The genomic and transcriptomic landscape of advanced renal cell cancer for individualized treatment strategies.

Differences in the clinical course and treatment responses in individual patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC) can largely be explained by the different genomics of this disease. To improve the personalized treatment strategy and survival outcomes for patients with advanced RCC, the genomic make-up in patients with advanced RCC was investigated to identify putative actionable variants and signatures. In this prospective multicenter study (NCT01855477), whole-genome sequencing (WGS) data of locally advanced and metastatic tissue biopsies and matched whole-blood samples were collected from 91 patients with histopathologically confirmed RCC. WGS data were analyzed for small somatic variants, copy-number alterations and structural variants. For a subgroup of patients, RNA sequencing (RNA-Seq) data could be analyzed. RNA-Seq data were clustered on immunogenic and angiogenic gene expression patterns according to a previously developed angio-immunogenic gene signature. In all patients with papillary and clear cell RCC, putative actionable drug targets were detected by WGS, of which 94% were on-label available. RNA-Seq data of clear cell and papillary RCC were clustered using a previously developed angio-immunogenic gene signature. Analyses of driver mutations and RNA-Seq data revealed clear differences among different RCC subtypes, showing the added value of WGS and RNA-Seq over clinicopathological data. By improving both histological subtyping and the selection of treatment according to actionable targets and immune signatures, WGS and RNA-Seq may improve therapeutic decision making for most patients with advanced RCC, including patients with non-clear cell RCC for whom no standard treatment is available to data. Prospective clinical trials are needed to evaluate the impact of genomic and transcriptomic diagnostics on survival outcome for advanced RCC patients.

Feasibility and effectiveness of trifluridine/tipiracil in metastatic colorectal cancer: real-life data from The Netherlands.

BACKGROUND: The RECOURSE trial showed clinical efficacy for trifluridine/tipiracil for refractory metastatic colorectal cancer patients. We assessed the feasibility and effectiveness of trifluridine/tipiracil in daily clinical practice in The Netherlands. METHODS: Medical records of patients from 17 centers treated in the trifluridine/tipiracil compassionate use program were reviewed and checked for RECOURSE eligibility criteria. Baseline characteristics, safety, and survival times were compared, and prespecified baseline characteristics were tested in multivariate analyses for prognostic significance on overall survival (OS). RESULTS: A total of 136 patients with a median age of 62 years were analyzed. Forty-three patients (32%) did not meet the RECOURSE eligibility criteria for not having received all prior standard treatments (n = 35, 26%) and/or ECOG performance status (PS) 2 (n = 12, 9%). The most common grade ≥3 toxicities were neutropenia (n = 44, 32%), leukopenia (n = 8, 6%), anemia (n = 7, 5%), and fatigue (n = 7, 5%). Median progression-free survival (PFS) and median OS were 2.1 (95% CI, 1.8-2.3) and 5.4 months (95% CI, 4.0-6.9), respectively. Patients with ECOG PS 2 had a worse median OS (3.2 months) compared to patients with ECOG PS 0-1 (5.9 months). ECOG PS, KRAS-mutation status, white blood cell count, serum lactate dehydrogenase, and alkaline phosphatase were prognostic factors for OS. CONCLUSIONS: Our data show that treatment with trifluridine/tipiracil in daily clinical practice is feasible and safe. Differences in patient characteristics between our population and the RECOURSE study population should be taken into account in the interpretation of survival data. Our results argue against the use of trifluridine/tipiracil in patients with ECOG PS 2. FUNDING: Johannes J.M. Kwakman received an unrestricted research grant from Servier.

Randomized phase III trial of S-1 versus capecitabine in the first-line treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer: SALTO study by the Dutch Colorectal Cancer Group.

BACKGROUND: Hand-foot syndrome (HFS) is a common side-effect of capecitabine. S-1 is an oral fluoropyrimidine with comparable efficacy to capecitabine in gastrointestinal cancers but associated with a lower incidence of HFS in Asian patients. This study compares the incidence of HFS between S-1 and capecitabine as first-line treatment in Western metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with previously untreated mCRC and planned treatment with fluoropyrimidine monochemotherapy were randomized 1 : 1 to receive either capecitabine (1250 mg/m2 orally for patients <70 years; 1000 mg/m2 for patients ≥70 years, twice daily on days 1-14) or S-1 (30 mg/m2 orally twice daily on days 1-14) in 3-weekly cycles, with bevacizumab optional in both groups. The primary endpoint was the incidence of any grade HFS, as assessed by both physicians and patients (diaries). Secondary endpoints included grade 3 HFS, other toxicities, relative dose intensity, progression-free survival, response rate and overall survival. RESULTS: A total of 161 patients were randomized in 27 centres. The incidence of any grade HFS as assessed by physicians was 73% in the capecitabine group (n = 80) and 45% in the S-1 group (n = 80) [odds ratio (95% confidence interval) 0.31 (0.16-0.60), P = 0.0005]. The incidence of grade 3 HFS was 21% and 4% (P = 0.003), respectively. Patient-assessed any grade HFS was 84% and 58%, respectively (P = 0.004). Grade 3 anorexia was more common in the S-1 group (3% versus 13%, P = 0.03). Median relative dose intensity was 88% in the capecitabine group and 95% in the S-1 group (P = 0.026). There were no statistically significant differences in median progression-free survival, response rate and overall survival rates. CONCLUSION: Treatment with S-1 in Western mCRC patients is associated with a significantly lower incidence of HFS compared with capecitabine, with comparable efficacy. CLINICALTRIALS.GOV REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT01918852.

Limited human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 discordance in metastatic breast cancer patients treated with trastuzumab, a population based study.

BACKGROUND: Accurate assessment of the human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) in breast cancer is essential for proper treatment decisions. HER2 positivity confirmation rates in breast cancer trials by central testing pathology laboratories were reported to be approximately 85%. The aim of our study was to assess in a population based sample concordance of HER2 status in metastatic breast cancer (MBC) patients locally tested HER2 positive and treated with trastuzumab. Moreover cost-effectiveness of in situ hybridisation (ISH) in patients with an immunohistochemical score 3+ (IHC3+) was explored. METHODS: MBC patients treated between 2005 and 2009 with trastuzumab-based therapy in North East Netherlands were identified by a survey of hospital pharmacies. Primary tumour samples were retested centrally for HER2 status using 1 immunohistochemical (IHC) method and two methods using ISH on tissue micro-arrays. Potential discordant patients were retested on whole tumour slides. HER2 positivity was defined as: (1) ISH amplification (according to American Society of Clinical Oncology/College of American Pathologists (ASCO/CAP) clinical practice Guideline Update) and (2) when ISH failed an IHC score of 3+. Cost-effectiveness was estimated using potential ISH and treatment costs. RESULTS: HER2 status could be retested in 174 of 194 (90%) patients. The HER2 concordance rate was 87%. The 21 discordant patients were in the 67% due to primary HER2 testing with only IHC. Overall survival of HER2 discordant and concordant patients was not significantly different (18 versus 25months, p=0.131). Structural ISH in the case of IHC3+ has an estimated potential saving of €87,710 per 100 patients. CONCLUSION: HER2 concordance in a population based study is comparable to those described in selected populations. Discordance is mostly due to testing with only IHC. ISH in the case of IHC3+ is cost-effective.