Management of Metastatic Urothelial Carcinoma in Emerging Markets (EM): An Expert Opinion.

Urothelial carcinoma (UC) is the 10th most common cancer globally with an almost 4 times higher prevalence in men. The main risk factors for development of urothelial carcinoma are advanced age, smoking, arsenic contamination, exposure to carcinogens. Metastatic urothelial carcinoma (mUC) has overall poor prognosis with a 5-year overall survival rate of only < 5%. The standard of care comprises of platinum-based chemotherapy, but the responses are often not sustained. A working group was established with an objective to discuss the most recent clinical data on the genitourinary tumors of interest and comprised of experts across Latin America, Emerging Asia (except China, Japan, and South Korea), Africa, and the Middle East (known as Emerging Markets or EM). There is an evident disparity in terms of uneven mortality and incidence rate distribution among various regions. There is a lack and/or insufficient data on epidemiology, treatment, and outcomes in the EM. The lack of registries impacts the healthcare decisions and the lower incidence from the region might not be reflective of the true disease burden. The treatment outcomes of mUC can be improved by understanding the current disease burden and treatment approach of mUC and identifying the gaps and challenges associated with management. Hence, a literature review was developed to summarize the current disease burden and treatment approach of mUC across EM. The review also highlights the unmet needs for mUC management in EM and suggests a way forward to improve the current situation in order to better serve the patients.

Patient-Reported Health-Related Quality of Life in KEYNOTE-604: Pembrolizumab or Placebo Added to Etoposide and Platinum as First-Line Therapy for Extensive-Stage SCLC.

Introduction: In the phase 3 KEYNOTE-604 study (NCT03066778), pembrolizumab plus etoposide and platinum chemotherapy (EP) significantly (p = 0.0023) improved progression-free survival versus placebo plus EP in previously untreated extensive-stage SCLC (ES-SCLC). We present health-related quality of life (HRQoL) results from KEYNOTE-604. Methods: Patients with stage IV SCLC were randomized 1:1 to pembrolizumab 200 mg or placebo every 3 weeks for 35 cycles plus four cycles of EP. Secondary end points included mean change from baseline to week 18 in the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality-of-Life Questionnaire-Core 30 (QLQ-C30) global health status/quality of life (GHS/QoL) scale and time to deterioration in the composite outcome of cough, chest pain, or dyspnea from QLQ-C30 and QLQ-Lung Cancer Module 13. Two-sided, nominal p values are reported. Results: A total of 439 patients completed at least one QLQ-C30 and QLQ-Lung Cancer Module 13 assessment (pembrolizumab + EP, n = 221; placebo + EP, n = 218). GHS/QoL scores improved from baseline to week 18: least squares mean (95% confidence interval [CI]) changes were 8.7 (5.3-12.1) for pembrolizumab plus EP and 4.2 (0.9-7.5) for placebo plus EP. Between-group differences in least squares mean scores were improved for pembrolizumab plus EP (4.4 [95% CI: 0.2-8.7], p = 0.040]). Median time to deterioration for the composite end point was not reached and 8.7 (95% CI: 5.9-not reached) months, respectively (hazard ratio = 0.80 [95% CI: 0.56-1.14], p = 0.208). Conclusions: First-line pembrolizumab plus EP therapy maintained HRQoL in patients with ES-SCLC and may be associated with greater improvement than placebo plus EP. Together with the efficacy and safety findings in KEYNOTE-604, HRQoL data support the benefit of pembrolizumab in ES-SCLC.

KEYNOTE-033: Randomized phase 3 study of pembrolizumab vs docetaxel in previously treated, PD-L1-positive, advanced NSCLC.

KEYNOTE-033 (NCT02864394) was a multicountry, open-label, phase 3 study that compared pembrolizumab vs docetaxel in previously treated, programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1)-positive, advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), with most patients enrolled in mainland China. Eligible patients were randomized (1:1) to pembrolizumab 2 mg/kg or docetaxel 75 mg/m2 every 3 weeks. Primary endpoints were overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival and were evaluated sequentially using stratified log-rank tests, first in patients with PD-L1 tumor proportion score (TPS) ≥50% and then in patients with PD-L1 TPS ≥1% (significance threshold: P < .025, one-sided). A total of 425 patients were randomized to pembrolizumab (N = 213) or docetaxel (N = 212) between 8 September 2016 and 17 October 2018. In patients with a PD-L1 TPS ≥50% (n = 227), median OS was 12.3 months with pembrolizumab and 10.9 months with docetaxel; the hazard ratio (HR) was 0.83 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.61-1.14; P = .1276). Because the significance threshold was not met, sequential testing of OS and PFS was ceased. In patients with a PD-L1 TPS ≥1%, the HR for OS for pembrolizumab vs docetaxel was 0.75 (95% CI: 0.60-0.95). In patients from mainland China (n = 311) with a PD-L1 TPS ≥1%, HR for OS was 0.68 (95% CI: 0.51-0.89). Incidence of grade 3 to 5 treatment-related AEs was 11.3% with pembrolizumab vs 47.5% with docetaxel. In summary, pembrolizumab improved OS vs docetaxel in previously treated, PD-L1-positive NSCLC without unexpected safety signals; although the statistical significance threshold was not reached, the numerical improvement is consistent with that previously observed for pembrolizumab in previously treated, advanced NSCLC.

Real-world KINDLE-Latin America subset data on treatment patterns and clinical outcomes in patients with stage III non-small-cell lung cancer.

INTRODUCTION: Stage III non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) management is challenging given the heterogeneous nature of the disease. The LATAM subset of the real-world, global KINDLE study reported the treatment patterns and clinical outcomes for LATAM from the pre-immuno-oncology era. METHODS: The study was conducted in seven countries (Argentina, Chile, Colombia, Dominican Republic, Mexico, Peru and Uruguay) in stage III NSCLC (American Joint Committee on Cancer, 7th edition) diagnosed between January 2013 and December 2017. Retrospective data from patients' medical records (index date to the end of follow-up) were collected. Summary statistics, Kaplan-Meier survival estimates and a two-sided 95% confidence interval (CI) were provided. Cox proportional hazard model was used for univariate and multi-variate analyses. RESULTS: A total of 231 patients was enrolled, the median age was 65.0 years (range 21.0-89.0), 60.6% were males, 76.6% had smoking history, 64.0% had adenocarcinoma and 28.7% underwent curative resection. Multiple treatment regimens (>25) were used; chemotherapy alone was the most common (24.8%). The overall median progression-free survival (mPFS) and median overall survival (mOS) were 14.8 months (95% CI, 12.1-18.6) and 48.6 months (95% CI, 34.7 to not calculable). Significantly better mPFS and mOS were observed for stage IIIA with curative surgery and resectable tumours and stage IIIB with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group score of 0/1, female gender, resectable tumours, adenocarcinoma and curative surgery (p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Results show diversity in treatment practices and the corresponding clinical outcomes in stage III NSCLC. There is a need to streamline treatment selection and sequencing to decrease relapse rates after initial therapy.

IMpower150 Final Exploratory Analyses for Atezolizumab Plus Bevacizumab and Chemotherapy in Key NSCLC Patient Subgroups With EGFR Mutations or Metastases in the Liver or Brain.

INTRODUCTION: Final overall survival (OS) analyses are presented for EGFR mutations and liver or brain metastases subgroups in the phase 3 IMpower150 study (NCT02366143) evaluating atezolizumab plus bevacizumab plus carboplatin and paclitaxel (ABCP) or atezolizumab plus carboplatin and paclitaxel (ACP) versus bevacizumab plus carboplatin and paclitaxel (BCP). METHODS: Overall, 1202 patients (intention-to-treat population) with chemotherapy-naive, metastatic, nonsquamous NSCLC were randomized to ABCP, ACP, or BCP. Patients with treated, stable brain metastases were permitted. OS was evaluated in EGFR mutations and baseline liver metastases subgroups; rate and time to development of new brain metastases were evaluated in the intention-to-treat patients. RESULTS: At data cutoff (September 13, 2019; median follow-up, 39.3 mo), OS improvements were sustained with ABCP versus BCP in sensitizing EGFR mutations (all: hazard ratio [HR] = 0.60; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.31-1.14; previous tyrosine kinase inhibitor [TKI]: HR = 0.74; 95% CI: 0.38-1.46) and baseline liver metastases (HR = 0.68; 95% CI: 0.45-1.02) subgroups. ACP did not have survival benefit versus BCP in sensitizing EGFR mutations (all: HR = 1.0; 95% CI: 0.57-1.74; previous TKI: HR = 1.22; 95% CI: 0.68-2.22) or liver metastases (HR = 1.01; 95% CI: 0.68-1.51) subgroups. Overall, 100 patients (8.3%) developed new brain metastases. Although not formally evaluated, an improvement toward delayed time to development was found with ABCP versus BCP (HR = 0.68; 95% CI: 0.39-1.19). CONCLUSIONS: This final exploratory analysis revealed OS benefits for ABCP versus BCP in patients with sensitizing EGFR mutations, including those with previous TKI failures, and with liver metastases, although these results should be interpreted with caution. The impact of ABCP on delaying the development of new brain lesions requires further investigation.

Real-world evaluation of molecular testing and treatment patterns for EGFR mutations in non-small cell lung cancer in Latin America.

Lung cancer is a leading cause of cancer-related deaths in Latin America, with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) being the most prevalent. The current study aimed to report real-world data on epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutational testing and treatment regimens at diagnosis and progression in patients with metastatic NSCLC across four Latin American countries (Argentina, Chile, Colombia and Uruguay). A retrospective, multicenter, observational study was conducted in patients with NSCLC using medical records from participating countries. The study population was categorized into two cohorts: Cohort 1 comprised of newly diagnosed, treatment-naïve patients with stage IV NSCLC; and cohort 2 comprised of stage IV NSCLC EGFR mutation (EGFRm)-positive patients who had progressed after first- or second-generation EGFR-tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) treatment. Measures included demographic variables, health characteristics, treatment regimen, molecular testing rate and turnaround time at diagnosis and at progression for cohorts 1 and 2, respectively. Descriptive statistics were used to summarize all study measures. Of the 462 patients enrolled, 431 were newly diagnosed or treatment naïve with metastatic NSCLC. In cohort 1, the majority of patients with private health insurance (57.31%) underwent molecular diagnosis while only 41.3% of patients within the public sector had access to testing. The average molecular testing rate in cohort 1 varied across countries, with Argentina having the highest testing rate (79%) and Uruguay the lowest (27.63%). EGFRm was observed in 22% of patients. Cohort 2 comprised 31 patients who had progressed after first- or second-generation EGFR-TKI treatment and of these, only 22 (70.97%) underwent testing after progression. Access to molecular testing is still a challenge impacting the choice of first-line treatment in Latin American patients with NSCLC. These findings underline the unmet needs of ensuring early diagnosis, molecular profiling and use of correct treatment to alleviate NSCLC burden in the region.

IMpower150 Final Overall Survival Analyses for Atezolizumab Plus Bevacizumab and Chemotherapy in First-Line Metastatic Nonsquamous NSCLC.

INTRODUCTION: We report the final overall survival (OS) analyses of atezolizumab-carboplatin-paclitaxel (ACP [experimental arm]) and OS data with approximately 39.8 months of median follow-up with atezolizumab-bevacizumab-carboplatin-paclitaxel (ABCP) versus bevacizumab-carboplatin-paclitaxel (BCP) in chemotherapy-naive patients with metastatic nonsquamous NSCLC in the phase 3 IMpower150 study (NCT02366143). METHODS: In this randomized, open-label study (N = 1202), coprimary end points included investigator-assessed progression-free survival and OS in intention-to-treat (ITT) wild-type (WT; no EGFR or ALK alterations) patients. Secondary and exploratory end points included OS in ITT and programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) subgroups defined by the VENTANA SP142 and SP263 immunohistochemistry assays. RESULTS: At the final analysis with ACP versus BCP (data cutoff: September 13, 2019; minimum follow-up: 32.4 mo), ACP had numerical, but not statistically significant, improvements in OS (ITT-WT: median OS = 19.0 versus 14.7 mo; hazard ratio = 0.84; 95% confidence interval: 0.71-1.00). OS benefit was sustained with ABCP versus BCP (ITT-WT: 19.5 versus 14.7 mo; hazard ratio = 0.80; 95% confidence interval: 0.67-0.95). Exploratory analyses in the SP142-defined PD-L1 subgroups revealed longer median OS with ABCP and ACP versus BCP in PD-L1-high and PD-L1-positive subgroups; in the PD-L1-negative subgroups, median OS was similar with ACP and ABCP versus BCP. Safety was consistent with that in earlier analyses (data cutoff: January 22, 2018). CONCLUSIONS: At the final IMpower150 OS analysis, ACP had numerical, but not statistically significant, OS improvement versus BCP. Updated data with an additional 20 months of follow-up revealed continued OS improvement with ABCP versus BCP in all patients.

Consensus for Treatment of Metastatic Castration-Sensitive Prostate Cancer: Report From the First Global Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference for Developing Countries (PCCCDC).

PURPOSE: International guideline recommendations may not always be extrapolated to developing countries where access to resources is limited. In metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer (mCSPC), there have been successful drug and imaging advancements that were addressed in the Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference for Developing Countries for best-practice and limited-resource scenarios. METHODS: A total of 24 out of 300 questions addressed staging, treatment, and follow-up for patients with mCSPC both in best-practice settings and resource-limited settings. Responses were compiled and presented in percentage of clinicians supporting each response. Questions had 4-8 options for response. RESULTS: Recommendations for staging in mCSPC were split but there was consensus that chest x-ray, abdominal and pelvic computed tomography, and bone scan should be used where resources are limited. In both de novo and relapsed low-volume mCSPC, orchiectomy alone in limited resources was favored and in relapsed high-volume disease, androgen deprivation therapy plus docetaxel in limited resources and androgen deprivation therapy plus abiraterone in high-resource settings were consensus. A 3-weekly regimen of docetaxel was consensus among voters. When using abiraterone, a regimen of 1,000 mg plus prednisone 5 mg/d is optimal, but in limited-resource settings, half the panel agreed that abiraterone 250 mg with fatty foods plus prednisone 5 mg/d is acceptable. The panel recommended against the use of osteoclast-targeted therapy to prevent osseous complications. There was consensus that monitoring of patients undergoing systemic treatment should only be conducted in case of prostate-specific antigen elevation or progression-suggestive symptoms. CONCLUSION: The treatment recommendations for most topics addressed differed between the best-practice setting and resource-limited setting, accentuating the need for high-quality evidence that contemplates the effect of limited resources on the management of mCSPC.

Consensus on Treatment and Follow-Up for Biochemical Recurrence in Castration-Sensitive Prostate Cancer: A Report From the First Global Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference for Developing Countries.

PURPOSE: To present a summary of the treatment and follow-up recommendations for the biochemical recurrence in castration-sensitive prostate cancer (PCa) acquired through a questionnaire administered to 99 PCa experts from developing countries during the Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference for Developing Countries. METHODS: A total of 27 questions were identified as related to this topic from more than 300 questions. The clinician's responses were tallied and presented in a percentage format. Topics included the use of imaging for staging biochemical recurrence, treatment recommendations for three different clinical scenarios, the field of radiation recommended, and follow-up. Each question had 5-7 relevant response options, including "abstain" and/or "unqualified to answer," and investigated not only recommendations but also if a limitation in resources would change the recommendation. RESULTS: For most questions, a clear majority (> 50%) of clinicians agreed on a recommended treatment for imaging, treatment scenarios, and follow-up, although only a few topics reached a consensus > 75%. Limited resources did affect several areas of treatment, although in many cases, they reinforced more stringent criteria for treatment such as prostate-specific antigen values > 0.2 ng/mL and STAMPEDE inclusion criteria as a basis for recommending treatment. CONCLUSION: A majority of clinicians working in developing countries with limited resources use similar cutoff points and selection criteria to manage patients treated for biochemically recurrent castration-sensitive PCa.

Updated Overall Survival and PD-L1 Subgroup Analysis of Patients With Extensive-Stage Small-Cell Lung Cancer Treated With Atezolizumab, Carboplatin, and Etoposide (IMpower133).

PURPOSE: IMpower133 (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02763579), a randomized, double-blind, phase I/III study, demonstrated that adding atezolizumab (anti-programmed death-ligand 1 [PD-L1]) to carboplatin plus etoposide (CP/ET) for first-line (1L) treatment of extensive-stage small-cell lung cancer (ES-SCLC) resulted in significant improvement in overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) versus placebo plus CP/ET. Updated OS, disease progression patterns, safety, and exploratory biomarkers (PD-L1, blood-based tumor mutational burden [bTMB]) are reported. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with untreated ES-SCLC were randomly assigned 1:1 to receive four 21-day cycles of CP (area under the curve 5 mg per mL/min intravenously [IV], day 1) plus ET (100 mg/m2 IV, days 1-3) with atezolizumab (1,200 mg IV, day 1) or placebo, and then maintenance atezolizumab or placebo until unacceptable toxicity, disease progression, or loss of clinical benefit. Tumor specimens were collected; PD-L1 testing was not required for enrollment. The two primary end points, investigator-assessed PFS and OS, were statistically significant at the interim analysis. Updated OS and PFS and exploratory biomarker analyses were conducted. RESULTS: Patients received atezolizumab plus CP/ET (n = 201) or placebo plus CP/ET (n = 202). At the updated analysis, median follow-up for OS was 22.9 months; 302 deaths had occurred. Median OS was 12.3 and 10.3 months with atezolizumab plus CP/ET and placebo plus CP/ET, respectively (hazard ratio, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.60 to 0.95; descriptive P = .0154). At 18 months, 34.0% and 21.0% of patients were alive in atezolizumab plus CP/ET and placebo plus CP/ET arms, respectively. Patients derived benefit from the addition of atezolizumab, regardless of PD-L1 immunohistochemistry or bTMB status. CONCLUSION: Adding atezolizumab to CP/ET as 1L treatment for ES-SCLC continued to demonstrate improved OS and a tolerable safety profile at the updated analysis, confirming the regimen as a new standard of care. Exploratory analyses demonstrated treatment benefit independent of biomarker status.

Pembrolizumab Plus Ipilimumab or Placebo for Metastatic Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer With PD-L1 Tumor Proportion Score ≥ 50%: Randomized, Double-Blind Phase III KEYNOTE-598 Study.

PURPOSE: Pembrolizumab monotherapy is standard first-line therapy for metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) with programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) tumor proportion score (TPS) ≥ 50% without actionable driver mutations. It is not known whether adding ipilimumab to pembrolizumab improves efficacy over pembrolizumab alone in this population. METHODS: In the randomized, double-blind, phase III KEYNOTE-598 trial (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03302234), eligible patients with previously untreated metastatic NSCLC with PD-L1 TPS ≥ 50% and no sensitizing EGFR or ALK aberrations were randomly allocated 1:1 to ipilimumab 1 mg/kg or placebo every 6 weeks for up to 18 doses; all participants received pembrolizumab 200 mg every 3 weeks for up to 35 doses. Primary end points were overall survival and progression-free survival. RESULTS: Of the 568 participants, 284 were randomly allocated to each group. Median overall survival was 21.4 months for pembrolizumab-ipilimumab versus 21.9 months for pembrolizumab-placebo (hazard ratio, 1.08; 95% CI, 0.85 to 1.37; P = .74). Median progression-free survival was 8.2 months for pembrolizumab-ipilimumab versus 8.4 months for pembrolizumab-placebo (hazard ratio, 1.06; 95% CI, 0.86 to 1.30; P = .72). Grade 3-5 adverse events occurred in 62.4% of pembrolizumab-ipilimumab recipients versus 50.2% of pembrolizumab-placebo recipients and led to death in 13.1% versus 7.5%. The external data and safety monitoring committee recommended that the study be stopped for futility and that participants discontinue ipilimumab and placebo. CONCLUSION: Adding ipilimumab to pembrolizumab does not improve efficacy and is associated with greater toxicity than pembrolizumab monotherapy as first-line treatment for metastatic NSCLC with PD-L1 TPS ≥ 50% and no targetable EGFR or ALK aberrations. These data do not support use of pembrolizumab-ipilimumab in place of pembrolizumab monotherapy in this population.

Atezolizumab Plus Chemotherapy for First-Line Treatment of Nonsquamous NSCLC: Results From the Randomized Phase 3 IMpower132 Trial.

INTRODUCTION: We report the final results of the phase 3 IMpower132 study evaluating atezolizumab plus carboplatin or cisplatin plus pemetrexed (APP) in patients with nonsquamous NSCLC. METHODS: Chemotherapy-naive patients with stage IV nonsquamous NSCLC without sensitizing EGFR or ALK genetic alterations were randomized in a one-to-one ratio to receive four or six cycles of carboplatin or cisplatin plus pemetrexed (PP) or APP every 3 weeks, followed by maintenance therapy with atezolizumab plus pemetrexed or pemetrexed alone. Co-primary end points were overall survival (OS) and investigator-assessed progression-free survival (PFS). RESULTS: The intention-to-treat population included 578 patients (APP, n = 292; PP, n = 286). At the primary PFS analysis (May 22, 2018; median follow-up, 14.8 mo), APP exhibited significant PFS improvement versus PP (median = 7.6 versus 5.2 mo, stratified hazard ratio [HR] = 0.60, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.49-0.72, p < 0.0001). OS for the APP group was numerically better but not statistically significant at the interim (May 22, 2018; median = 18.1 versus 13.6 mo, stratified HR = 0.81, 95% CI: 0.64-1.03, p = 0.0797) and final analyses (July 18, 2019; median = 17.5 versus 13.6 mo; stratified HR = 0.86, 95% CI: 0.71-1.06, p = 0.1546). The OS and PFS results favored APP versus PP across subgroups. Grade 3 or 4 treatment-related adverse events occurred in 54.6% (APP) and 40.1% (PP) of patients; grade 5 treatment-related events occurred in 3.8% and 2.9%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: IMpower132 met its co-primary PFS end point but not its co-primary OS end point, with numerical improvement for OS in the APP arm. APP had a manageable safety profile, with no new or unexpected safety signals identified.

Pembrolizumab or Placebo Plus Etoposide and Platinum as First-Line Therapy for Extensive-Stage Small-Cell Lung Cancer: Randomized, Double-Blind, Phase III KEYNOTE-604 Study.

PURPOSE: Pembrolizumab monotherapy has shown antitumor activity in patients with small-cell lung cancer (SCLC). The randomized, double-blind, phase III KEYNOTE-604 study compared pembrolizumab plus etoposide and platinum (EP) with placebo plus EP for patients with previously untreated extensive-stage (ES) SCLC. METHODS: Eligible patients were randomly assigned 1:1 to pembrolizumab 200 mg once every 3 weeks or saline placebo for up to 35 cycles plus 4 cycles of EP. Primary end points were progression-free survival (PFS; RECIST version 1.1, blinded central review) and overall survival (OS) in the intention-to-treat population. Objective response rate (ORR) and duration of response were secondary end points. Prespecified efficacy boundaries were one-sided P = .0048 for PFS and .0128 for OS. RESULTS: Of the 453 participants, 228 were randomly assigned to pembrolizumab plus EP and 225 to placebo plus EP. Pembrolizumab plus EP significantly improved PFS (hazard ratio [HR], 0.75; 95% CI, 0.61 to 0.91; P = .0023). Twelve-month PFS estimates were 13.6% with pembrolizumab plus EP and 3.1% with placebo plus EP. Although pembrolizumab plus EP prolonged OS, the significance threshold was not met (HR, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.64 to 0.98; P = .0164). Twenty-four-month OS estimates were 22.5% and 11.2%, respectively. ORR was 70.6% in the pembrolizumab plus EP group and 61.8% in the placebo plus EP group; the estimated proportion of responders remaining in response at 12 months was 19.3% and 3.3%, respectively. In the pembrolizumab plus EP and placebo plus EP groups, respectively, any-cause adverse events were grade 3-4 in 76.7% and 74.9%, grade 5 in 6.3% and 5.4%, and led to discontinuation of any drug in 14.8% and 6.3%. CONCLUSION: Pembrolizumab plus EP significantly improved PFS compared with placebo plus EP as first-line therapy for patients with ES-SCLC. No unexpected toxicities were seen with pembrolizumab plus EP. These data support the benefit of pembrolizumab in ES-SCLC.

Safety and Patient-Reported Outcomes of Atezolizumab Plus Chemotherapy With or Without Bevacizumab Versus Bevacizumab Plus Chemotherapy in Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer.

PURPOSE: Atezolizumab, bevacizumab, carboplatin, and paclitaxel (ABCP) demonstrated survival benefit versus bevacizumab, carboplatin, and paclitaxel (BCP) in chemotherapy-naïve nonsquamous non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). We present safety and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) to provide additional information on the relative impact of adding atezolizumab to chemotherapy with and without bevacizumab in nonsquamous NSCLC. METHODS: Patients were randomly assigned to receive atezolizumab, carboplatin, and paclitaxel (ACP), ABCP, or BCP. Coprimary end points were overall survival and investigator-assessed progression-free survival. The incidence, nature, and severity of adverse events (AEs) were assessed. PROs, a secondary end point, were evaluated using the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire (EORTC QLQ)-Core 30 and EORTC QLQ-Lung Cancer 13. RESULTS: Overall, 400 (ACP), 393 (ABCP), and 394 (BCP) patients were safety evaluable (ie, intention-to-treat population that received one or more doses of any study treatment). More patients had grade 3/4 treatment-related AEs during the induction versus maintenance phase (ACP, 40.5% v 8.2%; ABCP, 48.6% v 21.2%; BCP, 44.7% v 11.1%). During induction, the incidence of serious AEs (SAEs) was 28.3%, 28.5%, and 26.4% in the ACP, ABCP, and BCP arms, respectively. During maintenance, SAE incidences were 20.0%, 26.3%, and 13.0%, respectively. Completion rates of the PRO questionnaires were > 88% at baseline and remained ≥ 70% throughout most study visits. Across arms, patients on average reported no clinically meaningful worsening of global health status or physical functioning scores through cycle 13. Patients across arms rated common symptoms with chemotherapy and immunotherapy similarly. CONCLUSION: ABCP seems tolerable and manageable versus ACP and BCP in first-line nonsquamous NSCLC. Treatment tolerability differed between induction and maintenance phases across treatment arms. PROs reflect a minimal treatment burden (eg, health-related quality of life, symptoms) with each regimen.

Nintedanib in combination with pemetrexed and cisplatin for chemotherapy-naive patients with advanced malignant pleural mesothelioma (LUME-Meso): a double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Nintedanib targets VEGF receptors 1-3, PDGF receptors α and ß, FGF receptors 1-3, and Src and Abl kinases, which are all implicated in malignant pleural mesothelioma pathogenesis. Here, we report the final results of the phase 3 part of the LUME-Meso trial, which aimed to investigate the efficacy and safety of pemetrexed plus cisplatin combined with nintedanib or placebo in unresectable malignant pleural mesothelioma. METHODS: This double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled phase 3 trial was done at 120 academic medical centres and community clinics in 27 countries across the world. Chemotherapy-naive adults (aged ≥18 years) with unresectable epithelioid malignant pleural mesothelioma and ECOG performance status 0-1 were randomly assigned 1:1 via an independently verified random number-generating system to receive up to six 21-day cycles of pemetrexed (500 mg/m2) plus cisplatin (75 mg/m2) on day 1, then nintedanib (200 mg twice daily) or matched placebo on days 2-21. Patients without disease progression after six cycles received nintedanib or placebo maintenance on days 1-21 of each cycle. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (investigator-assessed according to mRECIST) in the intention-to-treat population. Safety was assessed in all patients who received at least one dose of their assigned study drug. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01907100. FINDINGS: Between April 14, 2016, and Jan 5, 2018, 541 patients were screened and 458 were randomly assigned to either the nintedanib group (n=229) or the placebo group (n=229). Median treatment duration was 5·3 months (IQR 2·8-7·3) in the nintedanib group and 5·1 months (2·7-7·8) in the placebo group. After 250 events, progression-free survival was not different between the nintedanib group (median 6·8 months [95% CI 6·1-7·0]) and the placebo group (7·0 months [6·7-7·2]; HR 1·01 [95% CI 0·79-1·30], p=0·91). The most frequently reported grade 3 or worse adverse event in both treatment groups was neutropenia (73 [32%] in the nintedanib group vs 54 [24%] in the placebo group). Serious adverse events were reported in 99 (44%) patients in the nintedanib group and 89 (39%) patients in the placebo group. The only serious adverse event occurring in at least 5% of patients in either group was pulmonary embolism (13 [6%] vs seven [3%]). INTERPRETATION: The primary progression-free survival endpoint of the phase 3 part of LUME-Meso was not met and phase 2 findings were not confirmed. No unexpected safety findings were reported. FUNDING: Boehringer Ingelheim.

Atezolizumab plus bevacizumab and chemotherapy in non-small-cell lung cancer (IMpower150): key subgroup analyses of patients with EGFR mutations or baseline liver metastases in a randomised, open-label phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: The IMpower150 trial showed significant improvements in progression-free and overall survival with atezolizumab plus bevacizumab plus carboplatin plus paclitaxel (ABCP) versus the standard-of-care bevacizumab plus carboplatin plus paclitaxel (BCP) in chemotherapy-naive patients with non-squamous non-small-cell lung cancer. Here, we report the efficacy of ABCP or atezolizumab plus carboplatin plus paclitaxel (ACP) versus BCP in key patient subgroups. METHODS: IMpower150 was a randomised, open-label, phase 3 study done at 240 academic medical centres and community oncology practices across 26 countries worldwide. Patients with chemotherapy-naive metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer were randomly assigned (1:1:1) to receive ABCP, ACP, or BCP every three weeks. The co-primary endpoints were overall survival and investigator-assessed progression-free survival in intention-to-treat wild-type patients (patients with epidermal growth factor receptor [EGFR] or anaplastic lymphoma kinase [ALK] genetic alterations were excluded). Efficacy was assessed in key subgroups within the intention-to-treat population, including patients with EGFR mutations (both sensitising and non-sensitising; EGFR-positive) previously treated with one or more tyrosine kinase inhibitors and patients with baseline liver metastases. Overall survival in the intention-to-treat population was included among secondary efficacy endpoints. Exploratory endpoints included the proportion of patients achieving an objective response in the intention-to-treat population, including EGFR-positive patients and patients with baseline liver metastases. Data are reported as per the Jan 22, 2018, data cutoff date, at which the number of coprimary prespecified overall survival events was met in the ABCP versus BCP groups. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02366143, and is ongoing. FINDINGS: Between March 31, 2015, and Dec 30, 2016, 1202 patients were enrolled. 400 patients were randomly assigned to ABCP, 402 to ACP, and 400 to BCP. In EGFR-positive patients (124 of 1202), median overall survival was not estimable (NE; 95% CI 17·0-NE) with ABCP (34 of 400) and 18·7 months (95% CI 13·4-NE) with BCP (45 of 400; hazard ratio [HR] 0·61 [95% CI 0·29-1·28]). Improved overall survival with ABCP versus BCP was observed in patients with sensitising EGFR mutations (median overall survival NE [95% CI NE-NE] with ABCP [26 of 400] vs 17·5 months [95% CI 11·7-NE] with BCP [32 of 400]; HR 0·31 [95% CI 0·11-0·83]) and in the intention-to-treat population (19·8 months [17·4-24·2] vs 14·9 months [13·4-17·1]; HR 0·76 [0·63-0·93]). Improved median overall survival with ABCP versus BCP was seen in patients with baseline liver metastases (13·3 months [11·6-NE] with ABCP [52 of 400] vs 9·4 months [7·9-11·7] with BCP [57 of 400]; HR 0·52 [0·33-0·82]). Median overall survival was 21·4 months (95% CI 13·8-NE) with ACP versus 18·7 months (95% CI 13·4-NE) with BCP in EGFR-positive patients (HR 0·93 [95% CI 0·51-1·68]). No overall survival benefit was seen with ACP versus BCP in patients with sensitising EGFR mutations (HR 0·90 [95% CI 0·47-1·74]), in the intention-to-treat population (HR 0·85 [0·71-1·03]), or in patients with baseline liver metastases (HR 0·87 [0·57-1·32]). In the intention-to-treat safety-evaluable population, grade 3-4 treatment-related events occurred in 223 (57%) patients in the ABCP group, in 172 (43%) in the ACP group, and in 191 (49%) in the BCP group; 11 (3%) grade 5 adverse events occurred in the ABCP group, as did four (1%) in the ACP group, and nine (2%) in the BCP group. INTERPRETATION: Improved survival was noted for patients treated with ABCP compared with those given BCP in the intention-to-treat population, and in patients with baseline liver metastases. The overall survival signal in the subgroup of patients with EGFR sensitising mutations warrants further study. FUNDING: F. Hoffmann-La Roche, Genentech.

Atezolizumab for First-Line Treatment of Metastatic Nonsquamous NSCLC.

BACKGROUND: The cancer-cell-killing property of atezolizumab may be enhanced by the blockade of vascular endothelial growth factor-mediated immunosuppression with bevacizumab. This open-label, phase 3 study evaluated atezolizumab plus bevacizumab plus chemotherapy in patients with metastatic nonsquamous non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) who had not previously received chemotherapy. METHODS: We randomly assigned patients to receive atezolizumab plus carboplatin plus paclitaxel (ACP), bevacizumab plus carboplatin plus paclitaxel (BCP), or atezolizumab plus BCP (ABCP) every 3 weeks for four or six cycles, followed by maintenance therapy with atezolizumab, bevacizumab, or both. The two primary end points were investigator-assessed progression-free survival both among patients in the intention-to-treat population who had a wild-type genotype (WT population; patients with EGFR or ALK genetic alterations were excluded) and among patients in the WT population who had high expression of an effector T-cell (Teff) gene signature in the tumor (Teff-high WT population) and overall survival in the WT population. The ABCP group was compared with the BCP group before the ACP group was compared with the BCP group. RESULTS: In the WT population, 356 patients were assigned to the ABCP group, and 336 to the BCP group. The median progression-free survival was longer in the ABCP group than in the BCP group (8.3 months vs. 6.8 months; hazard ratio for disease progression or death, 0.62; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.52 to 0.74; P<0.001); the corresponding values in the Teff-high WT population were 11.3 months and 6.8 months (hazard ratio, 0.51 [95% CI, 0.38 to 0.68]; P<0.001). Progression-free survival was also longer in the ABCP group than in the BCP group in the entire intention-to-treat population (including those with EGFR or ALK genetic alterations) and among patients with low or negative programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression, those with low Teff gene-signature expression, and those with liver metastases. Median overall survival among the patients in the WT population was longer in the ABCP group than in the BCP group (19.2 months vs. 14.7 months; hazard ratio for death, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.64 to 0.96; P=0.02). The safety profile of ABCP was consistent with previously reported safety risks of the individual medicines. CONCLUSIONS: The addition of atezolizumab to bevacizumab plus chemotherapy significantly improved progression-free survival and overall survival among patients with metastatic nonsquamous NSCLC, regardless of PD-L1 expression and EGFR or ALK genetic alteration status. (Funded by F. Hoffmann-La Roche/Genentech; IMpower150 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02366143 .).

Aflibercept versus placebo in combination with docetaxel and prednisone for treatment of men with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (VENICE): a phase 3, double-blind randomised trial.

BACKGROUND: Docetaxel plus prednisone is standard first-line chemotherapy for men with metastatic castrate-resistant prostate cancer. Aflibercept is a recombinant human fusion protein that binds A and B isoforms of VEGF and placental growth factor, thereby inhibiting angiogenesis. We assessed whether the addition of aflibercept to docetaxel and prednisone would improve overall survival in men with metastatic castrate-resistant prostate cancer compared with the addition of placebo to docetaxel and prednisone. METHODS: VENICE was a phase 3, multicentre, randomised double-blind placebo-controlled parallel group study done in 31 countries (187 sites). Men with metastatic castrate-resistant prostate cancer, adequate organ function, and no prior chemotherapy were treated with docetaxel (75 mg/m(2) intravenously every 3 weeks) and oral prednisone (5 mg twice daily) and randomly allocated (1:1) to receive aflibercept (6 mg/kg) or placebo, intravenously, every 3 weeks. Treatment allocation was done centrally via an interactive voice response system, using a computer-generated sequence with a permuted-block size of four and stratified according Eastern Co-operative Group performance status (0-1 vs 2). Patients, investigators, and other individuals responsible for study conduct and data analysis were masked to treatment assignment. Aflibercept or placebo vials were supplied in identical boxes. The primary endpoint was overall survival using intention-to-treat analysis. This is the primary analysis of the completed trial. The study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00519285 FINDINGS: Between Aug 17, 2007, and Feb 11, 2010, 1224 men were randomly allocated to treatment: 612 to each group. At final analysis, median follow-up was 35 months (IQR 29-41) and 873 men had died. Median overall survival was 22·1 months (95·6% CI 20·3-24·1) in the aflibercept group and 21·2 months (19·6-23·8) in the placebo group (stratified hazard ratio 0·94, 95·6% CI 0·82-1·08; p=0·38). We recorded a higher incidence of grade 3-4 gastrointestinal disorders (182 [30%] vs 48 [8·0%]), haemorrhagic events (32 [5·2%] vs ten [1·7%]), hypertension (81 [13%] vs 20 [3·3%]), fatigue (97 [16%] vs 46 [7·7%]), infections (123 [20%] vs 60 [10%]) and treatment-related fatal adverse events (21 [3·4%] vs nine [1·5%]) in the aflibercept group than in the placebo group. INTERPRETATION: Aflibercept in combination with docetaxel and prednisone given as first-line chemotherapy for men with metastatic castrate-resistant prostate cancer resulted in no improvement in overall survival and added toxicity compared with placebo. Docetaxel plus prednisone remains the standard treatment for such men who need first-line chemotherapy. FUNDING: Sanofi and Regeneron Pharmaceuticals Inc.

Breast cancer in Latin America: results of the Latin American and Caribbean Society of Medical Oncology/Breast Cancer Research Foundation expert survey.

The incidence of breast cancer in Latin American countries is lower than that in more developed countries, whereas the mortality rate is higher. These differences probably are related to differences in screening strategies and access to treatment. Population-based data are needed to make informed decisions. A 65-question telephone survey that included 100 breast cancer experts from 12 Latin American countries was conducted in 2006 as an exploratory analysis of the current state of breast cancer treatment in these regions at both at the country level and at the center level. Greater than 90% of countries had no national law or guideline for mammography screening. The access rate to mammography was 66.3% at the country level and 47% at the center level. Variation in care based on level (country vs center) was indicated for the timing of treatment after diagnosis, timing from initial diagnosis to treatment, and the time from surgery to initial chemotherapy. However, the more sophisticated diagnostic testing for hormone receptors and biomarkers were available at most centers (>80%), and, overall, nearly 80% of patients started treatment within 3 months of diagnosis. Variation in care between breast cancer care at the center level versus the country level indicated a need for national cancer care programs. Alternative data collection strategies for understanding the state of breast cancer control programs in developing countries can help identify areas of improvement.

Cáncer testicular: en busca del tratamiento óptimo / Testicular cancer: in search of the best treatment

El cáncer testicular es una enfermedad infrecuente, pero sin embargo es una de las primeras causas de muertes en pacientes de 20-35 años. Actualmente existen clasificaciones que permiten identificar grupos de pacientes con riesgos diferentes. Más de 80 por ciento de los pacientes son suceptibles de ser curados definitivamente, con bajo riesgo de secuelas, si las diferentes formas de tratamiento quirúrgico, de radio y quimioterapia se aplican adecuadamente. La quimioterapia basada en cis-platino es el componente fundamental en los tratamientos de la enfermedad en sus etapas diseminadas y su empleo debe estar en manos de especialistas, en centros adecuados. En nuestro país más que un problema de resolución individual, debería ser considerado como un problema a solucionar por la sociedad, proporcionando los medios que faciliten a todos los pacientes terapia en centros especializados