Search

Objective: We sought to determine whether aggressive local treatment provides a benefit in patients with stage IV esophageal adenocarcinoma and to determine factors associated with survival., Methods: Patients with clinical stage IV esophageal adenocarcinoma at diagnosis who underwent esophagectomy from 2010 to 2023 were identified from our prospectively maintained database. Clinicopathologic and demographic characteristics were compared among patients by stage. Overall survival was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier approach., Results: In total, 66 patients met the inclusion criteria. Of these, 30 (45%) had stage IVA disease, and 36 (55%) had stage IVB disease. Of the 36 patients with stage IVB disease, 26 had oligometastatic disease, and 10 had disseminated disease. All patients with stage IVA disease received standard neoadjuvant therapy followed by curative-intent surgery; 26 of these patients (87%) received chemoradiation. Patients with oligometastatic stage IVB disease underwent systemic therapy with the goal of surgical resection. Patients with disseminated stage IVB disease underwent palliative chemotherapy, which led to improvement in disease burden and performance of esophagectomy. Median time from the start of therapy to surgery was shorter for patients with stage IVA disease than patients with stage IVB disease (P < .001). Three-year progression-free survival was lower for patients with stage IVA disease (40% vs 56%), as was 3-year overall survival (57% vs 85%). Adjusted overall survival, from the start of therapy to most recent follow-up, was higher for patients with stage IVB disease., Conclusions: Aggressive local treatment may provide a benefit for highly selected patients with advanced or metastatic esophageal adenocarcinoma., Competing Interests: Conflict of Interest Statement Dr Janjigian has received research funding from AstraZeneca, Acrus Biosciences, Bayer, Bristol Myers Squibb, Eli Lilly, Roche/Genentech, Inspirna, Merck, and Transcenta and has served in consulting or advisory roles for Abbvie, Amerisource Bergen, Ask-Gene Pharma, Arcus Biosciences, Astellas, AstraZeneca, Basilea Pharmaceutica, Bayer, Bristol Myers Squibb, Daiichi Sankyo, Eli Lilly, Geneos Therapeutics, GlaxoSmithKline, Guardant Health, Imedex, Imugene, Inspirna, Lynx Health, Merck, Mersana Therapeutics, PeerView Institute, Pfizer, Seagen, Silverback Therapeutics, and Zymerworks. Dr Maron has received research funding from Guardant Health (institutional) and Roche/Genentech (institutional); has served in consulting or advisory roles for Amgen, Basilea, Clinical Care Options, Daiichi Sankyo, Elevaton Oncology, Health Advances, MedPage Today, Natera, Novartis, Physicians’ Education Resource, Pinetree Therapeutics, Purple Biotech, and Vindico Medical Education; and has equity in Calithera Biosciences and McKesson. Dr Bott is a consultant for AstraZeneca Pharmaceuticals, Iovance Biotherapeutics, and Intuitive Surgical and receives research support from Obsidian Therapeutics. Dr Park has received honoraria from Intuitive Surgical, AstraZeneca, Medtronic, serves as a consultant to CEEVRA, and has received institutional research support from Intuitive Surgical. Dr Sihag is a member of the AstraZeneca Advisory Board. Dr Jones is a member of the Advisory Council for AstraZeneca and receives research grant support from Merck. Dr Ku has served in consulting or advisory roles for AstraZeneca, Bristol Myers Squibb, Merck, and Zymeworks. Dr Wu reports research support from CivaTech Oncology, honoraria from Nanovi A/S, serves on the Simphotek Scientific Advisory Board, and has stock in Simphotek. Dr Molena serves on a steering committee for AstraZeneca, as a consultant for Johnson & Johnson, Bristol-Myers Squibb, AstraZeneca, and Boston Scientific, and has been an invited speaker for Merck and Genentech. All other authors reported no conflicts of interest. The Journal policy requires editors and reviewers to disclose conflicts of interest and to decline handling or reviewing manuscripts for which they may have a conflict of interest. The editors and reviewers of this article have no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2024 The American Association for Thoracic Surgery. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Immunotherapy-related colitis (irC) frequently emerges as an immune-related adverse event during immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy and is presumably influenced by the gut microbiota. We longitudinally studied microbiomes from 38 ICI-treated cancer patients. We compared 13 ICI-treated subjects who developed irC against 25 ICI-treated subjects who remained irC-free, along with a validation cohort. Leveraging a preclinical mouse model, predisease stools from irC subjects induced greater colitigenicity upon transfer to mice. The microbiota during the first 10 days of irC closely resembled inflammatory bowel disease microbiomes, with reduced diversity, increased Proteobacteria and Veillonella, and decreased Faecalibacterium, which normalized before irC remission. These findings highlight the irC gut microbiota as functionally distinct but phylogenetically similar to non-irC and healthy microbiomes, with the exception of an acute, transient disruption early in irC. We underscore the significance of longitudinal microbiome profiling in developing clinical avenues to detect, monitor, and mitigate irC in ICI therapy cancer patients., (© 2024 Shang et al.)

Treatment options are limited for patients with non-clear cell renal cell carcinoma (nccRCC). Patients with nccRCC experienced a favorable objective response rate (ORR) in a phase 2 trial of cabozantinib plus nivolumab. We now report updated efficacy and safety results at median follow-up of 34 mo for patients with papillary, unclassified, or translocation-associated RCC. Cabozantinib and nivolumab were administered at standard doses to patients with metastatic nccRCC that had progressed on zero or one line of systemic therapy. The primary endpoint was the ORR according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors v1.1. Secondary endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and adverse events. Forty patients were treated. At median follow-up of 34 mo for survivors, the ORR was 48% (95% confidence interval [CI] 31.5-63.9%). Median PFS was 13 mo (95% CI 7-16); the 12-mo and 24-mo PFS rates were 51% (95% CI 34-65%) and 23% (95% CI 11-37%), respectively. Median OS was 28 mo (95% CI 23-43); the 18-mo and 36-mo OS rates were 70% (95% CI 53-82%) and 44% (95% CI 28-60%), respectively. No new safety signals were seen with cabozantinib and nivolumab. This extended follow-up analysis demonstrates promising efficacy, and highlights the potential for sustained responses with cabozantinib plus nivolumab in patients with metastatic nccRCC., (Copyright © 2024. Published by Elsevier B.V.)

Background: Although different kidney cancers represent a heterogeneous group of malignancies, multiple subtypes including Von Hippel-Lindau (VHL)-altered clear cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC), fumarate hydratase (FH)- and succinate dehydrogenase (SDH)-deficient renal cell carcinoma (RCC), and renal medullary carcinoma (RMC) are affected by genomic instability. Synthetic lethality with poly ADP-ribose polymerase inhibitors (PARPis) has been suggested in preclinical models of these subtypes, and paired PARPis with immune checkpoint blockade (ICB) may achieve additive and/or synergistic effects in patients with previously treated advanced kidney cancers., Objective: To evaluate combined PARPi + ICB in treatment-refractory metastatic kidney cancer., Design, Setting, and Participants: We conducted a single-center, investigator-initiated phase 2 trial in two genomically selected advanced kidney cancer cohorts: (1) VHL-altered RCC with at least one prior ICB agent and one vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) inhibitor, and (2) FH- or SDH-deficient RCC with at least one prior ICB agent or VEGF inhibitor and RMC with at least one prior line of chemotherapy., Intervention: Patients received talazoparib 1 mg daily plus avelumab 800 mg intravenously every 14 d in 28-d cycles., Outcome Measurements and Statistical Analysis: The primary endpoint was objective response rate (ORR) by Immune Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors at 4 mo, and the secondary endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival, and safety., Results and Limitations: Cohort 1 consisted of ten patients with VHL-altered ccRCC. All patients had previously received ICB. The ORR was 0/9 patients; one patient was not evaluable due to missed doses. In this cohort, seven patients achieved stable disease (SD) as the best response. The median PFS was 3.5 mo (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.0, 3.9 mo). Cohort 2 consisted of eight patients; four had FH-deficient RCC, one had SDH-deficient RCC, and three had RMC. In this cohort, six patients had previously received ICB. The ORR was 0/8 patients; two patients achieved SD as the best response and the median PFS was 1.2 mo (95% CI 0.4, 2.9 mo). The most common treatment-related adverse events of all grades were fatigue (61%), anemia (28%), nausea (22%), and headache (22%). There were seven grade 3-4 and no grade 5 events., Conclusions: The first clinical study of combination PARPi and ICB therapy in advanced kidney cancer did not show clinical benefit in multiple genomically defined metastatic RCC cohorts or RMC., Patient Summary: We conducted a study to look at the effect of two medications, talazoparib and avelumab, in patients with metastatic kidney cancer who had disease progression on standard treatment. Talazoparib blocks the normal activity of molecules called poly ADP-ribose polymerase, which then prevents tumor cells from repairing themselves and growing, while avelumab helps the immune system recognize and kill cancer cells. We found that the combination of these agents was safe but not effective in specific types of kidney cancer., (Copyright © 2023 European Association of Urology. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Importance: Immuno-oncology agents have changed the treatment paradigm for metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). Such therapies improve survival but can impose considerable health care resource use (HCRU) and associated costs, necessitating their examination., Objective: To compare HCRU, costs, and clinical outcomes among patients receiving first-line pembrolizumab plus axitinib (P+A) or ipilimumab plus nivolumab (I+N)., Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective cohort study used data from an administrative claims database on patients with mRCC receiving first-line P+A or I+N that was initiated between January 2018 and May 2020. Data were analyzed from February 2021 to July 2022., Exposure: First-line P+A or I+N., Main Outcome and Measures: HCRU and costs during the first 90 days, full first-line treatment, and full follow-up periods were assessed. Using Kaplan-Meier analysis, time on treatment, overall survival, time to first emergency department (ED) visit, and time to first inpatient stay were compared., Results: Among 507 patients, there were 126 patients receiving P+A (91 male [72.2%]; mean [SD] age, 67.93 [9.66] y) and 381 patients receiving I+N (271 male [71.1%]; mean [SD] age, 66.52 [9.94] years). The median time on treatment was longer for the P+A compared with I+N group (12.4 months [95% CI, 8.40 months to not estimable] vs 4.1 months [95% CI, 3.07 to 5.30 months]; P < .001). The median time to first ED visit was longer for the P+A than I+N group (7.2 months [95% CI 3.9 to 11.1 months ] vs 3.3 months [95% CI, 2.6 to 3.9 months]; P = .005), as was time to first inpatient stay (9.0 months [95% CI 6.5 months to not estimable] vs 5.6 months [95% CI, 3.9 to 7.9 months]; P = .02). During the first 90 days, a lower proportion of the P+A than N+I group had ED visits (43 patients [34.1%] vs 182 patients [47.8%] and inpatient stays (24 patients [19.1%) vs144 patients [37.8%]; P < .001). During full follow-up, mean total adjusted costs were similar for P+A and I+N groups, but adjusted 12-month estimated total costs were higher for P+A than I+N groups ($325 574 vs $ 263 803; P = .03)., Conclusions and Relevance: In this study, treatment with P+A was associated with longer time on treatment, time to first ED visit, and inpatient stay, while 12-month estimated costs were higher for the P+A group. This is among the first clinical studies to evaluate economic burden associated with modern treatments for mRCC.

Regulatory approval of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) was based on results of large, randomized clinical trials, resulting in limited outcomes data in patient cohorts typically underrepresented in such trials. The objective of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of ICIs in these unique patient cohorts. This is a multicenter, retrospective analysis of real-world data at six academic and community clinics in the United States from 1 January 2011 to 1 April 2018. Patients were included if they had received at least one cycle of ICI treatment. Unique patient cohorts included age > 75 years, non-White race, positive smoking history, ECOG performance status (PS) ≥ 2, BMI ≥ 30 kg/m 2 , autoimmune diseases (AIDs), chronic viral infections (CVI), extensive prior lines of therapy (LOTs), or >three metastatic sites. Immune-related adverse events (irAEs), overall survival (OS), and time to treatment failure were evaluated in the entire cohort and in NSCLC patients treated with PD-(L)1 monotherapy. Outcomes and their association with unique patient cohorts were compared on univariate analysis and multivariate analysis to those without a particular characteristic in the entire NSCLC PD-(L)1 monotherapy cohorts. In total, 1453 patients were included: 56.5%-smokers, 30.4%-non-White, 22.8%-elderly, 20.8%-ECOG PS ≥ 2, 15.7%-history of AIDs, and 4.7%-history of CVI. The common ICIs were nivolumab (37.1%) and pembrolizumab (22.2%). Black patients, compared to White patients, experienced fewer irAEs (OR 0.54, p < 0.001). An ECOG PS of ≥2 (HR = 2.01, p < 0.001) and an increased number of previous LOTs were associated with poor OS (the median OS of 26.2 vs. 16.2 vs. 9.6 months for one vs. two vs. three prior LOTs, p < 0.001). The above results were confirmed in anti-PD-(L)1 monotherapy non-small cell lung cancer patients (n = 384). Overall, ICIs were safe and efficacious in these typically underrepresented patient cohorts. We noted ECOG PS ≥ 2 and an increased prior LOTs were associated with poor ICI efficacy, and Black patients, compared to White patients, experienced fewer irAEs.

Cancer research is dependent on accurate and relevant information of patient's medical journey. Data in radiology reports are of extreme value but lack consistent structure for direct use in analytics. At Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center (MSKCC), the radiology reports are curated using gold-standard approach of using human annotators. However, the manual process of curating large volume of retrospective data slows the pace of cancer research. Manual curation process is sensitive to volume of reports, number of data elements and nature of reports and demand appropriate skillset. In this work, we explore state of the art methods in artificial intelligence (AI) and implement end-to-end pipeline for fast and accurate annotation of radiology reports. Language models (LM) are trained using curated data by approaching curation as multiclass or multilabel classification problem. The classification tasks are to predict multiple imaging scan sites, presence of cancer and cancer status from the reports. The trained natural language processing (NLP) model classifiers achieve high weighted F1 score and accuracy. We propose and demonstrate the use of these models to assist in the manual curation process which results in higher accuracy and F1 score with lesser time and cost, thus improving efforts of cancer research., Significance: Extraction of structured data in radiology for cancer research with manual process is laborious. Using AI for extraction of data elements is achieved using NLP models' assistance is faster and more accurate., (© 2024 The Authors; Published by the American Association for Cancer Research.)

Introduction: Genetic ancestry (GA) refers to population hereditary patterns that contribute to phenotypic differences seen among race/ethnicity groups, and differences among GA groups may highlight unique biological determinants that add to our understanding of health care disparities., Methods: A retrospective review of patients with renal cell carcinoma (RCC) was performed and correlated GA with clinicopathologic, somatic, and germline molecular data. All patients underwent next-generation sequencing of normal and tumor DNA using Memorial Sloan Kettering-Integrated Mutation Profiling of Actionable Cancer Targets, and contribution of African (AFR), East Asian (EAS), European (EUR), Native American, and South Asian (SAS) ancestry was inferred through supervised ADMIXTURE. Molecular data was compared across GA groups by Fisher exact test and Kruskal-Wallis test., Results: In 953 patients with RCC, the GA distribution was: EUR (78%), AFR (4.9%), EAS (2.5%), SAS (2%), Native American (0.2%), and Admixed (12.2%). GA distribution varied by tumor histology and international metastatic RCC database consortium disease risk status (intermediate-poor: EUR 58%, AFR 88%, EAS 74%, and SAS 73%). Pathogenic/likely pathogenic germline variants in cancer-predisposition genes varied (16% EUR, 23% AFR, 8% EAS, and 0% SAS), and most occurred in CHEK2 in EUR (3.1%) and FH in AFR (15.4%). In patients with clear cell RCC, somatic alteration incidence varied with significant enrichment in BAP1 alterations (EUR 17%, AFR 50%, SAS 29%; p = .01). Comparing AFR and EUR groups within The Cancer Genome Atlas, significant differences were identified in angiogenesis and inflammatory pathways., Conclusion: Differences in clinical and molecular data by GA highlight population-specific variations in patients with RCC. Exploration of both genetic and nongenetic variables remains critical to optimize efforts to overcome health-related disparities., (© 2023 American Cancer Society.)

Background : Immune-related cutaneous adverse events (ircAEs) are frequent and may reduce quality of life and consistent dosing. IL12/23 has been implicated in psoriasis, which is reminiscent of the psoriasiform/lichenoid ircAE phenotype. We report the use of ustekinumab as a therapeutic option. Methods : Patients at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, who received immune checkpoint inhibitors and were treated with ustekinumab or had the keywords "ustekinumab" or "Stelara" in their clinical notes between 1 March 2017 and 1 December 2022 were retrospectively identified via a database query. Documentation from initial and follow-up visits was manually reviewed, and response to ustekinumab was categorized into complete cutaneous response (CcR, decrease to CTCAE grade 0), partial cutaneous response (PcR, any decrease in CTCAE grade exclusive of decrease to grade 0), and no cutaneous response (NcR, no change in CTCAE grade or worsening). Labs including complete blood count (CBC), cytokine panels, and IgE were obtained in a subset of patients as standard of care. Skin biopsies were reviewed by a dermatopathologist. Results : Fourteen patients with psoriasiform (85.7%), maculopapular (7.1%), and pyoderma gangrenosum (7.1%) ircAEs were identified. Ten (71.4%) receiving ustekinumab had a positive response to treatment. Among these 10 responders, 4 (40%) demonstrated partial cutaneous response and 6 (60%) demonstrated complete cutaneous resolution. Six patients (42.9%) experienced interruptions to their checkpoint inhibitor treatment as a result of intolerable ircAEs, and following ircAE management with ustekinumab, two (33.3%) were successfully rechallenged with their checkpoint inhibitors. On histopathology, patients primarily had findings of interface or psoriasiform dermatitis. No patients reported an adverse event related to ustekinumab. Conclusions : Ustekinumab showed a benefit in a subset of patients with psoriasiform/lichenoid ircAEs. No safety signals were identified. However, further prospective randomized controlled trials are needed to confirm our findings.

Background: Immune-Oncology (IO) therapies have changed first-line (1L) treatment paradigm for metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) in last few years with robust clinical trial data. We examined clinical outcomes among clear cell mRCC (mccRCC) patients who received pembrolizumab + axitinib (pembro-axi) or ipilimumab + nivolumab (ipi-nivo) in the US community oncology setting., Methods: This retrospective cohort study utilized data from electronic health records and chart review within The US Oncology Network to identify adult patients with mccRCC initiating 1L pembro-axi or ipi-nivo from January 01, 2019 to December 31, 2020 and followed through March 31, 2021. Physician-recorded response (real-world overall response rate [rwORR] and real-world disease control rate [rwDCR]) was assessed descriptively. Real-world progression-free survival (rwPFS), real-world time to next treatment (rwTTNT) and time on treatment (rwToT) were estimated using Kaplan-Meier analysis. Association of 1L systemic treatment with time-to-event outcomes was examined using multivariable cox proportional hazards models., Results: Study included 331 mccRCC patients (pembro-axi:44%, ipi-nivo:56%). Median age was 65 years, 75.5% were male, and 82.5% had intermediate/poor (I/P) IMDC risk score. RwORR and rwDCR were 71.0% and 80.0% for pembro-axi and 45.2% and 58.6% for ipi-nivo. In multivariable analysis, pembro-axi was associated with longer rwToT (aHR, 0.53 [95% CI, 0.40, 0.71]), rwTTNT (aHR, 0.60 [95% CI, 0.42, 0.87]), and rwPFS (aHR, 0.70 [95% CI, 0.49, 0.99]) compared to ipi-nivo (P < 0.01)., Conclusions: Our study provides insight into newer mccRCC treatment tolerability and effectiveness in the real-world US community setting. Our real-world results were comparable to data from clinical trials, which is encouraging for mccRCC patients., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest Neil J. Shah has a consulting/advisory role from Merck & Co., Inc., Rahway, NJ, USA and research funding from Aravive. Sneha Sura and Junxin She are employee of Ontada. Reshma Shinde, Puneet Singhal and Rodolfo Perini are employees of Merck & Co., Inc., Rahway, NJ, USA and own stock in Merck & Co., Inc., Rahway, NJ, USA. Robert J. Motzer has a consulting/advisory role from Novartis, Eisai, Exelixis, Merck, Genentech/Roche, Incyte, Lilly, Pfizer, AstraZeneca, EMD Serono, and Calithera Biosciences and travel, accommodations, and expenses from Bristol-Myers Squibb, and research funding from Pfizer, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Eisai, Novartis, Genentech/Roche, Exelixis and Merck., (Copyright © 2023 Merck Sharp & Dohme LLC., a subsidiary of Merck & Co., Inc., Rahway, NJ, USA, The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: Compared with people living without HIV (PWOH), people living with HIV (PWH) and cancer have traditionally been excluded from immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) trials. Furthermore, there is a paucity of real-world data on the use of ICIs in PWH and cancer., Methods: This retrospective study included PWH treated with anti-PD-1- or anti-PD-L1-based therapies for advanced cancers. Kaplan-Meier method was used to estimate overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). Objective response rates (ORRs) were measured per RECIST 1.1 or other tumor-specific criteria, whenever feasible. Restricted mean survival time (RMST) was used to compare OS and PFS between matched PWH and PWOH with metastatic NSCLC (mNSCLC)., Results: Among 390 PWH, median age was 58 years, 85% (n = 331) were males, 36% (n = 138) were Black; 70% (n = 274) received anti-PD-1/anti-PD-L1 monotherapy. Most common cancers were NSCLC (28%, n = 111), hepatocellular carcinoma ([HCC]; 11%, n = 44), and head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC; 10%, n = 39). Seventy percent (152/216) had CD4+ T cell counts ≥200 cells/µL, and 94% (179/190) had HIV viral load <400 copies/mL. Twenty percent (79/390) had any grade immune-related adverse events (irAEs) and 7.7% (30/390) had grade ≥3 irAEs. ORRs were 69% (nonmelanoma skin cancer), 31% (NSCLC), 16% (HCC), and 11% (HNSCC). In the matched mNSCLC cohort (61 PWH v 110 PWOH), 20% (12/61) PWH and 22% (24/110) PWOH had irAEs. Adjusted 42-month RMST difference was -0.06 months (95% CI, -5.49 to 5.37; P = .98) for PFS and 2.23 months (95% CI, -4.02 to 8.48; P = .48) for OS., Conclusion: Among PWH, ICIs demonstrated differential activity across cancer types with no excess toxicity. Safety and activity of ICIs were similar between matched cohorts of PWH and PWOH with mNSCLC.

Background: Immune-related adverse events (irAEs) associated with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) are often managed via immunosuppressive agents (ISAs); however, their impact on ICI efficacy is not well studied. The impact of the use of ISAs on ICI efficacy in patients with advanced melanoma was therefore investigated., Methods: This is a real-world, multicenter, retrospective cohort study of patients with advanced melanoma who received ICIs (n = 370). Overall survival (OS) and time to treatment failure (TTF) from the time of ICI initiation were compared among patients in subgroups of interest by unadjusted and 12-week landmark sensitivity-adjusted analyses. The association of irAEs and their management with OS and TTF were evaluated using univariate and multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression models., Results: Overall, irAEs of any grade and of grade ≥3 occurred in 57% and 23% of patients, respectively. Thirty-seven percent of patients received steroids, and 3% received other ISAs. Median OS was longest among patients receiving both (not reached [NR]), shorter among those receiving only systemic steroids (SSs) (84.2 months; 95% CI, 40.2 months to NR), and shortest among those who did not experience irAEs (10.3 months; 95% CI, 6-20.1 months) (p < .001). Longer OS was significantly associated with the occurrence of irAEs and the use of SSs with or without ISAs upon multivariable-adjusted analysis (p < .001). Similar results were noted with anti-programmed death 1 (PD-1) monotherapy and combination anti-PD-1 plus anti-cytotoxic T-lymphocyte antigen 4 (CTLA-4) therapy, and with 12-week landmark sensitivity analysis (p = .01)., Conclusions: These findings in patients with melanoma who were treated with ICIs suggest that the use of SSs or ISAs for the management of irAEs is not associated with inferior disease outcomes, which supports the use of these agents when necessary., (© 2023 American Cancer Society.)

Immunotherapy (IO)-based combinations used to treat metastatic clear cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC) include dual immune checkpoint inhibition with ipilimumab and nivolumab (IO/IO) and several combinations of vascular endothelial growth factor receptor-targeting tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) with an immune checkpoint inhibitor (TKI/IO). IO/IO and TKI/IO approaches have not been compared directly, and it is unknown whether patients who do not respond to first-line IO/IO can salvage long-term survival by receiving a second-line TKI. Progression-free survival after second-line therapy (PFS-2) evaluates the ability to be salvaged by second-line therapy. We retrospectively evaluated 173 patients treated with first-line IO/IO or TKI/IO for metastatic ccRCC at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center and report PFS-2, overall survival, and response to second line of therapy (ORR 2nd ) for groups defined by first-line category. Although ORR 2nd was significantly higher with IO/IO than with TKI/IO (47% vs 13%, p < 0.001), there was no significant difference in median PFS-2 for TKI/IO versus IO/IO (44 vs 23 mo, log-rank p = 0.1) or restricted mean survival time (RMST) for PFS-2 when adjusted for propensity score (33 vs 30 mo; difference 2.6 mo [95% confidence interval {CI}: -2.6, 7.9]; p = 0.3). There was also no significant difference in RMST for overall survival when adjusted for propensity score (38 vs 37 mo; group difference 1.0 mo [95% CI: -3.4, 5.5]; p = 0.7). These findings do not support a change in current utilization practices for IO/IO and TKI/IO treatment strategies for ccRCC. PATIENT SUMMARY: In cases of metastatic clear cell renal cell carcinoma, no significant difference was observed in progression-free survival after second line of therapy between patients receiving ipilimumab plus nivolumab and those receiving a combination of a tyrosine kinase inhibitor and an immune checkpoint inhibitor., (Copyright © 2022 European Association of Urology. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

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., (© 2023 Merck Sharp & Dohme LLC., a subsidiary Merck & Co., The Author(s).)

Purpose: To assess the efficacy and safety of cabozantinib plus nivolumab in a phase II trial in patients with non-clear-cell renal cell carcinoma (RCC)., Patients and Methods: Patients had advanced non-clear-cell renal carcinoma who underwent 0-1 prior systemic therapies excluding prior immune checkpoint inhibitors. Patients received cabozantinib 40 mg once daily plus nivolumab 240 mg once every 2 weeks or 480 mg once every 4 weeks. Cohort 1 enrolled patients with papillary, unclassified, or translocation-associated RCC; cohort 2 enrolled patients with chromophobe RCC. The primary end point was objective response rate (ORR) by RECIST 1.1; secondary end points included progression-free survival, overall survival, and safety. Next-generation sequencing results were correlated with response., Results: A total of 47 patients were treated with a median follow-up of 13.1 months. Objective response rate for cohort 1 (n = 40) was 47.5% (95% CI, 31.5 to 63.9), with median progression-free survival of 12.5 months (95% CI, 6.3 to 16.4) and median overall survival of 28 months (95% CI, 16.3 to not evaluable). In cohort 2 (n = 7), no responses were observed; one patient had stable disease > 1 year. Grade 3/4 treatment-related adverse events were observed in 32% treated patients. Cabozantinib and nivolumab were discontinued because of toxicity in 13% and 17% of patients, respectively. Common mutations included NF2 and FH in cohort 1 and TP53 and PTEN in cohort 2. Objective responses were seen in 10/12 patients with either NF2 or FH mutations., Conclusion: Cabozantinib plus nivolumab showed promising efficacy in most non-clear-cell RCC variants tested in this trial, particularly those with prominent papillary features, whereas treatment effects were limited in chromophobe RCC. Genomic findings in non-clear-cell RCC variants warrant further study as predictors of response.

Background: Immune-related adverse events (irAEs) often require treatment with high-dose systemic steroids (SS) and other immunosuppressive agents (ISAs). NCCN Guidelines recommend prophylactic antibiotics for Pneumocystis jirovecii pneumonia (PJP) for patients receiving prolonged SS/ISAs. However, there is a paucity of evidence regarding the incidence of opportunistic infections (OIs) and non-OIs and the role of prophylactic antibiotics in patients on SS/ISAs for irAEs., Methods: A retrospective analysis was conducted of patients treated using immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) therapy at 5 MedStar Health hospitals from January 2011 to April 2018. OIs were defined per the Infectious Diseases Society of America guidelines for the prevention and treatment of OIs in patients with HIV. The study cohort included patients who received ≥20 mg daily of a prednisone equivalent for ≥4 weeks to manage irAEs., Results: The study cohort identified 112 (15%) of 758 total patients treated using ICIs. Baseline characteristics included the following: median age was 64 years, 74% (n=82) of patients were White, 89% (n=100) had an ECOG performance status ≤1, 61% (n=68) had melanoma, 19% (n=21) had non-small cell lung cancer, 45% (n=50) were treated using an anti-PD-(L)1 ICI, and 33% (n=37) were treated using an anti-PD-1/anti-CTLA-4 combination. The median starting SS dose was 100 mg of a prednisone equivalent, and 25% of patients required additional ISAs, with infliximab (n=15) and mycophenolate mofetil (n=9) being the most common. We found that 20% (n=22) of patients developed any infection, including 7% (n=8) with OIs (oral candidiasis [n=4], nondisseminated varicella zoster infection [n=2], PJP [n=1], and Listeria monocytogenes endophthalmitis [n=1]) and 13% (n=14) with non-OIs (most common: Clostridium difficile and pneumonia [n=5 each]). PJP prophylaxis with sulfamethoxazole/trimethoprim was given to 13% (n=14) patients, of whom 43% (n=6) developed OIs/non-OIs., Conclusions: Our study highlights the fundamental issues for patients on ICI therapy who require SS/ISAs for irAEs: the degree of immunosuppression and the relative risk of OI. We noted a low incidence of OIs overall and breakthrough infections despite PJP prophylaxis. We question whether PJP prophylaxis is efficacious or necessary. Prospective trials are required to answer these questions.

Purpose: The clinical utility of cell-free DNA (cfDNA) as a biomarker for advanced clear cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC) remains unclear. We evaluated the validity of cfDNA-based genomic profiling in a large cohort of patients with ccRCC with matched next-generation sequencing (NGS) from primary tumor tissues., Materials and Methods: We performed paired NGS of tumor DNA and plasma cfDNA using the MSK-IMPACT platform in 110 patients with metastatic ccRCC. Tissues were profiled for variants and copy number alterations with germline comparison. Manual cross-genotyping between cfDNA and tumor tissue was performed. Deep sequencing with a higher sensitivity platform, MSK-ACCESS, was performed on a subset of cfDNA samples. Clinical data and radiographic tumor volumes were assessed to correlate cfDNA yield with treatment response and disease burden., Results: Tumor tissue MSK-IMPACT testing identified 582 genomic alterations (GAs) across the cohort. Using standard thresholds for de novo variant calling in cfDNA, only 24 GAs were found by MSK-IMPACT in cfDNA in 7 of 110 patients (6%). With manual cross-genotyping, 210 GAs were detectable below thresholds in 74 patients (67%). Intrapatient concordance with tumor tissue was limited, including VHL (31.6%), PBRM1 (24.1%), and TP53 (52.9%). cfDNA profiling did not identify 3p loss because of low tumor fractions. Tumor volume was associated with cfDNA allele frequency, and VHL concordance was superior for patients with greater disease burden., Conclusion: cfDNA-based NGS profiling yielded low detection rates in this metastatic ccRCC cohort. Concordance with tumor profiling was low, even for truncal mutations such as VHL , and some findings in peripheral blood may represent clonal hematopoiesis. Routine cfDNA panel testing is not supported, and its application in biomarker efforts must account for these limitations.

Immune-related adverse events (irAEs) frequently complicate treatment with immune checkpoint blockade (ICB) targeting CTLA-4, PD-1, and PD-L1, which are commonly used to treat solid and hematologic malignancies. The skin and gastrointestinal (GI) tract are most frequently affected by irAEs. While extensive efforts to further characterize organ-specific adverse events have contributed to the understanding and management of individual toxicities, investigations into the relationship between multi-organ toxicities have been limited. Therefore, we aimed to conduct a characterization of irAEs occurring in both the skin and gut. A retrospective analysis of two cohorts of patients treated with ICB at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center was conducted, including a cohort of patients with cutaneous irAEs (ircAEs) confirmed by dermatologists ( n = 152) and a cohort of patients with biopsy-proven immune-related colitis ( n = 246). Among both cohorts, 15% (61/398) of patients developed both skin and GI irAEs, of which 72% (44/61) patients had ircAEs preceding GI irAEs ( p = 0.00013). Our study suggests that in the subset of patients who develop both ircAEs and GI irAEs, ircAEs are likely to occur first. Further prospective studies with larger sample sizes are needed to validate our findings, to assess the overall incidence of co-incident irAEs, and to determine whether ircAEs are predictors of other irAEs. This analysis highlights the development of multi-system dermatologic and gastrointestinal irAEs and underscores the importance of oncologists, gastroenterologists, and dermatologists confronted with an ircAE to remain alert for additional irAEs.

Background: TMPRSS2, a cell surface protease regulated by androgens and commonly upregulated in prostate cancer (PCa), is a necessary component for SARS-CoV-2 viral entry into respiratory epithelial cells. Previous reports suggested a lower risk of SARS-CoV-2 among PCa patients on androgen deprivation therapy (ADT). However, the impact of ADT on severe COVID-19 illness is poorly understood., Methods: We performed a multicenter study across 7 US medical centers and evaluated patients with PCa and SARS-CoV-2 detected by polymerase-chain-reaction between March 1, 2020, and May 31, 2020. PCa patients were considered on ADT if they had received appropriate ADT treatment within 6 months of COVID-19 diagnosis. We used multivariable logistic and Cox proportional-hazard regression models for analysis. All statistical tests were 2-sided., Results: We identified 465 PCa patients (median age = 71 years) with a median follow-up of 60 days. Age, body mass index, cardiovascular comorbidity, and PCa clinical disease state adjusted overall survival (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.16, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.68 to 1.98, P = .59), hospitalization status (HR = 0.96, 95% CI = 0.52 to 1.77, P = .90), supplemental oxygenation (HR 1.14, 95% CI = 0.66 to 1.99, P = .64), and use of mechanical ventilation (HR = 0.81, 95% CI = 0.25 to 2.66, P = .73) were similar between ADT and non-ADT cohorts. Similarly, the addition of androgen receptor-directed therapy within 30 days of COVID-19 diagnosis to ADT vs ADT alone did not statistically significantly affect overall survival (androgen receptor-directed therapy: HR = 1.27, 95% CI = 0.69 to 2.32, P = .44)., Conclusions: In this retrospective cohort of PCa patients, the use of ADT was not demonstrated to influence severe COVID-19 outcomes, as defined by hospitalization, supplemental oxygen use, or death. Age 70 years and older was statistically significantly associated with a higher risk of developing severe COVID-19 disease., (© The Author(s) 2022. Published by Oxford University Press.)

Evidence regarding the association between body mass index (BMI) and immune-related adverse events (irAEs) among cancer patients receiving immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) is limited. Here, we use cross-sectional hospital-based data to explore their relationship. Pre-treatment BMI was treated as an ordinal variable (<25, 25 to ≤30, ≥30 kg/m 2 ). The outcome of interest was irAEs after ICI initiation. A multivariable logistic regression model estimated the adjusted odds ratio (aOR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) of BMI. A total of 684 patients with stage III or IV cancer were included in the study (lung: 269, melanoma: 204, other: 211). The mean age at the first dose of ICI was 64.1 years (SD = 13.5), 394 patients (57.6%) were male, and over one-third ( N = 260, 38.0%) were non-White. Overall, 52.9% of patients had BMI ≥ 25 kg/m 2 (25 to ≤30: 217, ≥30: 145) and 288 (42.1%) had irAEs after ICI treatment. Patients with higher BMI tended to have a higher rate of irAEs (<25: 35.7%, 25 to ≤30: 47.0%, ≥30: 49.0%). The multivariable logistic regression yielded consistent results (BMI ≥ 30 vs. BMI < 25: aOR = 1.47, 95% CI = 0.96-2.23; 25 ≤ BMI < 30 vs. BMI < 25: aOR = 1.46, 95% CI = 1.02-2.11, p -trend = 0.04). In conclusion, among patients with advanced cancer receiving ICIs, the rate of irAEs appears to be higher among those with higher BMI.

Background: Despite guidelines recommending genetic counseling for patients with early-onset renal cell carcinoma (RCC), studies interrogating the spectrum of germline mutations and clinical associations in patients with early-onset RCC are lacking., Objective: To define the germline genetic spectrum and clinical associations for patients with early-onset RCC diagnosed at age ≤46 yr who underwent genetic testing., Design, Setting, and Participants: We retrospectively identified patients with early-onset RCC who underwent germline testing at our institution from February 2003 to June 2020., Outcome Measurement and Statistical Analysis: The frequency and spectrum of pathogenic/likely pathogenic (P/LP) variants were determined. Clinical characteristics associated with mutation status were analyzed using two-sample comparison (Fisher's exact or χ 2 test)., Results and Limitations: Of 232 patients with early-onset RCC, 50% had non-clear-cell histology, including unclassified RCC (12.1%), chromophobe RCC (9.7%), FH-deficient RCC (7.0%), papillary RCC (6.6%), and translocation-associated RCC (4.3%). Overall, 43.5% had metastatic disease. Germline P/LP variants were identified in 41 patients (17.7%), of which 21 (9.1%) were in an RCC-associated gene and 20 (8.6%) in a non-RCC-associated gene, including 17 (7.3%) in DNA damage repair genes such as BRCA1/2, ATM, and CHEK2. Factors associated with RCC P/LP variants include bilateral/multifocal renal tumors, non-clear-cell histology, and additional extrarenal primary malignancies. In patients with only a solitary clear-cell RCC, the prevalence of P/LP variants in RCC-associated and non-RCC-associated genes was 0% and 9.9%, respectively., Conclusions: Patients with early-onset RCC had high frequencies of germline P/LP variants in genes associated with both hereditary RCC and other cancer predispositions. Germline RCC panel testing has the highest yield when patients have clinical phenotypes suggestive of underlying RCC gene mutations. Patients with early-onset RCC should undergo comprehensive assessment of personal and family history to guide appropriate genetic testing., Patient Summary: In this study of 232 patients with early-onset kidney cancer who underwent genetic testing, we found a high prevalence of mutations in genes that increase the risk of cancer in both kidneys and other organs for patients and their at-risk family members. Our study suggests that patients with early-onset kidney cancer should undergo comprehensive genetic risk assessment., (Copyright © 2021 European Association of Urology. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Importance: Androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) has been theorized to decrease the severity of SARS-CoV-2 infection in patients with prostate cancer owing to a potential decrease in the tissue-based expression of the SARS-CoV-2 coreceptor transmembrane protease, serine 2 (TMPRSS2)., Objective: To examine whether ADT is associated with a decreased rate of 30-day mortality from SARS-CoV-2 infection among patients with prostate cancer., Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study analyzed patient data recorded in the COVID-19 and Cancer Consortium registry between March 17, 2020, and February 11, 2021. The consortium maintains a centralized multi-institution registry of patients with a current or past diagnosis of cancer who developed COVID-19. Data were collected and managed using REDCap software hosted at Vanderbilt University Medical Center in Nashville, Tennessee. Initially, 1228 patients aged 18 years or older with prostate cancer listed as their primary malignant neoplasm were included; 122 patients with a second malignant neoplasm, insufficient follow-up, or low-quality data were excluded. Propensity matching was performed using the nearest-neighbor method with a 1:3 ratio of treated units to control units, adjusted for age, body mass index, race and ethnicity, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status score, smoking status, comorbidities (cardiovascular, pulmonary, kidney disease, and diabetes), cancer status, baseline steroid use, COVID-19 treatment, and presence of metastatic disease., Exposures: Androgen deprivation therapy use was defined as prior bilateral orchiectomy or pharmacologic ADT administered within the prior 3 months of presentation with COVID-19., Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was the rate of all-cause 30-day mortality after COVID-19 diagnosis for patients receiving ADT compared with patients not receiving ADT after propensity matching., Results: After exclusions, 1106 patients with prostate cancer (before propensity score matching: median age, 73 years [IQR, 65-79 years]; 561 (51%) self-identified as non-Hispanic White) were included for analysis. Of these patients, 477 were included for propensity score matching (169 who received ADT and 308 who did not receive ADT). After propensity matching, there was no significant difference in the primary end point of the rate of all-cause 30-day mortality (OR, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.42-1.42)., Conclusions and Relevance: Findings from this cohort study suggest that ADT use was not associated with decreased mortality from SARS-CoV-2 infection. However, large ongoing clinical trials will provide further evidence on the role of ADT or other androgen-targeted therapies in reducing COVID-19 infection severity.

Background: Limited data exist on safe discontinuation of antiprogrammed cell death protein 1 (PD-1) therapy in responding patients with advanced melanoma. The use of 18fluorodeoxyglucose ( 18 FDG)-PET/CT scan and tumor biopsy for assessment of active disease may be an effective predictive biomarker to guide such treatment decisions., Methods: A retrospective study of 122 patients with advanced melanoma treated with anti-PD-1 monotherapy or anti-PD-1/anticytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated protein 4 combination therapy at Georgetown Lombardi Comprehensive Cancer Center was conducted. Uveal melanoma patients and those receiving concurrent experimental therapy were excluded. Baseline characteristics, treatment outcomes, and survival were analyzed. Patients who decided to come off treatment typically after 12 months using CT scan radiographic complete response (CR), 18 FDG-PET/CT scan complete metabolic response (CMR) or tumor biopsy of a non-CR/CMR tumor site negative for active disease (possible pathological CR) were identified and compared with patients who discontinued treatment due to toxicity while their disease was in control. Event-free survival (EFS) was assessed from the last dose of anti-PD-1 therapy to progression requiring subsequent treatment (surgery, radiation, and/or systemic therapy) or referral to hospice/death due to melanoma., Results: 24 (20%) patients discontinued treatment by choice with no active disease and 28 (23%) patients discontinued treatment due to toxicity with disease control after 12-month and 4-month median treatment durations, respectively. Similar baseline characteristics were observed between cohorts except higher prior receipt of ipilimumab (29% vs 7%; p=0.036) and fewer BRAF mutant positive disease (17% vs 41%; p=0.064) in patients off treatment by choice. Three-year EFS rates were 95% and 71%, respectively. No significant associations between EFS and sex, disease stage, lactate dehydrogenase elevation, BRAF status, prior systemic therapy, ECOG performance status, presence of brain metastases, or combination versus monotherapy were observed. Tumor biopsies led to alternative management in 3/10 patients due to active metastatic melanoma or second malignancy., Conclusions: Anti-PD-1 therapy discontinuation after 12 months when no active disease is observed on CT scan, PET/CT scan or tumor biopsy may have low rates of disease relapse in patients with advanced melanoma. Biopsy of residual disease may frequently lead to a change in management. These findings are undergoing validation in the EA6192 trial., Competing Interests: Competing interests: GTG has served as a consultant for Novartis, Bristol Myers Squibb, Array Biopharma, Merck, Regeneron, Exicure and Sapience Therapeutics, and has received institutional research support from Exelixis and Lucerno Dynamics. MBA has served as an advisor for Arrowhead, Aveo, Bristol Myers Squibb, Eisai, Elpis, Genetech/Roche, Leads, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Pneuma, Pyxis Oncology, Werewolf and as a consultant to Adagene, Agenus, Apexigen, Exelixis, Idera, ImmunoCore, Iovance, and Neoleuken., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2021. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Background: Anti-programmed cell death protein 1 and programmed cell death ligand 1 (PD-L1) agents are broadly used in first-line and second-line treatment across different tumor types. While immunohistochemistry-based assays are routinely used to assess PD-L1 expression, their clinical utility remains controversial due to the partial predictive value and lack of standardized cut-offs across antibody clones. Using a high throughput immunoassay, the reverse phase protein microarray (RPPA), coupled with a fluorescence-based detection system, this study compared the performance of six anti-PD-L1 antibody clones on 666 tumor samples., Methods: PD-L1 expression was measured using five antibody clones (22C3, 28-8, CAL10, E1L3N and SP142) and the therapeutic antibody atezolizumab on 222 lung, 71 ovarian, 52 prostate and 267 breast cancers, and 54 metastatic lesions. To capture clinically relevant variables, our cohort included frozen and formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded samples, surgical specimens and core needle biopsies. Pure tumor epithelia were isolated using laser capture microdissection from 602 samples. Correlation coefficients were calculated to assess concordance between antibody clones. For two independent cohorts of patients with lung cancer treated with nivolumab, RPPA-based PD-L1 measurements were examined along with response to treatment., Results: Median-center PD-L1 dynamic ranged from 0.01 to 39.37 across antibody clones. Correlation coefficients between the six antibody clones were heterogeneous (range: -0.48 to 0.95) and below 0.50 in 61% of the comparisons. In nivolumab-treated patients, RPPA-based measurement identified a subgroup of tumors, where low PD-L1 expression equated to lack of response., Conclusions: Continuous RPPA-based measurements capture a broad dynamic range of PD-L1 expression in human specimens and heterogeneous concordance levels between antibody clones. This high throughput immunoassay can potentially identify subgroups of tumors in which low expression of PD-L1 equates to lack of response to treatment., Competing Interests: Competing interests: The authors are inventors on US Government and University assigned patents and patent applications that cover aspects of the technologies discussed such as the Reverse Phase Protein Microarrays. As inventors, they are entitled to receive royalties as provided by US Law and George Mason University policy. MP, JW, LL and EFP receive royalties from and are consultants of TheraLink Technologies. EFP and LL are shareholders and consultants of TheraLink Technologies. EFP is shareholder and consultant of Perthera., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2021. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Purpose: Although immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have substantially improved survival in patients with advanced malignancies, they are associated with a unique spectrum of side effects termed immune-related adverse events (irAEs). To ensure treatment safety, research efforts are needed to comprehensively detect and understand irAEs. Retrospective analysis of data from electronic health records can provide knowledge to characterize these toxicities. However, such information is not captured in a structured format within the electronic health record and requires manual chart review., Materials and Methods: In this work, we propose a natural language processing pipeline that can automatically annotate clinical notes and determine whether there is evidence that a patient developed an irAE. Seven hundred eighty-one cases were manually reviewed by clinicians and annotated for irAEs at the patient level. A dictionary of irAEs keywords was used to perform text reduction on clinical notes belonging to each patient; only sentences with relevant expressions were kept. Word embeddings were then used to generate vector representations over the reduced text, which served as input for the machine learning classifiers. The output of the models was presence or absence of any irAEs. Additional models were built to classify skin-related toxicities, endocrine toxicities, and colitis., Results: The model for any irAE achieved an average F1-score = 0.75 and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve = 0.85. This outperformed a basic keyword filtering approach. Although the classifier of any irAEs achieved good accuracy, individual irAE classification still has room for improvement., Conclusion: We demonstrate that patient-level annotations combined with a machine learning approach using keywords filtering and word embeddings can achieve promising accuracy in classifying irAEs in clinical notes. This model may facilitate annotation and analysis of large irAEs data sets., Competing Interests: Neil J. ShahConsulting or Advisory Role: Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp Michael B. AtkinsStock and Other Ownership Interests: Werewolf Pharma, PyxisConsulting or Advisory Role: Genentech, Novartis, Bristol Myers Squibb, Merck, Exelixis, Eisai, Agenus, Arrowhead Pharmaceuticals, Werewolf Pharma, Surface Oncology, Iovance Biotherapeutics, Immunocore, Pyxis, Pneuma Respiratory, Leads Biolabs, Fathom Biotechnology, Aveo, Cota Healthcare, Neoleukin Therapeutics, Adagene, Idera, Ellipses Pharma, AstraZeneca, PACT Pharma, Third Rock Ventures, Seattle Genetics, Pfizer, ScholarRockResearch Funding: Bristol Myers Squibb Subha MadhavanLeadership: PertheraStock and Other Ownership Interests: PertheraConsulting or Advisory Role: PertheraResearch Funding: Teewinot Life Sciences, Leidos BiosciencesNo other potential conflicts of interest were reported.

Background: Pneumonitis related to immune checkpoint blockade is uncommon but can be severe, fatal or chronic. Steroids are first-line treatment, however, some patients are refractory or become resistant to steroids. Like many immune-related adverse events, little is known regarding the outcomes and optimal management of patients in whom steroids are ineffective., Methods: We performed a single-center retrospective cohort study at a high-volume tertiary cancer center to evaluate the clinical course, management strategies and outcomes of patients treated for immune checkpoint pneumonitis with immune modulatory medications in addition to systemic steroids. Pharmacy records were queried for patients treated with both immune checkpoint blockade and receipt of additional immune modulators. Records were then manually reviewed to identify patients who received the additional immune modulators for immune checkpoint pneumonitis., Results: From 2013 to 2020, we identified 26 patients treated for immune checkpoint pneumonitis with additional immune modulators in addition to steroids. Twelve patients (46%) were steroid-refractory and 14 (54%) were steroid-resistant. Pneumonitis severity included grade 2 (42%) or grade 3-4 (58%). Additional immune modulation consisted of tumor necrosis factor-alpha inhibitor (77%) and/or mycophenolate (23%). Durable improvement in pneumonitis following initiation of additional immune modulators occurred in 10 patients (38%), including three patients (12%) in whom pneumonitis resolved and all immunosuppressants ceased. The rate of 90-day all-cause mortality/hospice referral was 50%. At last follow-up, mortality attributable to pneumonitis was 23%. In addition to mortality from pneumonitis and cancer, 3 patients (12%) died due to infections possibly associated with immunosuppression., Conclusions: Steroid-refractory or -resistant immune checkpoint pneumonitis is uncommon but associated with significant morbidity and mortality. Additional immunomodulators can yield durable improvement, attained in over one third of patients. An improved understanding of the underlying biology of immune-related pneumonitis will be crucial to guide more precise and effective treatment strategies in the future., Competing Interests: Competing interests: JB, HR, PF, AS, I-HL, NJS, MC report no COI. JL reports honoraria from Targeted Oncology. MP reports consulting fees from BMS, Merck, Array BioPharma, Novartis, Incyte, NewLink Genetics, Aduro, Eisai; honoraria from BMS and Merck; institutional support from RGenix, Infinity, BMS, Merck, Array BioPharma, Novartis, AstraZeneca. MC reports institutional research support and employment of a family member by Bristol-Myers Squibb; consulting, advisory, or speaking compensation for: AstraZeneca/MedImmune, Incyte, Moderna, Immunocore and Merck. MHV reports receiving commercial research grants from Bristol-Myers Squibb, Pfizer; honoraria from BMS, travel/accommodation from Astra Zeneca, Eisai; consultant/advisory board member for Corvus Pharmaceuticals, Exelixis, Eisai, Merck, Onquality Pharmaceuticals and Pfizer as well as institutional support from Astra Zeneca, BMS, Corvus, Medimmune, Merck, Pfizer. ABW reports consulting fees from Nanobiotix; honorarium from LG Chem Life Sciences, Novartis; advisory board member of Lovance. MDH reports research support from Bristol-Myers Squibb; consulting fees from Merck, Bristol-Myers Squibb, AstraZeneca, Genentech/Roche, Nektar, Syndax, Mirati, Shattuck Labs, Immunai, Blueprint Medicines, Achilles and Arcus; travel support/honoraria from AstraZeneca, Eli Lilly and Bristol-Myers Squibb; options from Shattuck Labs, Immunai and Arcus; patent filed by his institution related to the use of tumor mutation burden to predict response to immunotherapy (PCT/US2015/062208), which has received licensing fees from PGDx., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2021. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Purpose: Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) are standard therapy in metastatic renal cell carcinoma (RCC). The safety and activity of the combination of ipilimumab and nivolumab in patients who have received prior ICI targeting the programmed death 1 (PD-1) pathway remains unknown. We evaluated ipilimumab and nivolumab in patients with metastatic RCC after prior treatment with anti-PD-1 pathway-targeted therapy., Patients and Methods: Patients with metastatic RCC who received prior anti-PD-1 pathway-targeted therapy and subsequently received ipilimumab and nivolumab were reviewed. Objective response rate and progression-free survival per investigator assessment were recorded. Toxicity of ipilimumab and nivolumab was also assessed., Results: Forty-five patients with metastatic RCC were included. All patients (100%) received prior ICIs targeting the PD-1 pathway. The median age was 62 years (range, 21-82 years). At a median follow-up of 12 months, the objective response rate to ipilimumab and nivolumab was 20%. The median progression-free survival while on ipilimumab and nivolumab was 4 months (range, 0.8-19 months). Immune-related adverse events (irAEs) of any grade with ipilimumab and nivolumab were recorded in 29 (64%) of the 45 patients; grade 3 irAEs were recorded in 6 (13%) of the 45 patients., Conclusion: Ipilimumab and nivolumab demonstrated antitumor activity with acceptable toxicity in patients with metastatic RCC who had prior treatment with checkpoint inhibition.

Background: Patients with chronic viral infections including human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), hepatitis B (HBV) and hepatitis C (HCV) are at increased risk of developing malignancies. The safety and efficacy of ICI therapy in patients with both cancer and chronic viral infections is not well established as most clinical trials of ICIs excluded these patient populations., Methods: We performed a retrospective analysis of patients with advanced-stage cancers and HIV, HBV, or HCV infection treated with ICI therapy at 5 MedStar Health hospitals from January 2011 to April 2018., Results: We identified 50 patients including 16 HIV, 29 HBV/HCV, and 5 with concurrent HIV and either HBV or HCV. In the HIV cohort (n = 21), any grade immune-related adverse events (irAEs) were 24% with grade ≥ 3 irAEs 14%. Among 5 patients with matched pre/post-treatment results, no significant changes in HIV viral load and CD4+ T-cell counts were observed. RECIST confirmed (n = 18) overall response rate (ORR) was 28% with 2 complete responses (CR) and 3 partial responses (PR). Responders included 2 patients with low baseline CD4+ T-cell counts (40 and 77 cells/ul, respectively). In the HBV/HCV cohort (n = 34), any grade irAEs were 44% with grade ≥ 3 irAEs 29%. RECIST confirmed ORR was 21% (6 PR). Among the 6 patients with known pre/post-treatment viral titers (2 HCV and 4 HBV), there was no evidence of viral reactivation., Conclusions: Our retrospective series is one of the largest case series to report clinical outcomes among HIV, HBV and HCV patients treated with ICI therapy. Toxicity and efficacy rates were similar to those observed in patients without chronic viral infections. Viral reactivation was not observed. Tumor responses occurred in HIV patients with low CD4 T-cell counts. While prospective studies are needed to validate above findings, these data support not excluding such patients from ICI-based clinical trials or treatment.

Background: Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have now become standard of care treatment for many malignancies. ICIs are associated with unique immune mediated adverse events (irAEs) due to dysregulation of immune activation. As treatment with ICIs is becoming more common, rare irAEs are also being recognized. Here we report a case of ICI-induced celiac disease., Case: A 74-year-old Caucasian female with metastatic renal carcinoma received second line nivolumab (anti-PD1 antibody) after initial disease progression on sunitinib. Ipilimumab was added after she failed to respond to six cycles of nivolumab monotherapy. One week after her first cycle of combination treatment, she presented with nausea, vomiting, grade 1 diarrhea, and weight loss. She underwent endoscopy, which showed bile stasis in the stomach, normal appearing stomach mucosa, and nonbleeding erythematous mucosa in the duodenal bulb. Stomach biopsy showed moderate active chronic gastritis. Duodenal biopsy showed moderate chronic active duodenitis with focal neutrophilic cryptitis, mucosal erosions, villous atrophy, mildly increased intraepithelial lymphocytes, and moderate chronic inflammation in the lamina propria pathognomonic of celiac disease. Symptoms improved with gluten-free diet, twice-daily omeprazole and anti-emetics and she was able to continue on treatment., Conclusions: There has been only one published case reporting ICI-induced celiac disease. Our case report highlights a rare irAE (celiac disease) associated with ICI treatment. It is unclear whether the patient had previously undiagnosed celiac disease or whether ICIs triggered her enteritis. Our patient was able to continue treatment with ICIs with dietary modifications, suggesting correct diagnosis is critical for optimal patient outcome.

Colitis is a frequent, clinically-significant immune-related adverse event caused by anti-programmed death-1 (PD-1). The clinical features, timing, and management of colitis with anti-PD-1-based regimens are not well-characterized. Patients with advanced melanoma that received either anti-PD-1 monotherapy ("monotherapy") or combined with ipilimumab ("combination therapy") were screened from 8 academic medical centers, to identify those with clinically-relevant colitis (colitis requiring systemic steroids). Of 1261 patients who received anti-PD-1-based therapy, 109 experienced colitis. The incidence was 3.2% (30/937) and 24.4% (79/324) in the monotherapy and combination therapy cohorts, respectively. Patients with colitis from combination therapy had significantly earlier symptom onset (7.2 weeks vs 25.4 weeks, p  < 0.0001), received higher steroid doses (median prednisone equivalent 1.5 mg/kg vs 1.0 mg/kg, p  = 0.0015) and experienced longer steroid tapers (median 6.0 vs 4.0 weeks, p  = 0.0065) compared to monotherapy. Infliximab use and steroid-dose escalation occurred more frequently in the combination therapy cohort compared to monotherapy. Nearly all patients had resolution of their symptoms although one patient died from complications. Anti-PD-1 associated colitis has a variable clinical presentation, and is more frequent and severe when associated with combination therapy. This variability in checkpoint-inhibitor associated colitis suggests that further optimization of treatment algorithms is needed.

Lung cancer remains a leading cause of mortality with 1.69 million deaths worldwide. Activating mutations in epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR), predominantly exon 19 deletions and exon 21 L858R mutations, are known oncogenic drivers identified in 20-40% of non-small-cell lung cancers (NSCLC). 70% of EGFR-mutant NSCLC patients develop brain metastases (BM), compared to 38% in EGFR wild-type patients. First-generation tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs), such as erlotinib and gefitinib have proven to be superior to chemotherapy in the front-line treatment of EGFR-mutant NSCLC, as has afatinib, a second-generation TKI. The most common acquired resistance mechanism is the development of a gatekeeper mutation in exon 20 T790M. Osimertinib has emerged as a third-generation EGFR TKI with proven activity in the front-line setting as well as in patients with a T790M acquired resistance mutation with remarkable CNS activity. As long-term survival outcomes in EGFR-mutant NSCLC continue to improve, the burden of BM becomes a greater challenge. Here, we review the literature related to the management of BM in EGFR-mutant NSCLC including the role of the three generations of EGFR TKIs, immunotherapy, and brain radiation.

Immunotherapy as a therapeutic strategy has seized the narrative throughout clinical oncology over the past few years. Once considered a niche treatment for rare cancers, immunotherapy has quickly emerged as the standard of care for many common cancer types. The remarkable rise is largely due to the development of novel checkpoint inhibitors, specifically, antibodies targeting PD-1 and PD-L1. Offering promising efficacy with a favorable toxicity profile, these agents have been approved for use in several malignancies and are under investigation for many more. One of the more appealing features is the chance for meaningful, durable response - uncharacteristic for most cancer therapies. Atezolizumab is a humanized IgG1 monoclonal antibody that targets PD-L1. Atezolizumab has been approved for use in the treatment of advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and bladder cancer and has shown promising activity in several other types of cancer. Here, we provide a product review for atezolizumab.