Adapted EXTREME regimen in the first-line treatment of fit, older patients with recurrent or metastatic head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (ELAN-FIT): a multicentre, single-arm, phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: A standard treatment for fit, older patients with recurrent or metastatic head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) is yet to be established. In the previous EXTREME trial, few older patients were included. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy and tolerance of an adapted EXTREME regimen in fit, older patients with recurrent or metastatic HNSCC. METHODS: This single-arm, phase 2 study was done at 22 centres in France. Eligible patients were aged 70 years or older and assessed as not frail (fit) using the ELAN Geriatric Evaluation (EGE) and had recurrent or metastatic HNSCC in the first-line setting that was not eligible for local therapy (surgery or radiotherapy), and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-1. The adapted EXTREME regimen consisted of six cycles of fluorouracil 4000 mg/m2 on days 1-4, carboplatin with an area under the curve of 5 on day 1, and cetuximab on days 1, 8, and 15 (400 mg/m2 on cycle 1-day 1, and 250 mg/m2 subsequently), all intravenously, with cycles starting every 21 days. In patients with disease control after two to six cycles, cetuximab 500 mg/m2 was continued once every 2 weeks as maintenance therapy until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Granulocyte colony-stimulating factor was systematically administered and erythropoietin was recommended during chemotherapy. The study was based on the two-stage Bryant and Day design, combining efficacy and toxicity endpoints. The primary efficacy endpoint was objective response rate at week 12 after the start of treatment, assessed by central review (with an unacceptable rate of ≤15%). The primary toxicity endpoint was morbidity, defined as grade 4-5 adverse events, or cutaneous rash (grade ≥3) that required cetuximab to be discontinued, during the chemotherapy phase, or a decrease in functional autonomy (Activities of Daily Living score decrease ≥2 points from baseline) at 1 month after the end of chemotherapy (with an unacceptable morbidity rate of >40%). Analysis of the coprimary endpoints, and of safety in the chemotherapy phase, was based on the per-protocol population, defined as eligible patients who received at least one cycle of the adapted EXTREME regimen. Safety in the maintenance phase was assessed in all patients who received at least one dose of cetuximab as maintenance therapy. The study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01864772, and is completed. FINDINGS: Between Sept 27, 2013, and June 20, 2018, 85 patients were enrolled, of whom 78 were in the per-protocol population. 66 (85%) patients were male and 12 (15%) were female, and the median age was 75 years (IQR 72-79). The median number of chemotherapy cycles received was five (IQR 3-6). Objective response at week 12 was observed in 31 patients (40% [95% CI 30-51]) and morbidity events were observed in 24 patients (31% [22-42]). No fatal adverse events occurred. Four patients presented with a decrease in functional autonomy 1 month after the end of chemotherapy versus baseline. During chemotherapy, the most common grade 3-4 adverse events were haematological events (leukopenia [22 patients; 28%], neutropenia [20; 26%], thrombocytopenia [15; 19%], and anaemia [12; 15%]), oral mucositis (14; 18%), fatigue (11; 14%), rash acneiform (ten; 13%), and hypomagnesaemia (nine; 12%). Among 44 patients who received cetuximab during the maintenance phase, the most common grade 3-4 adverse events were hypomagnesaemia (six patients; 14%) and acneiform rash (six; 14%). INTERPRETATION: The study met its primary objectives on objective response and morbidity, and showed overall survival to be as good as in younger patients treated with standard regimens, indicating that the adapted EXTREME regimen could be used in older patients with recurrent or metastatic HNSCC who are deemed fit with use of a geriatric evaluation tool adapted to patients with head and neck cancer, such as the EGE. FUNDING: French programme PAIR-VADS 2011 (sponsored by the National Cancer Institute, the Fondation ARC, and the Ligue Contre le Cancer), Sandoz, GEFLUC, and GEMLUC. TRANSLATION: For the French translation of the abstract see Supplementary Materials section.

PD-L1 expression and its prognostic value in metastatic papillary renal cell carcinoma: Results from a GETUG multicenter retrospective cohort.

INTRODUCTION: Papillary renal cell carcinoma (pRCC) is a rare and aggressive cancer with no specifically established therapeutic strategy in the metastatic setting. Combinations of tyrosine kinase and immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) are a promising option. We aimed to study the immune landscape of metastatic pRCC, and its interactions with angiogenesis pathways, to search for potential therapeutic targets. METHODS: The expression of immune markers (PD-L1, PD-1, PD-L2, LAG-3) and angiogenic pathways (CAIX, c-MET), was analyzed by immunohistochemistry on 68 metastatic pRCC retrieved from a retrospective multicenter GETUG cohort. Our primary endpoint was to estimate the prevalence of PD-L1 expression and its prognostic impact in metastatic pRCC. Secondary endpoints included the evaluation of other immune markers (PD-1, PD-L2, and LAG-3) and their association with PD-L1. We also assessed angiogenic markers and their association with PD-L1. RESULTS: Overall, 27.9 % of tumors were PD-L1 positive. PD-L2 was more frequently expressed (45.6 %), PD-1 and LAG-3 were positive in 17.6 % and 19.1 % respectively. None of these markers was correlated with PD-L1 expression. 66 % (45/68) expressed at least one immune marker, and 43 % (29/68) were "double-positive", as they expressed both immune and angiogenic markers. OS was significantly shorter for patients with PD-L1 positive pRCC. A multivariate analysis confirmed a significant association between PD-L1 expression and shorter overall survival (HR = 4.0, p = 0.01). CONCLUSION: These results reinforce clinical data on the expected benefit of ICI in metastatic pRCC treatment, as PD-L1 expression is a factor of poor prognosis in this multicenter cohort.

Safety and efficacy of nivolumab in elderly patients with metastatic clear cell renal cell carcinoma: Analysis of the NIVOREN GETUG-AFU 26 study.

INTRODUCTION: Immune checkpoint inhibitors are standard of care in metastatic renal cell carcinoma but their activity and safety in elderly patients is insufficiently explored. We evaluated outcomes of elderly patients with mRCC treated with nivolumab in the GETUG-AFU 26 NIVOREN phase 2 trial (NCT03013335) and conducted exploratory circulating biomarker analyses. METHODS: Patients with mRCC were treated with nivolumab after at least one antiangiogenic therapy. The main endpoint of this analysis was safety in patients ≥ 70 years old (y.o), as per the rate of treatment-related grade 3-5 events (TRAE). Secondary endpoints included overall response rate (ORR), progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival. Exploration of candidate biomarkers associated with aging included baseline circulating cytokines involved in inflammation, adhesion, immune checkpoints, angiogenesis (IL6, IL7, IL8, BAFF, CXCL13, VCAM-1, 4-1BB, VEGF). RESULTS: Of 720 patients, 515 were < 70 y.o and 205 ≥ 70 y.o. Patients ≥ 70 y.o exhibited numerically less IMDC poor risk disease (21.0% vs 26.9%), sarcomatoid component (4.9% vs 9.8%) or brain metastases (5.9% vs. 14.7%), but more previous treatment lines (≥ 2 in 54.1% vs 48.5%). TRAE were higher in patients ≥ 70 y.o (24.9% vs. 17.9%, p = 0.033). Respective ORR (19.2% vs. 22.1%) and median PFS (4.5 versus 3.0 months, HR 0.97 [95%CI 0.81-1.15]) were similar. Overall survival was shorter in patients ≥ 70 y.o (19.3 versus 26.9 months, HR 1.26 [95%CI 1.04-1.51]), but not significantly in a competitive risk model. Only V-CAM1 and 4-1BB were found to be increased in patients ≥ 70 y.o. CONCLUSIONS: Nivolumab displayed higher grade 3/4 TRAE but manageable toxicity in elderly patients, with sustained activity. Elderly patients did not display specific inflammatory or angiogenic circulating profiles.

A phase 2, multicenter, open-label study of anti-LAG-3 ieramilimab in combination with anti-PD-1 spartalizumab in patients with advanced solid malignancies.

Ieramilimab, a humanized anti-LAG-3 monoclonal antibody, was well tolerated in combination with the anti-PD-1 antibody spartalizumab in a phase 1 study. This phase 2 study aimed to further investigate the efficacy and safety of combination treatment in patients with selected advanced (locally advanced or metastatic) solid malignancies. Eligible patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), melanoma, renal cell carcinoma (RCC), mesothelioma, and triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) were grouped depending on prior anti-PD-1/L1 therapy (anti-PD-1/L1 naive or anti-PD-1/L1 pretreated). Patients received ieramilimab (400 mg) followed by spartalizumab (300 mg) every 3 weeks. The primary endpoint was objective response rate (ORR), along with safety, pharmacokinetics, and biomarker assessments. Of 235 patients, 142 were naive to anti-PD-1/L1 and 93 were pretreated with anti-PD-1/L1 antibodies. Durable responses (>24 months) were seen across all indications for patients naive to anti-PD-1/L1 and in melanoma and RCC patients pretreated with anti-PD1/L1. The most frequent study drug-related AEs were pruritus (15.5%), fatigue (10.6%), and rash (10.6%) in patients naive to anti-PD-1/L1 and fatigue (18.3%), rash (14.0%), and nausea (10.8%) in anti-PD-1/L1 pretreated patients. Biomarker assessment indicated higher expression of T-cell-inflamed gene signature at baseline among responding patients. Response to treatment was durable (>24 months) in some patients across all enrolled indications, and safety findings were in accordance with previous and current studies exploring LAG-3/PD-1 blockade.

Randomized phase II study of preoperative afatinib in untreated head and neck cancers: predictive and pharmacodynamic biomarkers of activity.

There is no strong and reliable predictive biomarker in head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) for EGFR inhibitors. We aimed to identify predictive and pharmacodynamic biomarkers of efficacy of afatinib, a pan-HER tyrosine kinase inhibitor, in a window-of-opportunity trial (NCT01415674). Multi-omics analyses were carried out on pre-treatment biopsy and surgical specimen for biological assessment of afatinib activity. Sixty-one treatment-naïve and operable HNSCC patients were randomised to afatinib 40 mg/day for 21-28 days versus no treatment. Afatinib produced a high rate of metabolic response. Responders had a higher expression of pERK1/2 (P = 0.02) and lower expressions of pHER4 (P = 0.03) and pRB1 (P = 0.002) in pre-treatment biopsy compared to non-responders. At the cellular level, responders displayed an enrichment of tumor-infiltrating B cells under afatinib (P = 0.02). At the molecular level, NF-kappa B signaling was over-represented among upregulated genes in non-responders (P < 0.001; FDR = 0.01). Although exploratory, phosphoproteomics-based biomarkers deserve further investigations as predictors of afatinib efficacy.

Comprehensive analyses of immune tumor microenvironment in papillary renal cell carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Papillary renal cell carcinoma (pRCC) is the most common non-clear cell RCC, and associated with poor outcomes in the metastatic setting. In this study, we aimed to comprehensively evaluate the immune tumor microenvironment (TME), largely unknown, of patients with metastatic pRCC and identify potential therapeutic targets. METHODS: We performed quantitative gene expression analysis of TME using Microenvironment Cell Populations-counter (MCP-counter) methodology, on two independent cohorts of localized pRCC (n=271 and n=98). We then characterized the TME, using immunohistochemistry (n=38) and RNA-sequencing (RNA-seq) (n=30) on metastatic pRCC from the prospective AXIPAP trial cohort. RESULTS: Unsupervised clustering identified two "TME subtypes", in each of the cohorts: the "immune-enriched" and the "immune-low". Within AXIPAP trial cohort, the "immune-enriched" cluster was significantly associated with a worse prognosis according to the median overall survival to 8 months (95% CI, 6 to 29) versus 37 months (95% CI, 20 to NA, p=0.001). The two immune signatures, Teff and JAVELIN Renal 101 Immuno signature, predictive of response to immune checkpoint inhibitors (CPI) in clear cell RCC, were significantly higher in the "immune-enriched" group (adjusted p<0.05). Finally, five differentially overexpressed genes were identified, corresponding mainly to B lymphocyte populations. CONCLUSION: For the first time, using RNA-seq and immunohistochemistry, we have highlighted a specific immune TME subtype of metastatic pRCC, significantly more infiltrated with T and B immune population. This "immune-enriched" group appears to have a worse prognosis and could have a potential predictive value for response to immunotherapy, justifying the confirmation of these results in a cohort of metastatic pRCC treated with CPI and in combination with targeted therapies. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02489695.

Adrenal Metastases Are Associated with Poor Outcomes in Patients with Metastatic Clear Cell Renal Cell Carcinoma Treated with Nivolumab in the GETUG-AFU-26 NIVOREN Phase 2 Trial.

BACKGROUND: Glandular metastases (GMs; adrenal gland, pancreas, thyroid, ovary, breast, or prostate) are rare in metastatic clear cell renal cell carcinoma (mccRCC). Previous studies have indicated that GM patients treated with antiangiogenic therapy experience significantly longer overall survival (OS). OBJECTIVES: To assess outcomes for mccRCC with or without GMs treated with nivolumab. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: The GETUG-AFU-26 NIVOREN phase 2 trial evaluated the activity and safety of nivolumab in patients with mccRCC who experienced failure of antiangiogenic therapies (NCT03013335). In this ancillary study, patients were divided into two groups according to the presence or absence of at least one GM. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: The primary outcome was OS; secondary outcomes were progression-free survival (PFS) and the objective response rate (ORR). Survival was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Univariate and multivariable Cox regression models are used to estimate the hazard ratio (HR) with 95% confidence interval (CI) for survival outcomes. Subgroup analyses were performed for patients with pancreatic metastases and patients with adrenal metastases. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: Among 720 patients treated with nivolumab between February 2016 and July 2017, 217 had GMs, of whom 151/217 had adrenal metastases and 86/217 had pancreatic metastasis. Patients with adrenal metastases had worse 12-mo OS (64% vs 71.1%) and 6-mo PFS (27.2% vs 36.6%) and a lower objective response rate (12.5%, 95% CI 7.6%-19.0%, vs 23.2%, 95% CI 19.8-27.0%; p = 0.005) than patients without adrenal metastases. Conversely, univariate analysis showed that patients with pancreatic metastases had significantly better 12-mo OS (82.3% vs 67.9%; HR 0.59, 95% CI 0.40-0.85) in comparison to patients with nonpancreatic GMs. On multivariable analysis, only adrenal metastasis remained associated with adverse prognosis. CONCLUSIONS: Adrenal metastasis is an independent prognostic factor for poor response and survival in the GETUG-AFU-26 NIVOREN trial. Limited activity with nivolumab was observed for patients with mccRCC with adrenal metastases. These results warrant an evaluation of the prognostic value of adrenal metastases in patients treated with immunotherapy combinations with ipilimumab or tyrosine kinase inhibitors. PATIENT SUMMARY: Our study showed that metastasis in the adrenal glands could be an independent factor associated with poor response to immunotherapy and survival for patients with metastatic kidney cancer. It would be useful to evaluate the prognostic value of adrenal gland metastasis in patients treated with immunotherapy combinations or immunotherapy agents combined with drugs called tyrosine kinase inhibitors.

Phase Ib/II trial of tipapkinogene sovacivec, a therapeutic human papillomavirus16-vaccine, in combination with avelumab in patients with advanced human papillomavirus16-positive cancers.

PURPOSE: To evaluate tipapkinogene sovacivec (TG4001), a viral immunotherapeutic vaccine expressing human papillomavirus (HPV)16 E6/E7 non-oncogenic proteins and IL-2, in combination with avelumab in HPV16+ cancer patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In this open-label, phase Ib/II, multicenter study, HPV16+ advanced cancer patients received subcutaneous TG4001 at two dose levels (DL) in phase Ib and at the recommended phase II dose (RP2D) in phase II weekly for 6 weeks, then every 2 weeks (q2Wk) until 6 months, thereafter every 12 weeks, in combination with avelumab q2Wk starting from day 8. Exploratory end-points included immunomonitoring from sequential tumour and blood samples. RESULTS: Forty-three patients, mainly heavily pretreated (88% ≥ 1 previous line), were included in the safety analysis, with a majority of anal cancer (44%). No dose-limiting toxicities were reported, and DL2 (5 × 107 Plaque forming units (PFU)) was selected as the RP2D. Treatment-related adverse events to TG4001 occurred in 93% of patients, mostly grade 1/2, with grade 3 anaemia in one patient and no grade 4/5. Overall response rate (ORR) was 22% (8/36) and 32% (8/25) in all and patients without liver metastases, respectively. Median progression-free survival (PFS) and Overall Survival (OS) were 2.8 months (95% CI: 1.4-5.6) and 11.0 months (95% CI:7.5-16.7) in the total population and 5.6 months (95% CI:1.6-9.6) and 13.3 months (95% CI:8.7-32.7) in patients without liver metastases. Antigen-specific T-cell response was identified in 7/11 patients by IFNγ ELISpot. CONCLUSIONS: TG4001 in combination with avelumab is safe, demonstrated antitumour activity in heavily pre-treated HPV16+ cancer patients, and is currently being evaluated in a randomised phase II trial in patients with incurable anogenital cancer and limited hepatic involvement. GOV IDENTIFIER: NCT03260023.

Very Long-Term Complete Remission Can Be Achieved in Men With High-Risk Localized Prostate Cancer and a Very High PSA Value: An Analysis of the GETUG 12 Phase 3 Trial.

INTRODUCTION: Serum prostate specific antigen (PSA) is a well-known prognostic parameter in men with prostate cancer. The treatment of men with very high PSA values and apparently no detectable metastases is not fully established. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Ancillary analysis from the GETUG 12 phase 3 trial. Patients with non-metastatic high-risk prostate cancer by bone and computerized tomography (CT) scan were randomly assigned to receive androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) and docetaxel plus estramustine or ADT alone. Relapse-free survival (RFS), clinical RFS, metastases-free survival (MFS), overall survival (OS), and prostate cancer-specific survival (PCSS) were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method for different levels of PSA (50 ng/mL, 75 ng/mL, and 100 ng/mL). The relationship between PSA and outcomes was studied using residual-based approaches and spline functions. RESULTS: The median follow-up was 12 years (range: 0-15.3). Baseline PSA (<50 ng/mL, n = 328; ≥50ng/mL, n = 85) was associated with improved RFS (P = .0005), cRFS (P = .0024), and MFS (P = .0068). The 12-year RFS rate was 46.33% (CI 40.59-51.86), 33.59% (CI 22.55-44.97), and 11.76% (1.96-31.20) in men with PSA values <50 ng/mL (n = 328), 50-100 ng/mL (n = 68), and ≥100 ng/mL (n = 17), respectively. Exploratory analyses revealed no deviation from the linear relationship assumption between PSA and the log hazard of events. CONCLUSIONS: Men with apparently localized prostate cancer and a high baseline PSA value have a reasonable chance of being long-term disease-free when treated with curative intent combining systemic and local therapy.

Gemcitabine plus platinum-based chemotherapy in combination with bevacizumab for kidney metastatic collecting duct and medullary carcinomas: Results of a prospective phase II trial (BEVABEL-GETUG/AFU24).

BACKGROUND: Renal medullary carcinoma (RMC) and collecting duct carcinoma (CDC) are rare entities with a poor outcome. First-line metastatic treatment is based on gemcitabine + platinum chemotherapy (GC) regimen but retrospective data suggest enhanced anti-tumour activity with the addition of bevacizumab. Therefore, we performed a prospective assessment of the safety and efficacy of GC + bevacizumab in metastatic RMC/CDC. METHODS: We conducted a phase 2 open-label trial in 18 centres in France in patients with metastatic RMC/CDC and no prior systemic treatment. Patients received bevacizumab plus GC up to 6 cycles followed, for non-progressive disease, by maintenance therapy with bevacizumab until progression or unacceptable toxicity. The co-primary end-points were objective response rates (ORRs) and progression-free survival (PFS) at 6 months (ORR-6; PFS-6). PFS, overall survival (OS) and safety were secondary end-points. At interim analysis, the trial was closed due to toxicity and lack of efficacy. RESULTS: From 2015 to 2019, 34 of the 41 planned patients have been enroled. After a median follow-up of 25 months, ORR-6 and PFS-6 were 29.4% and 47.1%, respectively. Median OS was 11.1 months (95% confidence interval [CI]: 7.6-24.2). Seven patients (20.6%) discontinued bevacizumab because of toxicities (hypertension, proteinuria, colonic perforation). Grade 3-4 toxicities were reported in 82% patients, the most common being haematologic toxicities and hypertension. Two patients experienced grade 5 toxicity (subdural haematoma related to bevacizumab and encephalopathy of unknown origin). CONCLUSION: Our study showed no benefit for bevacizumab added to chemotherapy in metastatic RMC and CDC with higher than expected toxicity. Consequently, GC regimen remains a therapeutic option for RMC/CDC patients.

Extended follow-up of a phase 2 trial of xevinapant plus chemoradiotherapy in high-risk locally advanced squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck: a randomised clinical trial.

INTRODUCTION: We report long-term efficacy and overall survival (OS) results from a randomised, double-blind, phase 2 study (NCT02022098) investigating xevinapant plus standard-of-care chemoradiotherapy (CRT) vs. placebo plus CRT in 96 patients with unresected locally advanced squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (LA SCCHN). METHODS: Patients were randomised 1:1 to xevinapant 200 mg/day (days 1-14 of a 21-day cycle for 3 cycles), or matched placebo, plus CRT (cisplatin 100 mg/m2 every 3 weeks for 3 cycles plus conventional fractionated high-dose intensity-modulated radiotherapy [70 Gy/35 F, 2 Gy/F, 5 days/week for 7 weeks]). Locoregional control, progression-free survival, and duration of response after 3 years, long-term safety, and 5-year OS were assessed. RESULTS: The risk of locoregional failure was reduced by 54% for xevinapant plus CRT vs. placebo plus CRT but did not reach statistical significance (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 0.46; 95% CI, 0.19-1.13; P = .0893). The risk of death or disease progression was reduced by 67% for xevinapant plus CRT (adjusted HR 0.33; 95% CI, 0.17-0.67; P = .0019). The risk of death was approximately halved in the xevinapant arm compared with placebo (adjusted HR 0.47; 95% CI, 0.27-0.84; P = .0101). OS was prolonged with xevinapant plus CRT vs. placebo plus CRT; median OS not reached (95% CI, 40.3-not evaluable) vs. 36.1 months (95% CI, 21.8-46.7). Incidence of late-onset grade ≥3 toxicities was similar across arms. CONCLUSIONS: In this randomised phase 2 study of 96 patients, xevinapant plus CRT demonstrated superior efficacy benefits, including markedly improved 5-year survival in patients with unresected LA SCCHN.

Geriatric Assessment Implementation before Chemotherapy in MEtastatic Prostate Cancer, Results from the Real-Life Study GAMERS.

Geriatric assessment (GA) can predict and improve treatment tolerance and estimate overall survival in older patients with cancer. Several international organizations promote GA; however, data related to its implementation in daily clinical practice are still limited. We aimed to describe GA implementation in patients over 75 years old with metastatic prostate cancer treated with docetaxel as first-line treatment, and with positive G8 screening test or frailty criteria. This retrospective real-world study included 224 patients treated from 2014 to 2021 in four French centers, including 131 patients with a theoretical indication of GA. Among the latter, 51 (38.9%) patients had GA. The main barriers to GA were the lack of systematic screening (32/80, 40.0%), unavailability of geriatric physician (20/80, 25.0%), and absence of referral despite a positive screening test (12/80, 15.0%). With GA performed in only one-third of the patients with a theoretical indication in daily clinical practice, mostly due to an absence of screening test, the use of GA is currently sub-optimal.

Survival by Depth of Response and Efficacy by International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium Subgroup with Lenvatinib Plus Pembrolizumab Versus Sunitinib in Advanced Renal Cell Carcinoma: Analysis of the Phase 3 Randomized CLEAR Study.

BACKGROUND: The extent of tumor shrinkage has been deemed a predictor of survival for advanced/metastatic renal cell carcinoma (RCC), a disease with historically poor survival. OBJECTIVE: To perform an exploratory analysis of overall survival (OS) by tumor response by 6 mo, and to assess the efficacy and survival outcomes in specific subgroups. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: CLEAR was an open-label, multicenter, randomized, phase 3 trial of first-line treatment of advanced clear cell RCC. INTERVENTION: Patients were randomized 1:1:1 to lenvatinib 20 mg orally daily with pembrolizumab 200 mg intravenously once every 3 wk, lenvatinib plus everolimus (not included in this analysis), or sunitinib 50 mg orally daily for 4 wk on treatment/2 wk of no treatment. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Landmark analyses were conducted to assess the association of OS with tumor shrinkage and progressive disease status by 6 mo. Progression-free survival, duration of response, and objective response rate (ORR) were analyzed by the International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium (IMDC) risk subgroup and by the presence of target kidney lesions. Efficacy was assessed by an independent review committee as per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: Landmark analyses by tumor shrinkage showed that patients enrolled to lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab arm with a confirmed complete response or >75% target-lesion reduction by 6 mo had a 24-mo OS probability of ≥91.7%. A landmark analysis by disease progression showed that patients with no progression by 6 mo had lower probabilities of death in both arms. Patients with an IMDC risk classification of intermediate/poor had longer median progression-free survival (22.1 vs 5.9 mo) and a higher ORR (72.4% vs 28.8%) with lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab versus sunitinib. Similarly, results favored lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab in IMDC-favorable patients and those with/without target kidney lesions. Limitations of the study are that results were exploratory and not powered/stratified. CONCLUSIONS: Lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab showed improved efficacy versus sunitinib for patients with advanced RCC; landmark analyses showed that tumor response by 6 mo correlated with longer OS. PATIENT SUMMARY: In this report of the CLEAR trial, we explored the survival of patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma by assessing how well they initially responded to treatment. We also explored how certain groups of patients responded to treatment overall. Patients were assigned to cycles of either lenvatinib 20 mg daily plus pembrolizumab 200 mg every 3 wk or sunitinib 50 mg daily for 4 wk (followed by a 2-wk break). Patients who either had a "complete response" or had their tumors shrunk by >75% within 6 mo after starting treatment with lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab had better survival than those with less tumor reduction by 6 mo. Additionally, patients who had more severe disease (as per the International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium) at the start of study treatment survived for longer without disease progression with lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab than with sunitinib.

Afatinib maintenance therapy following post-operative radiochemotherapy in head and neck squamous cell carcinoma: Results from the phase III randomised double-blind placebo-controlled study BIB2992ORL (GORTEC 2010-02).

OBJECTIVE: We investigated the efficacy and safety of afatinib maintenance therapy in patients with head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) with macroscopically complete resection and adjuvant radiochemotherapy (RCT). METHODS: This French multicentric randomised phase III double-blind placebo-controlled study included adult patients with ECOG-PS≤2, normal haematological, hepatic and renal functions, and non-metastatic, histologically confirmed HNSCC of the oral cavity, oropharynx, larynx or hypopharynx, with macroscopically complete resection and adjuvant RCT (≥2 cycles of cisplatin 100 mg/m2 J1, J22, J43 and 66Gy (2Gy/fraction, 5 fractions/week, conventional or intensity modulated radiotherapy ≥60Gy). Randomised patients were planned to receive either afatinib (afa arm) or placebo (control arm (C)) as maintenance therapy for one year. Primary endpoint was disease free survival (DFS). A 15% improvement in DFS was expected at 2 years with afatinib (from 55 to 70%). RESULTS: Among the 167 patients with resected HNSCC included in 19 cancer centres and hospitals from Dec 2011, 134 patients were randomised to receive one-year maintenance afatinib or placebo (afa:67; C:67). Benefit/risk ratio was below assumptions and independent advisory committee recommended to stop the study in Feb 2017, the sponsor decided premature study discontinuation, with a 2-year follow-up for the last randomised patient. 2y-DFS was 61% (95% CI 0.48-0.72) in the afatinib group and 64% (95% CI 0.51-0.74) in the placebo group (HR 1.12, 95% CI 0.70-1.80). CONCLUSION: Maintenance therapy with afatinib compared with placebo following post-operative RCT in patients with HNSCC did not significantly improve 2y-DFS and should not be recommended in this setting outside clinical trials. CLINICALTRIALS: gov identifier NCT01427478.

Chemotherapy following immune checkpoint inhibitors in patients with locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Recent studies suggest improvements in response to salvage chemotherapy (CT) after immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) in several types of cancer. Our objective was to assess the efficacy of chemotherapy re-challenge after ICI, compared with second-line chemotherapy without previous ICI in patients with locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma (la/mUC). METHODS: In this multicentre retrospective study, we included all patients with la/mUC initiating second or third-line chemotherapy from January 2015 to June 2020. We compared patients treated with second-line chemotherapy without previous ICI (CT2) and patients treated with third-line chemotherapy after ICI (CT3). The primary end-point was objective response rate (ORR) in CT3 compared with CT2. Secondary end-points included progression-free survival (PFS) and toxicities. RESULTS: Overall, 553 patients were included. ORRs were 31.0% (95% CI, 26.5 to 35.5) and 29.2% (95% CI, 21.9 to 36.6), respectively, in CT2 and CT3, with no statistically significant differences (P = 0.62). In subgroup analyses, no differences in ORR were observed by Bellmunt risk group, type of chemotherapy (platinum or taxanes), duration of response to first-platinum-based chemotherapy (< or ≥ 12 months) or FGFR-status. Median PFS was 4.6 months (95% CI, 3.9 to 5.1) and 4.9 months (95% CI, 4.1 to 5.5) in CT2 and CT3, respectively, and grade 3-4 hematologic toxicity occurred in 35.0% and 22.4% of patients. CONCLUSION: This large multicentre retrospective study provides clinically relevant real-world data. Chemotherapy re-challenge after ICI in la/mUC achieves ORR and PFS comparable with those obtained in CT2 with an acceptable safety profile. These updated results offer more promising outcomes than historically reported with second-line chemotherapy data.

Efficacy and Safety of Concomitant Proton Pump Inhibitor and Nivolumab in Renal Cell Carcinoma: Results of the GETUG-AFU 26 NIVOREN Multicenter Phase II Study.

INTRODUCTION: Proton pump inhibitors (PPI) may influence the gut microbiome and thus impact the effectiveness of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI). The effect of PPIs on the outcomes of ICI has not been fully explored and investigated in metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). METHODS: This retrospective analysis used prospectively collected data from the GETUG-AFU 26 NIVOREN (NCT03013335) phase II study which enrolled 729 mRCC patients of whom 720 were treated with nivolumab. The main objective of this analysis was to evaluate the impact of PPI on the efficacy and safety outcomes of mRCC patients. PPI use was defined as PPI administration on the day of ICI initiation. RESULTS: Of the 707 patients with mRCC analyzed in this study, 196 (27.7%) were PPI users. The majority of PPI users were males (80.6%), had an ECOG performance status of 0-1 (78.9%) and a nephrectomy (82.1%). Almost two-thirds of the patients had a favorable and intermediate IMDC risk category and 52% received nivolumab in the third line and beyond. PPI use did not correlate with PFS or OS (HR = 0.89, 95% CI 0.74-1.08 and HR = 1.24; 95% CI, 0.98-1.58, respectively). Grade 3-5 nivolumab-related adverse events were more common among PPI users (25.5% vs. 15.3%). CONCLUSIONS: This real-world study suggests that PPI use in patients with mRCC does not impact the efficacy outcomes but may influence the safety of nivolumab which warrants further investigations.

[Metastatic renal cell carcinoma: Management of toxicities of combinations]. / Cancer du rein métastatique : gestion des toxicités des combinaisons.

New combinations of antiangiogenic tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKI) and immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) or dual ICI have been shown to be effective in phase III trials compared to sunitinib in the first-line treatment of metastatic renal cell cancer. While ICI doublet is already used in other indications, TKI/ICI combinations are more recent and the management of their adverse effects (AEs) are less well known, particularly with regard to the accountability of each therapeutic class. The objective of this article is to analyze the safety data from the main phase III studies to provide clinicians with practical advice for managing the AEs from these combinations. Their management depends largely on the type of combination and their grade. In the case of a TKI/ICI combination, discontinuation of the 2 molecules is considered from grade 2. Rapid improvement in symptoms suggests that the AE is related to the TKI. It is then possible, after resolution, to reintroduce the TKI, if needed by reducing the dose, and to continue the ICI. Otherwise, the blame falls on the ICI and treatment usually involves corticosteroids. Management also depends on the type of AE and its severity. In some cases (dysthyroidism), treatment with TKI/ICI may be continued. In other situations (cardiac or neurological toxicity), it should be discontinued from grade 1 and hospitalization and corticosteroid therapy should be considered immediately. In all cases, information and education are integral parts of the prevention and proper management of potential AEs.

Metastatic Renal Medullary and Collecting Duct Carcinoma in the Era of Antiangiogenic and Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors: A Multicentric Retrospective Study.

Collecting duct carcinoma (CDC) and renal medullary carcinoma (RMC) are two rare subtypes of kidney cancer with a poor prognosis in the metastatic setting. Beyond first-line treatment, there are no standard-of-care therapies. This retrospective study assessed the efficacy of treatments after first-line chemotherapy in 57 patients with metastatic (m) CDC (n = 35) or RMC (n = 22) treated between 2010 and 2019 at 11 French centers. The median age was 53 years; overall, 60% (n = 34) of patients were metastatic at diagnosis. After a median follow-up of 13 months, the median overall survival was 12 (95% CI, 11−16) months. All patients received first-line platinum chemotherapy ± bevacizumab, with a median time to progression of 7.27 (95% CI, 7−100 months and an objective response rate (ORR) of 39% (95% CI, 26−52%). Patients received a median of two (1−5) treatment lines. Subsequent treatments included tyrosine kinase inhibitors (n = 12), chemotherapy (n = 34), and checkpoint inhibitors (n = 20), with ORR ranging 10−15% and disease control rates ranging 24−50%. The duration of response for all treatments was ~2 months. Notably, nine patients with CDC were still alive > two years after metastatic diagnosis. Beyond first-line therapy, treatments showed very low antitumor activity in mCDC/RMC. A better understanding of the biology of those rare tumors is urgently needed in order to identify potential targets.

PD-1 Blockade in Solid Tumors with Defects in Polymerase Epsilon.

Missense mutations in the polymerase epsilon (POLE) gene have been reported to generate proofreading defects resulting in an ultramutated genome and to sensitize tumors to checkpoint blockade immunotherapy. However, many POLE-mutated tumors do not respond to such treatment. To better understand the link between POLE mutation variants and response to immunotherapy, we prospectively assessed the efficacy of nivolumab in a multicenter clinical trial in patients bearing advanced mismatch repair-proficient POLE-mutated solid tumors. We found that only tumors harboring selective POLE pathogenic mutations in the DNA binding or catalytic site of the exonuclease domain presented high mutational burden with a specific single-base substitution signature, high T-cell infiltrates, and a high response rate to anti-PD-1 monotherapy. This study illustrates how specific DNA repair defects sensitize to immunotherapy. POLE proofreading deficiency represents a novel agnostic biomarker for response to PD-1 checkpoint blockade therapy. SIGNIFICANCE: POLE proofreading deficiency leads to high tumor mutational burden with high tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes and predicts anti-PD-1 efficacy in mismatch repair-proficient tumors. Conversely, tumors harboring POLE mutations not affecting proofreading derived no benefit from PD-1 blockade. POLE proofreading deficiency is a new tissue-agnostic biomarker for cancer immunotherapy. This article is highlighted in the In This Issue feature, p. 1397.

Analysis by region of outcomes for patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma treated with cabozantinib or everolimus: a sub-analysis of the METEOR study.

INTRODUCTION: METEOR was a phase 3 trial (NCT01865747) of cabozantinib versus everolimus in adults with advanced or metastatic clear cell RCC previously treated with VEGF receptor (VEGFR) tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs). This post hoc analysis of METEOR compared outcomes for patients recruited from European and non-European countries. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Adults with advanced/metastatic clear cell RCC who had received ≥ 1 prior VEGFR-TKI treatment were randomized 1:1 to receive cabozantinib or everolimus. Patients were categorized by recruitment region: Europe or outside of Europe (rest of world [RoW]). Progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), objective response rate (ORR), and adverse events (AEs) were compared between regional subgroups. RESULTS: In total, there were 320 eligible patients from Europe (cabozantinib, 167; everolimus, 153) and 338 from RoW (North America, 240 patients; Asia-Pacific, 86; Latin America, 12; randomized as cabozantinib, 163; everolimus, 175). PFS and OS were longer with cabozantinib than with everolimus and similar for the Europe and RoW subgroups. For PFS, the hazard ratio (HR) for cabozantinib versus everolimus was 0.54 for the Europe subgroup (p < .001) and 0.50 for the RoW subgroup (p < .001). For OS, the HR was 0.75 for the Europe subgroup (p = .034) and 0.69 for the RoW subgroup (p = .006). ORR in the Europe subgroup was 15% for cabozantinib and 3.9% for everolimus (p < .001). For the RoW subgroup, ORR was 20% for cabozantinib and 2.9% for everolimus (p < .001). Incidence of grade 3/4 AEs were similar for the Europe (cabozantinib, 74%; everolimus, 58%) and RoW subgroups (cabozantinib, 69%; everolimus, 64%). CONCLUSION: In the METEOR trial, efficacy outcomes for patients recruited from European and non-European countries favored cabozantinib over everolimus. The efficacy and safety results for the regional subgroups were consistent with those of the overall METEOR population.