Bladder-Preserving Trimodality Therapy With Capecitabine

INTRODUCTION

Many patients with muscle-invasive bladder cancer are poor candidates for radical cystectomy or trimodality therapy with maximal transurethral resection of bladder tumor (TURBT) and chemoradiotherapy with cisplatin or mitomycin C. Given the benefit of chemotherapy in bladder-preserving therapy, less-intense concurrent chemotherapy regimens are needed. This study reports on efficacy and toxicity for patients treated with trimodality therapy using single-agent concurrent capecitabine.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Patients deemed ineligible for radical cystectomy or standard chemoradiotherapy by a multidisciplinary tumor board and patients who refused cystectomy were included. Following TURBT, patients received twice-daily capecitabine (goal dose 825 mg/m2) concurrent with radiotherapy to the bladder +/- pelvis depending on nodal staging and patient risk factors. Toxicity was evaluated prospectively in weekly on-treatment visits and follow-up visits by the treating physicians. Descriptive statistics are provided. Overall, progression-free, cancer-specific, distant metastasis-free, and bladder recurrence-free survival were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method.

RESULTS

Twenty-seven consecutive patients met criteria for inclusion from 2013 to 2023. The median age was 79 with 9 patients staged cT3-4a and 7 staged cN1-3. The rate of complete response in the bladder and pelvis was 93%. Overall, progression-free, cancer-specific, distant metastasis-free, and bladder recurrence-free survival at 2 years were estimated as 81%, 65%, 91%, 75%, and 92%, respectively. There were 2 bladder recurrences, both noninvasive. There were 7 grade 3 acute hematologic or metabolic events but no other grade 3+ toxicities.

CONCLUSION

Maximal TURBT followed by radiotherapy with concurrent capecitabine offers a high rate of bladder control and low rates of acute and late toxicity.

PROMISE Registry: A prostate cancer registry of outcomes and germline mutations for improved survival and treatment effectiveness

BACKGROUND

Recently approved treatments and updates to genetic testing recommendations for prostate cancer have created a need for correlated analyses of patient outcomes data via germline genetic mutation status. Genetic registries address these gaps by identifying candidates for recently approved targeted treatments, expanding clinical trial data examining specific gene mutations, and understanding effects of targeted treatments in the real-world setting.

METHODS

The PROMISE Registry is a 20-year (5-year recruitment, 15-year follow-up), US-wide, prospective genetic registry for prostate cancer patients. Five thousand patients will be screened through an online at-home germline testing to identify and enroll 500 patients with germline mutations, including: pathogenic or likely pathogenic variants and variants of uncertain significance in genes of interest. Patients will be followed for 15 years and clinical data with real time patient reported outcomes will be collected. Eligible patients will enter long-term follow-up (6-month PRO surveys and medical record retrieval). As a virtual study with patient self-enrollment, the PROMISE Registry may fill gaps in genetics services in underserved areas and for patients within sufficient insurance coverage.

RESULTS

The PROMISE Registry opened in May 2021. 2114 patients have enrolled to date across 48 US states and 23 recruiting sites. 202 patients have met criteria for long-term follow-up. PROMISE is on target with the study's goal of 5000 patients screened and 500 patients eligible for long-term follow-up by 2026.

CONCLUSIONS

The PROMISE Registry is a novel, prospective, germline registry that will collect long-term patient outcomes data to address current gaps in understanding resulting from recently FDA-approved treatments and updates to genetic testing recommendations for prostate cancer. Through inclusion of a broad nationwide sample, including underserved patients and those unaffiliated with major academic centers, the PROMISE Registry aims to provide access to germline genetic testing and to collect data to understand disease characteristics and treatment responses across the disease spectrum for prostate cancer with rare germline genetic variants.

Optimizing the doses of cancer drugs after usual dose finding

Since the middle of the 20th century, oncology's dose-finding paradigm has been oriented toward identifying a drug's maximum tolerated dose, which is then carried forward into phase 2 and 3 trials and clinical practice. For most modern precision medicines, however, maximum tolerated dose is far greater than the minimum dose needed to achieve maximal benefit, leading to unnecessary side effects. Regulatory change may decrease maximum tolerated dose's predominance by enforcing dose optimization of new drugs. Dozens of already approved cancer drugs require re-evaluation, however, introducing a new methodologic and ethical challenge in cancer clinical trials. In this article, we assess the history and current landscape of cancer drug dose finding. We provide a set of strategic priorities for postapproval dose optimization trials of the future. We discuss ethical considerations for postapproval dose optimization trial design and review three major design strategies for these unique trials that would both adhere to ethical standards and benefit patients and funders. We close with a discussion of financial and reporting considerations in the realm of dose optimization. Taken together, we provide a comprehensive, bird's eye view of the postapproval dose optimization trial landscape and offer our thoughts on the next steps required of methodologies and regulatory and funding regimes.

A multicenter, open-label, randomized, phase II study of cediranib with or without lenalidomide in iodine 131-refractory differentiated thyroid cancer

BACKGROUND

Multitargeted tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) of the vascular endothelial growth factor receptor (VEGFR) pathway have activity in differentiated thyroid cancer (DTC). Lenalidomide demonstrated preliminary efficacy in DTC, but its safety and efficacy in combination with VEGFR-targeted TKIs is unknown. We sought to determine the safety and efficacy of cediranib, a VEGFR-targeted TKI, with or without lenalidomide, in the treatment of iodine 131-refractory DTC.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

In this multicenter, open-label, randomized, phase II clinical trial, 110 patients were enrolled and randomized to cediranib alone or cediranib with lenalidomide. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS). Secondary endpoints included response rate, duration of response, toxicity, and overall survival (OS). Patients (≥18 years of age) with DTC who were refractory to further surgical or radioactive iodine (RAI) therapy as reviewed at a multispecialty tumor board conference, and evidence of disease progression within the previous 12 months and no more than one prior line of systemic therapy were eligible.

RESULTS

Of the 110 patients, 108 started therapy and were assessable for efficacy. The median PFS was 14.8 months [95% confidence interval (CI) 8.5-23.8 months] in the cediranib arm and 11.3 months (95% CI 8.7-18.9 months) in the cediranib with lenalidomide arm (P = 0.36). The 2-year OS was 64.8% (95% CI 43.3% to 86.4%) and 75.3% (95% CI 59.4% to 91.0%), respectively (P = 0.80). The serious adverse event rate was 41% in the cediranib arm and 46% in the cediranib with lenalidomide arm.

CONCLUSIONS

Single-agent therapy with cediranib showed promising efficacy in RAI-refractory DTC similar to other VEGFR-targeted TKIs, while the addition of lenalidomide did not result in clinically meaningful improvements in outcomes.

Enrollment Barriers for Molecular Targeted Trials

This quality improvement study examines the difficulties of patient accrual among patients with cancer and SETD2 variants.

A Phase II Study of sEphB4-HSA in Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer

INTRODUCTION

Ephrin receptors and their membrane-localized ligands induce bidirectional signaling and facilitate tumor-stroma interactions. Blocking the EphB4-EphrinB2 pathway, which can be accomplished by soluble EphB4 conjugated to human serum albumin (sEphB4-HSA), promotes cell death in preclinical models of aggressive prostate cancer. We hypothesized that targeting the EphB4-EphrinB2 pathway may serve as a therapeutic target in the treatment of metastatic castration resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We conducted a single arm, phase II trial in patients with progressive mCRPC who had received no more than 3 prior therapies for mCRPC. sEphB4-HSA 1000 mg IV was administered every 2 weeks, extending to 3 weeks starting from cycle 7. The primary endpoint was confirmed prostate specific antigen (PSA) response rate. We employed a Simon 2-stage Minimax design with 15 patients in the first stage and 10 additional patients in the second stage.

RESULTS

Fourteen eligible patients enrolled in the study with median age of 73.5 years (range: 52-83) and median baseline PSA of 65.11 ng/mL (range: 7.77-2850 ng/mL). Most patients received 3 prior therapies for mCRPC. The median treatment duration with sEphB4-HSA was 6.5 weeks (range: 2-35 weeks). Three patients experienced a serious adverse event potentially related to therapy, including 1 patient with a grade 5 event (cerebral vascular accident) possibly related to the study drug. No patient had a confirmed PSA response, and the study was stopped for futility. Thirteen patients had PSA progression. The median time to PSA progression was 28 days (90% CI: 28-42 days), and median time to radiologic progression was 55 days (90% CI: 54-72 days). Of 3 patients with measurable disease, 2 had stable disease and one had progressive disease.

CONCLUSION

In patients with mCRPC who progressed on prior second generation AR-targeted therapy, sEphB4-HSA monotherapy had no discernable anti-tumor activity.

Evaluation of Provider Preferences in First-Line Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma: Comparison Between Dual Immunotherapy vs. Immunotherapy/Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitors

INTRODUCTION

Dual immunotherapy (ipilimumab/nivolumab, IO/IO) and immunotherapy/tyrosine kinase inhibitor (IO/TKI) combinations (e.g. pembrolizumab/axitinib) are approved for the first-line treatment of intermediate/poor risk metastatic renal cell carcinoma (RCC), but there is limited comparative data between these two options. We sought to understand how oncologists decide between IO/IO vs. IO/TKI.

METHODS

We sent a 10-question electronic survey centered on a patient scenario of intermediate/poor risk metastatic RCC to 294 academic/disease-focused and general oncologists in the US.

RESULTS

We received 105 responses (36% response rate): 61% (64) of providers chose IO/IO, 39% (41) chose IO/TKI. 78% (82) of oncologists were academic or disease-focused, 22% (23) were general. Academic/disease-focused oncologists were significantly more likely to choose IO/IO (56/82, 68%) than general oncologists (8/23, 35%), P = .004. Among those who chose IO/IO, the perceived main issue with IO/TKI was: long-term toxicities - 31% (20), short-term toxicities - 28% (18), less effective - 28% (18), less convenient - 8% (5). Among those who chose IO/TKI, the perceived main issue with IO/IO was: short-term toxicities - 43% (17), less effective - 28% (11), long-term toxicities - 15% (6), and risk of death - 10% (4). 88% (92) of providers would be comfortable enrolling patients into a phase III trial comparing IO/IO vs. IO/TKI. We found no associations between therapy chosen by a provider and participation as PI in a trial of IO/IO or IO/TKI, or receipt of outside funding from an IO/IO or IO/TKI company.

CONCLUSION

In response to a patient scenario of intermediate/poor risk metastatic RCC, 61% of providers chose IO/IO, 39% chose IO/TKI. There was a significant association between type of practice and choice of therapy, with academic/disease-focused oncologists more likely to choose IO/IO. The majority of oncologists would be comfortable enrolling patients into a phase III trial comparing IO/IO vs. IO/TKI.

Efficacy and Safety of Telaglenastat Plus Cabozantinib vs Placebo Plus Cabozantinib in Patients With Advanced Renal Cell Carcinoma: The CANTATA Randomized Clinical Trial

Importance

Dysregulated metabolism is a hallmark of renal cell carcinoma (RCC). Glutaminase is a key enzyme that fuels tumor growth by converting glutamine to glutamate. Telaglenastat is an investigational, first-in-class, selective, oral glutaminase inhibitor that blocks glutamine utilization and downstream pathways. Preclinically, telaglenastat synergized with cabozantinib, a VEGFR2/MET/AXL inhibitor, in RCC models.

Objective

To compare the efficacy and safety of telaglenastat plus cabozantinib (Tela + Cabo) vs placebo plus cabozantinib (Pbo + Cabo).

Design, Setting, and Participants

CANTATA was a randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind, pivotal trial conducted at sites in the US, Europe, Australia, and New Zealand. Eligible patients had metastatic clear-cell RCC following progression on 1 to 2 prior lines of therapy, including 1 or more antiangiogenic therapies or nivolumab plus ipilimumab. The data cutoff date was August 31, 2020. Data analysis was performed from December 2020 to February 2021.

Interventions

Patients were randomized 1:1 to receive oral cabozantinib (60 mg daily) with either telaglenastat (800 mg twice daily) or placebo until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The primary end point was progression-free survival (Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1) assessed by blinded independent radiology review.

Results

A total of 444 patients were randomized: 221 to Tela + Cabo (median [range] age, 61 [21-81] years; 47 [21%] women and 174 [79%] men) and 223 to Pbo + Cabo (median [range] age, 62 [29-83] years; 68 [30%] women and 155 [70%] men). A total of 276 (62%) patients had received prior immune checkpoint inhibitors, including 128 with prior nivolumab plus ipilimumab, 93 of whom had not received prior antiangiogenic therapy. Median progression-free survival was 9.2 months for Tela + Cabo vs 9.3 months for Pbo + Cabo (HR, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.74-1.21; P = .65). Overall response rates were 31% (69 of 221) with Tela + Cabo vs 28% (62 of 223) with Pbo + Cabo. Treatment-emergent adverse event (TEAE) rates were similar between arms. Grade 3 to 4 TEAEs occurred in 160 patients (71%) with Tela + Cabo and 172 patients (79%) with Pbo + Cabo and included hypertension (38 patients [17%] vs 40 patients [18%]) and diarrhea (34 patients [15%] vs 29 patients [13%]). Cabozantinib was discontinued due to AEs in 23 patients (10%) receiving Tela + Cabo and 33 patients (15%) receiving Pbo + Cabo.

Conclusions and Relevance

In this randomized clinical trial, telaglenastat did not improve the efficacy of cabozantinib in metastatic RCC. Tela + Cabo was well tolerated with AEs consistent with the known risks of both agents.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03428217.

NF2-mutated Renal Carcinomas Have Common Morphologic Features Which Overlap With Biphasic Hyalinizing Psammomatous Renal Cell Carcinoma: A Comprehensive Study of 14 Cases

Genetic alterations involving NF2 occur at low frequencies in renal cell carcinoma across all of the major histologic subtypes and have been associated with adverse outcomes. To better characterize tumors harboring these alterations, we identified 14 cases with NF2 mutations that had been previously diagnosed as papillary renal cell carcinoma; renal cell carcinoma, unclassified; or translocation associated renal cell carcinoma. These tumors were characterized by a tubulopapillary architecture, sclerotic stroma, microscopic coagulative necrosis, and psammomatous calcifications. All the cases displayed eosinophilic cytology as well as a high nuclear grade (World Health Organization/International Society of Urological Pathology [WHO/ISUP] grade 3 to 4) in all but 1 case. A subset of cases shared features with the recently described biphasic hyalinizing psammomatous renal cell carcinoma. Next-generation sequencing demonstrated mutations involving NF2 gene in all cases. In 10 cases, this was paired with the loss of chromosome 22. Additional mutations involving PBRM1 were found in 5 cases that were associated with a more solid growth pattern. Eight patients presented with metastatic disease including all 5 with PBRM1 mutations. Despite the aggressive disease course seen in many of the patients in our series, 2 patients exhibited a dramatic response to immunotherapy. Our results support the existence of a distinct group of cases of renal cell carcinoma characterized by distinct although admittedly nonspecific morphology, an aggressive disease course, and NF2 mutations, often paired with the loss of chromosome 22.

Comparison of out-of-pocket costs and adherence between the two arms of the prospective, randomized abiraterone food effect trial

PURPOSE

Abiraterone acetate, prescribed for metastatic prostate cancer, has enhanced absorption with food. This effect was exploited in a randomized trial which showed noninferiority of PSA decline for 250 mg abiraterone with a low-fat meal (LOW) compared to 1,000 mg abiraterone fasting (STD). Drug was obtained via patient insurance. Patient out-of-pocket costs and adherence were surveyed.

METHODS

Trial participants were randomized to STD or LOW, and surveys of adherence and out-of-pocket costs were administered at baseline and just before coming off study (follow-up).

RESULTS

Out-of-pocket costs were available from 20 of 36 STD and 21 of 36 LOW patients. Median out-of-pocket costs for a month of drug were $0 (LOW) and $5 (STD); mean costs were $43.61 (LOW) and $393.83 (STD). The two groups did not differ significantly (p = 0.421). Maximum out-of-pocket cost was $1,000 (LOW) and $4,000 (STD). Monthly out-of-pocket costs > $500 were found in 1 LOW and 5 STD patients. For adherence, only 11 STD and 19 LOW patients had questionnaires completed at both baseline and follow-up. STD adherence was 98.18% at baseline and 91.69% at follow-up, differing significantly (p = 0.0078). LOW adherence was 96.52% at baseline and 97.86% at follow-up, not differing significantly (p = 0.3511). Adherence did not correlate with demographics. At follow-up, increasing adherence correlated significantly with decreasing dose (p = 0.013; rho =  - 0.458).

CONCLUSIONS

Out-of-pocket costs did not differ significantly in this limited analysis. Adherence was significantly different in STD as the trial progressed, which was not found in LOW.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01543776; registered March 5, 2012.

Phase I/II trial of enzalutamide and mifepristone, a glucocorticoid receptor antagonist, for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer

PURPOSE

Although androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) and androgen receptor signaling inhibitors (ARSI) are effective in metastatic prostate cancer (PC), resistance occurs in most patients. This phase I/II trial assessed the safety, pharmacokinetic impact, and efficacy of the glucocorticoid receptor (GR) antagonist mifepristone (Mif) in combination with enzalutamide (Enz) for castration-resistant PC (CRPC).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

106 patients with CRPC were accrued. Phase I subjects were treated with Enz monotherapy at 160 mg per day for 28 days to allow steady-state accumulation. Patients then entered the dose escalation combination portion of the study. In phase II, patients were randomized 1:1 to either receive Enz alone or Enz plus Mif. The primary endpoint was PSA progression free survival (PFS), with radiographic PFS, and PSA response rate (RR) as key secondary endpoints. Circulating tumor cells were collected before randomization for exploratory translational biomarker studies.

RESULTS

We determined a 25% dose reduction in Enz, when added to Mif resulted in equivalent drug levels compared to full dose Enz and was well tolerated. However, the addition of Mif to Enz following a 12-week Enz lead-in did not delay time to PSA, radiographic or clinical PFS. The trial was terminated early due to futility.

CONCLUSION

This is the first prospective trial of dual AR-GR antagonism in CRPC. Enz combined with Mif was safe and well tolerated but did not meet its primary endpoint. The development of more specific GR antagonists combined with AR antagonists, potentially studied in an earlier disease state, should be explored.

Biomarker-Based Phase II Study of Sapanisertib (TAK-228): An mTORC1/2 Inhibitor in Patients With Refractory Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma

PURPOSE

Sapanisertib is a kinase inhibitor that inhibits both mammalian target of rapamycin complex 1 (mTORC1) and mTORC2. In this multicenter, single-arm phase II trial, we evaluated the efficacy of sapanisertib in patients with treatment-refractory metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC; NCT03097328).

METHODS

Patients with mRCC of any histology progressing through standard therapy (including prior mTOR inhibitors) had baseline biopsy and received sapanisertib 30 mg by mouth once weekly until unacceptable toxicity or disease progression. The primary end point was objective response rate by RECIST 1.1. Tissue biomarkers of mTOR pathway activation were explored.

RESULTS

We enrolled 38 patients with mRCC (clear cell = 28; variant histology = 10) between August 2017 and November 2019. Twenty-four (63%) had received ≥ 3 prior lines of therapy; 17 (45%) had received prior rapalog therapy. The median follow-up was 10.4 (range 1-27.4) months. Objective response rate was two of 38 (5.3%; 90% CI, 1 to 15.6); the median progression-free survival (PFS) was 2.5 months (95% CI, 1.8 to 3.7). Twelve patients (32%) developed treatment-related grade 3 adverse events, with no grade 4 or 5 toxicities. Alterations in the mTOR pathway genes were seen in 5 of 29 evaluable patients (MTOR n = 1, PTEN n = 3, and TSC1 n = 1) with no association with response or PFS. Diminished or loss of PTEN expression by immunohistochemistry was seen in 8 of 21 patients and trended toward shorter PFS compared with intact PTEN (median 1.9 v 3.7 months; hazard ratio 2.5; 95% CI, 0.9 to 6.7; P = .055).

CONCLUSION

Sapanisertib had minimal activity in treatment-refractory mRCC independent of mTOR pathway alterations. Additional therapeutic strategies are needed for patients with refractory mRCC.

Genetic Factors Associated with Prostate Cancer Conversion from Active Surveillance to Treatment

Men diagnosed with low-risk prostate cancer (PC) are increasingly electing active surveillance (AS) as their initial management strategy. While this may reduce the side effects of treatment for prostate cancer, many men on AS eventually convert to active treatment. PC is one of the most heritable cancers, and genetic factors that predispose to aggressive tumors may help distinguish men who are more likely to discontinue AS. To investigate this, we undertook a multi-institutional genome-wide association study (GWAS) of 5,222 PC patients and 1,139 other patients from replication cohorts, all of whom initially elected AS and were followed over time for the potential outcome of conversion from AS to active treatment. In the GWAS we detected 18 variants associated with conversion, 15 of which were not previously associated with PC risk. With a transcriptome-wide association study (TWAS), we found two genes associated with conversion (MAST3, p = 6.9×10-7 and GAB2, p = 2.0×10-6). Moreover, increasing values of a previously validated 269-variant genetic risk score (GRS) for PC was positively associated with conversion (e.g., comparing the highest to the two middle deciles gave a hazard ratio [HR] = 1.13; 95% Confidence Interval [CI]= 0.94-1.36); whereas, decreasing values of a 36-variant GRS for prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels were positively associated with conversion (e.g., comparing the lowest to the two middle deciles gave a HR = 1.25; 95% CI, 1.04-1.50). These results suggest that germline genetics may help inform and individualize the decision of AS-or the intensity of monitoring on AS-versus treatment for the initial management of patients with low-risk PC.

Tissue based biomarkers in non-clear cell RCC: Correlative analysis from the ASPEN clinical trial

Biomarkers are needed in patients with non-clear cell renal cell carcinomas (NC-RCC), particularly papillary renal cell carcinoma, in order to inform on initial treatment selection and identify potentially novel targets for therapy. We enrolled 108 patients in ASPEN, an international randomized open-label phase 2 trial of patients with metastatic papillary, chromophobe, or unclassified NC-RCC treated with the mTOR inhibitor everolimus (n=57) or the vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) receptor inhibitor sunitinib (n=51), stratified by MSKCC risk and histology. The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS) and secondary efficacy endpoints for this exploratory biomarker analysis were radiographic progression-free survival (rPFS) defined by intention-to-treat using the RECIST 1.1 criteria and radiographic response rates. Tissue biomarkers (n=78) of mTOR pathway activation (phospho-S6 and -Akt, c-kit) and VEGF pathway activation (HIF-1α, c-MET) were prospectively explored in tumor tissue by immunohistochemistry prior to treatment and associated with clinical outcomes. We found that S6 activation was more common in poor risk NC-RCC tumors and S6/Akt activation was associated with worse PFS and OS outcomes with both everolimus and sunitinib, while c-kit was commonly expressed in chromophobe tumors and associated with improved outcomes with both agents. C-MET was commonly expressed in papillary tumors and was associated with lower rates of radiographic response but did not predict PFS for either agent. In multivariable analysis, both pAkt and c-kit were statistically significant prognostic biomarkers of OS. No predictive biomarkers of treatment response were identified for clinical outcomes. Most biomarker subgroups had improved outcomes with sunitinib as compared to everolimus.

A Prospective Multicenter Evaluation of Initial Treatment Choice in Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Prior to the Immunotherapy Era: The MaRCC Registry Experience

INTRODUCTION

The Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma (MaRCC) Registry provides prospective data on real-world treatment patterns and outcomes in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC).

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Patients with mRCC and no prior systemic therapy were enrolled at academic and community sites. End of study data collection was in March 2019. Outcomes included overall survival (OS). A survey of treating physicians assessed reasons for treatment initiations and discontinuations.

RESULTS

Overall, 376 patients with mRCC initiated first-line therapy; 171 (45.5%) received pazopanib, 75 (19.9%) sunitinib, and 74 (19.7%) participated in a clinical trial. Median (95% confidence interval) OS was longest in the clinical trial group (50.3 [35.8-not reached] months) versus pazopanib (39.0 [29.7-50.9] months) and sunitinib 26.2 [19.9-61.5] months). Non-clear cell RCC (21.5% of patients) was associated with worse median OS than clear cell RCC (18.0 vs. 47.3 months). Differences in baseline characteristics, treatment starting dose, and relative dose exposure among treatment groups suggest selection bias. Survey results revealed a de-emphasis on quality of life, toxicity, and patient preference compared with efficacy in treatment selection.

CONCLUSION

The MaRCC Registry gives insights into real-world first-line treatment selection, outcomes, and physician rationale regarding initial treatment selection prior to the immunotherapy era. Differences in outcomes between clinical trial and off-study patients reflect the difficulty in translating trial results to real-world patients, and emphasize the need to broaden clinical trial eligibility. Physician emphasis on efficacy over quality of life and toxicity suggests more data and education are needed regarding these endpoints.

Active surveillance of metastatic renal cell carcinoma: Results from a prospective observational study (MaRCC)

BACKGROUND

Systemic therapy (ST) can be deferred in patients who have metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) and slow-growing metastases. Currently, this subset of patients managed with active surveillance (AS) is not well described in the literature.

METHODS

This was a prospective observational study of patients with mRCC across 46 US community and academic centers. The objective was to describe baseline characteristics and demographics of patients with mRCC initially managed by AS, reasons for AS, and patient outcomes. Descriptive statistics were used to characterize demographics, baseline characteristics, and patient-related outcomes. Wilcoxon 2-sample rank-sum tests and χ² tests were used to assess differences between ST and AS cohorts in continuous and categorical variables, respectively. Kaplan-Meier survival curves were used to assess survival.

RESULTS

Of 504 patients, mRCC was initially managed by AS (n = 143) or ST (n = 305); 56 patients were excluded from the analysis. Disease was present in 69% of patients who received AS, whereas the remaining 31% had no evidence of disease. At data cutoff, 72 of 143 patients (50%) in the AS cohort had not received ST. The median overall survival was not reached (95% CI, 122 months to not estimable) in patients who received AS versus 30 months (95% CI, 25-44 months) in those who received ST. Quality of life at baseline was significantly better in patients who were managed with AS versus ST.

CONCLUSIONS

AS occurs frequently (32%) in real-world clinical practice and appears to be a safe and appropriate alternative to immediate ST in selected patients.

Angiokines Associated with Targeted Therapy Outcomes in Patients with Non-Clear Cell Renal Cell Carcinoma

PURPOSE

Biomarkers are needed in patients with non-clear cell renal cell carcinomas (NC-RCC) to inform treatment selection but also to identify novel therapeutic targets. We thus sought to profile circulating angiokines in the context of a randomized treatment trial of everolimus versus sunitinib.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

ASPEN (NCT01108445) was an international, randomized, open-label phase II trial of patients with metastatic papillary, chromophobe, or unclassified NC-RCC with no prior systemic therapy. Patients were randomized to everolimus or sunitinib and treated until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. The primary endpoint was radiographic progression-free survival (PFS) defined by RECIST 1.1. Plasma angiokines were collected at baseline, cycle 3, and progression and associated with PFS and overall survival (OS).

RESULTS

We enrolled 108 patients, 51 received sunitinib and 57 everolimus; of these, 99 patients had evaluable plasma for 23 angiokines. At the final data cutoff, 94 PFS and 64 mortality events had occurred. Angiokines that were independently adversely prognostic for OS were osteopontin (OPN), TIMP-1, thrombospondin-2 (TSP-2), hepatocyte growth factor (HGF), and VCAM-1, and these were also associated with poor-risk disease. Stromal derived factor 1 (SDF-1) was associated with improved survival. OPN was also significantly associated with worse PFS. No statistically significant angiokine-treatment outcome interactions were observed for sunitinib or everolimus. Angiopoeitin-2 (Ang-2), CD-73, HER-3, HGF, IL6, OPN, PIGF, PDGF-AA, PDGF-BB, SDF-1, TGF-b1-b2, TGFb-R3, TIMP-1, TSP-2, VCAM-1, VEGF, and VEGF-R1 levels increased with progression on everolimus, while CD-73, ICAM-1, IL6, OPN, PlGF, SDF-1, TGF-b2, TGFb-R3, TIMP-1, TSP-2, VEGF, VEGF-D, and VCAM-1 increased with progression on sunitinib.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with metastatic NC-RCC, we identified several poor prognosis angiokines and immunomodulatory chemokines during treatment with sunitinib or everolimus, particularly OPN.

Randomized Phase III Trial of Gemcitabine and Cisplatin With Bevacizumab or Placebo in Patients With Advanced Urothelial Carcinoma: Results of CALGB 90601 (Alliance)

PURPOSE

The combination of gemcitabine and cisplatin (GC) is a standard therapy for metastatic urothelial carcinoma. Based on data that angiogenesis plays a role in urothelial carcinoma growth and progression, a randomized placebo-controlled trial was performed with the primary objective of testing whether patients treated with GC and bevacizumab (GCB) have superior overall survival (OS) than patients treated with GC and placebo (GCP).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Between July 2009 and December 2014, 506 patients with metastatic urothelial carcinoma without prior chemotherapy for metastatic disease and no neoadjuvant or adjuvant chemotherapy within 12 months were randomly assigned to receive either GCB or GCP. The primary end point was OS, with secondary end points of progression-free survival, objective response, and toxicity.

RESULTS

With a median follow-up of 76.3 months among alive patients, the median OS was 14.5 months for patients treated with GCB and 14.3 months for patients treated with GCP (hazard ratio for death = 0.87; 95% CI, 0.72 to 1.05; two-sided stratified log-rank P = .14). The median progression-free survival was 8.0 months for GCB and 6.7 months for GCP (hazard ratio = 0.77; 95% CI, 0.63 to 0.95; P = .016). The proportion of patients with grade 3 or greater adverse events did not differ significantly between both arms, although increased bevacizumab-related toxicities such as hypertension and proteinuria occurred in the bevacizumab-treated arm.

CONCLUSION

The addition of bevacizumab to GC did not result in improved OS. The observed median OS of about 14 months is consistent with prior phase III trials of cisplatin-based chemotherapy.

Steroid-refractory dermatologic and pulmonary toxicity in a patient on rituximab treated with pembrolizumab for progressive urothelial carcinoma: a case report

BACKGROUND

Increasingly widespread use of programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1) immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) for treatment of a variety of progressive malignancies continues to reveal a range of immune-related adverse events (irAEs), necessitating immunosuppressive therapy for management. While a single course of systemic corticosteroids may be sufficient for many irAEs, no clear standard-of-care guidelines exist for steroid-refractory cases. We present an unusual case of a patient who developed several steroid-refractory novel irAEs on pembrolizumab despite ongoing B cell-directed immunosuppressive therapy with rituximab, who ultimately noted resolution of symptoms with tacrolimus, a T-cell-directed immunosuppressant.

CASE PRESENTATION

This 72-year-old Caucasian man with Waldenstrom's macroglobulinemia and myelin-associated glycoprotein (MAG) immunoglobulin M (IgM) antibody-associated neuropathy was being treated with maintenance rituximab and intravenous immunoglobulin when he was started on pembrolizumab (2.26 mg/kg) for metastatic urothelial cancer 31 months after surgery and adjuvant chemotherapy. After his third dose of pembrolizumab, he developed a painful blistering papular rash of the distal extremities. He received two more doses of pembrolizumab before he also developed diarrhea, and it was held; he was initiated on 1 mg/kg prednisone for presumed ICI-induced dermatitis and colitis. Skin biopsy 10 weeks after cessation of pembrolizumab and taper of steroids to 20  mg daily revealed a unique bullous erythema multiforme. He was then admitted with dyspnea and imaging concerning for necrotizing pneumonia, but did not respond to antibiotic therapy. Bronchoscopy and biopsy revealed acute fibrinous organizing pneumonia. His symptoms failed to fully respond to multiple courses of high-dose systemic corticosteroids and a trial of azathioprine, but pneumonia, diarrhea, and skin rash all improved markedly with tacrolimus. The patient has since completed his therapy for tacrolimus, continues off of ICI, and has not experienced a recurrence of any irAEs, though has more recently experienced progression of his cancer.

CONCLUSION

Despite immunosuppression with rituximab and intravenous immunoglobulin, two immunomodulators targeting B cells, ICI cessation, and systemic corticosteroid therapy, our patient developed two high-grade unusual irAEs, bullous erythema multiforme and acute fibrinous organizing pneumonia. Our patient's improvement with tacrolimus can offer critical insight into the pathophysiology of steroid-refractory irAEs.

Efficacy and Safety of Atezolizumab Plus Bevacizumab Following Disease Progression on Atezolizumab or Sunitinib Monotherapy in Patients with Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma in IMmotion150: A Randomized Phase 2 Clinical Trial

BACKGROUND

The use of immune checkpoint inhibitors combined with vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF)-targeted therapy as second-line treatment for metastatic clear cell renal cancer (mRCC) has not been evaluated prospectively.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of atezolizumab + bevacizumab following disease progression on atezolizumab or sunitinib monotherapy in patients with mRCC.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

IMmotion150 was a multicenter, randomized, open-label, phase 2 study of patients with untreated mRCC. Patients randomized to the atezolizumab or sunitinib arm who had investigator-assessed progression as per RECIST 1.1 could be treated with second-line atezolizumab + bevacizumab.

INTERVENTION

Patients received atezolizumab 1200 mg intravenously (IV) plus bevacizumab 15 mg/kg IV every 3 wk following disease progression on either atezolizumab or sunitinib monotherapy.

OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS

The secondary endpoints analyzed during the second-line part of IMmotion150 included objective response rate (ORR), progression-free survival (PFS), and safety. PFS was examined using Kaplan-Meier methods.

RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS

Fifty-nine patients in the atezolizumab arm and 78 in the sunitinib arm were eligible, and 103 initiated second-line atezolizumab + bevacizumab (atezolizumab arm, n = 44; sunitinib arm, n = 59). ORR (95% confidence interval [CI]) was 27% (19-37%). The median PFS (95% CI) from the start of second line was 8.7 (5.6-13.7) mo. The median event follow-up duration was 19.4 (12.9-21.9) mo among the 25 patients without a PFS event. Eighty-six (83%) patients had treatment-related adverse events; 31 of 103 (30%) had grade 3/4 events. Limitations were the small sample size and selection for progressors.

CONCLUSIONS

The atezolizumab + bevacizumab combination had activity and was tolerable in patients with progression on atezolizumab or sunitinib. Further studies are needed to investigate sequencing strategies in mRCC.

PATIENT SUMMARY

Patients with advanced kidney cancer whose disease had worsened during treatment with atezolizumab or sunitinib began second-line treatment with atezolizumab + bevacizumab. Tumors shrank in more than one-quarter of patients treated with this combination, and side effects were manageable.

Prevalence of potential interactions of medications, including herbs and supplements, before, during, and after chemotherapy in patients with breast and prostate cancer

BACKGROUND

The use of herbs and supplements (HS) is common among patients with cancer, yet limited information exists about potential medication interactions (PMIs) with HS use around chemotherapy.

METHODS

Patients with breast or prostate cancer who had recently finished chemotherapy at 2 academic medical centers were surveyed by telephone. Interviewers inquired about all medications, including HS, before, during, and after chemotherapy. Micromedex, Lexicomp, and Natural Medicines Comprehensive Database interaction software programs were used to determine PMIs.

RESULTS

A total of 67 subjects (age range, 39-77 years) were evaluated in this study. Participants were primarily White patients (73%) with breast cancer (87%). The median number of medications was 11 (range, 2-28) during the entire study and was highest during chemotherapy (7; range, 2-22). Approximately four-fifths (84%) used HS. A total of 1747 PMIs were identified, and they represented 635 unique PMIs across all 3 timeframes, with most occurring during chemotherapy. Prescription-related PMIs (70%) were the most common type, and they were followed by HS-related (56%) and anticancer treatment-related PMIs (22%). Approximately half of the PMIs (54%) were categorized as moderate interactions, and more than one-third (38%) were categorized as major interactions. Patient use of HS increased from 51% during chemotherapy to 66% after chemotherapy, and this correlated with an increased prevalence of HS PMIs (46% to 60%). HS users were more likely to be at risk for a major PMI than non-HS users (92% vs 70%; P = .038).

CONCLUSIONS

The use of HS remains prevalent among patients with cancer and may place them at risk for PMIs both during chemotherapy and after the completion of treatment.

LAY SUMMARY

This study evaluates the risk of potential medication interactions for patients with breast or prostate cancer undergoing chemotherapy. The results show that patients often use herbs and supplements during treatment. Prescription medications are most often associated with medication interactions, which are followed by herb and supplement-related interactions. More than one-third of potential medication interactions are considered major. Patients should be educated about the risk of herb and supplement-related medication interactions during treatment.

Optimized Management of Nivolumab and Ipilimumab in Advanced Renal Cell Carcinoma: A Response-Based Phase II Study (OMNIVORE)

PURPOSE

In this phase II response-adaptive trial, we investigated the rational application of immune checkpoint blockade in renal cell carcinoma (RCC; ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03203473).

METHODS

We enrolled patients with metastatic RCC with no prior checkpoint inhibitor exposure. All patients received nivolumab alone with subsequent arm allocation based on response. Patients with a confirmed partial response (PR) or complete response (CR) within 6 months discontinued nivolumab and were observed (arm A). Patients with stable disease or progressive disease (PD) after no more than 6 months of nivolumab received two doses of ipilimumab (arm B). The primary endpoints were the proportion of patients with PR/CR at 1 year after nivolumab discontinuation (arm A) and proportion of nivolumab nonresponders who converted to PR/CR after ipilimumab (arm B).

RESULTS

Overall, 83 patients initiated treatment, of whom 96% had clear-cell histology, 51% were treatment naïve, and 67% had intermediate/poor-risk disease. Median follow-up was 19.5 months. Within 6 months, induction nivolumab resulted in a confirmed PR in 12% of patients (n = 10). Fourteen patients were not allocated to a study arm (seven because of toxicity, seven because of PD). Twelve patients (14%) were allocated to arm A and discontinued nivolumab, of whom five (42%; 90% CI, 18% to 68%) remained off nivolumab at ≥ 1 year. Of 57 patients (69%) allocated to arm B, two patients converted to a confirmed PR (4%; 90% CI, 1% to 11%), and no CRs were observed.

CONCLUSION

In this study, nivolumab followed by two doses of ipilimumab resulted in no CRs and a low PR/CR conversion. The number of patients evaluated for nivolumab discontinuation was too small to assess the value of this approach. Currently, our data do not support a response-adaptive strategy for checkpoint blockade in advanced RCC.

Patient-Reported Outcomes from the Phase III Randomized IMmotion151 Trial: Atezolizumab Bevacizumab versus Sunitinib in Treatment-Naïve Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma

PURPOSE

Patient-reported outcomes (PRO) were evaluated in the phase III IMmotion151 trial (NCT02420821) to inform overall treatment/disease burden of atezolizumab plus bevacizumab versus sunitinib in patients with previously untreated metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients were randomized 1:1 to receive atezolizumab 1,200 mg intravenous (i.v.) infusions every 3 weeks (q3w) plus bevacizumab 15 mg/kg i.v. q3w or sunitinib 50 mg per day orally 4 weeks on/2 weeks off. Patients completed the MD Anderson Symptom Inventory (MDASI), National Comprehensive Cancer Network Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Kidney Symptom Index (FKSI-19), and Brief Fatigue Inventory (BFI) at baseline, q3w during treatment, at end of treatment, and during survival follow-up. Longitudinal and time to deterioration (TTD) analyses for core and RCC symptoms and their interference with daily life, treatment side-effect bother, and health-related quality of life (HRQOL) were evaluated.

RESULTS

The intent-to-treat population included 454 and 461 patients in the atezolizumab plus bevacizumab and sunitinib arms, respectively. Completion rates for each instrument were 83% to 86% at baseline and ≥ 70% through week 54. Milder symptoms, less symptom interference and treatment side-effect bother, and better HRQOL at most visits were reported with atezolizumab plus bevacizumab versus sunitinib. The TTD HR (95% CI) favored atezolizumab plus bevacizumab for core (HR, 0.50; 0.40-0.62) and RCC symptoms (HR, 0.45; 0.37-0.55), symptom interference (HR, 0.56; 0.46-0.68), and HRQOL (HR, 0.68; 0.58-0.81).

CONCLUSIONS

PROs in IMmotion151 suggest lower overall treatment burden with atezolizumab plus bevacizumab compared with sunitinib in patients with treatment-naïve mRCC and provide further evidence for clinical benefit of this regimen.

A randomized phase 2 study of temsirolimus and cetuximab versus temsirolimus alone in recurrent/metastatic, cetuximab-resistant head and neck cancer: The MAESTRO study

BACKGROUND

Patients with cetuximab-resistant, recurrent/metastatic head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) have poor outcomes. This study hypothesized that dual blockade of mammalian target of rapamycin and epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) would overcome cetuximab resistance on the basis of the role of phosphoinositide 3-kinase signaling in preclinical models of EGFR resistance.

METHODS

In this multicenter, randomized clinical study, patients with recurrent/metastatic HNSCC with documented progression on cetuximab (in any line in the recurrent/metastatic setting) received 25 mg of temsirolimus weekly plus cetuximab at 400/250 mg/m² weekly (TC) or single-agent temsirolimus (T). The primary outcome was progression-free survival (PFS) in the TC arm versus the T arm. Response rates, overall survival, and toxicity were secondary outcomes.

RESULTS

Eighty patients were randomized to therapy with TC or T alone. There was no difference for the primary outcome of median PFS (TC arm, 3.5 months; T arm, 3.5 months). The response rate was 12.5% in the TC arm (5 responses, including 1 complete response [2.5%]) and 2.5% in the T arm (1 partial response; P = .10). Responses were clinically meaningful in the TC arm (range, 3.6-9.1 months) but not in the T-alone arm (1.9 months). Fatigue, electrolyte abnormalities, and leukopenia were the most common grade 3 or higher adverse events and occurred in less than 20% of patients in both arms.

CONCLUSIONS

The study did not meet its primary endpoint of improvement in PFS. However, TC induced responses in cetuximab-refractory patients with good tolerability. The post hoc observation of activity in patients with acquired resistance (after prior benefit from cetuximab monotherapy) may warrant further investigation.

A randomized phase 2 network trial of tivantinib plus cetuximab versus cetuximab in patients with recurrent/metastatic head and neck squamous cell carcinoma

BACKGROUND

MET signaling is a well described mechanism of resistance to anti-EGFR therapy, and MET overexpression is common in head and neck squamous cell carcinomas (HNSCCs). In the current trial, the authors compared the oral MET inhibitor tivantinib (ARQ197) in combination with cetuximab (the TC arm) versus a control arm that received cetuximab monotherapy (C) in patients with recurrent/metastatic HNSCC.

METHODS

In total, 78 evaluable patients with cetuximab-naive, platinum-refractory HNSCC were enrolled, including 40 on the TC arm and 38 on the C arm (stratified by human papillomavirus [HPV] status). Patients received oral tivantinib 360 mg twice daily and intravenous cetuximab 500 mg/m² once every 2 weeks. The primary outcome was the response rate (according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors, version 1.1), and secondary outcomes included progression-free and overall survival. After patients progressed on the C arm, tivantinib monotherapy was optional.

RESULTS

The response rate was 7.5% in the TC arm (N = 3; 1 complete response) and 7.9% in the C arm (N = 3; not significantly different [NS]). The median progression-free survival in both arms was 4 months (NS), and the median overall survival was 8 months (NS). Both treatments were well tolerated, with a trend toward increased hematologic toxicities in the TC arm (12.5% had grade 3 leukopenia). The response rate in 31 HPV-positive/p16-positive patients was 0% in both arms, whereas the response rate in HPV-negative patients was 12.7% (12.5% in the TC arm and 13% in the C arm). Fifteen patients received tivantinib monotherapy, and no responses were observed.

CONCLUSIONS

Combined tivantinib plus cetuximab does not significantly improve the response rate or survival compared with cetuximab alone but does increase toxicity in an unselected HNSCC population. Cetuximab responses appear to be limited to patients who have HPV-negative HNSCC. MET-aberration-focused trials for HNSCC and the use of higher potency, selective MET inhibitors remain of interest.

EPHB4 inhibition activates ER stress to promote immunogenic cell death of prostate cancer cells

The EPHB4 receptor is implicated in the development of several epithelial tumors and is a promising therapeutic target, including in prostate tumors in which EPHB4 is overexpressed and promotes tumorigenicity. Here, we show that high expression of EPHB4 correlated with poor survival in prostate cancer patients and EPHB4 inhibition induced cell death in both hormone sensitive and castration-resistant prostate cancer cells. EPHB4 inhibition reduced expression of the glucose transporter, GLUT3, impaired glucose uptake, and reduced cellular ATP levels. This was associated with the activation of endoplasmic reticulum stress and tumor cell death with features of immunogenic cell death (ICD), including phosphorylation of eIF2α, increased cell surface calreticulin levels, and release of HMGB1 and ATP. The changes in tumor cell metabolism after EPHB4 inhibition were associated with MYC downregulation, likely mediated by the SRC/p38 MAPK/4EBP1 signaling cascade, known to impair cap-dependent translation. Together, our study indicates a role for EPHB4 inhibition in the induction of immunogenic cell death with implication for prostate cancer therapy.

Atezolizumab plus bevacizumab versus sunitinib in patients with previously untreated metastatic renal cell carcinoma (IMmotion151): a multicentre, open-label, phase 3, randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND

A phase 2 trial showed improved progression-free survival for atezolizumab plus bevacizumab versus sunitinib in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma who express programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1). Here, we report results of IMmotion151, a phase 3 trial comparing atezolizumab plus bevacizumab versus sunitinib in first-line metastatic renal cell carcinoma.

METHODS

In this multicentre, open-label, phase 3, randomised controlled trial, patients with a component of clear cell or sarcomatoid histology and who were previously untreated, were recruited from 152 academic medical centres and community oncology practices in 21 countries, mainly in Europe, North America, and the Asia-Pacific region, and were randomly assigned 1:1 to either atezolizumab 1200 mg plus bevacizumab 15 mg/kg intravenously once every 3 weeks or sunitinib 50 mg orally once daily for 4 weeks on, 2 weeks off. A permuted-block randomisation (block size of 4) was applied to obtain a balanced assignment to each treatment group with respect to the stratification factors. Study investigators and participants were not masked to treatment allocation. Patients, investigators, independent radiology committee members, and the sponsor were masked to PD-L1 expression status. Co-primary endpoints were investigator-assessed progression-free survival in the PD-L1 positive population and overall survival in the intention-to-treat (ITT) population. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02420821.

FINDINGS

Of 915 patients enrolled between May 20, 2015, and Oct 12, 2016, 454 were randomly assigned to the atezolizumab plus bevacizumab group and 461 to the sunitinib group. 362 (40%) of 915 patients had PD-L1 positive disease. Median follow-up was 15 months at the primary progression-free survival analysis and 24 months at the overall survival interim analysis. In the PD-L1 positive population, the median progression-free survival was 11·2 months in the atezolizumab plus bevacizumab group versus 7·7 months in the sunitinib group (hazard ratio [HR] 0·74 [95% CI 0·57-0·96]; p=0·0217). In the ITT population, median overall survival had an HR of 0·93 (0·76-1·14) and the results did not cross the significance boundary at the interim analysis. 182 (40%) of 451 patients in the atezolizumab plus bevacizumab group and 240 (54%) of 446 patients in the sunitinib group had treatment-related grade 3-4 adverse events: 24 (5%) in the atezolizumab plus bevacizumab group and 37 (8%) in the sunitinib group had treatment-related all-grade adverse events, which led to treatment-regimen discontinuation.

INTERPRETATION

Atezolizumab plus bevacizumab prolonged progression-free survival versus sunitinib in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma and showed a favourable safety profile. Longer-term follow-up is necessary to establish whether a survival benefit will emerge. These study results support atezolizumab plus bevacizumab as a first-line treatment option for selected patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma.

FUNDING

F Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd and Genentech Inc.

Phase 1 study of lenalidomide plus dose-adjusted EPOCH-R in patients with aggressive B-cell lymphomas with deregulated MYC and BCL2

BACKGROUND

Dual translocation of MYC and BCL2 or the dual overexpression of these proteins in patients with aggressive B-cell lymphomas (termed double-hit lymphoma [DHL] and double-expressor lymphoma [DEL], respectively) have poor outcomes after chemoimmunotherapy with the combination of rituximab, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone (R-CHOP). Retrospective reports have suggested improved outcomes with dose-intensified regimens. In the current study, the authors conducted a phase 1 study to evaluate the feasibility, toxicity, and preliminary efficacy of adding lenalidomide to dose-adjusted etoposide, prednisone, vincristine, cyclophosphamide, and doxorubicin with rituximab (DA-EPOCH-R) in patients with DHL and DEL.

METHODS

The primary objective of the current study was to determine the maximum tolerated dose of lenalidomide in combination with DA-EPOCH-R. A standard 3+3 design was used with lenalidomide administered on days 1 to 14 of each 21-day cycle (dose levels of 10 mg, 15 mg, and 20 mg). Patients attaining a complete response after 6 cycles of induction therapy proceeded to maintenance lenalidomide (10 mg daily for 14 days every 21 days) for 12 additional cycles.

RESULTS

A total of 15 patients were enrolled, 10 of whom had DEL and 5 of whom had DHL. Two patients experienced dose-limiting toxicities at a lenalidomide dose of 20 mg, consisting of grade 4 sepsis. The maximum tolerated dose of lenalidomide was determined to be 15 mg. The most common nonhematologic grade ≥3 adverse events included thromboembolism (4 patients; 27%) and hypokalemia (2 patients; 13%) (toxicities were graded according to the National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events [version 4.0]). The preliminary efficacy of the regimen was encouraging, especially in the DEL cohort, in which all 10 patients achieved durable and complete metabolic responses with a median follow-up of 24 months.

CONCLUSIONS

The combination of lenalidomide with DA-EPOCH-R appears to be safe and feasible in patients with DHL and DEL. These encouraging results have prompted an ongoing phase 2 multicenter study.

The future of perioperative therapy in advanced renal cell carcinoma: how can we PROSPER?

Patients with high-risk renal cell carcinoma (RCC) experience high rates of recurrence despite definitive surgical resection. Recent trials of adjuvant tyrosine kinase inhibitor therapy have provided conflicting efficacy results at the cost of significant adverse events. PD-1 blockade via monoclonal antibodies has emerged as an effective disease-modifying treatment for metastatic RCC. There is emerging data across other solid tumors of the potential efficacy of neoadjuvant PD-1 blockade, and preclinical evidence supporting a neoadjuvant over adjuvant approach. PROSPER RCC is a Phase III, randomized trial evaluating whether perioperative nivolumab increases recurrence-free survival in patients with high-risk RCC undergoing nephrectomy. The neoadjuvant component, intended to prime the immune system for enhanced efficacy, distinguishes PROSPER from other purely adjuvant studies and permits highly clinically relevant translational studies.

Complete response of renal cell carcinoma vena cava tumor thrombus to neoadjuvant immunotherapy

Background

Clinically localized renal cell carcinoma is treated primarily with surgery followed by observation or adjuvant sunitinib in selected high-risk patients. The checkpoint inhibitor immunotherapeutic agents nivolumab and ipilimumab have recently shown a survival benefit in the first-line metastatic setting. To date, there have been no reports on the response of localized renal cancer to modern immunotherapy. We report a remarkable response of an advanced tumor thrombus to combined immunotherapy which facilitated curative-intent resection of the non-responding primary renal tumor. We characterized the tumor microenvironment within the responding and non-responding tumors.

Case presentation

A 54-year-old female was diagnosed with a locally advanced clear cell renal cell carcinoma with a level IV tumor thrombus of the vena cava. She was initially deemed unfit for surgical resection due to poor performance status. She underwent neoadjuvant immunotherapy with nivolumab and ipilimumab with a complete response of the vena cava and renal vein tumor thrombus, but had stable disease within her renal mass. She underwent complete surgical resection with negative margins and remains disease-free longer than 1 year after her diagnosis with no further systemic therapy. Notably, pathologic analysis showed a complete response within the vena cava and renal vein, but substantial viable cancer remained in the kidney. Multichannel immunofluorescence was performed and showed marked infiltration of immune cells including CD8⁺ T cells and Batf3⁺ dendritic cells in the thrombus, while the residual renal tumor showed a non-T cell-inflamed phenotype.

Conclusions

Preoperative immunotherapy with nivolumab and ipilimumab for locally advanced clear cell renal cancer resulted in a complete response of an extensive vena cava tumor thrombus, which enabled curative-intent resection of a non-responding primary tumor. If validated in larger cohorts, preoperative immunotherapy for locally advanced renal cell carcinoma may ultimately impact surgical planning and long-term prognosis.

Patient-provider communications about pharmacogenomic results increase patient recall of medication changes

Effective doctor-patient communication is critical for disease management, especially when considering genetic information. We studied patient-provider communications after implementing a point-of-care pharmacogenomic results delivery system to understand whether pharmacogenomic results are discussed and whether medication recall is impacted. Outpatients undergoing preemptive pharmacogenomic testing (cases), non-genotyped controls, and study providers were surveyed from October 2012-May 2017. Patient responses were compared between visits where pharmacogenomic results guided prescribing versus visits where pharmacogenomics did not guide prescribing. Provider knowledge of pharmacogenomics, before and during study participation, was also analyzed. Both providers and case patients frequently reported discussions of genetic results after visits where pharmacogenomic information guided prescribing. Importantly, medication changes from visits where pharmacogenomics influenced prescribing were more often recalled than non-pharmacogenomic guided medication changes (OR=3.3 [1.6–6.7], p=0.001). Case patients who had separate visits where pharmacogenomics did and did not respectively influence prescribing more often remembered medication changes from visits where genomic-based guidance was used (OR=3.4 [1.2–9.3], p=0.02). Providers also displayed dramatic increases in personal genomic understanding through program participation (94% felt at least somewhat informed about pharmacogenomics post-participation, compared to 61% at baseline, p=0.04). Using genomic information during prescribing increases patient-provider communications, patient medication recall, and provider understanding of genomics, important ancillary benefits to clinical use of pharmacogenomics.

Evolving Intersection Between Inherited Cancer Genetics and Therapeutic Clinical Trials in Prostate Cancer: A White Paper From the Germline Genetics Working Group of the Prostate Cancer Clinical Trials Consortium

Purpose

Advances in germline genetics, and related therapeutic opportunities, present new opportunities and challenges in prostate cancer. The Prostate Cancer Clinical Trials Consortium Germline Genetics Working Group was established to address genetic testing for men with prostate cancer, especially those with advanced disease undergoing testing for treatment-related objectives and clinical trials.

Methods

The Prostate Cancer Clinical Trials Consortium Germline Genetics Working Group met monthly to discuss the current state of genetic testing of men with prostate cancer for therapeutic or clinical trial purposes. We assessed current institutional practices, developed a framework to address unique challenges in this population, and identified areas of future research.

Results

Genetic testing practices in men with prostate cancer vary across institutions; however, there were several areas of agreement. The group recognized the clinical benefits of expanding germline genetic testing, beyond cancer risk assessment, for the goal of treatment selection or clinical trial eligibility determination. Genetic testing for treatment selection should ensure patients receive appropriate pretest education and consent and occur under auspices of a research study whenever feasible. Providers offering genetic testing should be able to interpret results and recommend post-test genetic counseling for patients. When performing tumor (somatic) genomic profiling, providers should discuss the potential for uncovering germline mutations and recommend appropriate genetic counseling. In addition, family members may benefit from cascade testing and early cancer screening and prevention strategies.

Conclusion

As germline genetic testing is incorporated into practice, further development is needed in establishing prompt testing for time-sensitive treatment decisions, integrating cascade testing for family, ensuring equitable access to testing, and elucidating the role of less-characterized germline DNA damage repair genes, individual gene-level biologic consequences, and treatment response prediction in advanced disease.

Phase II randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study of tivantinib in men with asymptomatic or minimally symptomatic metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC)

Background Tivantinib is a non-ATP competitive inhibitor of c-MET receptor tyrosine kinase that may have additional cytotoxic mechanisms including tubulin inhibition. Prostate cancer demonstrates higher c-MET expression as the disease progresses to more advanced stages and to a castration resistant state. Methods 80 patients (pts) with asymptomatic or minimally symptomatic mCRPC were assigned (2:1) to either tivantinib 360 mg PO BID or placebo (P). The primary endpoint was progression free survival (PFS). Results Of the 80 pts. enrolled, 78 (52 tivantinib, 26 P) received treatment and were evaluable. Median follow up is 8.9 months (range: 2.3 to 19.6 months). Patients treated with tivantinib had significantly better PFS vs. those treated with placebo (medians: 5.5 mo vs 3.7 mo, respectively; HR = 0.55, 95% CI: 0.33 to 0.90; p = 0.02). Grade 3 febrile neutropenia was seen in 1 patient on tivantinib while grade 3 and 4 neutropenia was recorded in 1 patient each on tivantinib and placebo. Grade 3 sinus bradycardia was recorded in two men on the tivantinib arm. Conclusions Tivantinib has mild toxicity and improved PFS in men with asymptomatic or minimally symptomatic mCRPC.

Contemporary Patterns of Multidisciplinary Care in Patients With Muscle-invasive Bladder Cancer

BACKGROUND

Multidisciplinary clinics integrate the expertise of several specialties to provide effective treatment to patients. This exposure is especially relevant in the management of muscle-invasive bladder cancer (MIBC), which requires critical input from urology, radiation oncology, and medical oncology, among other supportive specialties.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In the present study, we sought to catalog the different styles of multidisciplinary care models used in the management of MIBC and to identify barriers to their implementation. We surveyed providers from academic and community practices regarding their currently implemented multidisciplinary care models, available resources, and perceived barriers using the Bladder Cancer Advocacy Network and the Genitourinary Medical Oncologists of Canada e-mail databases.

RESULTS

Of the 101 responding providers, most practiced at academic institutions in the United States (61%) or Canada (29%), and only 7% were from community practices. The most frequently used model was sequential visits on different days (57%), followed by sequential same-day (39%) and concurrent (1 visit with all providers; 22%) models. However, most practitioners preferred a multidisciplinary clinic involving sequential same-day (41%) or concurrent (26%) visits. The lack of clinic space (58%), funding (41%), staff (40%), and time (32%) were the most common barriers to implementing a multidisciplinary clinic.

CONCLUSION

Most surveyed practitioners at academic centers use some form of a multidisciplinary care model for patients with MIBC. The major barriers to more integrated multidisciplinary clinics were limited time and resources rather than a lack of provider enthusiasm. Future studies should incorporate patient preferences, further evaluate practice patterns in community settings, and assess their effects on patient outcomes.

Prospective International Randomized Phase II Study of Low-Dose Abiraterone With Food Versus Standard Dose Abiraterone In Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer

Purpose Abiraterone acetate (AA) is a standard of care for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC). Despite a large food effect, AA was administered under fasting conditions in its pivotal trials. We sought to test the hypothesis that low-dose AA (LOW; 250 mg with a low-fat meal) would have comparable activity to standard AA (STD; 1,000 mg fasting) in patients with CRPC. Patients and Methods Patients (n = 72) with progressive CRPC from seven institutions in the United States and Singapore were randomly assigned to STD or LOW. Both arms received prednisone 5 mg twice daily. Prostate-specific antigen (PSA) was assessed monthly, and testosterone/dehydroepiandrosterone sulfate were assessed every 12 weeks with disease burden radiographic assessments. Plasma was collected for drug concentrations. Log change in PSA, as a pharmacodynamic biomarker for efficacy, was the primary end point, using a noninferiority design. Progression-free survival (PFS), PSA response (≥ 50% reduction), change in androgen levels, and pharmacokinetics were secondary end points. Results Thirty-six patients were accrued to both arms. At 12 weeks, there was a greater effect on PSA in the LOW arm (mean log change, -1.59) compared with STD (-1.19), and noninferiority of LOW was established according to predefined criteria. The PSA response rate was 58% in LOW and 50% in STD, and the median PFS was approximately 9 months in both groups. Androgen levels decreased similarly in both arms. Although there was no difference in PSA response or PFS, abiraterone concentrations were higher in STD. Conclusion Low-dose AA (with low-fat breakfast) is noninferior to standard dosing with respect to PSA metrics. Given the pharmacoeconomic implications, these data warrant consideration by prescribers, payers, and patients. Additional studies are indicated to assess the long-term efficacy of this approach.

Analyzing the clinical actionability of germline pharmacogenomic findings in oncology

BACKGROUND

Germline and tumor pharmacogenomics impact drug responses, but germline markers less commonly guide oncology prescribing. The authors hypothesized that a critical number of clinically actionable germline pharmacogenomic associations exist, representing clinical implementation opportunities.

METHODS

In total, 125 oncology drugs were analyzed for positive germline pharmacogenomic associations in journals with impact factors ≥5. Studies were assessed for design and genotyping quality, clinically relevant outcomes, statistical rigor, and evidence of drug-gene effects. Associations from studies of high methodologic quality were deemed potentially clinically actionable, and translational summaries were written as point-of-care clinical decision support (CDS) tools and formally evaluated using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE) II instrument.

RESULTS

The authors identified germline pharmacogenomic results for 56 of 125 oncology drugs (45%) across 173 publications. Actionable associations were detected for 12 drugs, including 6 that had germline pharmacogenomic information within US Food and Drug Administration labels or published guidelines (capecitabine/fluorouracil/dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase [DPYD], irinotecan/uridine diphosphate glucuronosyltransferase family 1 member A1 [UGT1A1], mercaptopurine/thioguanine/thiopurine S-methyltransferase [TPMT], tamoxifen/cytochrome P450 [CYP] family 2 subfamily D member 6 [CYP2D6]), and 6 others were novel (asparaginase/nuclear factor of activated T-cells 2 [NFATC2]/human leukocyte antigen D-related β1 [HLA-DRB1], cisplatin/acylphosphatase 2 [ACYP2], doxorubicin/adenosine triphosphate-binding cassette subfamily C member 2/Rac family small guanosine triphosphatase 2/neutrophil cytosolic factor 4 [ABCC2/RAC2/NCF4], lapatinib/human leukocyte antigen DQ α1 [HLA-DQA1], sunitinib/cytochrome P450 family 3 subfamily A member 5 [CYP3A5], vincristine/centrosomal protein 72 [CEP72]). By using AGREE II, the developed CDS summaries had high mean ± standard deviation scores (maximum score, 100) for scope and purpose (92.7 ± 5.1) and rigour of development (87.6 ± 7.4) and moderate yet robust scores for clarity of presentation (58.6 ± 25.1) and applicability (55.9 ± 24.6). The overall mean guideline quality score was 5.2 ± 1.0 (maximum score, 7). Germline pharmacogenomic CDS summaries for these 12 drugs were recommended for implementation.

CONCLUSIONS

Several oncology drugs have actionable germline pharmacogenomic information, justifying their delivery through institutional pharmacogenomic implementations to determine clinical utility. Cancer 2018;124:3052-65. © 2018 American Cancer Society.

Predicting Acute Renal Injury in Cancer Patients Receiving Cisplatin Using Urinary Neutrophil Gelatinase-Associated Lipocalin and Cystatin C

Acute kidney injury (AKI) limits cisplatin use. We tested whether urine cystatin C (uCyC) and neutrophil gelatinase‐associated lipocalin (uNGAL) can preidentify patients at risk for AKI. Patients initiating cisplatin‐based chemotherapy were prospectively enrolled. uNGAL/uCyC were measured pre/post‐cisplatin administration and compared with serum creatinine (sCr). AKI was defined as sCr increase ≥50% or ≥0.3 mg/dL above baseline. In all, 102 patients were enrolled; 95 provided evaluable data. Twenty‐five patients developed AKI. Median baseline and pre‐cisplatin uNGAL levels were significantly higher in AKI patients. Although immediate changes in uNGAL/uCyC 2 h after cisplatin were not detectable, post‐cisplatin peak values over the course of therapy were markedly and significantly elevated in AKI patients. In multivariate modeling with age, baseline glomerular filtration rate, and histology, maximum uCyC was a significant independent AKI predictor. These findings suggest pre‐cisplatin uNGAL and peak uCyC levels can identify patients with increased AKI risk, potentially allowing for tailored modification of cisplatin‐based treatment regimens.

Prognostic importance of lymphovascular invasion in urothelial carcinoma of the renal pelvis

BACKGROUND

The current study was conducted to assess the impact of lymphovascular invasion on the survival of patients with urothelial carcinoma of the renal pelvis.

METHODS

Patients with urothelial carcinoma of the renal pelvis who underwent radical nephroureterectomy from 2010 through 2015 were identified in the National Cancer Data Base. Patients were characterized according to demographic and clinical factors, including pathologic tumor stage and lymphovascular invasion. Associations with overall survival were assessed through proportional hazards regression analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 4177 patients were identified; 1576 had lymphovascular invasion. Patients with T3 disease and lymphovascular invasion had 5-year survival that was significantly worse than that of patients with T3 disease without lymphovascular invasion (34.7% vs 52.6; P < .001 by the log-rank test), and approached that of patients with T4 disease without lymphovascular invasion (34.7% vs 26.5%; P = .002). On multivariate analysis controlling for age, comorbidities, grade, lymph node status, surgical margin status, race, sex, and chemotherapy administration, patients with T3 disease and lymphovascular invasion also were found to have significantly worse survival compared with patients with T3 disease without lymphovascular invasion (hazard ratio, 1.7; 95% confidence interval, 1.4-1.91).

CONCLUSIONS

Lymphovascular invasion status is a key prognostic marker that can stratify the risk of patients with pT3 upper tract urothelial carcinoma further. Patients with this pathologic feature should be carefully considered for clinical trials exploring existing and novel therapies. Cancer 2018;124:2507-14. © 2018 American Cancer Society.