Search

Erdafitinib is an oral pan-fibroblast growth factor receptor (FGFR) tyrosine kinase inhibitor approved to treat locally advanced/metastatic urothelial carcinoma (mUC) in patients with susceptible FGFR3/2 alterations (FGFR alt) who progressed after platinum-containing chemotherapy. FGFR -altered tumours are enriched in luminal 1 subtype and may have limited clinical benefit from anti–programmed death-(ligand) 1 [PD-(L)1] treatment. This cohort in the randomized, open-label phase III THOR study assessed erdafitinib versus pembrolizumab in anti–PD-(L)1-naive patients with mUC. Patients ≥18 years with unresectable advanced/mUC, with select FGFRalt , disease progression on one prior treatment, and who were anti–PD-(L)1-naive were randomized 1 : 1 to receive erdafitinib 8 mg once daily with pharmacodynamically guided uptitration to 9 mg or pembrolizumab 200 mg every 3 weeks. The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS). Secondary endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate (ORR), and safety. The intent-to-treat population (median follow-up 33 months) comprised 175 and 176 patients in the erdafitinib and pembrolizumab arms, respectively. There was no statistically significant difference in OS between erdafitinib and pembrolizumab [median 10.9 versus 11.1 months, respectively; hazard ratio (HR) 1.18; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.92-1.51; P = 0.18]. Median PFS for erdafitinib and pembrolizumab was 4.4 and 2.7 months, respectively (HR 0.88; 95% CI 0.70-1.10). ORR was 40.0% and 21.6% (relative risk 1.85; 95% CI 1.32-2.59) and median duration of response was 4.3 and 14.4 months for erdafitinib and pembrolizumab, respectively. 64.7% and 50.9% of patients in the erdafitinib and pembrolizumab arms had ≥1 grade 3-4 adverse events (AEs); 5 (2.9%) and 12 (6.9%) patients, respectively, had AEs that led to death. Erdafitinib and pembrolizumab had similar median OS in this anti–PD-(L)1-naive, FGFR -altered mUC population. Outcomes with pembrolizumab were better than assumed and aligned with previous reports in non– FGFR -altered populations. Safety results were consistent with the known profiles for erdafitinib and pembrolizumab in this patient population. • Erdafitinib was not superior to pembrolizumab with similar efficacy outcomes in FGFR -altered, anti -PD-(L)1-naive mUC. • The primary endpoint was not met; median OS was 10.9 months for erdafitinib and 11.1 months for pembrolizumab. • Outcomes with pembrolizumab in mUC with FGFR alterations were similar to those reported for FGFR -unselected populations. • Safety was consistent with known safety profiles for erdafitinib and pembrolizumab; erdafitinib toxicities were manageable. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Enfortumab vedotin (EV) has been approved for the treatment of patients with locally advanced/metastatic urothelial carcinoma (la/mUC) who previously received platinum-based chemotherapy followed by immune checkpoint inhibitors. However, the pivotal clinical trials did not include patients previously treated with avelumab maintenance therapy., Objective: The aim of the present retrospective analysis was to assess the effectiveness of EV following avelumab in patients with mUC enrolled in the ARON-2 EV study., Patients and Methods: The study included 182 patients with mUC treated with EV following avelumab maintenance. The primary objective was to assess clinical outcomes, including progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), overall response rate (ORR), and duration of response (DoR). Statistical analysis involved Fisher exact test, Kaplan-Meier method, log-rank test, and univariate/multivariate Cox proportional hazard regression models., Results: Median OS and PFS were 12.7 (95% CI 10.2-14.1) and 7.9 (95% CI 6.4-9.9) months, respectively. Complete response (CR) was achieved in 5% and partial response (PR) in 34% of patients, with an ORR of 39%. The DoR in patients who achieved CR/PR was 10.9 months (95% CI 8.1-11.4). The incidence of grade ≥ 3 peripheral neuropathy and skin rash was 9%, followed by 8% of grade ≥ 3 diarrhea and 4% of grade ≥ 3 hyperglycemia., Conclusions: The results of our large international retrospective study confirm the effectiveness of EV and endorse its use in the population of patients with mUC treated with EV following the frontline platinum-based chemotherapy and subsequent maintenance treatment with avelumab., Competing Interests: Declarations Funding No external funding was used in the preparation of this manuscript. Conflicts of Interest Ondřej Fiala received honoraria from Roche, Janssen, GSK, and Pfizer for consultations and lectures unrelated to this project. Francesco Massari has received research support and/or honoraria from Advanced Accelerator Applications, Astellas, Astra Zeneca, Bayer, BMS, Janssen, Ipsen, MSD, and Pfizer outside the submitted work. Umberto Basso received honoraria for Bristol-Myers Squibb, Novartis, and Astra Zeneca; research funding from Ipsen; and travel grants from Bristol-Myers Squibb, Janssen Oncology, Astellas Pharma, MSD Oncology, Merck/Pfizer, and Bayer, all unrelated to this project. Sebastiano Buti received honoraria as speaker at scientific events and advisory role by BMS, Pfizer, MSD, Ipsen, Roche, Eli Lilly, AstraZeneca, Pierre-Fabre, Novartis, Merck, Gentili, and Astellas, all unrelated to the present paper. Yüksel Ürün has served on advisory board for Abdi-İbrahim, Astellas, AstraZeneca, Bristol Myers-Squibb, Deva, Eczacıbaşı, Gen ilaç, Gilead, GSK, Janssen, Merck, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, and Roche and received travel grants, honoraria, or consultation fees from Abdi-İbrahim, Astellas, Bristol Myers-Squibb, Deva, Eczacıbaşı, Gen İlaç, Gilead, GSK, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, and Roche, all unrelated to the present paper. Maria T. Bourlon is a consultant of Bristol Myers Squibb, Merck, MSD, Gilead, Astellas, and Asofarma and a speaker for Janssen Pharmaceuticasl, MSD, Merck, and Astellas, all unrelated to the present paper. Mimma Rizzo has received honoraria as a speaker/consultant by MSD, Merck Serono, Astrazeneca, Bristol Myers Squibb, Eisai, and Gilead, all unrelated to the present paper. Linda Cerbone has received honoraria for advisory boards, speaker engagements, and scientific consultancy for educational purposes from AstraZeneca, EISAI, MSD, Ipsen, BMS, and A.A.A.; and is a past MSD employee in Medical Affairs. Javier Molina-Cerrillo reports research funding from Roche, Ipsen, Pfizer, and Janssen; travel support from Pfizer, Janssen, Ipsen, and BMS; and a consulting or advisory role with Ipsen, Roche, BMS, Pfizer, Sanofi, Janssen, Astellas, Eisai, Adium, and MSD, all unrelated to the present paper. Álvaro Pinto is a member of advisory boards of Pfizer, Novartis, Ipsen, BMS, Janssen, Astellas, Sanofi, Bayer, Clovis, Roche, MSD, Pierre Fabre, and Merck; has received research support from Pfizer and BMS; clinical trial payments from Pfizer, Bayer, Janssen, MSD, Clovis, Pharmacyclics, BMS, Sanofi, Astra Zeneca, Roche, Eisai, and Aveo; and travel arrangements from Janssen, Roche, Pfizer, BMS, and Ipsen, all unrelated to the present paper. Andrey Soares reports honoraria from Janssen, Pfizer, Bayer, AstraZeneca, Astellas Pharma, Merck Serono, Sanofi, Ipsen, and Adium; consulting or advisory role from Astellas Pharma, Janssen, Roche, Bayer, AstraZeneca, MSD, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Adium, Ipsen, Pfizer, and Novartis; research funding from Bristol-Myers Squibb (Inst), Astellas (Inst), and AstraZeneca (Inst); travel, accommodations, and expenses from Bayer, Janssen, Ipsen, Adium, MSD, and Merck Serono; and ownership in BIO, Brazilian Information Oncology; all unrelated to this study. Alexandr Poprach has received payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers’ bureaus, manuscript writing, or educational events from BMS, Ipsen, Roche, Astellas, Merck, Eisai, MSD, Novartis, and Pfizer, unrelated to this project. Gian Paolo Spinelli has received payment or honoraria for advidory boards from Novartis, Roche, and Bayer, unrelated to this project. Martin Angel received honoraria from Roche, Johnson & Johnson, Raffo, and Pfizer for consultations and lectures unrelated to this project. Fernando Sabino M. Monteiro reports research support provided by Merck Sharp Dome; honoraria from Janssen, Ipsen, Bristol Myers Squibb, and Merck Sharp Dome; and ownership in BIO, Brazilian Information Oncology, all unrelated to this study. Camillo Porta acted as a remunerated consultant and/or speaker for Angelini Pharma, AstraZeneca, BMC, Eisai, Exilixis, Genenta, Ipsen, Merck Serono, and MSD; as a protocol steering committee member for Eisai and MSD; and as an Independent Review Board member for Genenta. Shilpa Gupta is a consultant for Bristol Myers Squibb, Merck, Pfizer, Gilead, Bayer, and Seattle Genetics; is a speaker for Bristol Myers Squibb; and has institutional research funding from Seatte Genetics, Pfizer, Merck, Bristol Myers Squibb, Roche, Novartis, and Tyra Biosciences. Matteo Santoni has received research support and honoraria from Janssen, Bristol Myers Squibb, Ipsen, MSD, Astellas, and Bayer, all unrelated to the present paper. Patrizia Giannatempo, Enrique Grande, Zin W. Myint, Ugo De Giorgi, Renate Pichler, Francesco Grillone, Fabio Calabrò, Luca Galli, Ravindran Kanesvaran, Giandomenico Roviello, Jakub Kucharz, Se Hoon Park, Emmanuel Seront, Carlo Messina, Daniele Santini, Akihiro Yano, Lorena Incorvaia, Martina Catalano, Luigi Formisano, Gaetano Facchini, Giuseppe Fornarini, Sara Elena Rebuzzi, Cecilia Nasso, Marco Stellato, Deniz Tural, Gaetano Aurilio, Ilana Epstein, Francesco Carrozza, Giovanni Benedetti, Tomáš Büchler, Cinzia Ortega, Roubini Zakopoulou, Nicola Battelli, and Joaquin Bellmunt declare that they have no conflicts of interest that might be relevant to the contents of this manuscript. Tomáš Büchler and Camillo Porta are Editorial Board members of Targeted Oncology. Tomáš Büchler and Camillo Porta were not involved in the selection of peer reviewers for the manuscript nor any of the subsequent editorial decisions. Ethics Approval The study protocol was approved on 28 September 2023, by the Ethical Committee of the coordinating center (Marche Region – Italy – no. 2022 39/7875, Study Protocol “ARON 2 Study” NCT05290038) and by the Institutional Review Boards of participating centers. Consent to Participate Informed consent with subsequent analysis of the follow-up data was obtained from all participants. Consent for Publication Not applicable. Availability of Data and Material The datasets generated and/or analyzed during the current study are not publicly available due to patient data security but are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request. Code Availability Not applicable. Author Contributions Study concept and design: all authors; acquisition of data: all authors; analysis and interpretation of data: all authors; drafting of the manuscript: Fiala, Massari, Gupta, and Santoni; critical revision of the manuscript for important intellectual content: all authors; statistical analysis: Santoni; obtaining funding: none; administrative, technical, or material support: none; and supervision: Gupta and Santoni., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Background: Therapeutic advancements based on immuno-oncology combinations have revolutionized the management of patients with renal cell carcinoma. However, patients who have progressive disease as the best response, "primary refractory" (P ref ), face dismal outcomes., Objective: Our multicenter retrospective real-world study aims to assess the prevalence and clinicopathological characteristics of P ref patients., Methods: This study collected data from 72 centers across 22 countries (1709 patients), involving patients aged ≥18 years with metastatic clear cell renal cell carcinoma. All patients were treated with first-line immune-oncology combinations. Data included patient demographics, histology, metastatic sites, and treatment responses. Radiological assessments followed Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1. Statistical analyses employed Kaplan-Meier method, Cox proportional hazard models, logistic regression, and the receiver operating characteristic curve., Results: In our study, the P ref rate was 19%. Nivolumab/ipilimumab showed the highest P ref rate (27%), while pembrolizumab/lenvatinib exhibited the lowest (10%). Primary refactory patients demonstrated significantly lower median overall survival (7.6 months) compared with non-P ref patients (55.7 months), p < 0.001. At the multivariate analysis, nephrectomy, sarcomatoid de-differentiation, intermediate/poor International Metastatic RCC Database Consortium risk, and bone and brain metastases emerged as significant predictors of overall survival for P ref patients with renal cell carcinoma. Logistic regression showed a significant relationship between liver metastases, intermediate/poor International Metastatic RCC Database Consortium risk, and no surgery and an increased risk of P ref . This study presents limitations, mainly because of its retrospective design., Conclusions: The ARON-1 study provides valuable insights into P ref patients, emphasizing the challenges of this precociously resistant subgroup. Identified predictors could guide risk stratification, aiding clinicians in tailored therapeutic approaches., Competing Interests: Declarations Funding No external funding was used in the preparation of this article. Conflicts of Interest/Compting Interests Ondrej Fiala received honoraria from Novartis, Janssen, Merck, BMS, MSD, Pierre Fabre, and Pfizer for consultations and lectures unrelated to this project. Sebastiano Buti has received honoraria for speaking at scientific events and advisory roles from Astra Zeneca, BMS, Ipsen, Merck, Eisai, MSD, Novartis, and Pfizer and research funding from Novartis and Pfizer unrelated to this project. He has also been on the advisory board for Gentili. Francesco Massari has received research support and/or honoraria from Astellas, BMS, Janssen, Ipsen, MSD, and Pfizer outside the submitted work. Enrique Grande has received honoraria for speaker engagements and advisory roles or received funding for continuous medical education from Adacap, Amgen, Angelini, Astellas, Astra Zeneca, Bayer, Blueprint, Bristol Myers Squibb, Caris Life Sciences, Celgene, Clovis-Oncology, Eisai, Eusa Pharma, Genetracer, Guardant Health, HRA-Pharma, Ipsen, ITM-Radiopharma, Janssen, Lexicon, Lilly, Merck KGaA, MSD, Nanostring Technologies, Natera, Novartis, ONCODNA (Biosequence), Palex, Pharmamar, Pierre Fabre, Pfizer, Roche, Sanofi-Genzyme, Servier, Taiho, and Thermo Fisher Scientific and research grants from Pfizer, Astra Zeneca, Astellas, and Lexicon Pharmaceuticals. All of the above are unrelated to the present paper. Alexandr Poprach has received payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers’ bureaus, manuscript writing, or educational events from BMS, Ipsen, Roche, Astellas, Merck, Eisai, MSD, Novartis, and Pfizer, unrelated to this project. Javier Molina-Cerrillo declares consultant, advisory, or speaker roles for Ipsen, Roche, Pfizer, Sanofi, Janssen, and BMS unrelated to this project. Zin W. Myint has received research support from Merck unrelated to the present paper. Ray Manneh Kopp has received research support and/or honoraria from Amgen, Astellas, Astra Zeneca, Bayer, BMS, Eli Lilly, Janssen, MSD, Pfizer, Tecnofarma and Roche, unrelated to this project. Jakub Kucharz has received honoraria from Angelini, Astellas, Astra Zeneca, Bayer, Bristol Myers Squibb, IPSEN, Janssen, Merck MSD, Novartis, and Pfizer, and research funding from Novartis, all unrelated to the present paper. Fernando Sabino M. Monteiro has received research support from Janssen and Merck Sharp Dome and honoraria from Janssen, Ipsen, Bristol Myers Squibb, and Merck Sharp Dome, all unrelated to the present paper. Ravindran Kanesvaran has received fees for speaker bureau and advisory board activities from the following companies; Pfizer, MSD, BMS, Eisai, Ipsen, Johnson and Johnson, Merck, Amgen, Astellas, and Bayer, unrelated to this project. Tomáš Büchler has received research support from AstraZeneca, Roche, Bristol Myers Squibb, Exelixis, Merck KGaA, MSD, and Novartis; consulting fees from Bristol Myers Squibb, Astellas, Janssen, and Sanofi/Aventis; payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers’ bureaus, manuscript writing, or educational events from Ipsen, Bristol Myers Squibb, AstraZeneca, Roche, Servier, Accord, MSD, and Pfizer, all unrelated to the present paper. Andrey Soares has received honoraria from Janssen, Pfizer, Bayer, AstraZeneca, Astellas Pharma, Merck Serono, Sanofi, Ipsen, Adium. Consulting or Advisory Role from Astellas Pharma, Janssen, Roche, Bayer, AstraZeneca, MSD, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Adium, Ipsen, and Pfizer, research Funding from Bristol-Myers Squibb (Inst), Astellas (Inst), and AstraZeneca (Inst), travel, accommodations, and expenses from Bayer, Janssen, Ipsen, Adium, MSD, and Merck Serono, and ownership in BIO, Brazilian Information Oncology. All are unrelated to this study. Camillo Porta has received honoraria from Angelini Pharma, AstraZeneca, BMS, Eisai, Exelixis, Genenta, Ipsen, Merck Serono, and MSD and acted as a Protocol Steering Committee Member for Eisai and MSD, unrelated to this project. Matteo Santoni has received research support and honoraria from Janssen, Bristol Myers Squibb, Ipsen, MSD, Astellas, A.A.A. and Bayer, all unrelated to the present paper. Daniele Santini, Haoran Li, Giandomenico Roviello, Se Hoon Park, Umberto Basso, Martina Catalano, Emmanuel Seront, Jawaher Ansari, Marwan Ghosn, Fabio Calabrò, Dipen Bhuva, Maria T. Bourlon, Michela Roberto, Mattia Alberto Di Civita, Veronica Mollica, Andrea Marchetti, Nicola Battelli, Marco Ricci, and Aristotelis Bamias have no conflicts of interest that are directly relevant to the content of this article. Tomas Buchler and Camillo Porta are Editorial Board members of Targeted Oncology. Tomas Buchler and Camillo Porta were not involved in the selection of peer reviewers for the manuscript nor any of the subsequent editorial decisions. Ethics Approval The “ARON-1” project obtained approved from the Ethics Committee of the Marche Region (2021-492) and adhered to the principles outlined in the Declaration of Helsinki. Consent to Participate Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study. Consent for Publication Not applicable. Availability of Data and Material The datasets generated during and/or analyzed in the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request. Code Availability Not applicable. Authors’ Contributions Conception and design: DS, MS, FM; acquisition of data: DS, MS, FM; analysis and interpretation of data: DS, MS, FM; drafting of the manuscript: DS, MS, FM; critical revision of the manuscript for important intellectual content: all authors; statistical analysis: MS; supervision: MS, FM., (© 2024. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature Switzerland AG.)

Rationale: Metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer has a poor prognosis especially when harboring DNA damage repair gene mutations, nevertheless, in the case of pathogenic BRCA gene mutations, PARPi demonstrated a survival benefit and is a validated treatment. Nowadays, there is no data regarding unusual metastases after these drugs. Cutaneous metastases appear rarely in prostate cancer and were associated with a worse prognosis. Moreover, there are no consolidated data concerning skin tropism of prostate cancer cells, neither in the case of BRCA-associated cancers., Patient Concerns: Here, we report the case of a patient with a long history of BRCA1-mutated metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer who developed a skin lesion on the scalp while on his fifth line of systemic therapy with olaparib. After a complete radical surgical excision, the pathology report showed prostate cancer localization., Diagnoses: A diagnosis of skin metastasis from prostate cancer was reported., Outcomes: The patient then continued olaparib therapy; after 7 months from excision, he experienced further bone and biochemical progression but not cutaneous progression., Lessons: A literature review of all reported cases of cutaneous metastasis in prostate cancer was conducted to shed light on the incidence, clinical presentation, diagnosis, treatment, and prognosis of this entity. We also reviewed published cases of skin metastasis in BRCA-associated cancers with an effort to correlate skin involvement with PARPi treatment, BRCAness status, and prognosis., Competing Interests: The authors have no conflicts of interest to disclose., (Copyright © 2024 the Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc.)

Background/aim: Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have revolutionized the treatment of metastatic urothelial carcinoma (mUC). However, they could be associated with immune-related adverse events (irAEs), which may be clinically significant. Identifying clinical characteristics that may be associated with a higher risk of irAEs is of great importance., Patients and Methods: We retrospectively collected data from all patients who received anti-PD1 or anti-PD-L1 for metastatic UC at our Institution from January 2017 to December 2022. Patients were dichotomized according to baseline neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR), systemic immune-inflammation index (SII), and platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio (PLR) values. We performed univariate and multivariate logistic regression to determine the association between baseline characteristics and the development of irAEs., Results: A total of 119 patients were identified. At a median follow-up of 29.6 months, 96 patients progressed and 82 died. Forty-five patients developed irAEs of any grade, 8 patients developed grade 3 toxicities. In the univariate analysis PS of 0 (p<0.01), baseline NLR <3.52, baseline PLR <194 (p=0.04) and baseline SII <906 (p=0.01) were significantly associated with a higher risk of developing irAEs, whereas in the multivariate analysis only PS=0 (p<0.01) and NLR <3.52 (p=0.03) maintained their correlation. Median progression-free survival (mPFS) and overall survival (mOS) were significantly longer in patients with NLR <3 (mPFS 3.8 vs. 2.6 months, p=0.01; mOS 15.3 vs. 5.6 months, p=0.002) and PS=0 (mPFS 4.8 vs. 2.1 months, p<0.001; mOS 15.3 vs. 3.8 months, p<0.001)., Conclusion: Low baseline NLR, PLR, and SII and good PS are associated with a higher risk of developing irAEs in patients treated with ICIs for mUC., (Copyright © 2024 International Institute of Anticancer Research (Dr. George J. Delinasios), All rights reserved.)

Background: Pembrolizumab/Axitinib combination is approved as first-line therapy in mRCC. The aim of this study is to evaluate outcomes of PAXI combo in the real-world in Italy., Methods: This is a prospective study including patients diagnosed with mRCC who received combination as first-line therapy in recruiting Italian Centers. Data about patient characteristics, safety and outcome were collected., Results: 170 pts have been treated from December 2020 to September 2023. The majority had clear-cell histology (83%). Sarcomatoid feature was present in 33%of available cases. About one half of patients (55%) had synchronous metastasis. In 58% of cases nephrectomy was performed, of which 27% were cytoreductive and 4% were deferred nephrectomies. Lung metastases were identified in 106 patients (62%), bone and liver involvement in 66 and 29 patients (38.8% and 17.1%) respectively. Stratifying by IMDC criteria, 32 patients (18.8%) were at favorable-risk, 106 (62.4%) at intermediate-risk, and 32 (18.8%) at poor-risk. At time of analysis, treatment was ongoing in 49% of patients. Progression occurred in 45% of patients. Median PFS was 19.2 months (95% CI: 15-NR). With a median follow-up of 19.3 months (range 1.3-34.5), at 24-months and 36-months landmark analysis 62% (95% CI, 53-70) and 58% (95% CI, 47-69) of treated patients are still alive respectively. Disease control rate was achieved in 84.6% of patients: 4.3% reached a complete response, 52% had a partial response and 28.8% a stable disease. Primary progression was observed in 15.3% of patients. In the multivariate analysis, the prognostic significance of age ≥ 65 years, non-clear cell histology, IMDC score, and adverse events and gender interaction as predictors of worse OS were confirmed., Conclusion: This is the first available prospective study on first-line Pembrolizumab/Axitinib combination in real world scenario. Our findings support the effectiveness and safety of first-line this combination in mRCC and reveal that gender emerged as a prognostic factor in relation to the occurrence of adverse events., Competing Interests: Disclosure The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Nowadays, different therapeutic options are available for the first-line treatment of metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). Immuno-combinations are the standard first-line therapy in all mRCC patients regardless of the International Metastatic RCC Database Consortium (IMDC) risk category, even though TKI monotherapy is still a therapeutic option in selected patients. However, comparisons between the different first-line treatment strategies are lacking and few real-world data are available in this setting. For this reason, the regimen choice represents an important issue in clinical practice and the optimal treatment sequence remains unclear., Methods: The REGAL study is a multicentric prospective observational study enrolling mRCC patients treated with first-line systemic therapy according to clinical practice in a real-world setting. A retrospective cohort of mRCC patients who received first-line systemic therapy from the 1st of January 2021 will also be included. The primary objective is to identify potential prognostic and predictive factors that could help guide the treatment choice; secondary objectives included the assessment of the prognostic performance of the novel prognostic Meet-URO score (IMDC score + neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio + bone metastases) compared with the IMDC score and the comparison between treatment strategies according to response and survival outcomes and toxicity profile., Discussion: Considering the high number of therapeutic first-line strategies available for mRCC, the identification of clinical prognostic and predictive factors to candidate patients to a preferable systemic therapy is still an unmet clinical need. The Meet-URO 33 study aims to provide a large-scale real-world database on mRCC patients, to identify the clinical predictive and prognostic factors and the different performances between the ICI-based combinations according to response, survival and toxicity., Trial Registration: CESC IOV 2023-78., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Background: Immune checkpoint inhibitors have changed previous treatment paradigm of advanced urothelial carcinoma (UC). The ARON-2 study (NCT05290038) aimed to assess the real-world effectiveness of pembrolizumab in patients recurred or progressed after platinum-based chemotherapy., Patients and Methods: Medical records of patients with documented metastatic UC treated by pembrolizumab as second-line therapy were retrospectively collected from 88 institutions in 23 countries. Patients were assessed for overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS) and overall response rate (ORR). Cox proportional hazards models were adopted to explore the presence of prognostic factors., Results: In total, 836 patients were included: 544 patients (65%) received pembrolizumab after progression to first-line platinum-based chemotherapy in the metastatic setting (cohort A) and 292 (35%) after recurring within < 12 months since the completion of adjuvant or neoadjuvant chemotherapy (cohort B). The median follow-up time was 15.3 months. The median OS and the ORR were 10.5 months and 31% in the overall study population, 9.1 months and 29% in cohort A and 14.6 months and 37% in cohort B. At multivariate analysis, ECOG-PS ≥ 2, bone metastases, liver metastases and pembrolizumab setting (cohort A vs B) proved to be significantly associated with worst OS and PFS. Stratified by the presence of 0, 1-2 or 3-4 prognostic factors, the median OS was 29.4, 12.5 and 4.1 months (p < 0.001), while the median PFS was 12.2, 6.4 and 2.8 months, respectively (p < 0.001)., Conclusions: Our study confirms that pembrolizumab is effective in the advanced UC real-world context, showing outcome differences between patients recurred or progressed after platinum-based chemotherapy., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Background: The addition of neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio (NLR) and bone metastases to the IMDC classification provided by the Meet-URO score, resulted in higher prognostic accuracy in metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) patients receiving ≥2nd line nivolumab or cabozantinib in 2 retrospective analyses and 1st line nivolumab-ipilimumab in an expanded access programme. Prognostic estimates for older mRCC patients might be key for clinical decision-making., Methods: The outcome of real-world older (≥70 years) mRCC patients treated with any line cabozantinib within the multicenter observational prospective ZEBRA (Meet-URO 9) study was analyzed according to the baseline Meet-URO score. The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS). The discriminative ability by Harrell's c-index and calibration were assessed to compare the Meet-URO and IMDC scores., Results: A total of 104 mRCC patients received cabozantinib as 1st (38%), 2nd (20%), or ≥3rd (41%) line. With a median follow-up of 11.2 months, the median OS (mOS) was of 18.4 months. According to the IMDC score, favorable (15%), intermediate (65%) and poor-risk (19%) patients had a mOS not reached, of 15.6 and 5.7 months respectively (p = .011). According to the Meet-URO score groups, mOS was not reached in both group 1 (10%) and group 2 (25%), while in group 3 (33%), group 4 (25%) and group 5 (8%) mOS was of 13.6, 12.5, and 3.7 months, respectively (p < .001). The discriminative ability of the Meet-URO score was maintained by merging groups 1 to 2 vs. 3 to 4 vs. 5 (p < .001). The Meet-URO score (with either the original 5-group stratification or the modified 3-group one) showed higher accuracy than the IMDC score (c-index of 0.686 and 0.676 vs. 0.622)., Conclusion: This analysis confirmed the prognostic accuracy of the Meet-URO score in older mRCC patients treated with cabozantinib and its role as a convenient tool for informing the patient and clinical decisions., Competing Interests: Disclosure SR received honoraria as a speaker at scientific events and travel accommodation from Amgen, GSK, BMS, and MSD. SB received honoraria as speaker at scientific events and advisory role by BMS, Pfizer, MSD, Ipsen, Roche, Eli Lilly, AstraZeneca, Pierre-Fabre, Novartis. GF services advisory boards for Astellas, Janssen, Pfizer, Bayer, MSD, Merck and received travel accomodation from Astellas, Janssen, Bayer. GP services advisory boards/consulting for Astellas, AstraZeneca, BMS, Janssen, IPSEN, Merk, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer. MS services advisory boards/consulting for Janssen, received research funding from Janssen and received travel accomodation from Ipsen, BMS, Janssen, Pfizer, Astellas Pharma. PR services advisory boards for MSD, AstraZeneca and Janssen. GLB reports personal fees from AstraZeneca and Astellas and non-financial support from Janssen. DS received honoraria for the advisory board from Amgen, Jansen, MSD, BMS, Bayer, Astra Zeneca, Ipsen, Novartis, and Merck. CN received honoraria as a speaker at scientific events from Astellas and BMS. The remaining authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Immunotherapy combinations with tyrosine-kinase inhibitors (TKIs) and immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) had significantly improved outcomes of patients with mRCC. Predictive and prognostic factors are crucial to improve patients' counseling and management. The present study aimed to externally validate the prognostic value of a previously developed red cell-based score, including hemoglobin (Hb), mean corpuscular volume (MCV) and red cell distribution width (RDW), in patients with mRCC treated with first-line immunotherapy combinations (TKI plus ICI or ICI plus ICI). We performed a sub-analysis of a multicentre retrospective observational study (ARON-1 project) involving patients with mRCC treated with first-line immunotherapy combinations. Uni- and multivariable Cox regression models were used to assess the correlation between the red cell-based score and progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS). Logistic regression were used to estimate the correlation between the score and the objective response rate (ORR). The prognostic impact of the red cell-based score on PFS and OS was confirmed in the whole population regardless of the immunotherapy combination used [median PFS (mPFS): 17.4 vs 8.2 months, HR 0.66, 95% CI 0.47-0.94; median OS (mOS): 42.0 vs 17.3 months, HR 0.60, 95% CI 0.39-0.92; p < 0.001 for both]. We validated the prognostic significance of the red cell-based score in patients with mRCC treated with first-line immunotherapy combinations. The score is easy to use in daily clinical practice and it might improve patient counselling., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Rationale: Treatment with a combination of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) (pembrolizumab or nivolumab) and oral Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitors (TKI) targeting angiogenesis (axitinib, cabozantinib or lenvatinib) has shown benefits in terms of efficacy and survival in metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC), with a favorable toxicity profile. However, some rare and serious treatment-related adverse events can be difficult to manage., Patient Concerns: Here we report the first case of an mRCC patient who, after only 2 administrations of pembrolizumab-axitinib, experienced severe multiorgan failure (MOF) with heart failure, oliguria and acute hepatitis requiring aggressive supportive treatment in intensive care unit., Diagnoses: A diagnosis of severe MOF induced by pembrolizumab plus axitinib was considered., Interventions: The patient was treated with dobutamine, levosimendan along with high-dose steroids under continuous cardiologic monitoring., Outcomes: After treatment, the patient had a full recovery and was discharged from the hospital., Lessons: We reviewed all the other cases of MOF reported during treatment with combined ICI-TKI in cancer patients in order to summarize incidence, clinical manifestations and management with a specific focus on the need for prompt recognition and aggressive management under multidisciplinary care., Competing Interests: U.B.: advisory board for BMS, NOVARTIS, MSD, ASTRA ZENECA, PFIZER; speaker’s fees and/or travel grants from Janssen, Astellas, Ipsen, Merck, Bms, MSD, Astra Zeneca. For the remaining authors, there are no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2024 the Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc.)

Castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC) is a heterogeneous disease associated with phenotypic subtypes that drive therapy response and outcome differences. Histologic transformation to castration-resistant neuroendocrine prostate cancer (CRPC-NE) is associated with distinct epigenetic alterations, including changes in DNA methylation. The current diagnosis of CRPC-NE is challenging and relies on metastatic biopsy. We developed a targeted DNA methylation assay to detect CRPC-NE using plasma cell-free DNA (cfDNA). The assay quantifies tumor content and provides a phenotype evidence score that captures diverse CRPC phenotypes, leveraging regions to inform transcriptional state. We tested the design in independent clinical cohorts (n = 222 plasma samples) and qualified it achieving an AUC > 0.93 for detecting pathology-confirmed CRPC-NE (n = 136). Methylation-defined cfDNA tumor content was associated with clinical outcomes in two prospective phase II clinical trials geared towards aggressive variant CRPC and CRPC-NE. These data support the application of targeted DNA methylation for CRPC-NE detection and patient stratification., Significance: Neuroendocrine prostate cancer is an aggressive subtype of treatment-resistant prostate cancer. Early detection is important, but the diagnosis currently relies on metastatic biopsy. We describe the development and validation of a plasma cell-free DNA targeted methylation panel that can quantify tumor fraction and identify patients with neuroendocrine prostate cancer noninvasively. This article is featured in Selected Articles from This Issue, p. 384., (©2023 The Authors; Published by the American Association for Cancer Research.)

Inflammation is a common condition of prostate tissue, whose impact on carcinogenesis is highly debated. Microbial colonization is a well-documented cause of a small percentage of prostatitis cases, but it remains unclear what underlies the majority of sterile inflammation reported. Here, androgen- independent fluctuations of PSA expression in prostate cells have lead us to identify a prominent function of the Transient Receptor Potential Cation Channel Subfamily M Member 8 (TRPM8) gene in sterile inflammation. Prostate cells secret TRPM8 RNA into extracellular vesicles (EVs), which primes TLR3/NF-kB-mediated inflammatory signaling after EV endocytosis by epithelial cancer cells. Furthermore, prostate cancer xenografts expressing a translation-defective form of TRPM8 RNA contain less collagen type I in the extracellular matrix, significantly more infiltrating NK cells, and larger necrotic areas as compared to control xenografts. These findings imply sustained, androgen-independent expression of TRPM8 constitutes as a promoter of anticancer innate immunity, which may constitute a clinically relevant condition affecting prostate cancer prognosis., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Instrumental activities of daily living (IADL) are significant health indicators closely related to executive functions and able to detect mild cognitive impairment. A decline in IADL usually precedes ADL limitation, including taking medications, and may therefore predict a cognitive decline. We aimed to investigate the association of patients' IADL score with other clinical factors, with a particular focus on the presence of a caregiver, and the impact on adherence to androgen receptor pathway inhibitors (ARPIs) and survival outcomes within the Meet-URO 5-ADHERE study. It was a large prospective multicentre observational cohort study monitoring adherence to ARPIs in 234 metastatic castrate-resistant PC (mCRPC) patients aged ≥ 70. We observed an association between impaired IADL and lower geriatric G8 scores (p < 0.01), and lower adherence to ARPIs whether assessed by pill counting (p = 0.01) or self-reported by the patient himself (p = 0.03). The combination of an IADL < 6 and the absence of a caregiver resulted in a significantly high risk of non-adherence to the ARPIs at the multivariable analysis (HR 9.23, 95% confidence interval 2.28-37.43, p = 0.01). IADL alongside the geriatric G8 scales represent essential tools to identify frail and less auto-sufficient patients who are extremely vulnerable particularly if not supported by a caregiver and have the highest risk of nonadherence to ARPIs., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Background: The prevalence of pathogenic germline mutations in DNA damage repair (gDDR) genes in the Italian population is unknown., Objective: In this prospective multicenter cohort study, we evaluated the prevalence of gDDR alterations in the Italian population affected by metastatic prostate cancer (mPCa) and analyzed the impact on response to therapy, survival, and time to castration resistance., Design Setting and Participants: In an observational prospective trial, 300 consecutive Italian mPCa patients, enrolled in the Meet-Uro-10 trial from three academic Italian centers, were recruited between 2017 and 2019 and were screened for gDDR mutations in 107 genes., Outcome Measurements and Statistical Analysis: The primary endpoint was to assess the prevalence of gDDR mutations in the Italian population of patients with mPCa. The secondary endpoints included the association of gDDR subgroups with metastatic onset, Gleason score, and time to castration resistance., Results and Limitations: We identified 297 valuable patients. Forty-six patients had a pathogenic/likely pathogenic variant (15.5%, 95% confidence interval: 11.4-19.6): the more frequent was gBRCA2 found in nine cases (3%), followed by gATM in five cases (1.7%). In patients without mutations, longer median overall survival was observed with the sequence docetaxel-androgen receptor signaling inhibitor (ARSI) than with the sequence ARSI-docetaxel (87.9 vs 42 mo, p  = 0.0001). In a univariate analysis, the median time to castration resistance in gDDR mutated patients was 19.8 mo, versus 23.7 mo in no mutated patients ( p  = 0.024). There were no associations of gDDR subgroups with metastatic onset and Gleason score ≥8. In our cohort, variants of unknown significance in gDDR genes were found in 80 patients and might have a prognostic relevance., Conclusions: The study reported the prevalence of gDDR in the Italian population. The presence of gBRCA2 mutations correlates with a shorter time to the onset of castration resistance disease., Patient Summary: The prevalence of gBRCA2 in the Italian population is 3%, which is similar to that in the Spanish population, identifying similarities between people of the Western Mediterranean area., (© 2024 The Authors.)

Background: Up to 30% of patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) develop visceral metastases, which are associated with a poor prognosis., Objectives: Efficacy of enzalutamide in mCRPC patients with measurable metastases, including visceral and/or extra-regional lymph nodes., Methods: In this phase II multicenter study, patients with mCRPC and measurable metastases received enzalutamide as the first line. Primary endpoint: 3-month (mo) disease control rate (DCR) defined as the proportion of patients with complete (CR) or partial response (PR) or stable disease (SD) as per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors 1.1. Secondary endpoint: safety. Exploratory endpoint: the association between ARv7 splicing variants in basal circulating tumor cell (CTC)-enriched blood samples and treatment response/resistance using the AdnaTest ProstateCancerSelect kit and the AdnaTest ProstateCancer Panel AR-V7., Results: From March 2017 to January 2021, 68 patients were enrolled. One patient never started treatment. Median age: 72 years. A total of 52 patients (78%) received enzalutamide as a first line for mCRPC. The median follow-up was 32 months. At the 3-month assessment, 24 patients presented an SD, 1 patient achieved a CR, and 23 patients had a PR (3-mo-DCR of 72%). Discontinuations due to adverse events (AEs), disease-related death, or disease progression occurred in 9%, 6%, and 48% of patients. All patients reported at least one grade (G) 1-2 AE: the most common were fatigue (49%) and hypertension (33%). Six G3 AEs were reported: two hypertension, one seizure, one fatigue, one diarrhea, and one headache. Basal detection of ARv7 was significantly associated with poor treatment response (p = 0.034) and a nonsignificant association (p = 0.15) was observed between ARv7 detection and response assessments. At month 3, ARv7 was detected in 57%, 25%, and 15% of patients undergoing progressive disease, SD, and PR, respectively., Conclusion: The study met its primary endpoint, showing the efficacy of enzalutamide in men with mCRPC and measurable metastatic lesions in visceral and/or lymph node sites., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03103724. First Posted: 6 April 2017. First patient enrollment: 19 April 2017., (© The Author(s), 2024.)