACKGROUND: Adiponectin, a fat tissue-derived adipokine, exhibits beneficial effects against insulin resistance, cardiovascular disease, inflammatory conditions, and cancer. Circulating adiponectin levels are decreased in obese individuals, and this feature correlates with increased risk of developing several metabolic, immunological and neoplastic diseases. Thus, pharmacological replacement of adiponectin might prove clinically beneficial, especially for the obese patient population. At present, adiponectin-based therapeutics are not available, partly due to yet unclear structure/function relationships of the cytokine and difficulties in converting the full size adiponectin protein into a viable drug. RESULTS: We aimed to generate adiponectin-based short peptide that can mimic adiponectin action and be suitable for preclinical and clinical development as a cancer therapeutic. Using a panel of 66 overlapping 10 amino acid-long peptides covering the entire adiponectin globular domain (residues 105-254), we identified the 149-166 region as the adiponectin active site. Three-dimensional modeling of the active site and functional screening of additional 330 peptide analogs covering this region resulted in the development of a lead peptidomimetic, ADP 355 (H-DAsn-Ile-Pro-Nva-Leu-Tyr-DSer-Phe-Ala-DSer-NH2). In several adiponectin receptor-positive cancer cell lines, ADP 355 restricted proliferation in a dose-dependent manner at 100 nM-10 µM concentrations (exceeding the effects of 50 ng/mL globular adiponectin). Furthermore, ADP 355 modulated several key signaling pathways (AMPK, Akt, STAT3, ERK1/2) in an adiponectin-like manner. siRNA knockdown experiments suggested that ADP 355 effects can be transmitted through both adiponectin receptors, with a greater contribution of AdipoR1. In vivo, intraperitoneal administration of 1 mg/kg/day ADP 355 for 28 days suppressed the growth of orthotopic human breast cancer xenografts by ~31%. The peptide displayed excellent stability (at least 30 min) in mouse blood or serum and did not induce gross toxic effects at 5-50 mg/kg bolus doses in normal CBA/J mice. CONCLUSIONS: ADP 355 is a first-in-class adiponectin receptor agonist. Its biological activity, superior stability in biological fluids as well as acceptable toxicity profile indicate that the peptidomimetic represents a true lead compound for pharmaceutical development to replace low adiponectin levels in cancer and other malignancies.