Outcomes of patients with solid tumour malignancies treated with first-line immuno-oncology agents who do not meet eligibility criteria for clinical trials

Cemiplimab monotherapy as first-line treatment of patients with brain metastases from advanced non-small cell lung cancer with programmed cell death-ligand 1 ≥50

BACKGROUND

In the phase 3 EMPOWER-Lung 1 study, first-line cemiplimab monotherapy provided significant survival benefit versus chemotherapy in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) with programmed cell death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) ≥50%. This exploratory subgroup analysis investigated the clinical outcomes of cemiplimab treatment in patients with advanced NSCLC with brain metastases.

METHODS

Patients with advanced NSCLC were randomized (1:1) to cemiplimab 350 mg every 3 weeks or four cycles of platinum doublet chemotherapy (NCT03088540). Patients with symptomatic radiotherapy-treated brain metastases were eligible to enroll. Of the 565 patients with confirmed PD-L1 expression ≥50%, 69 (12%) had brain metastases at baseline.

RESULTS

Patients with brain metastases who received cemiplimab had a median overall survival (OS) of 52.4 months compared with 20.7 months for those who received chemotherapy (hazard ratio [HR], 0.40; p = .0031) and a median progression-free survival (PFS) of 12.5 versus 5.3 months (HR, 0.33; p = .0002), respectively. Patients without brain metastases had a median OS of 24.3 months with cemiplimab versus 12.5 months with chemotherapy (HR, 0.63; p < .0001); their median PFS was 6.5 months versus 5.2 months (HR, 0.55; p < .0001), respectively. Cemiplimab was associated with a significant improvement in global health status/quality of life in all patients, including those with brain metastases. The cemiplimab safety profile was generally similar in all patients.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with advanced NSCLC with PD-L1 ≥50%, first-line cemiplimab monotherapy improved survival and patient-reported outcomes over chemotherapy for those who received prior radiotherapy for symptomatic brain metastases.

Immunotherapy in advanced non-small cell lung cancer: What to do for the 'Invisible' patients after IPSOS trial results?

BACKGROUND

Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) are currently included in the standard of care of the first-line treatment of advanced/metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). However, a relevant group of clinically unfit patients, including poor Performance Status, Elderly, and those with relevant comorbidities, are not represented in most pivotal clinical trials.

METHODS

An expert panel meeting commentary was virtually held to point out the key issues in treating such 'invisible' patients and to review the available evidence.

RESULTS

Overall, clinically unfit patients represent up to 50% of patients with diagnosis of advanced/metastatic NSCLC. Few dedicated studies with immunotherapy were conducted in this population. Among them, the IPSOS trial finally answers the issue of first line immunotherapy in platinum-unfit patients with advanced NSCLC, demonstrating atezolizumab improved OS and good tolerability compared to monochemotherapy.

CONCLUSIONS

Atezolizumab monotherapy can be considered a valid first-line treatment in patients with advanced NSCLC who are unfit to receive platinum-based chemotherapy, including elderly, those with poor PS and/or comorbidities.

Challenges and Opportunities for the Clinical Application of the Combination of Immune-Checkpoint Inhibitors and Radiation Therapy in the Treatment of Advanced Pancreatic Cancer

The treatment landscape of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) has seen slow progress, with immune-checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) failing to replicate the success observed in other malignancies. The immune-suppressive tumor microenvironment (TME) in PDAC represents a significant barrier, limiting the activation of an effective antitumor immune response following ICI administration. Radiation therapy (RT), with its immunomodulatory effects, has emerged as a promising partner for ICIs. This review discusses the recent efforts evaluating the combination of ICIs and RT in advanced PDAC. While the combination therapy has demonstrated an acceptable safety profile, the reported clinical efficacy remains modest, particularly for patients with refractory metastatic PDAC. The ongoing phase III trial (JCOG1908E) will clarify whether the combination of ICI and RT improves overall survival in chemo-naïve patients with locally advanced PDAC.

A Prospective Non-interventional Real-World Study of cabozantinib in Pretreated Patients With Advanced Renal Cell Carcinoma Refractory to Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor-Targeted Therapy (CASSIOPE)

BACKGROUND

There is a lack of published data on real-world cabozantinib use in patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma after prior vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF)-targeted therapy.

METHODS

CASSIOPE was a real-world, prospective, multicenter, non-interventional postauthorization safety study of cabozantinib in adult patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma in Europe following prior VEGF-targeted treatment (NCT03419572). Endpoints included cabozantinib utilization (dose modifications due to adverse events [AEs; primary endpoint], dose, dose modifications, and treatment duration), safety, effectiveness (progression-free survival [PFS], overall survival [OS], best overall response [BOR]), and healthcare resource utilization.

FINDINGS

Full analysis set (FAS)/safety population comprised 679 patients; 433 of these initiated cabozantinib at 60 mg/day (recommended dose) (primary safety population). Median age (FAS) was 67 (range, 29-93) years; most were male (73·0%), had clear-cell histology (85·7%), metastatic disease at cabozantinib initiation (97·8%), and prior nephrectomy (80·3%). In the primary safety population, 77·1% experienced dose modification owing to an AE. In the safety population, the median daily dose was 40·0 (range, 7·8-60·0) mg/day and the median treatment duration was 7·8 (< 0·1-15·2) months. Treatment-emergent and treatment-related AEs were experienced by 95·9% and 90·4% of patients, respectively. Median PFS (FAS) assessed by the local investigator using any method was 8·3 months, and 1-year OS rate was 74%. Approximately one-third of all patients had a BOR of partial response and 6 had a complete response.

INTERPRETATION

Second- or later-line cabozantinib was effective and manageable in a real-world setting and had a safety profile consistent with previous studies.

Immune-Based and Novel Therapies in Variant Histology Renal Cell Carcinomas

Renal cell carcinoma (RCC) is a heterogeneous disease that represents the most common type of kidney cancer. The classification of RCC is primarily based on distinct morphological and molecular characteristics, with two broad categories: clear cell RCC (ccRCC) and non-clear cell RCC (nccRCC). Clear cell RCC is the predominant subtype, representing about 70-80% of all RCC cases, while non-clear cell subtypes collectively make up the remaining 20-30%. Non-clear cell RCC encompasses many histopathological variants, each with unique biological and clinical characteristics. Additionally, any RCC subtype can undergo sarcomatoid dedifferentiation, which is associated with poor prognosis and rapid disease progression. Recent advances in molecular profiling have also led to the identification of molecularly defined variants, further highlighting the complexity of this disease. While immunotherapy has shown efficacy in some RCC variants and subpopulations, significant gaps remain in the treatment of rare subtypes. This review explores the outcomes of immunotherapy across RCC subtypes, including rare variants, and highlights opportunities for improving care through novel therapies, biomarker-driven approaches, and inclusive clinical trial designs.

Changes in outcome of patients with advanced non-clear cell renal cell carcinoma from the tyrosine kinase inhibitor era to the immuno-oncology era

BACKGROUND

The therapeutic benefit of immuno-oncology (IO) therapy for patients with advanced non-clear-cell renal cell carcinoma (nccRCC) remains unclear.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We reviewed clinical data from 93 patients with advanced nccRCC who received first-line systemic therapy including IO combination therapy and tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) monotherapy at our affiliated institutions. Patients were divided based on the period when the treatment was implemented as the standard of care into the IO and TKI eras. Survival and tumor response outcomes were compared between the IO and TKI eras.

RESULTS

Of the 93 patients, 50 (54%) and 43 (46%) were categorized as IO era and TKI era groups, respectively. Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were significantly longer in the IO era than in the TKI era (median PFS: 8.97 vs. 4.96 months, p = 0.0152; median OS: 38.4 vs. 13.5 months, p = 0.0001). After the adjustment using other covariates, the treatment era was an independent factor for PFS (hazard ratio: 0.59, p = 0.0235) and OS (hazard ratio: 0.27, p < 0.0001). Objective response and disease control rates was not significantly different between the treatment eras (26% vs. 16.3%, p = 0.268; 62% vs. 62.8%, p = 0.594).

CONCLUSION

The implementation of IO therapy was significantly associated with longer survival in the nccRCC population. Further studies are needed to establish a more effective treatment strategy in this population using multiple regimens of IO combination therapy.

RENO Study: Clinical characteristics, treatment patterns and survival results in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma in Northern Spain

BACKGROUND

The current available evidence on the management of metastatic renal cell cancer (mRCC) in real life is scarce in our environment. We present a summary of the existing real-world data and the results of an analysis describing the clinical characteristics, treatments, and health outcomes of patients with mRCC in northern Spain.

METHODS

Retrospective observational study. Adult patients diagnosed with mRCC between Jan 2007 and Dec 2019 were included. Epidemiological, efficacy and toxicity data were collected. Median overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were determined using the Kaplan-Meier method.

RESULTS

A total of 829 patients were included (median age at diagnosis:63 years;73% men). Median follow-up was 180 months. The preponderant histology was clear cell (85%). In 50% the initial diagnosis was advanced disease. The distribution according to IMDC prognosis was good (24%), intermediate (50%) and poor (26%). The most frequent metastatic locations were lung (68.3%) and lymph node (41.0%). Most patients (95%) received a first line (1L) systemic treatment, 60% were treated with a second line (2L) of therapy and 37% received third line (3L). A VEGFR-TKIs was the most common treatment (1L: 90%, n = 507; 2L: 49%, n = 233; 3L: 54%, n = 156) followed by mTOR inhibitors (1L: 2%, n = 4; 2L: 27%, n = 126; 3L: 23%, n = 68) and immunotherapy (1L: 3.7%, n = 25; 2L: 27%, n = 126). Median OS was 24.5 months in the general population. According to IMDC prognostic groups, OS was 52.5, 25.7 and 9 months respectively. From the start of the 1L, 2L, and 3L treatment, median PFS was: 1L: 7.8 (6.8-9.0); 2L: 4.9 (4.3-5.5); 3L: 4.3 (3.8-4.8) months. No unexpected toxicity was reported.

CONCLUSIONS

The Real-World Data on the management of mRCC in Northern Spain are comparable in epidemiology, efficacy, and safety to studies conducted in other areas of the world. The significant reduction in the number of patients receiving second and subsequent lines of therapy hampers the access to new therapies developed in this context.

Quantitative evaluation of the impact of relaxing eligibility criteria on the risk-benefit profile of drugs for lung cancer based on real-world data

INTRODUCTION

Restrictive eligibility criteria in cancer drug trials result in low enrollment rates and limited population diversity. Relaxed eligibility criteria (REC) based on solid evidence is becoming necessary for stakeholders worldwide. However, the absence of high-quality, favorable evidence remains a major challenge. This study presents a protocol to quantitatively evaluate the impact of relaxing eligibility criteria in common non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) protocols in China, on the risk-benefit profile. This involves a detailed explanation of the rationale, framework, and design of REC.

METHODS

To evaluate our REC in NSCLC drug trials, we will first construct a structured, cross-dimensional real-world NSCLC database using deep learning methods. We will then establish randomized virtual cohorts and perform benefit-risk assessment using Monte Carlo simulation and propensity matching. Shapley value will be utilized to quantitatively measure the effect of the change of each eligibility criterion on patient volume, clinical efficacy and safety.

DISCUSSION

This study is one of the few that focuses on the problem of overly stringent eligibility criteria cancer drug clinical trials, providing quantitative evaluation of the effect of relaxing each NSCLC eligibility criterion. This study will not only provide scientific evidence for the rational design of population inclusion in lung cancer clinical trials, but also establish a data governance system, as well as a REC evaluation framework that can be generalized to other cancer studies.

Checkpoint Inhibitor Monotherapy in Potentially Trial-Eligible or Trial-Ineligible Patients With Metastatic NSCLC in the German Prospective CRISP Registry Real-World Cohort (AIO-TRK-0315)

Introduction

Patients with metastatic NSCLC (mNSCLC) treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors in clinical practice may often not meet the strict inclusion criteria of clinical trials. Our aim was to assess the trial eligibility of patients with mNSCLC treated with pembrolizumab monotherapy in real-world and to compare the outcome of "trial-ineligible" and "potentially trial-eligible" patients.

Methods

Data from the prospective, clinical research platform CRISP were used to compare patient characteristics, treatment, and outcome of patients with programmed cell death-ligand 1 tumor proportion score greater than or equal to 50% tumors treated with pembrolizumab monotherapy who are deemed either "potentially trial-eligible" or "trial-ineligible" according to inclusion and exclusion criteria of the registrational studies (KEYNOTE-024 and -042).

Results

Of 746 patients included, 343 patients (46.0%) were classified as "trial-ineligible" and had significantly worse outcomes compared with "potentially trial-eligible" patients (n = 403, 54.0%): median progression-free survival: 6.2 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 5.2-8.4) versus 10.3 (95% CI: 8.4-13.8) months, hazard ratio (trial-ineligible versus potentially trial-eligible) of 1.43 (95% CI: 1.19-1.72), p less than 0.001; median overall survival: 15.9 (95% CI: 11.4-20.3) versus 25.3 (95% CI: 19.8-30.4) months, hazard ratio of 1.36 (95% CI: 1.10-1.67), p equals 0.004.

Conclusions

Our data reveal that a considerable proportion of patients with mNSCLC are not eligible to participate in a clinical trial and were found to have worse outcomes than potentially trial-eligible patients, whose outcomes were comparable with those obtained from pivotal clinical trials. This is of substantial clinical relevance for physicians discussing outcomes to be expected with their patients and stresses the need for real-world effectiveness analyses.

Association Between Kidney Function and Outcomes Following Immune Checkpoint Inhibitor-Based Combination Therapy in Patients With Advanced Renal Cell Carcinoma

BACKGROUND

It remains unclear whether kidney function affects outcomes following immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI)-based combination therapy for advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC).

METHODS

We retrospectively evaluated data of 167 patients with advanced RCC, including 98 who received ICI dual combination therapy (ie, immunotherapy [IO]-IO) and 69 who received ICI combined with tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) (ie, IO-TKI). In each regimen, treatment profiles were assessed according to the grade of chronic kidney disease (CKD) as defined by the KDIGO 2012 criteria.

RESULTS

Of the 98 patients who received IO-IO, 31 (32%), 30 (31%), 15 (15%), and 22 (22%) had CKD G1/2, G3a, G3b, and G4/5, respectively. Of the 69 patients who received IO-TKI, 18 (26%), 25 (36%), and 26 (38%) had G1/2, G3a, and G3b/4/5, respectively. Regarding efficacy, progression-free survival, overall survival, or objective response rate was not different according to the CKD grade in both treatment groups (P > .05). Regarding safety, the rate of adverse events, treatment interruption, or corticosteroid administration was not different according to the CKD grade in the IO-IO group (P > .05), whereas in the IO-TKI group, the incidence of grade ≥ 3 adverse events were significantly higher (P = .0292), and the rates of ICI interruption (P = .0353) and corticosteroid administration (P = .0685) increased, according to the CKD grade.

CONCLUSION

There is a differential safety but comparable efficacy profile between the IO-IO and IO-TKI regimens in patients with CKD. Further prospective studies are required to confirm these findings.

Outcomes of patients with advanced epithelial growth factor receptor mutant lung cancer treated with first-line osimertinib who would not have met the eligibility criteria for the FLAURA clinical trial

OBJECTIVES

Osimertinib is largely used as first-line therapy for metastatic epithelial growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutant lung cancers based on the FLAURA clinical trial. Real-world patient outcomes often differ from clinical trial outcomes. This study evaluated the efficacy of first-line osimertinib in patients treated in British Columbia (BC), Canada. Furthermore, we compared the outcomes of patients who would and would not have been eligible for the original FLAURA trial.

METHODS

Consecutive patients receiving first-line osimertinib for metastatic EGFR exon19 or L858R lung cancer were identified using the BC Cancer Pharmacy Database. Patient eligibility for the FLAURA clinical trial were retrospectively reviewed based on the following criteria: ECOG ≥ 2, symptomatic brain metastases or on steroids, hemoglobin < 90 g/L, platelets < 100x109/L, or a creatinine clearance < 50 mL/min. mOS was assessed for the entire population and compared between patients who would have been eligible and ineligible for FLAURA.

RESULTS

From January 2020 to October 2021, 311 patients received first-line osimertinib; 44 % (137/311) were deemed FLAURA ineligible, predominantly due to low ECOG (n = 120). After a median follow-up of 26.5 months, the mOS for the entire cohort was 27.4 months (95 %CI 23.8-30.1). The mOS for ineligible patients was 18 months shorter than eligible patients (15.8 vs 34.2, p < 0.001). Ineligible patients had higher rates of de novo stage IV disease, higher rates of stage IVB disease, and more sites of disease than eligible patients.

CONCLUSION

In this real-world population, nearly half of patients would have been ineligible for FLAURA. The mOS was one year shorter than reported in FLAURA. However, patients who would have been eligible for the FLAURA clinical trial had similar OS to patients enrolled in FLAURA. Trial ineligible patients had a higher burden of disease at baseline which may have led to inferior outcomes. Further research is needed to improve outcomes in these patients.

Face to face among different chemo-immunotherapy combinations in the first line treatment of patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer: Results of an international expert panel meeting by the italian association of thoracic oncology (AIOT)

BACKGROUND

The combination of platinum-based chemotherapy with immune-checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) is a standard of care option in the front-line treatment of advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Positive efficacy and safety results have been demonstrated with different chemo-ICI combinations in the corresponding clinical trials, however no randomized prospective comparison is available and there is no evidence on how to choose among the available regimens.

METHODS

A virtual International Expert Panel took place in July 2023 to review data on chemo-ICI regimens available in the first-line setting in patients with NSCLC, and reach common considerations both in clinical practice and in research setting.

RESULTS

Overall, all panelists agreed that safety of the chemo-immunotherapy combination regimens is supported by reviewed data, showing no additional toxicity concerns over those of the individual components of each regimen and highlighting differences in toxicity profile based on ICI component (single anti-PD-1 versus double anti-PD-1 and anti-CTLA-4). Among disease characteristics, PD-L1 value (<1%) but not histology was considered a potential selection factor in favor of the combination with dual ICI. With regards to clinical features, the panelists agreed that chemotherapy, whichever the ICI combination regimen, remains the backbone to counteract disease-related symptoms included those conditioning worse performance status. The panelists defined high, medium, and low priorities in clinical research. High priority was attributed to prospectively evaluating the impact of the addition of anti-CTLA-4 on brain metastasis, biomarker subgroups, and the optimal duration and schedule of combination regimens.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on the available evidence, the panelists reached common considerations on strengths and differences between chemotherapy plus single agent ICI and chemotherapy plus double agent ICIs in patients with advanced NSCLC. In the absence of direct comparison, different toxicity profile and subgroup analysis by PD-L1 are considered as the main potential features to select among the two regimens, however to be confirmed by recommended prospective randomized clinical research.

Time to treatment discontinuation in first-line non-small cell lung carcinoma: an overview

OBJECTIVE

Time To Discontinuation (TTD) is defined as the time from the start of treatment to the end of treatment, usually occurring due to loss of efficacy or occurrence of adverse events. It has become an important surrogate efficacy endpoint especially in real-world studies due to its correlation with endpoints such as Progression Free Survival (PFS). The aim of the study is to conduct a literature review of all studies reporting TTD in first-line therapy of Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC).

METHODS

All articles that reported TTD for any first-line treatment of NSCLC as of 30 June 2022 were extracted from the PubMed search engine. From these articles, the drugs, study type, and TTD values were extracted. A descriptive analysis of the studies was made, dividing the TTD by subgroup according to the type of treatment (traditional chemotherapy, target therapy, immunotherapy) and study design (clinical trials, real world studies).

RESULTS

Fifty-five studies were considered for the analysis, of which 12 were published in 2021; 28 were clinical trials and 27 were real-world studies. Thirty of the studies considered involved conventional chemotherapy and expressed TTD values from 1.4 to 4.5 months, 5 of the studies considered involved immunotherapy with TTD values from 2.1 to 7.4 months and 18 of the studies considered target therapy, with TTD values from 4 to 31 months. The clinical trials reported TTD values from 1.4 to 16 months and the real-world studies from 2 to 31 months.

CONCLUSION

Studies reporting TTD are increasing, most notably real-world studies. Given the increasing importance of TTD as an efficacy endpoint, it becomes critical to measure and monitor it in various therapeutic settings such as NSCLC. This is the first study to review all TTD values of drugs used in first-line NSCLC.

The landscape of immune therapy in vulnerable patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer: a narrative review

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

The clinical development of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) has led to substantial advances in the treatment of lung cancer. In particular, the contribution of ICIs to the long-term survival of certain patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) has been reported. With the accumulated experience in the use of ICIs, numerous studies have documented the efficacy and safety of ICIs in patients with diverse backgrounds, including those with problematic indications for drug therapy. In the current review, we summarize the most recent literature-based findings on ICI administration in vulnerable patients with NSCLC and provide an overview of the current status and prospects of ICIs.

METHODS

Herein, we defined vulnerable as the group of patients with NSCLC and performance status (PS) ≥2 (poor PS), advanced age (≥75 years), or cancer cachexia. We conducted a narrative review of the literature on the efficacy and safety of ICIs in vulnerable patients with advanced NSCLC.

KEY CONTENT AND FINDINGS

Among the vulnerable patient group, poor PS was a strong, poor prognostic factor, even in patients undergoing ICI therapy. ICI therapy in older patients can be effective, although adverse events (AEs) should be carefully monitored. The efficacy of ICI therapy in patients with cancer cachexia is poor, with further therapeutic development warranted.

CONCLUSIONS

Although prior studies have evaluated lung cancer pharmacotherapy in various vulnerable populations, clinical studies on the application of ICIs in patients with vulnerable NSCLC are lacking in both number and quality. Further development of these therapeutic agents, with the emergence of additional evidence regarding their appropriate use in this population, is expected.

Effectiveness of Immune Checkpoint Inhibitor with Anti-PD-1 Monotherapy or in Combination with Ipilimumab in Younger versus Older Adults with Advanced Melanoma

Background: The majority of melanoma is diagnosed in individuals between 55 and 84 years old. Current data varied in reporting differences in survival outcomes amongst different age groups. Methods: A retrospective, multi-center, provincial cohort database was used to investigate the relationship between age (<65 or ≥65 years old) and overall survival. Patients must have had histologically confirmed locally advanced or metastatic melanoma and had to have received at least one cycle of immunotherapy (single agent nivolumab, pembrolizumab, or combination ipilimumab plus nivolumab). Results: From August 2013 to May 2020, we identified 497 patients (median age = 64 [range 12-96 years]; 65.2% men; 36.4% with a BRAF mutation (V600E and V600K)). Of these, 260 were < 65 years old, and 237 were ≥65 years old. A total of 39.1% of the patients in the younger cohort received combination ICI compared with 10.2% in the older cohort, and the difference was statistically significant. Median survival amongst individuals aged ≥65 years old was shorter compared to individuals <65 years old, with a median overall survival of 17.1 (95% CI 12.3-22.9 months) months and 22.2 months (95% CI 18.7-33.8 months), respectively (p = 0.04), at a median follow-up of 34.4 months (range: 1.84-81.4 months). The survival difference was present in the cutaneous melanoma cohort where median OS was 18.2 months (95% CI 12.3-30.4 months) in patients ≥65 years old and 23.8 months (95% CI 19.2-48.2 months) in patients <65 years old, p = 0.04. There were no significant differences by age in the non-cutaneous melanoma cohort. A combination of nivolumab plus ipilimumab was associated with an improved overall survival hazard ratio of 0.48 (95% CI 0.36-0.65) as compared to anti-PD-1 monotherapy alone (p < 0.001). In the cutaneous cohort treated with anti-PD-1 monotherapy (n = 306), no significant differences were seen with median OS at 16.1 months (95% CI 11.4-25.7 months) in patients ≥65 years old and 17.1 months (95% CI 12.0-22.2 months) in patients <65 years old (p = 0.84). Tumor response to anti-PD-1 was higher in the older patients compared with the response in younger patients with cutaneous melanoma. Conclusions: Older melanoma patients have similar survival compared with younger patients after receiving the same treatment with anti-PD-1 monotherapy. The superior survival observed in the younger patients is possibly related to the higher utilization of combination ICI. Tumor response to immunotherapy is superior in older patients with cutaneous melanoma; however, younger patients may improve their survival by using combination ICI.

An Overview of Systemic Targeted Therapy in Renal Cell Carcinoma, with a Focus on Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma and Brain Metastases

The most commonly diagnosed malignancy of the urinary system is represented by renal cell carcinoma. Various subvariants of RCC were described, with a clear-cell type prevailing in about 85% of all RCC tumors. Patients with metastases from renal cell carcinoma did not have many effective therapies until the end of the 1980s, as long as hormonal therapy and chemotherapy were the only options available. The outcomes were unsatisfactory due to the poor effectiveness of the available therapeutic options, but then interferon-alpha and interleukin-2 showed treatment effectiveness, providing benefits but only for less than half of the patients. However, it was not until 2004 that targeted therapies emerged, prolonging the survival rate. Currently, new technologies and strategies are being developed to improve the actual efficacy of available treatments and their prognostic aspects. This article summarizes the mechanisms of action, importance, benefits, adverse events of special interest, and efficacy of immunotherapy in metastatic renal cell carcinoma, with a focus on brain metastases.

Impact of Performance Status on Survival Outcomes and Health Care Utilization in Patients With Advanced NSCLC Treated With Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors

Introduction

Landmark trials testing immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) in advanced NSCLC are difficult to extrapolate to real-world practice given the exclusion of patients with poor (i.e., ≥2) Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (ECOG PS). We sought to evaluate the impact of ECOG PS on clinical outcomes and health care utilization in patients with NSCLC treated with ICIs in real-world practice.

Methods

Patients with advanced NSCLC who received at least one dose of pembrolizumab or nivolumab were retrospectively identified from the Alberta Immunotherapy Database. The primary outcome was median overall survival, as stratified by ECOG PS. Secondary outcomes included median time-to-treatment failure and metrics of health care utilization, including emergency department visits, hospitalizations, and death in hospital.

Results

A total of 790 patients were included, with 29.2% having poor ECOG PS at initiation of ICI. These patients had significantly lower median overall survival (3.3 versus 13.4 mo) and median time-to-treatment failure (1.4 versus 4.9 mo) compared with those with favorable ECOG PS (p < 0.0001 for both outcomes). Patients with poor ECOG PS were also more likely to present to the emergency department, be admitted to the hospital, and die in the hospital during their first admission (risk ratio = 1.6, 2.3-2.7, p < 0.001).

Conclusions

Patients with NSCLC with poor ECOG PS treated with ICI had significantly worse survival outcomes and were significantly more likely to use health care services than those with favorable ECOG PS. The large proportion of patients with poor ECOG PS further justifies the urgent need for randomized trials evaluating the efficacy of ICI in this high-risk population.

Comparison of Outcomes Between Therapeutic Combinations Based on Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors or Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitor Monotherapy for First-Line Therapy of Patients with Advanced Renal Cell Carcinoma Outside of Clinical Trials: A Real-World Retrospective Multi-Institutional Study

BACKGROUND

Clinical trials have demonstrated the superior efficacy of immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI)-based combination therapy over sunitinib, a multi-target tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI), in patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma. However, such benefits have not been elucidated in populations outside of clinical trials.

METHODS

We retrospectively evaluated data from 467 patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma who received ICI-based combination therapy or TKIs, as first-line therapy. Clinical outcome was compared between ICI-based combination therapy and TKIs in each population divided according to trial eligibility.

RESULTS

Among 152 patients treated with ICI-based combination therapy and 315 patients treated with TKIs, 76 (50.0%) and 156 (49.5%) were trial ineligible, respectively. Overall survival (p = 0.0072) and objective response rate (p < 0.0001) were significantly higher in ICI-based combination therapy than in TKIs, but progression-free survival was comparable (p = 0.681). In the trial-eligible population, overall survival was longer (p = 0.0906) and the objective response rate was significantly higher (p = 0.0124) in ICI-based combination therapy than in TKIs. In the trial-ineligible population, overall survival (p = 0.0208) and objective response rate (p = 0.0006) were significantly higher with ICI-based combination therapy than with TKIs. A multivariate analysis also showed that ICI-based combination therapy was independently associated with prolonged overall survival (hazard ratio, 0.47; p = 0.0016). Regardless of trial eligibility, progression-free survival did not differ between ICI-based combination therapy and TKIs (trial eligible: p = 0.287; trial ineligible: p = 0.0708).

CONCLUSIONS

The present study, using real-world data, provides evidence indicating the therapeutic benefit of ICI-based combination therapy over TKIs for advanced renal cell carcinoma was more statistically significant in the trial-ineligible population than in the trial-eligible population.

Real-world Treatment Patterns and Clinical Outcomes for Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma in the Current Treatment Era

Background

Immuno-oncology (IO) agents and tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) have revolutionized the treatment paradigm for metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). Data on real-world usage and outcomes are limited.

Objective

To examine real-world treatment patterns and clinical outcomes for mRCC.

Design setting and participants

This retrospective cohort study included 1538 patients with mRCC who received first-line treatment with pembrolizumab + axitinib (P + A; n = 279, 18%), ipilimumab + nivolumab (I + N; n = 618, 40%), or TKI monotherapy (TKIm; cabozantinib, sunitinib, pazopanib, or axitinib; n = 641, 42%) between January 1, 2018 and September 30, 2020 in US Oncology Network/non-network practices.

Outcome measurements and statistical analysis

The relationship with outcomes, time on treatment (ToT), time to next treatment (TTNT), and overall survival (OS) was analyzed using multivariable Cox proportional-hazards models.

Results and limitations

The median age of the cohort was 67 yr (interquartile range 59.5-74.4), 70% were male, 79% had clear cell RCC, and 87% had an intermediate or poor International mRCC Database Consortium risk score. The median ToT was 13.6 for P + A versus 5.8 for I + N versus 3.4 mo for TKIm (p < 0.001) and the median TTNT was 16.4 for P + A versus 8.3 for I + N versus 8.4 mo for TKIm (p < 0.001) . Median OS was not reached for P + A, 27.6 mo for I + N, and 26.9 mo for TKIm (p = 0.237). On adjusted multivariable analysis, treatment with P + A was associated with better ToT (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 0.59, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.47-0.72 vs I + N; 0.37, 95% CI, 0.30-0.45 vs TKIm; p < 0.0001) and better TTNT (aHR 0.61, 95% CI 0.49-0.77 vs I + N; 0.53, 95% CI 0.42-0.67 vs TKIm; p < 0.0001). Limitations include the retrospective design and the limited follow-up for characterization of survival.

Conclusions

We noted substantial uptake of IO-based therapies in the first-line community oncology setting since their approval. In addition, the study provides insights into clinical effectiveness, tolerability, and/or compliance of IO-based therapies.

Patient summary

We examined the use of immunotherapy for patients with metastatic kidney cancer. The findings suggest rapid implementation of these new treatments by oncologists working in the community setting, which is reassuring for patients with this disease.

Pembrolizumab for all

The current approval indications for pembrolizumab are complex, reflecting the inclusion criteria of numerous clinical trials that led to approvals. Here we argue that allowing the use of pembrolizumab to any advanced solid tumor in any tumor type in any line of therapy for a fixed duration may be preferable to the current assortment of indications. The aggregate response rate in landmark clinical trials for approved indications of pembrolizumab is low and even lower in real-world populations. Due to heterogeneity of response to checkpoint inhibitors and limited predictive biomarkers, there are subsets of patients without approved indications for pembrolizumab that may have response to checkpoint inhibitors. The current regulatory framework of numerous overlapping clinical trials leading to complex approval indications is redundant and inefficient. We conclude that giving pembrolizumab in any metastatic solid tumor in any setting may lead to better outcomes with minimal increase in cost. Randomized clinical trials should focus more on optimal duration of treatment based on tumor type and initial response to checkpoint inhibitors.

CABOSEQ: The Effectiveness of Cabozantinib in Patients With Treatment Refractory Advanced Renal Cell Carcinoma: Results From the International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium (IMDC)

BACKGROUND

There are limited data evaluating the activity of cabozantinib (CABO) as second line (2L) therapy post standard of care ipilimumab-nivolumab (IPI-NIVO) or immuno-oncology(IO)/vascular endothelial growth factor inhibitor (VEGFi) combinations (IOVE).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Using the IMDC database, we sought to identify the objective response rate, time to treatment failure (TTF) and overall survival (OS) of 2L CABO after IPI-NIVO, IOVE combinations, pazopanib or sunitinib (PAZ/SUN) or other first line (1L) therapies. Multivariable Cox regression, adjusted for underlying differences in IMDC groups, was used to compare differences in OS for 2L CABO based on preceding therapy.

RESULTS

Three hundred and forty-six patients received 2L CABO (78 post IPI NIVO, 46 post IOVE, 161 post PAZ/SUN, 61 post Other). Of the entire cohort, 12.6%, 62.6%, and 24.8% were IMDC favourable, intermediate, and poor risk, respectively. Patients that received 1L IPI-NIVO had a median OS of 21.4 (95% CI, 12.1 - NE [Not evaluable]) months compared to 15.7 (95% CI, 9.3 - NE) months in 1L IOVE and 20.7 (95% CI, 15.6 - 35.6) months in 1L PAZ/SUN, P = .28. Median TTF from the initiation of 2L CABO in the overall population was 7.6 (95% CI, 6.6 - 9.0) months. We were unable to detect a significant difference in 2L CABO OS based on type of 1L therapy received: 1L IPI-NIVO (reference group) vs. 1L IOVE HR 1.73 (95% CI, 0.83 - 3.62 P = .14), 1L PAZ/SUN 1.16 (95% CI, 0.67 - 2.00 P = .60), however given the retrospective observational nature of this work a lack of sufficient power may contribute to this.

CONCLUSION

In a large real world dataset, we identified clinically meaningful activity of 2L CABO after all evaluated contemporary 1L therapies, irrespective of whether the 1L regimen included a VEGFi. These are real world benchmarks with which to counsel our patients.

Lung Immune Therapy Evaluation (LITE) Risk, a Novel Prognostic Model for Patients With Advanced Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer Treated With Immune Checkpoint Blockade

INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND

Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) have revolutionized non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). We aimed to identify baseline characteristics, that are prognostic factors for overall survival (OS) in patients with NSCLC treated with ICI monotherapy, in order to derive the Lung Immune Therapy Evaluation (LITE) risk, a prognostic model.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Multi-center observational cohort study of patients with advanced NSCLC that received ≥1 dose of ICI monotherapy. The training set (n=342) consisted of patients with NSCLC who received first line ICI. The test set (n=153) used for external validation was a discrete cohort of patients who received second line ICI. 20 candidate prognostic factors were examined. Penalized Cox regression was used for variable selection. Multiple imputation was used to address missingness.

RESULTS

Three baseline characteristics populated the final model: ECOG (0, 1 or ≥2), lactate dehydrogenase>upper limit of normal, and derived neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio ≥3. Patients were parsed into 3 risk groups; favorable (n=146, risk score 0-1), intermediate (n=101, risk score 2) and poor (n=95, risk score ≥3). The c-statistic of the training cohort was 0.702 and 0.694 after bootstrapping. The test cohort c-statistic was 0.664. The median OS for favorable, intermediate and poor LITE risk were; 28.3 months, 9.1 months and 2.1 months respectively. Improving LITE risk group was associated with improved OS, intermediate vs favorable HR 2.08 (95%CI 1.46-2.97, P < .001); poor vs favorable HR 5.21 (95%CI 3.69-7.34, P < .001).

CONCLUSION

A simple prognostic model, utilizing accessible clinical data, can discriminate survival outcomes in patients with advanced NSCLC.

Clinico-Genomic Characterization of Patients with Metastatic Urothelial Carcinoma in Real-World Practice Identifies a Novel Bladder Immune Performance Index (BIPI)

PURPOSE

This retrospective analysis of the largest available clinico-genomic database used de-identified patient-level electronic health record-derived real-world data (RWD) combined with FoundationOne® comprehensive genomic profiling (CGP) to characterize patients with metastatic urothelial carcinoma (mUC) treated in the real-world setting, detect potential biomarkers, and develop a bladder immune performance index (BIPI).

EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN

Patients with mUC who started front-line single-agent immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) and an unmatched group treated with front-line platinum-based chemotherapy between January 1, 2011 and September 30, 2019 were selected. Clinical and genomic data were correlated with overall survival (OS). A novel BIPI predicting outcome with ICIs was developed using machine learning methods and validated using data from a phase II trial (NCT02951767).

RESULTS

In ICI-treated patients (n=118), high tumor mutational burden (≥10 mutations/megabase) was associated with improved OS (HR 0.58 [95% CI, 0.35-0.95]; P=0.03). In chemotherapy-treated patients (n=268), those with high APOBEC mutational signature had worse OS (HR 1.43 [95% CI, 1.06-1.94]; P=0.02). Neither FGFR3 mutations nor DNA damage-repair pathway alterations were associated with OS. A novel BIPI combining clinical and genomic variables (non-metastatic at initial diagnosis, normal or above normal albumin level at baseline, prior surgery for organ-confined disease, high TMB) identified ICI-treated patients with longest OS and was validated in an independent dataset.

CONCLUSIONS

Contemporary RWD including FoundationOne® CGP can be used to characterize outcomes in real-world patients according to biomarkers beyond PD-L1. A validated, novel clinico-genomic BIPI demonstrated satisfactory prognostic performance for OS in patients with mUC receiving front-line ICI therapy.

Efficacy and Safety of Immunotherapy-Based Combinations as First-Line Therapy for Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma in Patients Who Do Not Meet Trial Eligibility Criteria

BACKGROUND

Data regarding the efficacy and safety profiles of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) for metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) trial-ineligible patients in the real world remain unclear.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to clarify the impact of trial eligibility on ICI-based combination therapy for mRCC.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We collected clinical data of mRCC patients receiving ICIs since 2016, and 222 patients were registered. Among these patients, we evaluated 93 patients treated with ICI-based combination therapy, including nivolumab plus ipilimumab, pembrolizumab plus axitinib, or avelumab plus axitinib, as first-line therapy. Patients were classified into the trial-ineligible group when they had at least one of the following factors at the time of treatment initiation: Karnofsky performance status (KPS) < 70%, hemoglobin level < 9.0 g/dL, estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) < 40 mL/min/1.73 m², platelet count < 100,000/µL, neutrophil count < 1500/µL, non-clear cell histology, or brain metastasis. The remaining patients were classified into the trial-eligible group.

RESULTS

Forty-eight patients (52%) were classified into the trial-ineligible group. The frequency of patients with trial-ineligible factors was highest for low eGFR (n = 20, 45%), followed by non-clear cell histology (n = 17, 36%) and low KPS score (n = 12, 25%). There was no significant difference in progression-free survival (median: 24.0 vs. 11.0 months, p = 0.416), overall survival (1-year rate: 87.0% vs. 85.3%, p = 0.634), or objective response rate (52% vs. 42%, p = 0.308) between the trial-eligible and -ineligible patients. The incidence rate of adverse events was higher in the trial-eligible patients than in the trial-ineligible patients (91% vs. 75%, p = 0.0397); however, the rate of grade 3 or higher adverse events was comparable between the two groups (42% vs. 40%, p = 0.796).

CONCLUSIONS

There are many trial-ineligible patients in the real world. Nevertheless, the efficacy and safety of ICI-based combination therapy in trial-ineligible patients were non-inferior compared with those of trial-eligible patients.

Management of Metastatic Clear Cell Renal Cell Carcinoma: ASCO Guideline

PURPOSE

To provide recommendations for the management of patients with metastatic clear cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC).

METHODS

An Expert Panel conducted a systematic literature review to obtain evidence to guide treatment recommendations.

RESULTS

The panel considered peer-reviewed reports published in English.

RECOMMENDATIONS

The diagnosis of metastatic ccRCC should be made using tissue biopsy of the primary tumor or a metastatic site with the inclusion of markers and/or stains to support the diagnosis. The International Metastatic RCC Database Consortium risk criteria should be used to inform treatment. Cytoreductive nephrectomy may be offered to select patients with kidney-in-place and favorable- or intermediate-risk disease. For those who have already had a nephrectomy, an initial period of active surveillance may be offered if they are asymptomatic with a low burden of disease. Patients with favorable-risk disease who need systemic therapy may be offered an immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) in combination with a vascular endothelial growth factor receptor (VEGFR) tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI); patients with intermediate or poor risk should be offered a doublet regimen (no recommendation was provided between ICIs or an ICI in combination with a VEGFR TKI). For select patients, monotherapy with either an ICI or a VEGFR TKI may be offered on the basis of comorbidities. Interleukin-2 remains an option, although selection criteria could not be identified. Recommendations are also provided for second- and subsequent-line therapy as well as the treatment of bone metastases, brain metastases, or the presence of sarcomatoid features. Participation in clinical trials is highly encouraged for patients with metastatic ccRCC.Additional information is available at www.asco.org/genitourinary-cancer-guidelines.

First-line immunotherapy in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer patients with ECOG performance status 2: results of an International Expert Panel Meeting by the Italian Association of Thoracic Oncology

BACKGROUND

Immunotherapy represents the standard of care in the first-line treatment of advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), either as monotherapy in high programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1)-positive tumors (≥50%) or in combination with platinum-based chemotherapy regardless of PD-L1 status. However, most pivotal clinical trials of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) did not include patients with Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status (PS) 2. Hence, a consensus is lacking on the safety and efficacy of ICIs in this specific subgroup of patients.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A virtual International Expert Panel took place in July 2021 with the aim of reviewing the available evidence on the use of ICIs in NSCLC patients with ECOG PS 2, both in clinical practice and in a research setting.

RESULTS

All panelists expressed concern about the applicability of currently available PS scales to evaluate patients for ICI treatment. The panelists agreed that, though limited, the available data support the safety of single-agent immunotherapy in PS 2 NSCLC patients, whereas concern was raised on the safety of ICI combinations, mainly related to chemotherapy and/or anti-cytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated antigen 4 toxicity. On the basis of reviewed data, ICI efficacy may be speculated in PS 2 NSCLC patients; however, PS 2 remains a negative prognostic category as compared to PS 0-1 in patients treated with ICI, as it is for chemotherapy. The panelists defined high, medium and low priorities in clinical research. High priority was attributed to the inclusion of PS 2 patients in prospective clinical trials and the specific evaluation of combined ICI treatments with attenuated chemotherapy doses.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on the current evidence, the panelists outlined the major limitations affecting PS 2 patients with NSCLC and reached common considerations on the feasibility, safety and effectiveness of ICI monotherapy and ICI combinations in the first-line setting.

Data collection framework for electronic medical record-based real-world data to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of cancer drugs: a nationwide real-world study of the Korean Cancer Study Group

Background:

Electronic medical records (EMRs) have the highest value among real-world data (RWD). The aim of the present study was to propose a data collection framework of EMR-based RWD to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of cancer drugs by conducting a nationwide real-world study based on the Korean Cancer Study Group.

Methods:

We considered all patients who received ramucirumab plus paclitaxel (RAM/PTX) for gastric cancer and trastuzumab emtansine (T-DM1) for breast cancer at relevant institutions in South Korea. Standard operating procedures for systematic data collection were prospectively developed. Investigator reliability was evaluated using the concordance rate between the recommended input value for representative fictional cases and the input value of each investigator. Reliability of collected data was evaluated twice during the study period at three institutions randomly selected using the concordance rate between the previously collected data and data collected by an independent investigator. The reliability results of the investigators and collected data were used for revision of the electronic data capture system and site training.

Results:

Between the starting date of medical insurance coverage and December 2018, a total of 1063 patients at 56 institutions in the RAM/PTX cohort and 824 patients at 60 institutions in the T-DM1 cohort were included. Mean investigator reliability in the RAM/PTX and T-DM1 cohorts was 73.5% and 71.9%, respectively. Mean reliability of collected data in the RAM/PTX and T-DM1 cohort was 90.0% for both cohorts in the first analysis and 89.0% and 84.0% in the second analysis, respectively. Mean missing values of the RAM/PTX and T-DM1 cohorts at the time of simulation of fictional cases and final data analysis decreased from 20.7% to 0.46% and from 18.5% to 0.76%, respectively.

Conclusion:

This real-world study provides a framework that ensures relevance and reliability of EMR-based RWD for evaluating the effectiveness and safety of cancer drugs.

Effectiveness and Safety of First-Line Pembrolizumab in Older Adults with PD-L1 Positive Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: A Retrospective Cohort Study of the Alberta Immunotherapy Database

The emergence of immunotherapy revolutionized the treatment of non-small-cell-lung cancer (NSCLC), with multiple landmark clinical trials establishing the efficacy of these agents. However, many patients who receive immunotherapy in clinical practice would be considered clinical trial ineligible. One such population that is often under-represented in clinical trials is older adults. In the current study, we evaluated clinical and safety outcomes in this population. Overall, older adults (>70 years of age) and younger adults had comparable clinical outcomes with an equivalent objective response rate (ORR), time to treatment failure (TTF), and median overall survival (p = 0.67, p = 0.98, and p = 0.91, respectively). Furthermore, the safety outcomes were equivalent between the cohorts with similar rates of immune-related adverse events (irAEs), irAE-related hospitalizations, and all-cause hospitalization (p = 0.99, p = 0.63, and p = 0.74, respectively). While older age was not found to impact overall survival, multivariant analysis revealed that a poor Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) status, low body-mass-index (BMI), and poor/intermediate lung immune prognostic index (LIPI) were all associated with worse survival. In conclusion, age does not impact the efficacy or safety of pembrolizumab in NSCLC, and therefore advanced age should not be a deterrent for treating these patients with pembrolizumab. Physicians and care providers can thus focus on other factors that may influence therapeutic outcomes.

Clinical laboratory tests associated with survival in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma: A Laboratory Wide Association Study (LWAS)

BACKGROUND

Prognostic models for patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) include select laboratory values. These models have important limitations, including reliance on a limited array of laboratory tests, and use of dichotomous ("high-low") cutoffs. We applied a Laboratory-Wide Association Study (LWAS) framework to systematically evaluate common clinical laboratory results associated with survival for patients diagnosed with mRCC.

METHODS

We used laboratory data for 3,385 patients diagnosed with mRCC from 2002 to 2017. We developed a LWAS framework, to examine the association with 53 common clinical laboratory tests results (641,712 measurements) and overall survival. We employed false-discovery rate to test the association of multiple laboratory tests with survival, and validated these results using 3 separate cohorts to generate a standardized hazard ratio (sHR), reported for a 1 standard deviation unit change in each laboratory test.

RESULTS

The LWAS approach confirmed the association of laboratory values currently used in prognostic models with survival, including calcium (HR 1.35, 95%CI 1.24-1.48), leukocyte count (HR 1.40, 95%CI 1.30-1.51), platelet count (HR 1.36, 95%CI 1.27-1.51), and hemoglobin (HR 0.79, 95%CI 0.72-0.86). Use of these tests as continuous variables improved model performance. LWAS also identified acute phase reactants associated with survival not typically included in prognostic models, including serum albumin (HR 0.66, 95%CI 0.61-0.72), ferritin (HR 1.25, 95%CI 1.08-1.45), alkaline phosphatase (HR 1.31, 95%CI 1.23-1.40), and C-reactive protein (HR 1.70, 95%CI 1.14-2.53).

CONCLUSIONS

Routinely measured laboratory tests can refine current prognostic models, facilitate comparisons across clinical trial cohorts, and match patients with specific systemic therapies.