Atezolizumab plus chemotherapy versus placebo plus chemotherapy in untreated locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma (IMvigor130): final overall survival analysis results from a randomised, controlled, phase 3 study.

BACKGROUND: IMvigor130 demonstrated statistically significant investigator-assessed progression-free survival benefit with first-line atezolizumab plus platinum-based chemotherapy (group A) versus placebo plus platinum-based chemotherapy (group C) in patients with locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma. Overall survival was not improved in interim analyses. Here we report the final overall analysis for group A versus group C. METHODS: In this global, partially blinded, randomised, controlled, phase 3 study, patients (aged ≥18 years) with previously untreated locally advanced or metastatic urothelial cancer and who had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-2 were enrolled at 221 hospitals and oncology centres in 35 countries. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1:1), with a permuted block method (block size of six) and an interactive voice and web response system, stratified by PD-L1 status, Bajorin risk factor score, and investigator's choice of platinum-based chemotherapy, to receive atezolizumab plus platinum-based chemotherapy (group A), atezolizumab monotherapy (group B), or placebo plus platinum-based chemotherapy (group C). Sponsors, investigators, and patients were masked to assignment to atezolizumab or placebo (ie, group A and group C) and atezolizumab monotherapy (group B) was open label. For groups A and C, all patients received gemcitabine (1000 mg/m2 intravenously; day 1 and day 8 of each 21-day cycle), plus investigator's choice of carboplatin (area under curve 4·5 mg/mL per min or 5 mg/mL per min; intravenously) or cisplatin (70 mg/m2 intravenously), plus either atezolizumab (1200 mg intravenously) or placebo on day 1 of each cycle. Co-primary endpoints of the study were investigator-assessed progression-free survival and overall survival for group A versus group C in the intention-to-treat (ITT) population (ie, all randomised patients), and overall survival for group B versus group C, tested hierarchically. Final overall survival and updated safety outcomes (safety population; all patients who received any amount of any study treatment component) for group A versus group C are reported here. The final prespecified boundary for significance of the overall survival analysis was one-sided p=0·021. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02807636, and is active but no longer recruiting. FINDINGS: Between July 15, 2016, and July 20, 2018, 1213 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to treatment, of whom 851 were assigned to group A (n=451) and group C (n=400). 338 (75%) patients in group A and 298 (75%) in group C were male, 113 (25%) in group A and 102 (25%) in group C were female, and 346 (77%) in group A and 304 (76%) in group C were White. At data cutoff (Aug 31, 2022), after a median follow up of 13·4 months (IQR 6·2-30·8), median overall survival was 16·1 months (95% CI 14·2-18·8; 336 deaths) in group A versus 13·4 months (12·0-15·3; 310 deaths) in group C (stratified hazard ratio 0·85 [95% CI 0·73-1·00]; one-sided p=0·023). The most common grade 3-4 treatment-related adverse events were anaemia (168 [37%] of 454 patients who received atezolizumab plus chemotherapy vs 133 [34%] of 389 who received placebo plus chemotherapy), neutropenia (167 [37%] vs 115 [30%]), decreased neutrophil count (98 [22%] vs 95 [24%]), thrombocytopenia (95 [21%] vs 70 [18%]), and decreased platelet count (92 [20%] vs 92 [24%]). Serious adverse events occurred in 243 (54%) patients who received atezolizumab plus chemotherapy and 196 (50%) patients who received placebo plus chemotherapy. Treatment-related deaths occurred in nine (2%; acute kidney injury, dyspnoea, hepatic failure, hepatitis, neutropenia, pneumonitis, respiratory failure, sepsis, and thrombocytopenia [n=1 each]) patients who received atezolizumab plus chemotherapy and four (1%; unexplained death, diarrhoea, febrile neutropenia, and toxic hepatitis [n=1 each]) who received placebo plus chemotherapy. INTERPRETATION: Progression-free survival benefit with first-line combination of atezolizumab plus platinum-based chemotherapy did not translate into a significant improvement in overall survival in the ITT population of IMvigor130. Further research is needed to understand which patients might benefit from first-line combination treatment. No new safety signals were observed. FUNDING: F Hoffmann-La Roche.

Atezolizumab monotherapy versus chemotherapy in untreated locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma (IMvigor130): final overall survival analysis from a randomised, controlled, phase 3 study.

BACKGROUND: The primary analysis of IMvigor130 showed a significant progression-free survival benefit with first-line atezolizumab plus platinum-based chemotherapy (group A) versus placebo plus platinum-based chemotherapy (group C) in patients with locally advanced or metastatic urothelial cancer. However, this finding did not translate into significant overall survival benefit for group A versus group C at the final analysis, precluding formal statistical testing of outcomes with atezolizumab monotherapy (group B) versus group C. Here we report the final overall survival results for group B versus group C; this report is descriptive and should be considered exploratory due to the study's statistical design. METHODS: In this global, partially blinded, randomised, controlled, phase 3 study, patients (aged ≥18 years) who had locally advanced or metastatic urothelial cancer previously untreated in the metastatic setting and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-2 were enrolled at 221 hospitals and oncology centres in 35 countries. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1:1), using a permuted block method (block size of six) and an interactive voice and web response system, stratified by PD-L1 status, Bajorin score, and investigator's choice of platinum-based chemotherapy, to receive either atezolizumab plus platinum-based chemotherapy (group A), atezolizumab alone (group B), or placebo plus platinum-based chemotherapy (group C). Sponsors, investigators, and patients were masked to assignment to atezolizumab or placebo in group A and group C; atezolizumab monotherapy in group B was open label. For groups B and C, atezolizumab (1200 mg) or placebo was administered intravenously every 3 weeks. Chemotherapy involved 21-day cycles of gemcitabine (1000 mg/m2 body surface area on day 1 and day 8 of each cycle) plus the investigator's choice of carboplatin (area under the curve 4·5 mg/mL per min or 5 mg/mL per min) or cisplatin (70 mg/m2 body surface area), administered intravenously. Co-primary endpoints were progression-free survival and overall survival in group A versus group C, and overall survival in group B versus group C, tested hierarchically, in the intention-to-treat (ITT) population, and then the populations with high PD-L1 tumour expression (immune cell [IC] expression score of IC2/3) if the results from group A versus group C were significant. Here, we report the co-primary endpoint of overall survival for group B versus group C in the ITT and IC2/3 populations. The ITT population for this analysis comprised concurrently enrolled patients in groups B and C who were randomly assigned to treatment. For the safety analysis, all patients enrolled in group B and group C who received any study treatment were included. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02807636, and is active but no longer recruiting. FINDINGS: Between July 15, 2016, and July 20, 2018, 1213 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to treatment, of whom 362 patients were assigned to group B and 400 to group C, of whom 360 and 359, respectively, were enrolled concurrently (ITT population). 543 (76%) of 719 patients were male, 176 (24%) were female, and 534 (74%) were White. As of data cutoff (Aug 31, 2022), after a median follow-up of 13·4 months (IQR 6·2-30·8), median overall survival was 15·2 months (95% CI 13·1-17·7; 271 deaths) in group B and 13·3 months (11·9-15·6; 275 deaths) in group C (stratified hazard ratio 0·98 [95% CI 0·82-1·16]). The most common grade 3-4 treatment-related adverse events were anaemia (two [1%] in patients who received atezolizumab monotherapy vs 133 [34%] in those who received placebo plus chemotherapy), neutropenia (one [<1%] vs 115 [30%]), decreased neutrophil count (0 vs 95 [24%]), and decreased platelet count (one [<1%] vs 92 [24%]). Serious adverse events occurred in 163 (46%) patients versus 196 (50%). Treatment-related deaths occurred in three (1%; n=1 each, pneumonia, interstitial lung disease, large intestinal obstruction) patients who received atezolizumab monotherapy and four (1%; n=1 each, diarrhoea, febrile neutropenia, unexplained death, toxic hepatitis) who received placebo plus chemotherapy. INTERPRETATION: The final analysis from IMvigor130 did not show a significant improvement in overall survival with first-line atezolizumab monotherapy compared with platinum-based chemotherapy in the intention-to-treat population. The safety profile of atezolizumab monotherapy remained acceptable after extended follow-up, with no new safety signals. FUNDING: F Hoffmann-La Roche.

Sex and survival outcomes in patients with renal cell carcinoma receiving first-line immune-based combinations.

BACKGROUND: There is an ongoing debate as to whether sex could be associated with immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) benefit. Existing literature data reveal contradictory results, and data on first-line immune combinations are lacking. METHOD: This was a real-world, multicenter, international, observational study to determine the sex effects on the clinical outcomes in metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) patients treated with immuno-oncology combinations as first-line therapy. RESULTS: A total of 1827 mRCC patients from 71 cancer centers in 21 countries were included. The median OS was 38.7 months (95% CI 32.7-44.2) in the overall study population: 40.0 months (95% CI 32.7-51.6) in males and 38.7 months (95% CI 26.4-41.0) in females (p = 0.202). The median OS was higher in males vs. females in patients aged 18-49y (36.9 months, 95% CI 29.0-51.6, vs. 24.8 months, 95% CI 16.8-40.4, p = 0.426, with + 19% of 2y-OS rate, 72% vs. 53%, p = 0.006), in the clear cell histology subgroup (44.2 months, 95% CI 35.8-55.7, vs. 38.7 months, 95% CI 26.0-41.0, p = 0.047), and in patients with sarcomatoid differentiation (34.4 months, 95% CI 26.4-59.0, vs. 15.3 months, 95% CI 8.9-41.0, p < 0.001). Sex female was an independent negative prognostic factor in the sarcomatoid population (HR 1.72, 95% CI 1.15 - 2.57, p = 0.008). CONCLUSIONS: Although the female's innate and adaptive immunity has been observed to be more active than the male's, women in the subgroup of clear cell histology, sarcomatoid differentiation, and those under 50 years of age showed shorter OS than males.

Global real-world experiences with pembrolizumab in advanced urothelial carcinoma after platinum-based chemotherapy: the ARON-2 study.

BACKGROUND: Immune checkpoint inhibitors have changed previous treatment paradigm of advanced urothelial carcinoma (UC). The ARON-2 study (NCT05290038) aimed to assess the real-world effectiveness of pembrolizumab in patients recurred or progressed after platinum-based chemotherapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Medical records of patients with documented metastatic UC treated by pembrolizumab as second-line therapy were retrospectively collected from 88 institutions in 23 countries. Patients were assessed for overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS) and overall response rate (ORR). Cox proportional hazards models were adopted to explore the presence of prognostic factors. RESULTS: In total, 836 patients were included: 544 patients (65%) received pembrolizumab after progression to first-line platinum-based chemotherapy in the metastatic setting (cohort A) and 292 (35%) after recurring within < 12 months since the completion of adjuvant or neoadjuvant chemotherapy (cohort B). The median follow-up time was 15.3 months. The median OS and the ORR were 10.5 months and 31% in the overall study population, 9.1 months and 29% in cohort A and 14.6 months and 37% in cohort B. At multivariate analysis, ECOG-PS ≥ 2, bone metastases, liver metastases and pembrolizumab setting (cohort A vs B) proved to be significantly associated with worst OS and PFS. Stratified by the presence of 0, 1-2 or 3-4 prognostic factors, the median OS was 29.4, 12.5 and 4.1 months (p < 0.001), while the median PFS was 12.2, 6.4 and 2.8 months, respectively (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Our study confirms that pembrolizumab is effective in the advanced UC real-world context, showing outcome differences between patients recurred or progressed after platinum-based chemotherapy.

A correlative biomarker study and integrative prognostic model in chemotherapy-naïve metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer treated with enzalutamide.

BACKGROUND: There is a considerable need to incorporate biomarkers of resistance to new antiandrogen agents in the management of castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC). METHODS: We conducted a phase II trial of enzalutamide in first-line chemo-naïve asymptomatic or minimally symptomatic mCRPC and analyzed the prognostic value of TMPRSS2-ERG and other biomarkers, including circulating tumor cells (CTCs), androgen receptor splice variant (AR-V7) in CTCs and plasma Androgen Receptor copy number gain (AR-gain). These biomarkers were correlated with treatment response and survival outcomes and developed a clinical-molecular prognostic model using penalized cox-proportional hazard model. This model was validated in an independent cohort. RESULTS: Ninety-eight patients were included. TMPRSS2-ERG fusion gene was detected in 32 patients with no differences observed in efficacy outcomes. CTC detection was associated with worse outcome and AR-V7 in CTCs was associated with increased rate of progression as best response. Plasma AR gain was strongly associated with an adverse outcome, with worse median prostate specific antigen (PSA)-PFS (4.2 vs. 14.7 m; p < 0.0001), rad-PFS (4.5 vs. 27.6 m; p < 0.0001), and OS (12.7 vs. 38.1 m; p < 0.0001). The clinical prognostic model developed in PREVAIL was validated (C-Index 0.70) and the addition of plasma AR (C-Index 0.79; p < 0.001) increased its prognostic ability. We generated a parsimonious model including alkaline phosphatase (ALP); PSA and AR gain (C-index 0.78) that was validated in an independent cohort. CONCLUSIONS: TMPRSS2-ERG detection did not correlate with differential activity of enzalutamide in first-line mCRPC. However, we observed that CTCs and plasma AR gain were the most relevant biomarkers.

Complete remissions following immunotherapy or immuno-oncology combinations in cancer patients: the MOUSEION-03 meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Immunotherapy has determined unprecedented long-term responses in several hematological and solid tumors. In the MOUSEION-03 study, we conducted a meta-analysis to determine the possibility of achieving complete remissions (CR) with immunotherapy or immuno-oncology combinations in cancer patients. METHODS: The primary endpoint was to assess the incidence of CR in cancer patients receiving immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) alone or in combination with other agents versus control treatments. The pooled odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) for CR rate were extracted. RESULTS: A total of 12,130 potentially relevant trials were identified; 5 phase II and 80 phase III randomized studies (37 monotherapies and 48 combinations) and 49,425 cancer patients were included. The most frequent types of malignancies were non-small cell lung cancer (n = 14,249; 29%), urothelial cancer (n = 6536; 13%), renal cell carcinoma (n = 5743; 12%), and melanoma (n = 2904; 6%). In patients treated with immunotherapy (as monotherapy or in combination with other anticancer agents), the pooled OR was 1.67 (1.52-1.84). The highest OR was registered by immune-based combinations with two ICIs (3.56, 95% CI 1.28-9.90). CONCLUSIONS: To the best of the authors' knowledge, no comprehensive meta-analysis on the use of ICIs and ICI-based combinations in solid tumors to systematically investigate the probability to achieve CR has been published so far. Although CR is not a common event in several cancer patients receiving immunotherapy, the MOUSEION-03 suggests that the use of ICIs may significantly increase the chance of achieving CR in comparison with control treatments.

Real-world effectiveness of pembrolizumab as first-line therapy for cisplatin-ineligible patients with advanced urothelial carcinoma: the ARON-2 study.

BACKGROUND: The advent of immune-checkpoint inhibitors has challenged previous treatment paradigms for advanced urothelial carcinoma (UC) in the post-platinum setting as well as in the first-line setting for cisplatin-ineligible patients. In this study, we investigated the effectiveness of pembrolizumab as first-line treatment for cisplatin-ineligible UC. METHODS: Data from patients aged ≥ 18 years with cisplatin-ineligible UC and receiving first-line pembrolizumab from January 1st 2017 to September 1st 2022 were collected. Cisplatin ineligibility was defined according to the Galsky criteria. Thirty-three Institutions from 18 countries were involved in the ARON-2 study. RESULTS: Our analysis included 162 patients. The median follow-up time was 18.9 months (95%CI 15.3-76.9). In the overall study population, the median OS was 15.8 months (95%CI 11.3-32.4). The median OS was significantly longer in males versus females while no statistically significant differences were observed between patients aged < 65y versus ≥ 65y and between smokers and non-smokers. According to Recist 1.1 criteria, 26 patients (16%) experienced CR, 32 (20%) PR, 39 (24%) SD and 55 (34%) PD. CONCLUSIONS: Our data confirm the role of pembrolizumab as first-line therapy for cisplatin-unfit patients. Further studies investigating the biological and immunological characteristics of UC patients are warranted in order to optimize the outcome of patients receiving immunotherapy in this setting.

Use of concomitant proton pump inhibitors, statins or metformin in patients treated with pembrolizumab for metastatic urothelial carcinoma: data from the ARON-2 retrospective study.

BACKGROUND: Concomitant medications may potentially affect the outcome of cancer patients. In this sub-analysis of the ARON-2 real-world study (NCT05290038), we aimed to assess the impact of concomitant use of proton pump inhibitors (PPI), statins, or metformin on outcome of patients with metastatic urothelial cancer (mUC) receiving second-line pembrolizumab. METHODS: We collected data from the hospital medical records of patients with mUC treated with pembrolizumab as second-line therapy at 87 institutions from 22 countries. Patients were assessed for overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall response rate. We carried out a survival analysis by a Cox regression model. RESULTS: A total of 802 patients were eligible for this retrospective study; the median follow-up time was 15.3 months. PPI users compared to non-users showed inferior PFS (4.5 vs. 7.2 months, p = 0.002) and OS (8.7 vs. 14.1 months, p < 0.001). Concomitant PPI use remained a significant predictor of PFS and OS after multivariate Cox analysis. The use of statins or metformin was not associated with response or survival. CONCLUSIONS: Our study results suggest a significant prognostic impact of concomitant PPI use in mUC patients receiving pembrolizumab in the real-world context. The mechanism of this interaction warrants further elucidation.

Expert design thinking workshops to analyze users' perceived applicability of NUTRI-ONCOCARE algorithm to prevent and treat malnutrition in cancer patients under routine clinical practice conditions in Spain: the ALLIANCE study.

PURPOSE: NUTRI-ONCOCARE algorithm has been developed to identify and treat patients with solid tumors who are at risk of malnutrition. The present study is aimed at analyzing users' opinion about this new tool and at assessing whether it is perceived as useful to achieve the behavioral change required for a successful integration of nutritional assessment into routine cancer care. METHODS: Design thinking Double Diamond process was applied. A multidisciplinary team composed of ten potential end-users (four oncologists, three endocrinologists, one nutritionist, and two hospital pharmacists) participated in three different workshops aiming to analyze the different tasks included within the NUTRI-ONCOCARE algorithm. RESULTS: Users agreed on the need to perform nutritional assessment around cancer diagnosis and through the course of the disease using standardized tools included in hospital nutritional protocols and involving healthcare professionals with nutrition expertise. Nutritional evaluation and intervention should be individual and comprehensive, considering not only nutritional parameters but also patients' functional status. According to participants' opinion, the implementation of nutritional screening in routine clinical practice is limited by the lack of time and staff to conduct nutritional assessments, the low level of nutrition expert participation, and the poor support provided by hospital managers, which are often unaware of nutrition's impact in cancer care. CONCLUSIONS: Experts recognized the importance of considering nutritional status in cancer patients and identified the opportunity provided by the NUTRI-ONCOCARE algorithm for this purpose, as it meets main requirements for being used routinely in clinical practice.

Position Statement on the Diagnosis, Treatment, and Response Evaluation to Systemic Therapies of Advanced Neuroendocrine Tumors, With a Special Focus on Radioligand Therapy.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to provide a guidance for the management of neuroendocrine tumors (NETs) in clinical practice. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Nominal group and Delphi techniques were used. A steering committee of 8 experts reviewed the current management of NETs, identified controversies and gaps, critically analyzed the available evidence, and formulated several guiding statements for clinicians. Subsequently, a panel of 26 experts, was selected to test agreement with the statements through 2 Delphi rounds. Items were scored on a 4-point Likert scale from 1 = totally agree to 4 = totally disagree. The agreement was considered if ≥75% of answers pertained to Categories 1 and 2 (consensus with the agreement) or Categories 3 and 4 (consensus with the disagreement). RESULTS: Overall, 132 statements were proposed, which incorporated the following areas: (1) overarching principles; (2) progression and treatment response criteria; (3) advanced gastro-enteric NETs; (4) advanced pancreatic NETs; (5) advanced NETs in other locations; (6) re-treatment with radioligand therapy (RLT); (7) neoadjuvant therapy. After 2 Delphi rounds, only 4 statements lacked a clear consensus. RLT was not only recommended in the sequencing of different NETs but also as neoadjuvant treatment, while several indications for retreatment with RLT were also established. CONCLUSION: This document sought to pull together the experts' attitudes when dealing with different clinical scenarios of patients suffering from NETs, with RLT having a specific role where evidence-based data are limited.

Streptozotocin, 1982-2022: Forty Years from the FDA's Approval to Treat Pancreatic Neuroendocrine Tumors.

In May 1982, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved the use of streptozotocin to treat pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (panNETs). Thus, this year marks 40 years since that landmark date. This review of streptozotocin to treat panNETs is intended to commemorate this anniversary. A historical perspective of the chemical structure, pharmacokinetics, and mechanism of action of streptozotocin is followed by data from prospective and retrospective clinical studies. The last section of the review addresses the latest aspects and takes note of the prospects that lie ahead on the future horizon of the use of streptozotocin to treat panNETs, including ongoing clinical trials.

External Validity of Somatostatin Analogs Trials in Advanced Neuroendocrine Neoplasms: The GETNE-TRASGU Study.

INTRODUCTION: Somatostatin analogs (SSA) prolong progression-free survival (PFS) in patients with well-differentiated gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms (GEP-NENs). However, the eligibility criteria in randomized clinical trials (RCTs) have been restricted, which contrasts with the vast heterogeneity found in NENs. METHODS: We identified patients with well-differentiated (Ki-67% ≤20%), metastatic GEP-NENs treated in first line with SSA monotherapy from the Spanish R-GETNE registry. The therapeutic effect was evaluated using a Bayesian Cox model. The objective was to compare survival-based outcomes from real-world clinical practice versus RCTs. RESULTS: The dataset contained 535 patients with a median age of 62 years (range: 26-89). The median Ki-67% was 4 (range: 0-20). The most common primary tumor sites were as follows: midgut, 46%; pancreas, 34%; unknown primary, 10%; and colorectal, 10%. Half of the patients received octreotide LAR (n = 266) and half, lanreotide autogel (n = 269). The median PFS was 28.0 months (95% CI: 22.1-32.0) for octreotide versus 30.1 months (95% CI: 23.1-38.0) for lanreotide. The overall hazard ratio for lanreotide versus octreotide was 0.90 (95% credible interval: 0.71-1.12). The probability of effect sizes >30% with lanreotide versus octreotide was 2 and 6% for midgut and foregut NENs, respectively. CONCLUSION: Our study evaluated the external validity of RCTs examining SSAs in the real world, as well as the main effect-modifying factors (progression status, symptoms, tumor site, specific metastases, and analytical data). Our results indicate that both octreotide LAR and lanreotide autogel had a similar effect on PFS. Consequently, both represent valid alternatives in patients with well-differentiated, metastatic GEP-NENs.

High-Dose Somatostatin Analogs for the Treatment of Neuroendocrine Neoplasms: where are we Now?

OPINION STATEMENT: Neuroendocrine tumors (NET) represent a complex and heterogeneous group of malignancies arising from the diffuse endocrine cells and other cells derived from the neural crest. Advanced disease is observed at diagnosis in more than one-third of patients. Somatostatin analogs (SSA) are the cornerstone in advanced well-differentiated NET treatment. Unfortunately, most patients will eventually develop resistance to SSA treatment by different mechanisms that are not fully understood. In some cases of refractory carcinoid syndrome or progressive disease, the increase of SSA dose may help to reach out a symptomatic and/or tumor growth control. The clinical evidence behind above-label SSA administration is limited and should be individualized and discussed patient by patient. Some questions regarding high-dose SSA use are unsolved, such as the optimal dose to use, the frequency of administration, or the need of deepen molecular understanding that could help to adequately select patients for this approach.

177Lu-Dotatate plus long-acting octreotide versus high­dose long-acting octreotide in patients with midgut neuroendocrine tumours (NETTER-1): final overall survival and long-term safety results from an open-label, randomised, controlled, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: The primary analysis of the phase 3 NETTER-1 trial showed significant improvement in progression-free survival with 177Lu-Dotatate plus long-acting octreotide versus high-dose long-acting octreotide alone in patients with advanced midgut neuroendocrine tumours. Here, we report the prespecified final analysis of overall survival and long-term safety results. METHODS: This open-label, randomised, phase 3 trial enrolled patients from 41 sites in eight countries across Europe and the USA. Patients were 18 years and older with locally advanced or metastatic, well differentiated, somatostatin receptor-positive midgut neuroendocrine tumours (Karnofsky performance status score ≥60) and disease progression on fixed-dose long-acting octreotide. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) via an interactive web-based response system to intravenous 177Lu-Dotatate 7·4 GBq (200 mCi) every 8 weeks (four cycles) plus intramuscular long-acting octreotide 30 mg (177Lu-Dotatate group) or high-dose long-acting octreotide 60 mg every 4 weeks (control group). The primary endpoint of progression-free survival has been previously reported; here, we report the key secondary endpoint of overall survival in the intention-to-treat population. Final overall survival analysis was prespecified to occur either after 158 deaths or 5 years after the last patient was randomised, whichever occurred first. During long-term follow-up, adverse events of special interest were reported in the 177Lu-Dotatate group only. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01578239. FINDINGS: From Sept 6, 2012, to Jan 14, 2016, 231 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned for treatment. The prespecified final analysis occurred 5 years after the last patient was randomly assigned (when 142 deaths had occurred); median follow-up was 76·3 months (range 0·4-95·0) in the 177Lu-Dotatate group and 76·5 months (0·1-92·3) in the control group. The secondary endpoint of overall survival was not met: median overall survival was 48·0 months (95% CI 37·4-55·2) in the 177Lu-Dotatate group and 36·3 months (25·9-51·7) in the control group (HR 0·84 [95% CI 0·60-1·17]; two-sided p=0·30). During long-term follow-up, treatment-related serious adverse events of grade 3 or worse were recorded in three (3%) of 111 patients in the 177Lu-Dotatate group, but no new treatment-related serious adverse events were reported after the safety analysis cutoff. Two (2%) of 111 patients given 177Lu-Dotatate developed myelodysplastic syndrome, one of whom died 33 months after randomisation (this person was the only the only reported 177Lu-Dotatate treatment-related death). No new cases of myelodysplastic syndrome or acute myeloid leukaemia were reported during long-term follow-up. INTERPRETATION: 177Lu-Dotatate treatment did not significantly improve median overall survival versus high-dose long-acting octreotide. Despite final overall survival not reaching statistical significance, the 11·7 month difference in median overall survival with 177Lu-Dotatate treatment versus high-dose long-acting octreotide alone might be considered clinically relevant. No new safety signals were reported during long-term follow-up. FUNDING: Advanced Accelerator Applications, a Novartis company.

Atezolizumab with or without chemotherapy in metastatic urothelial cancer (IMvigor130): a multicentre, randomised, placebo-controlled phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Atezolizumab can induce sustained responses in metastatic urothelial carcinoma. We report the results of IMvigor130, a phase 3 trial that compared atezolizumab with or without platinum-based chemotherapy versus placebo plus platinum-based chemotherapy in first-line metastatic urothelial carcinoma. METHODS: In this multicentre, phase 3, randomised trial, untreated patients aged 18 years or older with locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma, from 221 sites in 35 countries, were randomly assigned to receive atezolizumab plus platinum-based chemotherapy (group A), atezolizumab monotherapy (group B), or placebo plus platinum-based chemotherapy (group C). Patients received 21-day cycles of gemcitabine (1000 mg/m2 body surface area, administered intravenously on days 1 and 8 of each cycle), plus either carboplatin (area under the curve of 4·5 mg/mL per min administered intravenously) or cisplatin (70 mg/m2 body surface area administered intravenously) on day 1 of each cycle with either atezolizumab (1200 mg administered intravenously on day 1 of each cycle) or placebo. Group B patients received 1200 mg atezolizumab, administered intravenously on day 1 of each 21-day cycle. The co-primary efficacy endpoints for the intention-to-treat population were investigator-assessed Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours 1.1 progression-free survival and overall survival (group A vs group C) and overall survival (group B vs group C), which was to be formally tested only if overall survival was positive for group A versus group C. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02807636. FINDINGS: Between July 15, 2016, and July 20, 2018, we enrolled 1213 patients. 451 (37%) were randomly assigned to group A, 362 (30%) to group B, and 400 (33%) to group C. Median follow-up for survival was 11·8 months (IQR 6·1-17·2) for all patients. At the time of final progression-free survival analysis and interim overall survival analysis (May 31, 2019), median progression-free survival in the intention-to-treat population was 8·2 months (95% CI 6·5-8·3) in group A and 6·3 months (6·2-7·0) in group C (stratified hazard ratio [HR] 0·82, 95% CI 0·70-0·96; one-sided p=0·007). Median overall survival was 16·0 months (13·9-18·9) in group A and 13·4 months (12·0-15·2) in group C (0·83, 0·69-1·00; one-sided p=0·027). Median overall survival was 15·7 months (13·1-17·8) for group B and 13·1 months (11·7-15·1) for group C (1·02, 0·83-1·24). Adverse events that led to withdrawal of any agent occurred in 156 (34%) patients in group A, 22 (6%) patients in group B, and 132 (34%) patients in group C. 50 (11%) patients in group A, 21 (6%) patients in group B, and 27 (7%) patients in group C had adverse events that led to discontinuation of atezolizumab or placebo. INTERPRETATION: Addition of atezolizumab to platinum-based chemotherapy as first-line treatment prolonged progression-free survival in patients with metastatic urothelial carcinoma. The safety profile of the combination was consistent with that observed with the individual agents. These results support the use of atezolizumab plus platinum-based chemotherapy as a potential first-line treatment option for metastatic urothelial carcinoma. FUNDING: F Hoffmann-La Roche and Genentech.

Sunitinib and Evofosfamide (TH-302) in Systemic Treatment-Naïve Patients with Grade 1/2 Metastatic Pancreatic Neuroendocrine Tumors: The GETNE-1408 Trial.

BACKGROUND: Sunitinib (SUN)-induced hypoxia within the tumor could promote the activation of the prodrug evofosfamide (EVO), locally releasing the cytotoxic DNA alkylator bromo-isophosphoramide mustard. SUNEVO, a phase II, open-label, single-arm trial, investigated the potential synergy of SUN plus EVO in advanced progressive pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (panNETs). METHODS: Systemic treatment-naïve patients with advanced or metastatic, unresectable, grade 1/2 panNETs with a Ki67 ≤20%, received EVO 340 mg/m2 on days 8, 15, and 22 every 4 weeks and sunitinib 37.5 mg/day continuously. The primary endpoint was objective response rate, measured every 8 weeks by RECIST version 1.1. RESULTS: From 2015 to 2018, 17 patients were enrolled. The median age was 62.4 years, 47% had a Ki67 >10%, and 70.6% had liver metastasis. Patients received a median of five and four cycles of SUN and EVO, respectively. After a median follow-up of 15.7 months, 17.6% of patients achieved a complete (n = 1) or partial response (n = 2), and 11 patients had stable disease (64.7%). The median progression-free survival was 10.4 months (95% confidence interval, 2.6-18.0). Treatment-related adverse events (grade ≥3) were observed in 64.7% of the patients, the most frequent being neutropenia (35.3%), fatigue (17.6%), and thrombopenia (11.8%). Treatment discontinuation due to toxicity was reported in 88.2% of the patients. No correlation was found between treatment response and DAXX, ATRX, MEN1, SETD2, and PTEN gene mutations. CONCLUSION: SUN plus EVO had a negative toxicity profile that should be taken into account for further clinical research in advanced panNETs. The combination showed moderate activity in terms of treatment response that did not correlate with somatic mutations. (Clinical trial identification number: NCT02402062) IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Addition of hypoxia-activated prodrugs has been proposed as a potential mechanism to overcome tumor resistance to antiangiogenic agents. Sunitinib and evofosfamide, which were widely proposed as a potential synergistic option, showed modest efficacy in pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (panNETs), reaching a median objective response rate of 17.6% and median progression-free survival of 10.4 months. Treatment response does not correlate with the biomarkers analyzed. The high systemic toxicity, with 88.2% of patients discontinuing the treatment, makes this therapeutic approach unfeasible and encourages future research to overcome panNETs' resistance to antiangiogenic agents with other therapies with a safer profile.

Effect of capmatinib on the pharmacokinetics of digoxin and rosuvastatin administered as a 2-drug cocktail in patients with MET-dysregulated advanced solid tumours: A phase I, multicentre, open-label, single-sequence drug-drug interaction study.

AIMS: Capmatinib, an orally bioavailable, highly potent and selective MET inhibitor, was recently approved to treat adult patients with metastatic nonsmall cell lung cancer with METex14 skipping mutations. The study investigated the effect of capmatinib on the pharmacokinetics of a single oral dose of digoxin and rosuvastatin in patients with MET-dysregulated advanced solid tumours. METHODS: This was a multicentre, open-label, single-sequence study. An oral drug cocktail containing 0.25 mg digoxin and 10 mg rosuvastatin was administered to adult patients with MET-dysregulated advanced solid tumours on Day 1, and then on Day 22 with capmatinib. Between Days 11 and 32, capmatinib 400 mg was administered twice daily to ensure the attainment of steady state for drug-drug interaction assessment. Pharmacokinetics of cocktail drugs and safety of capmatinib were evaluated. RESULTS: Thirty-two patients were enrolled. Compared to digoxin alone, the geometric mean ratios (90% confidence interval) of area under the concentration-time curve from time zero to infinity and maximum concentration for digoxin plus capmatinib were 1.47 (1.28, 1.68) and 1.74 (1.43, 2.13), respectively. Compared to rosuvastatin alone, the geometric mean ratios (90% confidence interval) of area under the curve to infinity and maximum concentration for rosuvastatin plus capmatinib were 2.08 (1.56, 2.76) and 3.04 (2.36, 3.92), respectively. Most frequent adverse events (≥25% for all grades) were nausea, asthenia, constipation, vomiting, peripheral oedema and pyrexia. Most frequent Grade 3/4 adverse events (≥5%) were anaemia, pulmonary embolism, asthenia, dyspnoea, nausea and vomiting. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrated that capmatinib is an inhibitor of P-gp and BCRP transporters, with clinically relevant drug-drug interaction potential. Capmatinib was well-tolerated and no unexpected safety concerns were observed.

Novel Tyrosine Kinase Targets in Urothelial Carcinoma.

Urothelial carcinoma represents one of the most prevalent types of cancer worldwide, and its incidence is expected to grow. Although the treatment of the advanced disease was based on chemotherapy for decades, the developments of different therapies, such as immune checkpoint inhibitors, antibody drug conjugates and tyrosine kinase inhibitors, are revolutionizing the therapeutic landscape of this tumor. This development coincides with the increasing knowledge of the pathogenesis and genetic alterations in urothelial carcinoma, from the non-muscle invasive setting to the metastatic one. The purpose of this article is to provide a comprehensive review of the different tyrosine kinase targets and their roles in the therapeutic scene of urothelial carcinoma.

The PALBONET Trial: A Phase II Study of Palbociclib in Metastatic Grade 1 and 2 Pancreatic Neuroendocrine Tumors (GETNE-1407).

LESSONS LEARNED: Palbociclib demonstrated no detectable activity in molecularly unselected and heavily pretreated patients with advanced grade 1/2 pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors. Predictive biomarkers that improve patient selection should be investigated in future studies of palbociclib. BACKGROUND: Palbociclib, a CDK4/6 inhibitor, has shown in vitro activity in pancreatic neuroendocrine tumor (pNET) cell lines. Here we prospectively assessed the activity and safety of palbociclib in monotherapy in metastatic refractory pNETs. METHODS: This was a nonrandomized, open-label, phase II study of patients with metastatic grade (G)1/2 pNETs recruited from 10 centers in Spain. Palbociclib 125 mg was orally administered once daily for 21 of 28 days until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. RESULTS: Twenty-one patients were included; 52.4% were men, and median age was 57.4 years (range, 37.4-73.4). Patients had previously received a median of three prior lines of systemic therapy (range, 1-10) for advanced disease (somatostatin analogues, 71.4%; sunitinib, 81.0%; everolimus, 47.6%; chemotherapy, 47.6%). Nineteen patients were evaluated for objective response rate (ORR), with a median follow-up of 12.4 months (range, 7.53-19.33). No objective and confirmed responses were observed (0%); 11 (57.9%) patients had stable disease, and 6 of them lasted more than 6 months; 8 (42.1%) patients had disease progression as best response. Median progression-free survival (PFS) was 2.6 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 0-14.4) and median overall survival (OS) was 18.7 months (95% CI, 7.4-29.9; Fig. 1). Most frequent toxicities of any grade were asthenia (76.2%), neutropenia (42.9%), diarrhea (33.3%), and nausea (33.3%). Five (23.8%) patients developed G3-4 neutropenia and two (9.5%) patients developed G3-4 thrombocytopenia. CONCLUSION: Lack of activity was observed with palbociclib as a single agent in molecularly unselected and heavily pretreated patients with advanced G1/2 pNETs.

Phase 3 Trial of 177Lu-Dotatate for Midgut Neuroendocrine Tumors.

BACKGROUND: Patients with advanced midgut neuroendocrine tumors who have had disease progression during first-line somatostatin analogue therapy have limited therapeutic options. This randomized, controlled trial evaluated the efficacy and safety of lutetium-177 (177Lu)-Dotatate in patients with advanced, progressive, somatostatin-receptor-positive midgut neuroendocrine tumors. METHODS: We randomly assigned 229 patients who had well-differentiated, metastatic midgut neuroendocrine tumors to receive either 177Lu-Dotatate (116 patients) at a dose of 7.4 GBq every 8 weeks (four intravenous infusions, plus best supportive care including octreotide long-acting repeatable [LAR] administered intramuscularly at a dose of 30 mg) (177Lu-Dotatate group) or octreotide LAR alone (113 patients) administered intramuscularly at a dose of 60 mg every 4 weeks (control group). The primary end point was progression-free survival. Secondary end points included the objective response rate, overall survival, safety, and the side-effect profile. The final analysis of overall survival will be conducted in the future as specified in the protocol; a prespecified interim analysis of overall survival was conducted and is reported here. RESULTS: At the data-cutoff date for the primary analysis, the estimated rate of progression-free survival at month 20 was 65.2% (95% confidence interval [CI], 50.0 to 76.8) in the 177Lu-Dotatate group and 10.8% (95% CI, 3.5 to 23.0) in the control group. The response rate was 18% in the 177Lu-Dotatate group versus 3% in the control group (P<0.001). In the planned interim analysis of overall survival, 14 deaths occurred in the 177Lu-Dotatate group and 26 in the control group (P=0.004). Grade 3 or 4 neutropenia, thrombocytopenia, and lymphopenia occurred in 1%, 2%, and 9%, respectively, of patients in the 177Lu-Dotatate group as compared with no patients in the control group, with no evidence of renal toxic effects during the observed time frame. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment with 177Lu-Dotatate resulted in markedly longer progression-free survival and a significantly higher response rate than high-dose octreotide LAR among patients with advanced midgut neuroendocrine tumors. Preliminary evidence of an overall survival benefit was seen in an interim analysis; confirmation will be required in the planned final analysis. Clinically significant myelosuppression occurred in less than 10% of patients in the 177Lu-Dotatate group. (Funded by Advanced Accelerator Applications; NETTER-1 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01578239 ; EudraCT number 2011-005049-11 .).