Search

Purpose: Renal cell carcinoma is an aggressive disease with a high mortality rate. Management has drastically changed with the new era of immunotherapy, and novel strategies are being developed; however, identifying systemic treatments is still challenging. This paper presents an update of the expert panel consensus from the Latin American Cooperative Oncology Group and the Latin American Renal Cancer Group on advanced renal cell carcinoma management in Brazil., Methods: A panel of 34 oncologists and experts in renal cell carcinoma discussed and voted on the best options for managing advanced disease in Brazil, including systemic treatment of early and metastatic renal cell carcinoma as well as nonclear cell tumours. The results were compared with the literature and graded according to the level of evidence., Results: Adjuvant treatments benefit patients with a high risk of recurrence after surgery, and the agents used are pembrolizumab and sunitinib, with a preference for pembrolizumab. Neoadjuvant treatment is exceptional, even in initially unresectable cases. First-line treatment is mainly based on tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) and immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs); the choice of treatment is based on the International Metastatic Database Consortium (IMCD) risk score. Patients at favourable risk receive ICIs in combination with TKIs. Patients classified as intermediate or poor risk receive ICIs, without preference for ICI + ICIs or ICI + TKIs. Data on nonclear cell renal cancer treatment are limited. Active surveillance has a place in treating favourable-risk patients. Either denosumab or zoledronic acid can be used for treating metastatic bone disease., Conclusion: Immunotherapy and targeted therapy are the standards of care for advanced disease. The utilization and sequencing of these therapeutic agents hinge upon individual risk scores and responses to previous treatments. This consensus reflects a commitment to informed decision-making, drawn from professional expertise and evidence in the medical literature., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) remains the cornerstone of advanced prostate cancer treatment. However, the progression towards castration-resistant prostate cancer is inevitable, as the cancer cells reactivate androgen receptor signaling and adapt to the castrate state through autoregulation of the androgen receptor. Additionally, the upfront use of novel hormonal agents such as enzalutamide and abiraterone acetate may result in long-term toxicities and may trigger the selection of AR-independent cells through "Darwinian" treatment-induced pressure. Therefore, it is crucial to develop new strategies to overcome these challenges. Bipolar androgen therapy (BAT) is one such approach that has been devised based on studies demonstrating the paradoxical inhibitory effects of supraphysiologic testosterone on prostate cancer growth, achieved through a variety of mechanisms acting in concert. BAT involves rapidly alternating testosterone levels between supraphysiological and near-castrate levels over a period of a month, achieved through monthly intramuscular injections of testosterone plus concurrent ADT. BAT is effective and well-tolerated, improving quality of life and potentially re-sensitizing patients to previous hormonal therapies after progression. By exploring the mechanisms and clinical evidence for BAT, this review seeks to shed light on its potential as a promising new approach to prostate cancer treatment.

Background: Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) improve overall survival (OS) in patients with locally advanced, unresectable, or metastatic urothelial carcinoma (aUC), but response rates can be modest. We compared outcomes between patients with and without prior intravesical Bacillus Calmette-Guerin (BCG), who received ICI for aUC, hypothesizing that prior intravesical BCG would be associated with worse outcomes., Patients and Methods: We performed a retrospective cohort study across 25 institutions in US and Europe. We compared observed response rate (ORR) using logistic regression; progression-free survival (PFS) and OS using Kaplan-Meier and Cox proportional hazards. Analyses were stratified by treatment line (first line/salvage) and included multivariable models adjusting for known prognostic factors., Results: A total of 1026 patients with aUC were identified; 614, 617, and 638 were included in ORR, OS, PFS analyses, respectively. Overall, 150 pts had history of prior intravesical BCG treatment. ORR to ICI was similar between those with and without prior intravesical BCG exposure in both first line and salvage settings (adjusted odds radios 0.55 [P= .08] and 1.65 [P= .12]). OS (adjusted hazard ratios 1.05 [P= .79] and 1.13 [P= .49]) and PFS (adjusted hazard ratios 1.12 [P= .55] and 0.87 [P= .39]) were similar between those with and without intravesical BCG exposure in first line and salvage settings., Conclusion: Prior intravesical BCG was not associated with differences in response and survival in patients with aUC treated with ICI. Limitations include retrospective nature, lack of randomization, presence of selection and confounding biases. This study provides important preliminary data that prior intravesical BCG exposure may not impact ICI efficacy in aUC., (Copyright © 2021. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Bipolar androgen therapy (BAT) is an emerging treatment for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). 18 F-DCFPyL is a small-molecule PET radiotracer targeting prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA). We analyzed the utility of 18 F-DCFPyL PET/CT in determining clinical response to BAT. Methods: Six men with mCRPC receiving BAT were imaged with 18 F-DCFPyL PET/CT at baseline and after 3 mo of treatment. Progression by PSMA-targeted PET/CT was defined as the appearance of any new 18 F-DCFPyL-avid lesion. Results: Three of 6 (50%) patients had progression on 18 F-DCFPyL PET/CT. All 3 had stable disease or better on contemporaneous conventional imaging. Radiographic progression on CT or bone scanning was observed within 3 mo of progression on 18 F-DCFPyL PET/CT. For the 3 patients who did not have progression on 18 F-DCFPyL PET/CT, radiographic progression was not observed for at least 6 mo. Conclusion: New radiotracer-avid lesions on 18 F-DCFPyL PET/CT in men with mCRPC undergoing BAT can indicate early progression., (© 2021 by the Society of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging.)

Background: Available therapies for castrate-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC) confer minimal survival advantage; thus, there is interest in metastasis-directed therapy (MDT) for oligometastatic or oligoprogressive disease to improve outcomes. Here, we describe outcomes of oligoprogressive CRPC treated with stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR)., Objective: To report outcomes of oligoprogressive CRPC treated with MDT using SABR., Design, Setting, and Participants: Patients with oligoprogressive CRPC were retrospectively evaluated, and outcomes following MDT were reported. Outcomes were additionally compared with oligoprogressive CRPC treated with change in systemic therapy alone., Intervention: SABR to oligoprogressive lesions., Outcome Measurements and Statistical Analysis: Outcomes of interest were time to prostate-specific antigen (PSA) failure, time to next intervention (TTNI), distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS), and overall survival. Survival analysis was performed using the Kaplan-Meier method, and univariable analysis and multivariable analysis (MVA) were performed., Results and Limitations: A total of 68 patients were included. After MDT, median time to PSA recurrence, TTNI, and DMFS were 9.7, 15.6, and 10.8 months, respectively. A total of 112 lesions were treated, and the cumulative incidences of local failure at 12 and 24 months were 2.1% and 13.8%, respectively. Factors associated with the risk of local recurrence on univariable analysis were age (hazard ratio [HR] 1.07, p =  0.03) and Gleason grade group (HR 2.20, p =  0.07). Compared with change in systemic therapy alone (n = 52), MDT (n = 31) was associated with improved median time to PSA failure (9.7 vs 4.2 months, p =  0.066)), TTNI (14.9 vs 8.8 months, p =  0.025), and DMFS (12.7 vs 8.9 months, p = 0.045), and remained associated with improved outcomes on MVA., Conclusions: In a retrospective cohort of oligoprogressive CRPC patients, MDT was associated with favorable outcomes and improved cancer control as compared with change in systemic treatment alone. Future prospective trials are needed to confirm these findings., Patient Summary: In this report, we retrospectively analyzed outcomes of patients with oligoprogressive castrate-resistant prostate cancer treated with radiation therapy to progressing lesions. Our results suggest that treatment of these lesions with radiation therapy can result in sustained periods of disease-free survival and might add benefit in addition to systemic therapy at the time of progression. These results need to be verified in a prospective trial to identify the optimal integration of radiation therapy into metastatic castrate-resistant prostate cancer., (Copyright © 2020 European Association of Urology. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

The androgen signaling axis has been the main therapeutic target in the management of advanced prostate cancer for several decades. Over the past years, significant advances have been made in terms of a better understanding the androgen receptor (AR) pathway and mechanisms of castration resistance, along with the development of more potent AR-targeted therapies. New drugs, such as abiraterone, enzalutamide, apalutamide, and darolutamide, have been approved for castration-resistant prostate cancer and also have demonstrated an overall survival benefit in the castration-sensitive state. Despite these major advances, the majority of patients eventually present with disease progression and a rise in prostate-specific antigen, reflecting a continuous dependence of disease on the AR pathway. In this setting, a number of AR-related mechanisms of resistance have been described, and novel strategies to overcome them are an important unmet need. In this manuscript, we review the most promising strategies to target the AR pathway in prostate cancer, including bromodomain and extraterminal (BET)/bromodomain inhibitors, CREB-binding protein/p300 inhibitors, N-terminal domain inhibitors, proteolysis-targeting chimeras, and AR-targeting vaccines. Another interesting and disruptive approach to targeting the AR and potentially reversing resistance to second-generation AR antagonists is the cyclic administration of high-dose testosterone, known as bipolar androgen therapy, which is currently being explored in multiple ongoing trials.

Purpose: Current first line treatment options in patients with metastatic urothelial carcinoma unfit to receive cisplatin containing chemotherapy include PD-1/L1 inhibitors and carboplatin containing chemotherapy. However, the optimal sequencing of these therapies remains unclear., Materials and Methods: We conducted a multicenter retrospective analysis. Consecutive cisplatin ineligible patients with metastatic urothelial carcinoma treated with first line carboplatin containing chemotherapy followed sequentially by second line PD-1/L1 inhibitor, or the reverse order, were included. Patient demographics, objective response, time to treatment failure for first line and second line therapy, interval between end of first line and initiation of second line treatment (Interval 1L-2L ) and overall survival were collected. Multivariate analysis was conducted to examine the association of sequencing on overall survival., Results: In this multicenter retrospective study we identified 146 cisplatin ineligible patients with metastatic urothelial carcinoma treated with first line PD-1/L1 inhibitor therapy followed by second line carboplatin containing chemotherapy (group 1, 43) or the reverse sequence (group 2, 103). In the overall cohort median age was 72, 76% were men and 18% had liver metastasis. In both groups objective response rates were higher with carboplatin containing chemotherapy (45.6% first line, 44.2% second line) compared to PD-1/L1 inhibitors (9.3% first line, 21.3% second line). On multivariate analysis treatment sequence was not associated with overall survival (HR 1.05, p=0.85). Site of metastasis was the only factor significantly associated with overall survival (p=0.002)., Conclusions: In this biomarker unselected cohort of cisplatin ineligible patients with metastatic urothelial carcinoma, PD-1/L1 inhibitor followed by carboplatin containing chemotherapy and the reverse sequence had comparable overall survival.

Introduction: The long-term effects caused by COVID-19 are unknown. The present study aims to assess factors associated with health-related quality of life and long-term outcomes among survivors of hospitalization for COVID-19 in Brazil., Methods: This is a multicenter prospective cohort study nested in five randomized clinical trials designed to assess the effects of specific COVID-19 treatments in over 50 centers in Brazil. Adult survivors of hospitalization due to proven or suspected SARS-CoV-2 infection will be followed-up for a period of 1 year by means of structured telephone interviews. The primary outcome is the 1-year utility score of health-related quality of life assessed by the EuroQol-5D3L. Secondary outcomes include all-cause mortality, major cardiovascular events, rehospitalizations, return to work or study, physical functional status assessed by the Lawton-Brody Instrumental Activities of Daily Living, dyspnea assessed by the modified Medical Research Council dyspnea scale, need for long-term ventilatory support, symptoms of anxiety and depression assessed by the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, symptoms of posttraumatic stress disorder assessed by the Impact of Event Scale-Revised, and self-rated health assessed by the EuroQol-5D3L Visual Analog Scale. Generalized estimated equations will be performed to test the association between five sets of variables (1- demographic characteristics, 2- premorbid state of health, 3- characteristics of acute illness, 4- specific COVID-19 treatments received, and 5- time-updated postdischarge variables) and outcomes., Ethics and Dissemination: The study protocol was approved by the Research Ethics Committee of all participant institutions. The results will be disseminated through conferences and peer-reviewed journals.

Introduction: Non-clear cell renal cell carcinoma (nccRCC) and sarcomatoid renal cell carcinoma (sRCC) are underrepresented in clinical trials. Treatment approaches are frequently extrapolated from data of clear cell renal cell carcinoma, in which pazopanib is non-inferior to sunitinib. We aim to compare the effectiveness of first-line sunitinib and pazopanib for nccRCC and sRCC., Methods: We evaluated a retrospective cohort of patients with metastatic nccRCC and sRCC treated with first-line sunitinib or pazopanib at an academic cancer centre. Overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS) and response rate were measured. Kaplan-Meier and log-rank analyses were used for time-to-event data. Cox regression was used for prognostic factors., Results: Fifty-three patients were included; 16 (30.1%) treated with sunitinib and 37 (69.9%) with pazopanib. Forty-six (86.8%) patients had nccRCC and 7 (13.2%) had sRCC. The majority had intermediate or poor International Metastatic Renal-Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium risk (93%).Median PFS was 6.6 months with sunitinib and 4.9 months with pazopanib (HR 1.75; P = 0.078). Treatment with pazopanib was associated with inferior OS in comparison with sunitinib (median OS: 30.4 months versus 8.7 months; HR 2.71, 95% CI 1.31-5.58, P = 0.007). These results were confirmed in subgroup analysis of patients with papillary, chromophobe and MiT family translocation histologies (median OS: 38.7 months versus 14.7 months; HR 3.16, 95% CI 1.20-8.29, P = 0.019). Unclassified and sarcomatoid histologies had inferior OS (median: 6.9 and 1.1 months, respectively) regardless of the treatment used., Conclusion: In this patient cohort, pazopanib was associated with inferior OS in comparison with sunitinib for metastatic nccRCC. Larger trials are ideally warranted to confirm these results., Competing Interests: Renata Colombo Bonadio Travel, Accomodation, Expenses: Roche. Pedro Isaacsson Velho Honoraria: Bayer Speakers’ Bureau: AstraZeneca, Pfizer, Bristol-Myers Squibb Research Funding: Bristol-Myers Squibb, Pfizer (Inst) Expert Testimony: Bayer Travel, Accomodations, Expenses: AstraZeneca, Astellas Pharma, Pfizer, Merck Serono, Merck Guilherme Nader Marta Travel, Accomodation, Expenses: Bayer Schering Pharma and Roche. Manoel Carlos Leonardi de Azevedo Souza
 Travel, Accommodations, Expenses: Zodiac Pharma Speakers’ Bureau: MSD, BMS, Amgen. David QB Muniz Speakers’ Bureau: Janssen and Pfizer. Research funding: Pfizer Travel, Accomodation, Expenses: Janssen. Diogo Assed Bastos Honoraria: Janssen, Bayer, Astellas, MSD, and BMS. Research funding: Astellas, Janssen and Pfizer. Mirella Nardo, Regis OF Bezerra, Raisa KA Bispo, Sheila F Faraj and Carlos Dzik have no relationship to disclose., (© the authors; licensee ecancermedicalscience.)

Purpose: Very high-risk prostate cancer (PC) is associated with poor response to local and systemic treatments; however, few cases have been molecularly profiled. We studied clinical outcomes and molecular profiles of patients with clinically localized primary Gleason pattern 5 PC., Patients and Methods: Clinicopathologic features, targeted somatic and germline sequencing, and PTEN, TP53, and ERG status by immunohistochemistry were assessed in patients undergoing surgery from 2005 to 2015; 60 consecutive patients were identified with Gleason score 5 + 4 = 9 or 5 + 5 = 10 PC after radical prostatectomy with available tissue and clinical follow-up. Clinicopathologic and genomic parameters were correlated with biochemical relapse, metastasis-free survival, time to castration resistance, and overall survival using Cox proportional hazards models., Results: Of patients with somatic sequencing data and clinical follow-up, 34% had DNA repair gene mutations, including 22% (11 of 49) with homologous recombination and 12% (six of 49) with mismatch repair gene alterations. Homologous recombination mutations were germline in 82% (nine of 11) of patients. In addition, 33% (16 of 49) had TP53 mutation, and 51% (29 of 57) had PTEN loss. Overall, 43% developed metastasis, with a time to castration resistance of 12 months. On multivariable analysis of clinicopathologic variables, only ductal/intraductal histology (hazard ratio, 4.43; 95% CI, 1.76 to 11.15; P = .002) and seminal vesicle invasion (hazard ratio, 5.14; 95% CI, 1.83 to 14.47; P = .002) were associated with metastasis. Among genomic alterations, only TP53 mutation and PTEN loss were associated with metastasis on univariable analysis, and neither remained significant in multivariable analyses. These data are retrospective and hypothesis generating., Conclusion: Potentially actionable homologous recombination and mismatch repair alterations are observed in a significant proportion of patients with very high-risk PC at the time of radical prostatectomy. These findings could inform the design of prospective trials in this patient population., Competing Interests: AUTHORS’ DISCLOSURES OF POTENTIAL CONFLICTS OF INTEREST The following represents disclosure information provided by authors of this manuscript. All relationships are considered compensated. Relationships are self-held unless noted. I = Immediate Family Member, Inst = My Institution. Relationships may not relate to the subject matter of this manuscript. For more information about ASCO’s conflict of interest policy, please refer to www.asco.org/rwc or ascopubs.org/po/author-center. Pedro Isaacsson Velho Honoraria: Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals Speakers’ Bureau: AstraZeneca, Pfizer, Bristol-Myers Squibb Research Funding: Bristol-Myers Squibb, Pfizer (Inst) Expert Testimony: Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals Travel, Accommodations, Expenses: AstraZeneca, Astellas Pharma, Pfizer, Merck Serono, Merck Michael A. Carducci Consulting or Advisory Role: Astellas Pharma, AbbVie, Roche/Genentech, Pfizer, Foundation Medicine Research Funding: Bristol-Myers Squibb (Inst), Pfizer (Inst), AstraZeneca (Inst), Gilead Sciences (Inst), EMD Serono (Inst), eFFECTOR Therapeutics (Inst) Samuel R. Denmeade Stock and Other Ownership Interests: Sophiris Bio Consulting or Advisory Role: Sophiris Bio Travel, Accommodations, Expenses: Sophiris Bio Mark C. Markowski Honoraria: Clovis, Exelixis William B. Isaacs Honoraria: AstraZeneca Travel, Accommodations, Expenses: AstraZeneca Emmanuel S. Antonarakis Honoraria: Sanofi, Dendreon, Medivation, Janssen Biotech, ESSA, Astellas Pharma, Merck, AstraZeneca, Clovis Oncology Consulting or Advisory Role: Sanofi, Dendreon, Medivation, Janssen Biotech, ESSA, Astellas Pharma, Merck, AstraZeneca, Clovis Oncology Research Funding: Janssen Biotech (Inst), Johnson & Johnson (Inst), Sanofi (Inst), Dendreon (Inst), Aragon Pharmaceuticals (Inst), Exelixis (Inst), Millennium Pharmaceuticals (Inst), Genentech (Inst), Novartis (Inst), Astellas Pharma (Inst), Tokai Pharmaceuticals (Inst), Merck (Inst), AstraZeneca (Inst), Clovis Oncology (Inst), Constellation Pharmaceuticals (Inst) Patents, Royalties, Other Intellectual Property: Coinventor of biomarker technology licensed to Qiagen Travel, Accommodations, Expenses: Sanofi, Dendreon, Medivation Mario A. Eisenberger Leadership: Veru Stock and Other Ownership Interests: Veru Honoraria: Sanofi, Pfizer Consulting or Advisory Role: Astellas Pharma, Ipsen, Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals, Sanofi, Pfizer Research Funding: Sanofi, Tokai Pharmaceuticals, Genentech Travel, Accommodations, Expenses: Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals, Astellas Pharma, Sanofi, Pfizer, Veru Tamara L. Lotan Consulting or Advisory Role: Janssen Oncology Research Funding: Ventana Medical Systems No other potential conflicts of interest were reported.