Search

Item does not contain fulltext, PURPOSE: Watchful waiting (WW) can be considered for patients with metastatic clear-cell renal cell carcinoma (mccRCC) with good or intermediate prognosis, especially those with <2 International Metastatic RCC Database Consortium criteria and ≤2 metastatic sites [referred to as watch and wait ("W&W") criteria]. The IMaging PAtients for Cancer drug SelecTion-Renal Cell Carcinoma study objective was to assess the predictive value of [18F]FDG PET/CT and [89Zr]Zr-DFO-girentuximab PET/CT for WW duration in patients with mccRCC. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: Between February 2015 and March 2018, 48 patients were enrolled, including 40 evaluable patients with good (n = 14) and intermediate (n = 26) prognosis. Baseline contrast-enhanced CT, [18F]FDG and [89Zr]Zr-DFO-girentuximab PET/CT were performed. Primary endpoint was the time to disease progression warranting systemic treatment. Maximum standardized uptake values (SUVmax) were measured using lesions on CT images coregistered to PET/CT. High and low uptake groups were defined on the basis of median geometric mean SUVmax of RECIST-measurable lesions across patients. RESULTS: The median WW time was 16.1 months [95% confidence interval (CI): 9.0-31.7]. The median WW period was shorter in patients with high [18F]FDG tumor uptake than those with low uptake (9.0 vs. 36.2 months; HR, 5.6; 95% CI: 2.4-14.7; P < 0.001). Patients with high [89Zr]Zr-DFO-girentuximab tumor uptake had a median WW period of 9.3 versus 21.3 months with low uptake (HR, 1.7; 95% CI: 0.9-3.3; P = 0.13). Patients with "W&W criteria" had a longer median WW period of 21.3 compared with patients without: 9.3 months (HR, 1.9; 95% CI: 0.9-3.9; Pone-sided = 0.034). Adding [18F]FDG uptake to the "W&W criteria" improved the prediction of WW duration (P < 0.001); whereas [89Zr]Zr-DFO-girentuximab did not (P = 0.53). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with good- or intermediate-risk mccRCC, low [18F]FDG uptake is associated with prolonged WW. This study shows the predictive value of

Contains fulltext : 294868.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Open Access), BACKGROUND: Ongoing research in the field of both localized, locally advanced and metastatic renal cell carcinoma has resulted in the availability of multiple treatment options. Hence, many questions are still unanswered and await further research. A nationwide collaborative registry allows to collect corresponding data. For this purpose, the Dutch PROspective Renal Cell Carcinoma cohort (PRO-RCC) has been founded, for the prospective collection of long-term clinical data, patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) and patient reported experience measures (PREMs). METHODS: PRO-RCC is designed as a multicenter cohort for all Dutch patients with renal cell carcinoma (RCC). Recruitment will start in the Netherlands in 2023. Importantly, participants may also consent to participation in a 'Trial within cohorts' studies (TwiCs). The TwiCs design provides a method to perform (randomized) interventional studies within the registry. The clinical data collection is embedded in the Netherlands Cancer Registry (NCR). Next to the standardly available data on RCC, additional clinical data will be collected. PROMS entail Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQoL), symptom monitoring with optional ecological momentary assessment (EMA) of pain and fatigue, and optional return to work- and/or nutrition questionnaires. PREMS entail satisfaction with care. Both PROMS and PREMS are collected through the PROFILES registry and are accessible for the patient and the treating physician. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Ethical board approval has been obtained (2021_218) and the study has been registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT05326620). DISCUSSION: PRO-RCC is a nationwide long-term cohort for the collection of real-world clinical data, PROMS and PREMS. By facilitating an infrastructure for the collection of prospective data on RCC, PRO-RCC will contribute to observational research in a real-world study population and prove effectiveness in daily clinical practice. The infrastructure of this cohort also e

Item does not contain fulltext

Item does not contain fulltext, Recent molecular characterization of primary urothelial carcinoma (UC) may guide future clinical decision-making. For metastatic UC (mUC), a comprehensive molecular characterization is still lacking. We analyzed whole-genome DNA and RNA sequencing data for fresh-frozen metastatic tumor biopsies from 116 mUC patients who were scheduled for palliative systemic treatment within the context of a clinical trial (NCT01855477 and NCT02925234). Hierarchical clustering for mutational signatures revealed two major genomic subtypes: GenS1 (67%), which was APOBEC-driven; and GenS2 (24%), which had a high fraction of de novo mutational signatures related to reactive oxygen species and is putatively clock-like. Significantly mutated genes (SMGs) did not differ between the genomic subtypes. Transcriptomic analysis revealed five mUC subtypes: luminal-a and luminal-b (40%), stroma-rich (24%), basal/squamous (23%), and a nonspecified subtype (12%). These subtypes differed regarding expression of key genes, SMGs, oncogenic pathway activity, and immune cell infiltration. We integrated the genomic and transcriptomic data to propose potential therapeutic options by transcriptomic subtype and for individual patients. This in-depth analysis of a large cohort of patients with mUC may serve as a reference for subtype-oriented and patient-specific research on the etiology of mUC and for novel drug development. PATIENT SUMMARY: We carried out an in-depth analysis of the molecular and genetic features of metastatic cancer involving the cells that line the urinary tract. We showed that this is a heterogeneous disease with different molecular subtypes and we identified possible targets for therapy for each subtype.

Purpose: MEDI0680 is a humanized anti-programmed cell death-1 (PD-1) antibody, and durvalumab is an anti-PD-L1 antibody. Combining treatment using these antibodies may improve efficacy versus blockade of PD-1 alone. This phase II study evaluated antitumor activity and safety of MEDI0680 plus durvalumab versus nivolumab monotherapy in immunotherapy-naive patients with advanced clear-cell renal cell carcinoma who received at least one prior line of antiangiogenic therapy. Patients and Methods: Patients received either MEDI0680 (20 mg/kg) with durvalumab (750 mg) or nivolumab (240 mg), all intravenous, every 2 weeks. The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed objective response rate (ORR). Secondary endpoints included best overall response, progression-free survival (PFS), safety, overall survival (OS), and immunogenicity. Exploratory endpoints included changes in circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA), baseline tumor mutational burden, and tumor-infiltrated immune cell profiles. Result(s): Sixty-three patients were randomized (combination, n = 42; nivolumab, n = 21). ORR was 16.7% [7/42; 95% confidence interval (CI), 7.0-31.4] with combination treatment and 23.8% (5/21; 95% CI, 8.2-47.2) with nivolumab. Median PFS was 3.6 months in both arms; median OS was not reached in either arm. Because of adverse events, 23.8% of patients discontinued MEDI0680 and durvalumab and 14.3% of patients discontinued nivolumab. In the combination arm, reduction in ctDNA fraction was associated with longer PFS. ctDNA mutational analysis did not demonstrate an association with response in either arm. Tumor-infiltrated immune profiles showed an association between immune cell activation and response in the combination arm. Conclusion(s): MEDI0680 combined with durvalumab was safe and tolerable; however, it did not improve efficacy versus nivolumab monotherapy.Copyright © 2022 The Authors; Published by the American Association for Cancer Research

Contains fulltext : 219918.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Closed access)

Background: MEDI0680 is a humanised IgG4kappa anti-programmed cell death-1 (PD-1) mAb. We hypothesised that simultaneous blockade of PD-1:PD-L1/PD-L2 with MEDI0680 (M) and PD-1:PD-L1/CD80 with anti-PD-L1 mAb durvalumab (D) would improve efficacy vs blockade of the PD-1:PD-L1/PD-L2 pathway (with nivolumab; N) alone. M+D was well tolerated in the dose-escalation phase of a Phase I/II study in pts with advanced solid tumours, with an ORR of 33% (10/30; including 3/4 RCC pts). In the Phase II portion of the study, we compared M+D to N in a dose-expansion cohort of pretreated, immunotherapy (IO)-naive pts with metastatic ccRCC. Method(s): Eligible pts had received 1-3 prior therapy lines, no prior IO exposure and >=1 measurable lesion. They were randomised 2:1 (stratified by MSKCC risk group and PD-L1 expression) to M 20 mg/kg IV + D 750 mg Q2W or N 240 mg IV Q2W until unacceptable toxicity or disease progression, for <=2 years. Endpoints included investigator-assessed ORR by RECIST v1.1 (primary endpoint), PFS and safety (secondary). Sample size was ~60 to detect a difference of 26.0% (ie, ORR = 47.5%, assuming ORR of 21.5% for N) with 76% power at a 1-sided significance level of 0.10. Result(s): By Feb 24, 2019, 63 pts were randomised. Baseline pt/disease characteristics were generally well balanced, but more pts on N had favourable MSKCC risk (7/21; 33.3%) vs M+D (10/42; 23.8%). ORR was 14.3% (6/42; 2 CR, 4 PR; plus 2 unconfirmed PR) vs 19.0% (4/21; 4 PR, 0 unconfirmed) for M+D and N, respectively. There was no difference between arms in ORR by PD-L1 expression (<1% vs >= 1%). All responses are ongoing. Median PFS was 3.6 months in both arms. Grade 3/4 treatment-related AEs (TRAEs) occurred in 26% on M+D (including 1 case of autoimmune encephalitis) and 19% on N. On M+D, 12% had TRAEs leading to treatment discontinuation, including colitis or diarrhoea (n = 3) and increased ALT/transaminases (n = 2), vs 5% on N (pancreatitis and increased lipase and amylase in 1 pt).

Background: In the ongoing phase 3 CheckMate 214 trial, nivolumab plus ipilimumab showed superior efficacy over sunitinib in patients with previously untreated intermediate-risk or poor-risk advanced renal cell carcinoma, with a manageable safety profile. In this study, we aimed to assess efficacy and safety after extended follow-up to inform the long-term clinical benefit of nivolumab plus ipilimumab versus sunitinib in this setting. Method(s): In the phase 3, randomised, controlled CheckMate 214 trial, patients aged 18 years and older with previously untreated, advanced, or metastatic histologically confirmed renal cell carcinoma with a clear-cell component were recruited from 175 hospitals and cancer centres in 28 countries. Patients were categorised by International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium risk status into favourable-risk, intermediate-risk, and poor-risk subgroups and randomly assigned (1:1) to open-label nivolumab (3 mg/kg intravenously) plus ipilimumab (1 mg/kg intravenously) every 3 weeks for four doses, followed by nivolumab (3 mg/kg intravenously) every 2 weeks; or sunitinib (50 mg orally) once daily for 4 weeks (6-week cycle). Randomisation was done through an interactive voice response system, with a block size of four and stratified by risk status and geographical region. The co-primary endpoints for the trial were overall survival, progression-free survival per independent radiology review committee (IRRC), and objective responses per IRRC in intermediate-risk or poor-risk patients. Secondary endpoints were overall survival, progression-free survival per IRRC, and objective responses per IRRC in the intention-to-treat population, and adverse events in all treated patients. In this Article, we report overall survival, investigator-assessed progression-free survival, investigator-assessed objective response, characterisation of response, and safety after extended follow-up. Efficacy outcomes were assessed in all randomly assig

In metastatic breast cancer (MBC), expression of estrogen receptor (ER), progesterone receptor (PR), and human epidermal growth factor receptor-2 (HER2) guides treatment selection. In case of bone-only metastatic disease, ER, PR, and HER2 status assessment may be hampered by decalcification. We aimed to determine the optimal decalcification method, and to study discordance of receptor expression between paired primary breast tumors and optimally decalcified bone metastases. First, decalcification was simulated using acetic acid, hydrochloric/formic acid, and EDTA on 12 primary breast carcinomas. ER, PR, and HER2 immunohistochemistry (IHC) and HER2 in situ hybridization (ISH) were assessed, before and after the 3 decalcification methods. EDTA was considered th

Purpose: The main objective of this preliminary analysis of the IMaging PAtients for Cancer drug selecTion (IMPACT)-renal cell cancer (RCC) study is to evaluate the lesion detection of baseline contrast-enhanced CT, [89Zr]Zr-DFO-girentuximab-PET/CT and [18F]FDG-PET/CT in detecting ccRCC lesions in patients with a good or intermediate prognosis metastatic clear cell renal cell carcinoma (mccRCC) according to the International Metastatic Database Consortium (IMDC) risk model. Methods: Between February 2015 and March 2018, 42 newly diagnosed mccRCC patients with good or intermediate prognosis, eligible for watchful waiting, were included. Patients underwent CT, [89Zr]Zr-DFO-girentuximab-PET/CT and [18F]FDG-PET/CT at baseline. Scans were independently reviewed and lesions of ≥10 mm and lymph nodes of ≥15 mm at CT were analyzed. For lesions with [89Zr]Zr-DFO-girentuximab or [18F]FDG-uptake visually exceeding background uptake, maximum standardized uptake values (SUVmax) were measured. Results: A total of 449 lesions were detected by ≥1 modality (median per patient: 7; ICR 4.25–12.75) of which 42% were in lung, 22% in lymph nodes and 10% in bone. Combined [89Zr]Zr-DFO-girentuximab-PET/CT and CT detected more lesions than CT alone: 91% (95%CI: 87–94) versus 56% (95%CI: 50–62, p = 0.001), respectively, and more than CT and [18F]FDG-PET/CT combined (84% (95%CI:79–88, p < 0.005). Both PET/CTs detected more bone and soft tissue lesions compared to CT alone. Conclusions: The addition of [89Zr]Zr-DFO-girentuximab-PET/CT and [18F]FDG-PET/CT to CT increases lesion detection compared to CT alone in newly diagnosed good and intermediate prognosis mccRCC patients eligible for watchful waiting.

Salivary duct carcinoma (SDC) is a subtype of salivary gland cancer with a dismal prognosis and a need for better prognostication and novel treatments. The aim of this national cohort study was to investigate clinical outcome, prognostic factors, androgen receptor (AR) and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) expression. SDC patients diagnosed between 1990 and 2014 were identified by the Nationwide Network and Registry of Histo- and Cytopathology in the Netherlands (PALGA). Subsequently, medical records were evaluated and pathological diagnoses reviewed. Data were analyzed for overall survival (OS), disease-free survival (DFS), distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS) and prognostic factors. AR was evaluated by immunohistochemistry (IHC), HER2 by IHC and fluorescent in-situ hybridization. A total of 177 patients were included. The median age was 65 years, 75% were male. At diagnosis, 68% presented with lymph node metastases and 6% with distant metastases. Median OS, DFS and DMFS were 51, 23 and 26 months, respectively. In patients presenting without distant metastases, the absolute number of positive lymph nodes was associated with poor OS and DMFS in a multivariable analysis. AR and HER2 were positive in 161/168 (96%) and 44/153 (29%) tumors, respectively, and were not prognostic factors. SDC has a dismal prognosis with primary lymph node involvement in the majority of patients. The absolute number of lymph node metastases was found to be the only prognostic factor for DMFS and OS. AR expression and-to a lesser extent-HER2 expression hold promise for systemic treatment in the metastatic and eventually adjuvant setting.

Background: There is an ongoing debate about the value of (neo-)adjuvant chemotherapy in high- and intermediate-grade osteosarcoma of the head and neck. Methods: All records of patients older than 16 years diagnosed with osteosarcoma of the head and neck in the Netherlands between 1993 and 2013 were reviewed. Results: We identified a total of 77 patients with an osteosarcoma of the head and neck; the 5-year overall survival (OS) was 55%. In 50 patients with surgically resected high- or intermediate-grade osteosarcoma of the head and neck younger than 75 years, univariate and multivariable analysis, adjusting for age and resection margins, showed that patients who had not received chemotherapy had a significantly higher risk of local recurrence (hazard ratio [HR] = 3.78 and 3.66, respectively). Conclusion: In patients younger than 75 years of age with surgically resected high- and intermediate-grade osteosarcoma of the head and neck, treatment with (neo-)adjuvant chemotherapy resulted in a significantly smaller risk of local recurrence. Therefore, we suggest (neo-)adjuvant chemotherapy in patients amenable to chemotherapy.

Background: Audit and feedback on professional practice and health care outcomes are the most often used interventions to change behaviour of professionals and improve quality of health care. However, limited information is available regarding preferred feedback for patients, professionals and health insurers. Objective: Investigate the (differences in) preferences of receiving feedback between stakeholders, using the Dutch Head and Neck Audit as an example. Methods: A total of 37 patients, medical specialists, allied health professionals and health insurers were interviewed using semi-structured interviews. Questions focussed on: “Why,” “On what aspects” and “How” do you prefer to receive feedback on professional practice and health care outcomes?. Results: All stakeholders mentioned that feedback can improve health care by creating awareness, enabling self-reflection and reflection on peers or colleagues, and by benchmarking to others. Patients prefer feedback on the actual professional practice that matches the health care received, whereas medical specialists and health insurers are interested mainly in health care outcomes. All stakeholders largely prefer a bar graph. Patients prefer a pie chart for patient-reported outcomes and experiences, while Kaplan-Meier survival curves are preferred by medical specialists. Feedback should be simple with firstly an overview, and 1-4 times a year sent by e-mail. Finally, patients and health professionals are cautious with regard to transparency of audit data. Conclusions: This exploratory study shows how feedback preferences differ between stakeholders. Therefore, tailored reports are recommended. Using this information, effects of audit and feedback can be improved by adapting the feedback format and contents to the preferences of stakeholders.

Background: Salivary duct carcinoma, an aggressive subtype of salivary gland cancer, is mostly androgen receptor-positive. Only limited data are available on androgen deprivation therapy (ADT). Methods: Patients with advanced androgen receptor-positive salivary duct carcinoma treated with first-line ADT were retrospectively evaluated for clinical benefit (ie, partial response [PR] and stable disease, progression-free survival [PFS] and overall survival [OS]). The OS was compared with patients with advanced salivary duct carcinoma who received best supportive care. Results: Thirty-four of 35 patients who were ADT-treated were evaluable: 6 patients had a PR (18%) and 11 had stable disease (32%) leading to a clinical benefit ratio of 50%. The median PFS for the ADT-treated patients was 4 months and the median duration of clinical benefit was 11 months. The median OS was 17 months versus 5 months in 43 patients receiving best supportive care (P=.02). Conclusion: We recommend ADT in advanced androgen receptor-positive salivary duct carcinoma given its response and clinical benefit.

Item does not contain fulltext, Hereditary leiomyomatosis and renal cell cancer (HLRCC) is an autosomal dominant syndrome characterized by skin piloleiomyomas, uterine leiomyomas and papillary type 2 renal cancer caused by germline mutations in the fumarate hydratase (FH) gene. Previously, we proposed renal imaging for FH mutation carriers starting at the age of 20 years. However, recently an 18-year-old woman from a Dutch family with HLRCC presented with metastatic renal cancer. We describe the patient and family data, evaluate current evidence on renal cancer risk and surveillance in HLRCC and consider the advantages and disadvantages of starting surveillance for renal cancer in childhood. We also discuss the targeted therapies administered to our patient.