Search

Nivolumab and cabozantinib are currently approved agents in metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) but there are no data available for patients progressing to both treatments. The aim of this study was to compare active therapeutic options and best supportive care (BSC) after progression to nivolumab and cabozantinib in mRCC.In this retrospective study, we selected 50 patients from eight Italian centers. The primary endpoint of the study was the overall survival (OS) of patients on active treatment versus BSC. Secondary endpoints were the progression-free survival (PFS) and objective response rate (ORR). The efficacy of active therapy was also investigated.After progression to both nivolumab and cabozantinib, 57.1% of patients were given active treatment (mainly everolimus and sorafenib) while 42.9% received BSC. The median OS was 13 months (95% CI: 4-NR) in actively treated patients and 3 months (95% CI: 2-4) in BSC patients (p = 0.001). Patients treated with sorafenib had better disease control than those treated with everolimus (stable disease: 71.4% vs. 16.7%, progression disease: 14.3% vs. 58.3%; p = 0.03), with no significant differences in PFS (5 and 3 months, 95% CI: 1-6 vs. 2-5; p = 0.6) and OS (12 and 4 months, 95% CI: 3-NR vs. 2-NR; p = 0.2).After treatment with both nivolumab and cabozantinib, the choice of a safe active systemic therapy offered better outcomes than BSC.

Background The identification of ALK and ROS1 rearrangements and the availability of an effective target therapy, such as crizotinib, represent a new option in the treatment of advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients. In light of recent advances in non-invasive diagnostic procedures, we aimed to demonstrate that direct cytological smears are suitable for assessing ALK and ROS1 rearrangements in patients with NSCLC. Methods Fifty-five patients with a cytological diagnosis of lung adenocarcinoma (ADC) were evaluated for ALK rearrangements by fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) and 12 patients for ROS1 FISH rearrangements. Seventeen of the 55 cytological samples tested for ALK were obtained from the primary tumor and 38 from metastatic lesions. Ten of 12 samples evaluated for ROS1 were obtained from metastatic sites and two from the primary tumor. Results ALK FISH was successful in 49/55 (89%) cytological ADC samples and ROS1 FISH in all 12 cytological samples. ALK rearrangements were found in 3/13 (23%) primary tumors and 7/36 (19%) metastatic sites. ROS1 rearrangements were found in one of the two primary tumors and in two of the 10 metastases. Two of the three rearranged cases were tested on cytology after knowing that they were rearranged on histology in order to increase representativeness of ROS1 rearranged cases in this study. Conclusion Whenever cytology represents the only available material for diagnosis and biological characterization of NSCLC, minimally invasive procedures may provide an additional important source of cellular material for FISH assessment of ALK and ROS1 rearrangements.//// Diagn. Cytopathol. 2015;43:941–946. © 2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

UNLABELLED What's known on the subject? and What does the study add? Sunitinib and sorafenib are orally administered multikinase inhibitors approved for the treatment of advanced RCC. The limited pharmacokinetics data on sunitinib and sorafenib suggest that haemodialysis does not significantly alter plasma concentrations. In this retrospective study we define the safety and efficacy of tyrosine kinase inhibitors in patients with metastatic RCC (mRCC) and end-stage renal disease requiring haemodialysis. Even though the retrospective nature of this survey and the relatively small sample size represent major limitations, these data indicate that treatment with sunitinib and sorafenib in this cohort of patients is feasible with no unexpected toxicity and good efficacy, results similar to those in the general population of patients with mRCC. OBJECTIVE To investigate the safety and efficacy of tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) and end-stage renal disease requiring haemodialysis (HD). PATIENTS AND METHODS Between July 2006 and December 2010, 24 patients undergoing HD were treated with sunitinib and/or sorafenib for mRCC in 14 Italian institutions. We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of these patients to evaluate the administered doses of TKIs, treatment-related toxicities and the clinical response to therapy. RESULTS Sunitinib was administered at 50 mg daily for 4-6 weeks in six patients, 37.5 mg daily for 4-6 weeks in seven patients (one patient subsequently increased the dose to 50 mg daily), 25 mg daily for 4-6 weeks in two patients and 12.5 mg daily for 4-6 weeks in one patient. Among the eight patients treated with sorafenib, four patients received 800 mg daily (400 mg every 12 h), three patients 400 mg daily and one patient 200 mg daily with a continuous schedule. The estimated median progression-free and overall survival periods of this cohort of patients were 10.3 months and 22.6 months, respectively. With regard to tolerability and safety, no unexpected adverse events were registered and no grade 4 haematological or non-haematological toxicities were reported. CONCLUSIONS Sunitinib and sorafenib treatment is not contraindicated in patients with mRCC undergoing HD. The outcome of this patient population is similar to that observed in patients with normal renal function treated with TKIs. These results merit further confirmation by a larger prospective trial.