Clinical features and response to immune combinations in patients with renal cell carcinoma and sarcomatoid de-differentiation (ARON-1 study).

Metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) carrying sarcomatoid features (sRCC) has aggressive biology and poor prognosis. First-line immunotherapy (IO)-based combinations have improved the outcome of clear cell RCC patients, including that of sRCC. Real-world data confirming the adequate first-line management of sRCC is largely lacking. We investigated the clinical features and the outcome of sRCC patients treated with IO-based combinations within the ARON-1 study population (NCT05287464). The primary objective was to define the incidence and baseline clinical characteristics of sRCC compared with non-sRCC patients. The secondary objective was to describe the outcome of sRCC patients based on type of first-line treatment (IO + IO vs. IO + tyrosin kinase inhibitor [TKI]). We identified 1362 mRCC patients with IMDC intermediate or poor risk, 226 sRCC and 1136 non-sRCC. These two subgroups did not differ in terms of baseline characteristics. The median overall survival (OS) was 26.8 months (95%CI 21.6-44.2) in sRCC and 35.3 months (95%CI 30.2-40.4) in non-sRCC patients (p = .013). The median progression-free survival (PFS) was longer in non-sRCC patients compared to sRCC (14.5 vs. 12.3 months, p = .064). In patients treated with first-line IO + TKI the median OS was 34.4 months compared to 26.4 months of those who received IO + IO (p = .729). The median PFS was 12.4 months with IO + TKI and 12.3 months with IO + IO (p = .606). In conclusion, we confirm that sRCC are aggressive tumors with poor prognosis. IO-based combinations improve survival outcomes of sRCC patients, regardless from the type of strategy (IO + IO versus IO + TKI) adopted.

Results from a Phase I Study of Lapatinib with Gemcitabine and Cisplatin in Advanced or Metastatic Bladder Cancer: EORTC Trial 30061.

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVE: Lapatinib is a potent HER1 and HER2 inhibitor. Gemcitabine-cisplatin (GC) is a standard chemotherapy regimen for advanced/metastatic bladder cancer. This phase I study examined the safety of lapatinib in combination with GC in patients with bladder cancer. The primary aim was to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of lapatinib in combination with GC. METHODS: A 3 + 3 dose escalation protocol was used with lapatinib at 750, 1,000 and then 1,250 mg. It was dosed daily with gemcitabine (1,000 mg/m2 on days 1, 8 and 15) and cisplatin (70 mg/m2 on day 2) every 28 days. In all, 18 patients with a median age of 63 years (range 50-77) were included; 3/6, 3/5 and 6/7 patients received lapatinib at 750, 1,000 and 1,250 mg, combined with GC, in cohorts 1, 2 and 3, respectively. RESULTS: No dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) were observed in cohort 1 or 2 (3 patients each); in cohort 3 (2 × 3 patients), 1 of the 6 patients presented DLTs (grade 4, treatment-related febrile neutropenia and renal failure). Twelve patients received 6 cycles. CONCLUSIONS: Lapatinib at 750-1,250 mg combined with GC appears safe and tolerable. The MTD of lapatinib combined with GC in bladder cancer was 1,250 mg.

Chemotherapy for Muscle-Invasive Bladder Cancer.

OPINION STATEMENT: In the last 25 years, there has been an improved understanding of the pathogenesis of muscle-invasive bladder cancer (BC). Development of new treatment strategies has followed. We have progressed from the awareness of the efficacy of platinum compounds, especially cisplatin, as single agents to the development of effective drug combinations with greater attention in improving safety profiles while impacting on survival. Peri-operative chemotherapy (CHT) is the standard of care for non-metastatic disease. The most evidence in terms of a survival advantage is derived from neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NC) trials, but adjuvant medical treatment should be strongly considered when NC has not been utilized. Patient selection and a multidisciplinary approach are essential. Platinum-based CHT is still the standard of care for both early and advanced disease. A deeper knowledge of the pathogenesis of BC will derive from gene expression profiling (GEP), and this will give us new prognostic and predictive tools to develop more targeted treatments. A high mutational rate has been observed in BC, which can generate neoantigens that initiate cancer immunity. Immunotherapy will become a pivotal treatment for BC, in the very near future. Emerging data are encouraging, and these treatments may well revolutionize the medical approach to this disease while CHT will play a less important role.

Algorithms in the First-Line Treatment of Metastatic Clear Cell Renal Cell Carcinoma--Analysis Using Diagnostic Nodes.

BACKGROUND: With the advent of targeted therapies, many treatment options in the first-line setting of metastatic clear cell renal cell carcinoma (mccRCC) have emerged. Guidelines and randomized trial reports usually do not elucidate the decision criteria for the different treatment options. In order to extract the decision criteria for the optimal therapy for patients, we performed an analysis of treatment algorithms from experts in the field. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Treatment algorithms for the treatment of mccRCC from experts of 11 institutions were obtained, and decision trees were deduced. Treatment options were identified and a list of unified decision criteria determined. The final decision trees were analyzed with a methodology based on diagnostic nodes, which allows for an automated cross-comparison of decision trees. The most common treatment recommendations were determined, and areas of discordance were identified. RESULTS: The analysis revealed heterogeneity in most clinical scenarios. The recommendations selected for first-line treatment of mccRCC included sunitinib, pazopanib, temsirolimus, interferon-α combined with bevacizumab, high-dose interleukin-2, sorafenib, axitinib, everolimus, and best supportive care. The criteria relevant for treatment decisions were performance status, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center risk group, only or mainly lung metastases, cardiac insufficiency, hepatic insufficiency, age, and "zugzwang" (composite of multiple, related criteria). CONCLUSION: In the present study, we used diagnostic nodes to compare treatment algorithms in the first-line treatment of mccRCC. The results illustrate the heterogeneity of the decision criteria and treatment strategies for mccRCC and how available data are interpreted and implemented differently among experts. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: The data provided in the present report should not be considered to serve as treatment recommendations for the management of treatment-naïve patients with multiple metastases from metastatic clear cell renal cell carcinoma outside a clinical trial; however, the data highlight the different treatment options and the criteria used to select them. The diversity in decision making and how results from phase III trials can be interpreted and implemented differently in daily practice are demonstrated.

Prognostic factors in patients receiving third line targeted therapy for metastatic renal cell carcinoma.

PURPOSE: Several prognostic models have been proposed for metastatic renal cell carcinoma but none has been validated in patients who receive third line targeted agents. We evaluated prognostic factors in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma who received a third line targeted agent. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed data on 2,065 patients with clear cell metastatic renal cell carcinoma who were treated with targeted therapy at a total of 23 centers in Italy. Included in final analysis were 281 patients treated with 3 targeted agents. Overall survival was the main outcome. Cox proportional hazards regression followed by bootstrap validation was used to identify independent prognostic factors. RESULTS: Three clinical characteristics (ECOG performance status greater than 1, metastasis at diagnosis and liver metastasis) and 2 biochemical factors (hemoglobin less than the lower limit of normal and neutrophil count greater than the upper limit of normal, respectively) were prognostic. Patients were classified into 3 risk categories, including low-zero or 1, intermediate-2 and high risk-more than 2 risk factors. Median overall survival was 19.7, 10.1 and 5.5 months, and 1-year overall survival was 71%, 43% and 15%, respectively. The major limitation was the retrospective nature of this study and absent external validation. CONCLUSIONS: This nomogram included clinical and biochemical prognostic factors. In clinical trials it may be useful to select patients and define the prognosis.

Sunitinib, pazopanib or sorafenib for the treatment of patients with late relapsing metastatic renal cell carcinoma.

PURPOSE: Late recurrence of renal cell carcinoma is not a rare event. In this retrospective study we investigate the clinicopathological features and the outcome of patients treated with sorafenib, sunitinib and pazopanib for late relapsing renal cell carcinoma. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Data were collected from 21 Italian centers involved in the treatment of metastatic renal cell carcinoma. Late relapse was defined as more than 5 years after initial radical nephrectomy. RESULTS: A total of 2,490 patients were screened and 269 (11%) were included in the study. First line therapy was sunitinib in 190 patients (71%), sorafenib in 58 (21%) and pazopanib in 21 (8%). Median progression-free survival was 20.0 months for sunitinib (95% CI 17.0-25.1), and 14.1 months for sorafenib (95% CI 11.0-29.0) and pazopanib (95% CI 11.2-not reported). On multivariate analysis MSKCC score and metastases to lymph nodes, liver and brain were associated with worst overall survival, while pancreatic metastases were associated with longer survival. Furthermore, age, MSKCC score and brain metastases were associated with worst progression-free survival. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with late relapsing renal cell carcinoma seem to present a characteristic pattern of metastatic spread without showing significant differences in terms of progression-free survival among sorafenib, sunitinib and pazopanib.

Surgical resection does not improve survival in patients with renal metastases to the pancreas in the era of tyrosine kinase inhibitors.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to compare survival of resected and unresected patients in a large cohort of patients with metastases to the pancreas from renal cell carcinoma (PM-RCC). METHODS: Data from 16 Italian centers involved in the treatment of metastatic RCC were retrospectively collected. The Kaplan-Meier and log-rank test methods were used to evaluate overall survival (OS). Clinical variables considered were sex, age, concomitant metastasis to other sites, surgical resection of PM-RCC, and time to PM-RCC occurrence. RESULTS: Overall, 103 consecutive patients with radically resected primary tumors were enrolled in the analysis. PM-RCCs were synchronous in only three patients (3 %). In 56 patients (54 %), the pancreas was the only metastatic site, whereas in the other 47 patients, lung (57 %), lymph nodes (28 %), and liver (21 %) were the most common concomitant metastatic sites. Median time for PM-RCC occurrence was 9.6 years (range 0-24 years) after nephrectomy. Surgical resection of PM-RCC was performed in 44 patients (median OS 103 months), while 59 patients were treated with tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs; median OS 86 months) (p = 0.201). At multivariate analysis, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center risk group was the only independent prognostic factor. None of the other clinical variables, such as age, sex, pancreatic surgery, or the presence of concomitant metastases, were significantly associated with outcome in PM-RCC patients. CONCLUSIONS: The presence of PM-RCC is associated with a long survival, and surgical resection does not improve survival in comparison with TKI therapy. However, surgical resection leads to a percentage of disease-free PM-RCC patients.

Clinical presentation, pathological features and natural course of metastatic uveal melanoma, an orphan and commonly fatal disease.

BACKGROUND: Uveal melanoma (UM) is a rare disease characterized by an unpredictable course and a variable outcome. We assessed the natural course of patients with metastatic uveal melanoma (MUM). METHODS: Data from 76 patients with MUM who were treated in Leuven between 1957 and 2008 were examined retrospectively. Statistical analysis involved the nonparametric, Kaplan-Meier and log rank tests. RESULTS: The median age at diagnosis of UM was 58 years (range 30-94). Synchronous metastases were found in 9% of the cases; all other patients had metachronous disease after a median interval of 40 months (range 7-420). Statistical analysis failed to identify factors related to the time until metastatic spread with the exception of a significant negative correlation with age at UM diagnosis (Spearman: ρ = -0.4, p < 0.001). The most frequent metastatic site was the liver (in 96% of the patients). The median time from diagnosis of UM until death was 47 months (range 2-236) and only 5 months in patients with metastatic disease (range 1-128). CONCLUSIONS: MUM is an orphan disease. Advances in MUM can only be achieved by the networking of sites interested in this rare tumor type, with systematic collection of data and tumor tissue for improving our understanding of the molecular biology of this disease.

Significance of PD-L1 in Metastatic Urothelial Carcinoma Treated With Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Importance: Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have broadened the metastatic urothelial carcinoma (mUC) therapeutic scenario. The association of programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) with response and survival in patients treated with ICIs is still controversial. Objectives: To evaluate the association of PD-L1 with response rate and overall survival among patients with mUC treated with ICIs. Data Sources: PubMed, Embase, American Society of Clinical Oncology and European Society for Medical Oncology Meeting Libraries, and Web of Science were searched up to December 10, 2023. Study Selection: Two authors independently screened the studies. Included studies were randomized and nonrandomized clinical trials enrolling patients with mUC receiving ICIs with available overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), or overall response rate (ORR) data, separated between patients with PD-L1-positive and -negative tumors. Data Extraction and Synthesis: The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) reporting guideline was followed. Two reviewers independently extracted data. Fixed- or random-effects models were used depending on the heterogeneity among the studies. Main Outcomes and Measures: Primary outcomes were odds ratios (ORs) for ORR and hazard ratios (HRs) for OS, comparing patients with PD-L1-positive tumors and patients with PD-L1-negative tumors. Secondary outcomes were the PFS HR between patients with PD-L1-positive and -negative tumors and OS HR between ICI arms and non-ICI arms of only randomized clinical trials. Results: A total of 14 studies were selected, comprising 5271 patients treated with ICIs (2625 patients had PD-L1-positive tumors). The ORR was 13.8% to 78.6% in patients with PD-L1-positive tumors and 5.1% to 63.2% in patients with PD-L1-negative tumors, with an association between PD-L1 status and ORR favoring patients with PD-L1-positive tumors (OR, 1.94; 95% CI, 1.47-2.56; P < .001). Median OS ranged from 8.4 to 24.1 months in patients with PD-L1-positive tumors and from 6.0 to 19.1 months in patients with PD-L1-negative tumors. The pooled HR showed a significant reduction for patients with PD-L1-positive tumors compared with those with PD-L1-negative tumors in the risk of death (HR, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.57-0.89; P = .003) and risk of progression (HR, 0.55; 95% CI, 0.44-0.69; P < .001) when ICIs were administered. PD-L1 is not likely to be a predictive biomarker of ICI response. Conclusions and Relevance: This systematic review and meta-analysis suggests that PD-L1 expression is associated with improved ORR, OS, and PFS for patients with mUC who receive ICIs, but it is unlikely to be useful as a predictive biomarker. Developing predictive biomarkers is essential to select patients most likely to benefit from ICIs and avoid toxic effects and financial burden with these agents.

Efficacy and Safety of Pembrolizumab plus Axitinib combination for Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma in a Real-World Scenario: Data From the Prospective ProPAXI Study.

BACKGROUND: Pembrolizumab/Axitinib combination is approved as first-line therapy in mRCC. The aim of this study is to evaluate outcomes of PAXI combo in the real-world in Italy. METHODS: This is a prospective study including patients diagnosed with mRCC who received combination as first-line therapy in recruiting Italian Centers. Data about patient characteristics, safety and outcome were collected. RESULTS: 170 pts have been treated from December 2020 to September 2023. The majority had clear-cell histology (83%). Sarcomatoid feature was present in 33%of available cases. About one half of patients (55%) had synchronous metastasis. In 58% of cases nephrectomy was performed, of which 27% were cytoreductive and 4% were deferred nephrectomies. Lung metastases were identified in 106 patients (62%), bone and liver involvement in 66 and 29 patients (38.8% and 17.1%) respectively. Stratifying by IMDC criteria, 32 patients (18.8%) were at favorable-risk, 106 (62.4%) at intermediate-risk, and 32 (18.8%) at poor-risk. At time of analysis, treatment was ongoing in 49% of patients. Progression occurred in 45% of patients. Median PFS was 19.2 months (95% CI: 15-NR). With a median follow-up of 19.3 months (range 1.3-34.5), at 24-months and 36-months landmark analysis 62% (95% CI, 53-70) and 58% (95% CI, 47-69) of treated patients are still alive respectively. Disease control rate was achieved in 84.6% of patients: 4.3% reached a complete response, 52% had a partial response and 28.8% a stable disease. Primary progression was observed in 15.3% of patients. In the multivariate analysis, the prognostic significance of age ≥ 65 years, non-clear cell histology, IMDC score, and adverse events and gender interaction as predictors of worse OS were confirmed. CONCLUSION: This is the first available prospective study on first-line Pembrolizumab/Axitinib combination in real world scenario. Our findings support the effectiveness and safety of first-line this combination in mRCC and reveal that gender emerged as a prognostic factor in relation to the occurrence of adverse events.

Neutrophil-to-Eosinophil Ratio Predicts the Efficacy of Avelumab in Patients With Advanced Urothelial Carcinoma Enrolled in the MALVA Study (Meet-URO 25).

BACKGROUND: Neutrophil-to-eosinophil ratio (NER) has been described to be associated with outcomes to immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) in several tumor types, but less is known about its role of in the response to avelumab in advanced urothelial cancer (aUC). Thus, we reported outcomes by NER of aUC patients treated with avelumab as maintenance after initial response to platinum-based chemotherapy and enrolled in the Maintenance with AVeLumAb ([MALVA] in advanced urothelial neoplasms in response to first-line chemotherapy: an observational retrospective study) study (Meet-URO 25). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Median NER at baseline and after 3 cycles of avelumab were calculated. Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) by NER were reported. RESULTS: At the cutoff date (April 15, 2023), a total of 109 patients were included. The median NER was 28.05 at baseline and 24.46 after 3 cycles of avelumab, respectively. Median PFS was not reached for patients with baseline NER less than the median (

Sodium levels and immunotherapy efficacy in mRCC patients with bone metastases: sub analysis of Meet-Uro 15 study.

Background: Immune-checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have significantly improved metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) prognosis, although their efficacy in patients with bone metastases (BMs) remains poorly understood. We investigated the prognostic role of natremia in pretreated RCC patients with BMs receiving immunotherapy. Materials and methods: This retrospective multicenter study included RCC patients with BMs receiving nivolumab as second-line therapy or beyond. Inclusion criteria involved baseline sodium levels (pre-ICI) and sodium levels after 4 weeks of nivolumab initiation (post-ICI). The population was divided into two groups based on the median value, and response rates, progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS) were assessed. Results: Among 120 eligible patients, those with pre-treatment sodium levels ≥140 mEq/L showed longer OS (18.7 vs. 12.0 months, p=0.04). Pre-treatment sodium levels ≥140 mEq/L were associated with better OS compared to levels <140 mE/L (18.7 vs. 12.0, p=0.04). Post-treatment sodium levels ≥140 mEq/L were associated with improved PFS (9.6 vs. 3.2 months) and OS (25.1 vs. 8.8 months) (p=0.05 and p<0.01, respectively). Patients with consistent sodium levels ≥140 mEq/L at both time points exhibited the best outcomes compared to those with lower values (PFS 11.5 vs. 3.3 months and OS 42.2 vs. 9.0 months, respectively, p<0.01). Disease control rate was significantly higher in the latter group (p<0.01). Multivariate analysis confirmed the prognostic significance of sodium levels. Conclusion: Elevated sodium levels (≥140 mEq/L) pre- and post-ICI treatment correlate with better survival outcomes in mRCC patients with BMs. This finding suggests sodium level assessment as a potential prognostic factor in these patients and warrants further investigation, particularly in combination immunotherapy settings.

Enfortumab Vedotin Following Platinum Chemotherapy and Avelumab Maintenance in Patients with Metastatic Urothelial Carcinoma: A Retrospective Data from the ARON-2EV Study.

BACKGROUND: Enfortumab vedotin (EV) has been approved for the treatment of patients with locally advanced/metastatic urothelial carcinoma (la/mUC) who previously received platinum-based chemotherapy followed by immune checkpoint inhibitors. However, the pivotal clinical trials did not include patients previously treated with avelumab maintenance therapy. OBJECTIVE: The aim of the present retrospective analysis was to assess the effectiveness of EV following avelumab in patients with mUC enrolled in the ARON-2EV study. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The study included 182 patients with mUC treated with EV following avelumab maintenance. The primary objective was to assess clinical outcomes, including progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), overall response rate (ORR), and duration of response (DoR). Statistical analysis involved Fisher exact test, Kaplan-Meier method, log-rank test, and univariate/multivariate Cox proportional hazard regression models. RESULTS: Median OS and PFS were 12.7 (95% CI 10.2-14.1) and 7.9 (95% CI 6.4-9.9) months, respectively. Complete response (CR) was achieved in 5% and partial response (PR) in 34% of patients, with an ORR of 39%. The DoR in patients who achieved CR/PR was 10.9 months (95% CI 8.1-11.4). The incidence of grade ≥ 3 peripheral neuropathy and skin rash was 9%, followed by 8% of grade ≥ 3 diarrhea and 4% of grade ≥ 3 hyperglycemia. CONCLUSIONS: The results of our large international retrospective study confirm the effectiveness of EV and endorse its use in the population of patients with mUC treated with EV following the frontline platinum-based chemotherapy and subsequent maintenance treatment with avelumab.

Larotaxel with Cisplatin in the first-line treatment of locally advanced/metastatic urothelial tract or bladder cancer: a randomized, active-controlled, phase III trial (CILAB).

BACKGROUND: This open-label, randomized phase III trial evaluated larotaxel/cisplatin versus gemcitabine/cisplatin as first-line treatment for locally advanced (T4b) or metastatic urothelial tract or bladder cancer. METHODS: Patients were randomized to larotaxel 50 mg/m(2) with cisplatin 75 mg/m(2) every 3 weeks (larotaxel/cisplatin) or gemcitabine 1,000 mg/m(2) on days 1, 8, and 15 with cisplatin 70 mg/m(2) on day 1 every 4 weeks (gemcitabine/cisplatin). The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS). RESULTS: The trial was prematurely closed following the sponsor's decision to stop clinical development of larotaxel (n = 337 randomized). The larotaxel dose was reduced to 40 mg/m(2) and cisplatin to 60 mg/m(2) following a data monitoring committee safety review of the first 97 patients. At the time of analysis, the median OS was 13.7 months [95% confidence interval (CI) 11.2-17.1] with larotaxel/cisplatin and 14.3 months (95% CI 10.5 to not reached) with gemcitabine/cisplatin [hazard ratio (HR) 1.21; 95% CI 0.83-1.76; p = 0.33]. The median progression-free survival (PFS) was 5.6 months (95% CI 4.1-6.2) with larotaxel/cisplatin and 7.6 months (95% CI 6.6-9.1) with gemcitabine/cisplatin (HR 1.67; 95% CI 1.24-2.25). More myelosuppression was observed with gemcitabine/cisplatin. CONCLUSION: There was no difference in OS. Although the trial was closed prematurely, PFS appeared worse with larotaxel/cisplatin, suggesting that larotaxel/cisplatin does not improve outcomes versus cisplatin/gemcitabine.

Primary and acquired resistance to first-line therapy for clear cell renal cell carcinoma.

The introduction of first-line combinations had improved the outcomes for metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) compared to sunitinib. However, some patients either have inherent resistance or develop resistance as a result of the treatment. Depending on the kind of therapy employed, many factors underlie resistance to systemic therapy. Angiogenesis and the tumor immune microenvironment (TIME), nevertheless, are inextricably linked. Although angiogenesis and the manipulation of the tumor microenvironment are linked to hypoxia, which emerges as a hallmark of renal cell carcinoma (RCC) pathogenesis, it is only one of the potential elements involved in the distinctive intra- and inter-tumor heterogeneity of RCC that is still dynamic. We may be able to more correctly predict therapy response and comprehend the mechanisms underlying primary or acquired resistance by integrating tumor genetic and immunological markers. In order to provide tools for patient selection and to generate hypotheses for the development of new strategies to overcome resistance, we reviewed the most recent research on the mechanisms of primary and acquired resistance to immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) and tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) that target the vascular endothelial growth factor receptor (VEGFR).We can choose patients' treatments and cancer preventive strategies using an evolutionary approach thanks to the few evolutionary trajectories that characterize ccRCC.

Phase II escalation study of sorafenib in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma who have been previously treated with anti-angiogenic treatment.

OBJECTIVE: To assess both clinical and biological efficacy and toxicity of sorafenib in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) previously treated with an anti-angiogenic vascular endothelial growth factor receptor (VEGFR) tyrosine kinase inhibitor. METHODS: Sorafenib is an orally active multikinase inhibitor approved for the treatment of mRCC. Drug-focused translational research on tissues (i.e. B-RAF) and plasma (VEGFR-α, circulating endothelial cells, endothelial progenitor cells) was performed to define biological predictive and prognostic markers and their related kinetics. Patients with mRCC pretreated with an anti-angiogenic treatment, an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (ECOG PS) of 0-2 and adequate organ function were eligible. Patients received sorafenib 400 mg twice a day continuously in 4-week cycles. Patients with no progressive disease at 12 weeks continued to receive sorafenib at the standard dose, whereas progressing patients received an increased dose (600 mg twice a day) with early disease restaging after 4 weeks. Patients who progressed at 600 mg twice a day went off study. Efficacy (overall tumour control) was assessed by Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors. RESULTS: In all, 19 patients were entered. The baseline characteristics were as follows: ECOG PS 0-1 94.8%; median (range) age 62 (41-81) years; nephrectomy 100%; surgery for metastatic disease 26.4%; clear cell 79.1%; papillary cell 15.7%; sarcomatoid/high grade 5.2%; two or more metastatic sites 84%. Overall, 11 patients (58%) had disease control at 6 months without significant correlation between response to prior therapy and hypertension. Progression-free survival (PFS) of 8.3 months was observed. Of six patients for whom the dose was escalated due to early progression, three benefitted with PFS of >3 months. Three (15.7%) of 19 patients had a V600E mutation and one had a K601E mutation; PFS appeared to be substantially shorter in these patients compared with 15 patients with wild-type B-RAF (2.5 vs 9.1 month, P < 0.05). The most common toxicity (National Cancer Institute Common Toxicity Criteria, NCIC 3.0, all patients) was grade ≥1 diarrhoea and grade 2-3 hand-foot syndrome in 11 patients. Grade 3 mucositis was observed in one patient. CONCLUSIONS: Sorafenib at doses of 400-600 mg twice a day continuously results in acceptable and well tolerated salvage treatment after VEGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor failure. In progressive patients, treatment with a higher dose could be a valid option and B-RAF mutations may be an interesting predictive marker to be studied in a larger randomized trial.

Administration of 24-h intravenous infusions of trabectedin in ambulatory patients with mesenchymal tumors via disposable elastomeric pumps: an effective and patient-friendly palliative treatment option.

BACKGROUND: Patients with progressive mesenchymal tumours after standard chemotherapy have poor outcome. Trabectedin is approved in Europe as 24-h intravenous (i.v.) infusion q3w in this setting. We report the use of disposable elastomeric pumps for ambulatory treatment with trabectedin. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Pre-treated sarcoma patients were offered trabectedin 1.5 mg/m(2) as 24-h i.v. infusion via port catheter, either as inpatients using electronic pumps or as outpatients using the Baxter LV10 pump. Co-medication consisted of antiemetics including dexamethasone. RESULTS: 21/28 patients with distant metastasis and/or local relapse elected outpatient therapy and received 130 cycles (median 3, range 1-24). Dose reductions were done in 60 cycles, mainly due to laboratory adverse events (AEs). Best response (Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours (RECIST)) was 4 cases of confirmed partial remission (PR), 6 cases of stable disease (SD), and 11 cases of progressive disease (PD). Grade 3/4 (Common Toxicity Criteria (CTC)) AEs were limited to 1 case each of haemorrhage and lung embolism; other AEs were in line with published trabectedin experience. 1 port catheter contamination required replacement, 1 catheter thrombosis occurred and 1 extravasation due to needle dislocation was observed. CONCLUSIONS: Outpatient administration of trabectedin as 24-h infusion using Baxter LV10 pumps is preferred by the vast majority of patients; it is feasible, safe, effective, cost efficient, and should be considered as routine practice in this clinical setting.

Case report: Metastatic urothelial cancer with an exceptional response to immunotherapy and comprehensive understanding of the tumor and the tumor microenvironment.

Although immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) are increasingly used as second-line treatments for urothelial cancer (UC), only a small proportion of patients respond. Therefore, understanding the mechanisms of response to ICIs is critical to improve clinical outcomes for UC patients. The tumor microenvironment (TME) is recognized as a key player in tumor progression and the response to certain anti-cancer treatments. This study aims to investigate the mechanism of response using integrated genomic and transcriptomic profiling of a UC patient who was part of the KEYNOTE-045 trial and showed an exceptional response to pembrolizumab. Diagnosed in 2014 and receiving first-line chemotherapy without success, the patient took part in the KEYNOTE-045 trial for 2 years. She showed dramatic improvement and has now been free of disease for over 6 years. Recently described by Bagaev et al., the Molecular Functional (MF) Portrait was utilized to dissect genomic and transcriptomic features of the patient's tumor and TME. The patient's tumor was characterized as Immune Desert, which is suggestive of a non-inflamed microenvironment. Integrated whole-exome sequencing (WES) and RNA sequencing (RNA-seq) analysis identified an ATM mutation and high TMB level (33.9 mut/mb), which are both positive biomarkers for ICI response. Analysis further revealed the presence of the APOBEC complex, indicating the potential for use of APOBEC signatures as predictive biomarkers for immunotherapy response. Overall, comprehensive characterization of the patient's tumor and TME with the MF Portrait revealed important insights that could potentially be hypothesis generating to identify clinically useful biomarkers and improve treatment for UC patients.

Serological response to COVID-19 vaccination in patients with cancer older than 80 years.

Central studies carried out on vaccines against the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-COV2) excluded patients receiving immunosuppressive therapy and those diagnosed with an immunosuppressive condition. Moreover, there are no data on vaccine efficacy regarding older patients with cancer. OBJECTIVES: The primary objective was to evaluate the seroprevalence of the SARS-CoV2 IgG in older patients (aged ≥80 years) diagnosed with solid or hematological malignancies, one month after administering the second dose of the BNT162b2 vaccine. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We screened 74 older patients with cancer, 45 of them accepted to receive the vaccination and collected serum samples from 36 patients; a group of medical doctors and nurses from our hospital was used as a control in a 1:2 ratio. RESULTS: The median age was 82 years (range 80-89). Median serum IgG were 2396,10 AU/ml (range 0-32,763,00) in patients with cancer and 8737,49 AU/ml (398.90-976,280,00) in the control group, p < 0.0001. Additional subgroup analyses were performed comparing males and females, patients treated with chemotherapy versus other therapies (immunotherapy, targeted therapy), solid tumors versus hematological malignancies, early (I-II) versus advanced (III-IV) stage of disease, continuative corticosteroid use or not. None of them reached statistical significance. CONCLUSION: Our study shows for the first time that patients with cancer aged ≥80 years can have a serological response to the BNT162b2 COVID-19 vaccine one month after vaccination and consequently support the vaccination campaign currently underway in this frail population.