Search

Non-clear cell renal cell carcinoma (nccRCC) represents a heterogeneous histological group which is 20-25% of those with renal cell carcinoma (RCC). Patients with nccRCC have limited therapeutic options due to their exclusion from phase III randomized trials. The aim of the present study was to investigate the effectiveness and tolerability of pembrolizumabaxitinib combination in chromophobe and papillary metastatic RCC (mRCC) patients enrolled in the I-RARE (Italian Registry on rAre genitor-uRinary nEoplasms) observational ongoing study (Meet-URO 23). Baseline characteristics, objective response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR) and progression-free survival (PFS) and toxicities were retrospectively and prospectively collected from nccRCC patients treated in 14 Italian referral centers adhering to the Meet-Uro group, from December 2020 to April 2022. Only patients with chromophobe and papillary histology were considered eligible for the present pre-specified analysis. There were 32 eligible patients who received pembrolizumab-axitinib as first-line treatment, of whom 13 (40%) had chromophobe histology and 19 (60%) were classified as papillary RCC. The DCR was 78.1% whereas ORR was 43.7% (11 patients achieved stable disease and 14 patients obtained partial response: 9/19 papillary, 5/13 chromophobe). Six patients (18.7%) were primary refractory. Median PFS was 10.8 months (95%CI 1.7-11.5). Eleven patients (34.3%) interrupted the full treatment due to immune-related adverse events (irAEs): G3 hepatitis (n = 5), G3 hypophisitis (n = 1), G3 diarrhea (n = 1), G3 pancreatitis (n = 1), G3 asthenia (n = 1). Twelve patients (37.5%) temporarily interrupted axitinib only due to persistent G2 hand-foot syndrome or G2 hypertension. Pembrolizumab-axitinib combination could be an active and feasible first-line treatment option for patients with papillary or chromophobe mRCC.

A concomitant drug-based score was developed by our group and externally validated for prognostic and predictive purposes in patients with advanced cancer treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs). The model considers the use of three classes of drugs within a month before initiating ICI, assigning score 1 for each between proton pump inhibitor and antibiotic administration until a month before immunotherapy initiation and score 2 in case of corticosteroid intake. In the present analysis, the drug score was validated in a prospective population of 305 patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma treated with ipilimumab plus nivolumab in the first-line setting. The value of the model in predicting overall survival and progression-free survival was statistically significant and clinically meaningful, with an overall survival rate at 12 months of 73% vs. 44% (P<0.0001), and median progression-free survival of 11.6 (95% CI: 9.1-14.1) months versus 4.8 (95% CI: 2.7-7.0) months (P=0.002), respectively, for patients belonging to the favorable group (score 0-1) versus the unfavorable (score 2-4). Further development will be represented by the gut microbiome analysis according to the drug-based model classification and to the outcome of patients to ICI therapy to demonstrate the link between drug exposure and immune sensitivity., (Copyright © 2022 The Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc.)

Background: Cisplatin-based chemotherapy is the most recommended treatment for metastatic urothelial cancer (mUC). However, about 50% of patients are considered to be cisplatin ineligible. Anti-programmed cell death protein 1/programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) therapies have, nevertheless, increased the options available to clinicians and are especially valuable for treating these patients. This study therefore tested the activity and safety of avelumab as first-line therapy for mUC., Patients and Methods: Patients with mUC who were ineligible for cisplatin-based chemotherapy were screened centrally for PD-L1 expression and only those with a tumour proportion score ≥ 5% were enrolled in the trial. The primary endpoint was 1-year overall survival (OS), and the secondary endpoints were median OS, median progression-free survival, overall response rate, duration of the response, safety and tolerability. All the survival rates were estimated with the Kaplan-Meier product-limit methodology and compared across groups using the log-rank test., Results: A total of 198 patients were screened, with 71 (35.9%) whose PD-L1 expression was ≥5% enrolled in the study. The median age was 75 years, bladder cancer was the primary tumour in 73.2% of cases and 25.3% had liver metastases. The main reasons for the cisplatin ineligibility were a low rate of creatinine clearance (<60 ml/min), present in 70.4% of patients, and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 2, which affected 31%. The median OS was 10.0 months (95% confidence interval 5.5-14.5 months) and 43% of patients were alive at 1 year. A complete response was achieved in 8.5% of cases, and 15.5% had a partial response. Adverse any-grade and high-grade events occurred in 49.3% and 8.5% of patients, respectively. A grade 3 infusion reaction was the only high-grade treatment-related adverse event. No treatment-related deaths were reported., Conclusions: This ARIES trial confirmed the activity and safety of avelumab for treating mUC, adding a new therapy option to the armamentarium of checkpoint inhibitors already approved for platinum-ineligible, locally advanced/mUC., Competing Interests: Disclosure RI served as an advisory board member or consultant for Astellas, Pfizer, Janssen, Sanofi, IPSEN, MSD, BMS, Novartis and EISAI; received institutional support for research project from Pfizer and BMS. SB received honoraria as a speaker at scientific events and advisory role by Bristol-Myers Squibb (BMS), Pfizer; MSD, Ipsen, Roche, Eli-Lilly, AstraZeneca and Novartis; he also received research funding from Novartis. CM reported honoraria for advisory boards or speaker fees for Merck Serono, Pfizer, BMS, MSD, Astellas, Ipsen and Janssen. MR acted as a paid consultant and/or speaker for Pfizer, Novartis, MSD, AstraZeneca and BMS. DS reported honoraria for advisory boards for BMS, Janssen, MSD, Merck, EISAI, Bayer, Novartis, Lilly, Astellas and AstraZeneca. GT served as an advisory board member for BMS and Novartis. All other authors have declared no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2022 European Society for Medical Oncology. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

New antimicrobials need to be discovered to fight the advance of multidrug-resistant pathogens. A promising approach is the screening for antimicrobial agents naturally produced by living organisms. As an alternative to studying the native producer, it is possible to use genetically tractable microbes as heterologous hosts to aid the discovery process, facilitate product diversification through genetic engineering, and ultimately enable environmentally friendly production. In this mini-review, we summarize the literature from 2017 to 2022 on the application of Escherichia coli and E. coli-based platforms as versatile and powerful systems for the discovery, characterization, and sustainable production of antimicrobials. We highlight recent developments in high-throughput screening methods and genetic engineering approaches that build on the strengths of E. coli as an expression host and that led to the production of antimicrobial compounds. In the last section, we briefly discuss new techniques that have not been applied to discover or engineer antimicrobials yet, but that may be useful for this application in the future., (© 2022 The Author(s).)

We performed an updated meta-analysis to explore the role of maintenance therapy in SCLC. Clinical trials with randomization to maintenance/consolidation (V) placebo or observation or best supportive care in SCLC, both extended and limited disease were searched from January 2009 to March 2022. The hazard ratios (HR) for progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) with the relative 95% confidence interval (CI) were extracted from each study. Summary HR was calculated using random- or fixed-effects models, depending on the heterogeneity of the included studies. A total of 9 studies were identified. Neither PFS nor OS were improved with maintenance/consolidation (PFS: random-effect; HR 0.93; 95% CI 0.71-1.21; P=0.10; OS: fixed-effect; HR 0.98; 95% CI 0.89-1.08; P=0.14). Among the different strategies, immunotherapy maintenance showed a significantly decreased risk of progression (V)standard of care (random-effect; HR 0.80; 95% CI 0.66-0.97; P=0.03). The current updated meta-analysis did not demonstrate a benefit of maintenance/consolidation therapy in SCLC, with only a PFS benefit for immunotherapy approach., Competing Interests: Conflicts of interest S.P. received honoraria or speaker's fees from Astra-Zeneca, BMS, Boehringer Ingelheim, MSD, Roche and Istituto Gentili. C.C. received honoraria or speaker's fees from Pfizer, Ipsen, Janssen, MSD. E.B. received speaker's and travel fees from MSD, Astra-Zeneca, Celgene, Pfizer, Helsinn, Eli-Lilly, BMS, Novartis and Roche. E.B received consultant fees from Roche, Pfizer. E.B. received institutional research grants from Astra-Zeneca and Roche. All other authors declare they have no conflicts of interest to disclose., (Copyright © 2022 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Importance: Dysregulated metabolism is a hallmark of renal cell carcinoma (RCC). Glutaminase is a key enzyme that fuels tumor growth by converting glutamine to glutamate. Telaglenastat is an investigational, first-in-class, selective, oral glutaminase inhibitor that blocks glutamine utilization and downstream pathways. Preclinically, telaglenastat synergized with cabozantinib, a VEGFR2/MET/AXL inhibitor, in RCC models., Objective: To compare the efficacy and safety of telaglenastat plus cabozantinib (Tela + Cabo) vs placebo plus cabozantinib (Pbo + Cabo)., Design, Setting, and Participants: CANTATA was a randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind, pivotal trial conducted at sites in the US, Europe, Australia, and New Zealand. Eligible patients had metastatic clear-cell RCC following progression on 1 to 2 prior lines of therapy, including 1 or more antiangiogenic therapies or nivolumab plus ipilimumab. The data cutoff date was August 31, 2020. Data analysis was performed from December 2020 to February 2021., Interventions: Patients were randomized 1:1 to receive oral cabozantinib (60 mg daily) with either telaglenastat (800 mg twice daily) or placebo until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity., Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point was progression-free survival (Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1) assessed by blinded independent radiology review., Results: A total of 444 patients were randomized: 221 to Tela + Cabo (median [range] age, 61 [21-81] years; 47 [21%] women and 174 [79%] men) and 223 to Pbo + Cabo (median [range] age, 62 [29-83] years; 68 [30%] women and 155 [70%] men). A total of 276 (62%) patients had received prior immune checkpoint inhibitors, including 128 with prior nivolumab plus ipilimumab, 93 of whom had not received prior antiangiogenic therapy. Median progression-free survival was 9.2 months for Tela + Cabo vs 9.3 months for Pbo + Cabo (HR, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.74-1.21; P = .65). Overall response rates were 31% (69 of 221) with Tela + Cabo vs 28% (62 of 223) with Pbo + Cabo. Treatment-emergent adverse event (TEAE) rates were similar between arms. Grade 3 to 4 TEAEs occurred in 160 patients (71%) with Tela + Cabo and 172 patients (79%) with Pbo + Cabo and included hypertension (38 patients [17%] vs 40 patients [18%]) and diarrhea (34 patients [15%] vs 29 patients [13%]). Cabozantinib was discontinued due to AEs in 23 patients (10%) receiving Tela + Cabo and 33 patients (15%) receiving Pbo + Cabo., Conclusions and Relevance: In this randomized clinical trial, telaglenastat did not improve the efficacy of cabozantinib in metastatic RCC. Tela + Cabo was well tolerated with AEs consistent with the known risks of both agents., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03428217.

Background: Immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI)-based combinations have become the first-line standard of care in metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC), but their activity on the primary tumor is still one of the most debated issues., Patients and Methods: The aim of our analysis was to evaluate the primary tumor's response to first-line therapy with cabozantinib or nivolumab+ipilimumab, and its correlation with metastatic response and with patient outcomes., Results: Sixty-seven mRCC patients met the criteria for inclusion in the final analysis (30 treated with cabozantinib and 37 with nivolumab+ipilimumab). In the overall population, the primary tumor control rate (PTCR) was 90.9%; no complete responses (CR) were achieved. A significant correlation was found between the baseline size of the primary tumor's longest diameter and its response according to RECIST v1.1 criteria at the time of the second radiological assessment (rs = -0.351; P = .049). Moreover, a significant correlation between the type of primary tumor response and the response of the metastases was observed in the overall population (rs = 0.50; two-sided P < 0.001). There was also a significant correlation between primary tumor response and 1-year survival rate (P = .002), even when adjusted for the IMDC prognostic group and type of therapy (HR = 8.70; 95%CI, 2.52-30.05; P = .001)., Conclusion: Extension of the primary tumor did not affect patient survival, while its response was significantly related to the response on metastatic disease and survival. No significant differences in terms of primary tumor shrinkage were identified between treatment with nivolumab+ipilimumab or cabozantinib in this cohort., Competing Interests: Disclosure The authors declare the following financial interests/personal relationships which may be considered as potential competing interests. RI served as consultant for Astellas, BMS, Ipsen; Janssen, Merk, MSD, Novartis; Pfizer; Sanofi and received research grant from Pfizer. SS served as consultant for Astellas, BMS, Ipsen, Janssen, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Sanofi-Genzyme. EV served as consultant for Ipsen, Janssen, Merck, MSD, Pfizer. Astellas, Novartis. CC served as consultant for Pfizer, BMS, MSD, Janssen. SB served as consultant for Pfizer, BMS, MSD, Roche, Astellas, Janssen, Ipsen, Bayer, Sanofi-Genzyme, Merck, AstraZeneca. Travel accommodation from Pfizer, BMS, Roche, Astellas, Janssen, Ipsen, AstraZeneca. UDG served as consultant for Astellas, Bayer, BMS, Ipsen, Janssen, Merck, Pfizer and Sanofi; has received travel support from BMS, Ipsen, Janssen and Pfizer; and has received research funding from AstraZeneca, Roche and Sanofi (Inst). UB served as consultant for Advisory board BMS, MSD, Janssen. He received speaker's fees BMS, Ipsen, Janssen, Astellas. GT served as consultant for BMS and MSD. GP served as consultant for Astellas, Astra-Zeneca, Bayer, BMS, Ipsen, Janssen, Merck, MSD, Pfizer, Novartis, Sanofi. CC, MM. AF, LG, FM, AC, MGM, DB, FMD, MD, FP, FR declared not conflict of interests., (Copyright © 2022. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Background: The addition of either docetaxel or an androgen receptor signalling pathway inhibitor (ARSi) to androgen-deprivation therapy (ADT) has become the standard of care for metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer (mCSPC) patients. Recent phase III data support even greater survival impact of a triplet regimen with ADT plus docetaxel plus an ARSi (abiraterone or darolutamide) compared to ADT plus docetaxel., Objective: To evaluate whether the addition of an ARSi to ADT improves outcomes of mCSPC patients treated with docetaxel., Methods: We searched MEDLINE/PubMed, the Cochrane Library, and ASCO Meeting abstracts for randomised clinical trials (RCTs) testing the combination of ARSi + ADT in mCSPC men who received docetaxel. Data extraction was conducted according to the PRISMA statement. Summary hazard ratio (HR) was calculated using random- or fixed-effects models. The statistical analyses were performed with RevMan software (v.5.2.3)., Results: Five RCTs were selected. Triplet therapy improved overall survival (OS) compared to ADT + docetaxel in mCSPC patients (HR = 0.73; p &lt; 0.00001). This intensified strategy maintained the OS benefit when the ARSi was administered concomitant to chemotherapy (HR = 0.72; p &lt; 0.00001), but no statistical effect was detected if the ARSi was sequential to docetaxel (p = 0.44). Moreover, in the subgroup of men with de novo mCSPC, triplets significantly improved OS (HR = 0.72, p &lt; 0.0001). The lack of access to raw data was the main limit of our analysis., Conclusion: Our results support a clear survival advantage of adding an ARSi to ADT in mCSPC patients treated with docetaxel, mainly when the ARSi was administered concomitantly to chemotherapy and in the subgroup of de novo mCSPC., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest statement Chiara Ciccarese: occasional consultant of IPSEN, Jannssen, MSD, Merck, Pfizer, Astellas. Roberto Iacovelli: advisory board member for Astellas, BMS, EISAI, IPSEN, Janssen, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Sanofi. Consultant for Astellas, EISAI, MSD, Pfizer. Cora N. Sternberg: Served as a consultant for Astellas Pharma, Sanofi–Genzyme, Roche-Genentech, Novartis, Bayer, Pfizer, Merck, MSD, AstraZeneca, Immunomedics (now Gilead), Janssen, Foundation Medicine, Impact Pharma, UroToday and Medscape. Silke Gillessen: Prof Silke Gillessen received (last 3 years) personal honoraria for participation in advisory boards from Amgen, MSD, Orion; other honoraria from Radio-televisione Svizzera Italiana (RSI), German-speaking European School of Oncology (DESO); invited speaker for ESMO, Swiss group for Clinical Cancer Research (SAKK), Swiss Academy of Multidisciplinary oncology (SAMO), Orikata academy research group, China Anti-Cancer Association Genitourinary Oncology Committee (CACA-GU); Speaker's bureau for Janssen Cilag; travel grant from ProteoMEdiX. Institutional honoraria for participation in advisory boards or in Independent Data Monitoring Committees and Steering Committees from AAA International, Amgen, Bayer, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Modra Pharmaceuticals, MSD, Novartis, Orion, Pfizer, Roche, Telixpharma Tolero Pharmaceutcials; other honoraria from Silvio Grasso Consulting. Patent royalties and other intellectual property for a research method for biomarker WO2009138392. Giampaolo Tortora: advisory board member for BMS and Novartis. Karim Fizazi: Participation to advisory boards and talks for: Amgen, Astellas, Astrazeneca, Bayer, Clovis, Janssen, MSD, Novartis/AAA, Pfizer, Sanofi Honoraria go to Gustave Roussy, my institution. Participation to advisory boards with personal honorarium for CureVac and Orion., (Copyright © 2022 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Hereditary and sporadic renal cell carcinomas (RCCs) are often associated with Von Hippel-Lindau (VHL)-gene inactivation. Patients with VHL disease have an increased risk of RCC, leading to bilateral nephrectomy and dialysis. In patients with advanced RCC, no standard second-lines are available after progression to immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs), and new agents are required to manage progression. HIFs have emerged as a promising target for metastatic RCC patients who have progressed to ICI-based combinations, as well as for those with RCC and VHL syndrome where the goal is to delay surgery and/or and preserve kidney function and avoid dialysis. This review describes the available evidence supporting the use of the small-molecule HIF-2 alpha inhibitor, belzutifan (MK-6482), as well as other new anti-HIF molecules that have demonstrated significant efficacy in VHL disease-related RCCs as well as for sporadic RCC that has progressed after the use of ICI-based combinations., (Copyright © 2022 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Filamentous fungi are highly productive cell factories, many of which are industrial producers of enzymes, organic acids, and secondary metabolites. The increasing number of sequenced fungal genomes revealed a vast and unexplored biosynthetic potential in the form of transcriptionally silent secondary metabolite biosynthetic gene clusters (BGCs). Various strategies have been carried out to explore and mine this untapped source of bioactive molecules, and with the advent of synthetic biology, novel applications, and tools have been developed for filamentous fungi. Here we summarize approaches aiming for the expression of endogenous or exogenous natural product BGCs, including synthetic transcription factors, assembly of artificial transcription units, gene cluster refactoring, fungal shuttle vectors, and platform strains., Competing Interests: Author RALB was employed by the company DSM Biotechnology Center. 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 © 2022 Mózsik, Iacovelli, Bovenberg and Driessen.)

Several first-line immune-checkpoints inhibitors (ICI) based combinations have been studied in metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) without any direct comparison between the regimens. The objective of this systematic review and network meta-analysis was to provide the most updated evidence about the preferred first line ICI-based regimen for mRCC. We searched various databases, including PubMed, Web of Science and Scopus and the major conference proceedings (ASCO, ESMO). Eligible studies were randomized trial, published before June 2021 that evaluated first-line, ICI-based combinations compared with the standard of care in mRCC. Screening was performed independently by two investigators. A Cochrane risk-of-bias tool was used to assess trial quality. Relative effects of competing treatments were assessed by Bayesian network meta-analysis. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses guideline was used. Outcomes included overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), overall response rate, complete response and adverse events. Six trials with 5478 patients comparing 7 treatments were identified. Network meta-analysis showed that lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab had the highest probability to be the best treatment in terms of OS (surface under the cumulative ranking (SUCRA) 80.7%) and PFS (SUCRA 99.6%), while in sarcomatoid patients, nivolumab plus cabozantinib had the highest rank in terms of survival outcomes (SUCRA 85.8% and SUCRA 77.3%, respectively). Although we established a ranking among new first-line mRCC treatment combinations, the absence of direct comparisons between the multiple treatment options represents a major hurdle in establishing optimal therapeutic sequences. Our results could represent a starting point for head-to-head trials between the most promising combinations., (Copyright © 2022. Published by Elsevier Ltd.)

We aimed to overcome intratumoral heterogeneity in clear cell renal cell carcinoma (clearRCC). One hundred cases of clearRCC were sampled. First, usual standard sampling was applied (1 block/cm of tumor); second, the whole tumor was sampled, and 0.6 mm cores were taken from each block to construct a tissue microarray; third, the residual tissue, mapped by taking pieces 0.5 × 0.5 cm, reconstructed the entire tumor mass. Precisely, six randomly derived pieces of tissues were placed in each cassette, with the number of cassettes being based on the diameter of the tumor (called multisite 3D fusion). Angiogenic and immune markers were tested. Routine 5231 tissue blocks were obtained. Multisite 3D fusion sections showed pattern A, homogeneous high vascular density (10%), pattern B, homogeneous low vascular density (8%) and pattern C, heterogeneous angiogenic signatures (82%). PD-L1 expression was seen as diffuse (7%), low (33%) and absent (60%). Tumor-infiltrating CD8 scored high in 25% (pattern hot), low in 65% (pattern weak) and zero in 10% of cases (pattern desert). Grading was upgraded in 26% of cases (G3-G4), necrosis and sarcomatoid/rhabdoid characters were observed in, respectively, 11 and 7% of cases after 3D fusion ( p = 0.03). CD8 and PD-L1 immune expressions were higher in the undifferentiated G4/rhabdoid/sarcomatoid clearRCC subtypes ( p = 0.03). Again, 22% of cases were set to intermediate to high risk of clinical recurrence due to new morphological findings of all aggressive G4, sarcomatoid/rhabdoid features by using 3D fusion compared to standard methods ( p = 0.04). In conclusion, we propose an easy-to-apply multisite 3D fusion sampling that negates bias due to tumor heterogeneity.

The recent approval of immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI)-based combinations has redefined the first-line standard of care of metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) patients. Although the undisputed advantage of these combinations, most patients progressed, requiring subsequent therapies. The change of first-line therapy inevitably led to modification of the all mRCC treatment algorithm; to date, the most appropriate second-line options remain still unclear. The aim of our review was to provide a useful summary of the available evidence in order to overcome the doubts about treatment sequences. Retrospectively, the efficacy of second-line VEGFR-TKIs seems to be greater after failure of a dual ICIs combination rather than after ICIs plus VEGFR-TKIs, nevertheless prospective data of second-line TKIs are limited. Moreover, ICI re-challenge could be an option but, again, most data derived from retrospective series emphasizing the identification of predictive factors of response to select mRCC patients that could benefit from this strategy. Novel molecules and different ICI-based combinations are under evaluation with the aim of implementing the second-line setting. In particular, belzutifan, ciforadenant (CPI-444), and talazoparib achieved encouraging objective response rates (ORR) in phase I/II trials. Phase III trials comparing these new molecules with the standard of care are currently ongoing. The first-line regimen, and the type and duration of response emerged as crucial factors that could influence the efficacy of second-line therapy. Prognostic models that integrate clinical features and molecular biomarkers with a predictive value are warranted to guide clinicians in the decision-making process with the ultimate goal of offering to the patients the most effective therapy in a personalized, precision medicine-based, therapeutic strategy., (Copyright © 2022 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background/aim: Recent evidence suggests potential synergistic antitumor effects of the combination of programmed death-1 (PD-1)/programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) immune checkpoint inhibitors with the oral hypoglycemic agent metformin. The aim of this study was to investigate the safety and activity of metformin combined with nivolumab in diabetic cancer patients., Patients and Methods: Patients with advanced melanoma, renal cell carcinoma or lung cancer receiving nivolumab with concurrent diabetes treated with metformin were retrospectively collected. The primary endpoint was the safety of nivolumab plus metformin combination., Results: We collected 40 patients with solid tumors who received metformin for concomitant diabetes and nivolumab as anticancer therapy in four Italian Hospitals. The concomitant use of nivolumab and metformin was well tolerated; adverse events (AEs) of any grade occurred in 75% of patients (mainly fatigue, pruritus, rash, and asthenia). Grade 3 AEs occurred only in 20% of cases; no grade 4 AEs were observed. A statistically significant correlation was found between higher doses of metformin (>1,000 mg daily) and longer progression-free survival (p=0.021), overall survival (p=0.037) and higher overall response rate., Conclusion: The combination of nivolumab and metformin was safe and might have an antitumor activity, supporting further investigations on the synergistic antitumor effect of this combination., (Copyright © 2022 International Institute of Anticancer Research (Dr. George J. Delinasios), All rights reserved.)

Background: The addition of neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) and bone metastases to the International Metastatic RCC Database Consortium (IMDC) score (by the Meet-URO score) has been shown to better stratify pretreated metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) patients receiving nivolumab. This study aimed to validate the Meet-URO score in patients receiving cabozantinib to assess its predictivity and prognostic role., Methods: A multicenter retrospective analysis evaluated mRCC patients receiving ⩾second-line cabozantinib. NLR, IMDC score and bone metastases were assessed before the start of cabozantinib. The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS). Harrell's c -index was calculated to compare the accuracy of the prediction of the two scores., Results: Overall, 174 mRCC patients received cabozantinib as second and third line (51.7% and 48.3%, respectively) with a median follow-up of 6.8 months. A shorter median overall survival (mOS) was observed for the IMDC poor-risk group, NLR ⩾3.2 and the presence of bone metastases, while the IMDC intermediate-risk group had a similar mOS to the favourable-risk one. Applying the Meet-URO score, three risk groups were identified: group 1 (55.2% of patients) with a score of 0-3, group 2 (38.5%) with a score of 4-8 and group 3 (6.3%) with a score of 9. Compared to group 1 (mOS: 39.4 months), a statistically significant worse mOS was observed in group 2 (11.2 months) and group 3 (3.2 months) patients, respectively. The Meet-URO c -index score was 0.640, showing a higher discriminative ability than the IMDC score ( c -index: 0.568)., Conclusion: This analysis showed that the Meet-URO score provides a more accurate prognostic stratification than the IMDC score in mRCC patients treated with ⩾second-line cabozantinib besides nivolumab. Moreover, it is an easy-to-use tool with no additional costs for clinical practice (web-calculator is available at: https://proviso.shinyapps.io/Meet-URO15&#95;score/). Future investigations will include the application of the Meet-URO score to the first-line immunotherapy-based combination therapies., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest statement: The authors declared the following potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship and/or publication of this article: S.E.R. received honoraria as speaker at scientific events and advisory role by Bristol-Myers Squibb and Astellas. U.D.G. serves as advisory/board member of Astellas, Bayer, Bristol-Myers Squibb, IPSEN, Janssen, Merck, Pfizer and Sanofi; received research grant/funding to the institution from AstraZeneca, Roche and Sanofi; and received travel/accommodations/expenses from Bristol-Myers Squibb, IPSEN, Janssen and Pfizer. G.P. serves as advisory boards/consulting for Astellas, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Janssen, IPSEN, Merk, MSD, Novartis and Pfizer. G.L.B. reports personal fees from AstraZeneca, Janssen-Cilag, Boehringer Ingelheim and Roche and non-financial support from Bristol-Myers Squibb, AstraZeneca, MedImmune, Pierre Fabre and IPSEN, outside the submitted work. S.B. received honoraria as speaker at scientific events and advisory role by BMS, Pfizer, MSD, Ipsen, Roche, Eli Lilly, AstraZeneca, Pierre Fabre and Novartis. G.F. serves as advisory boards for Astellas, Janssen, Pfizer, Bayer, MSD and Merck and received travel accommodation from Astellas, Janssen and Bayer. The other authors have no conflicts of interest to disclose., (© The Author(s), 2022.)

Background: Outcomes of castration-sensitive prostate cancer (CSPC) have improved owing to new therapies and early treatment, previously reserved for castration-resistant disease (CRPC). Prostatic-specific antigen (PSA) remains the most used marker to follow-up patients under treatment, but only limited data are available about the prognostic role of its changes over time and the impact of response to subsequent therapies. This analysis aims to assess the prognostic role of the magnitude and velocity of PSA response in CSPC and describe how this may affect the outcome to subsequent treatment outcomes in CRPC., Patients and Methods: A retrospective analysis was performed on patients with de novo CSPC referring to six oncology centers in Italy. Clinical and pathological features were recorded. PSA response (PSA50), defined as a decrease > 50% compared to baseline, PSA velocity (PSAv), defined as any decrease in PSA levels over time and the deep and fast PSA response (4mPSA50), defined as the PSA response reached within the threshold of 4 months from the beginning of androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) have been evaluated for their impact on survival. Survivals were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method and compared across groups using the log-rank test. Cox proportional-hazard models, stratified according to baseline characteristics, were used to estimate hazard ratios for overall survival (OS)., Results: A totals of 94.4% of patients had PSA50, which was correlated to longer OS compared to patients without PSA50 (56.0 vs. 14.8 months; p<0.001). The median PSAv was 6.9 (ng/dl)/month, which was predictive for longer OS: Each decrease of 1 (ng/dl)/month was able to improve OS by 0.2% (HR=0.998, 95%CI=0.997-1.000; p=0.008). A total of 47.9% of patients reached 4mPSA50, with a median OS and progression-free survival (PFS) to ADT-based therapy of 101.0 and 23.4 months compared to 41.9 and 11.0 months for those who did not (p<0.001), respectively. The independent prognostic role of 4mPSA50 was retained even when evaluated in multivariable analysis adjusted for other baseline characteristics and early docetaxel for CSPC. In CRPC, 4mPSA50 evaluated during CSPC retains its prognostic role even if it does not predict a different outcome between patients treated with abiraterone/enzalutamide or taxanes., Conclusion: Achieving a deep and fast PSA response correlates with a better outcome in patients with de novo mCSPC, also positively influencing the prognosis of the subsequent first-line therapy for CRPC disease., (Copyright © 2022 International Institute of Anticancer Research (Dr. George J. Delinasios), All rights reserved.)

Background: Preclinical data suggest that concurrent treatment of anti-CD38 and antiprogrammed death 1 (PD-1)/programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) antibodies substantially reduce primary tumor growth by reversing T-cell exhaustion and thus enhancing anti-PD-1/PD-L1 efficacy., Methods: This phase I/II study enrolled patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) or advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). The primary objectives of phase I were to investigate the safety and tolerability of isatuximab (anti-CD38 monoclonal antibody)+cemiplimab (anti-PD-1 monoclonal antibody, Isa+Cemi) in patients with mCRPC (naïve to anti-PD-1/PD-L1 therapy) or NSCLC (progressed on anti-PD-1/PD-L1-containing therapy). Phase II used Simon's two-stage design with response rate as the primary endpoint. An interim analysis was planned after the first 24 (mCRPC) and 20 (NSCLC) patients receiving Isa+Cemi were enrolled in phase II. Safety, immunogenicity, pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, and antitumor activity were assessed, including CD38, PD-L1, and tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes in the tumor microenvironment (TME), and peripheral immune cell phenotyping., Results: Isa+Cemi demonstrated a manageable safety profile with no new safety signals. All patients experienced ≥1 treatment-emergent adverse event. Grade≥3 events occurred in 13 (54.2%) patients with mCRPC and 12 (60.0%) patients with NSCLC. Based on PCWG3 criteria, assessment of best overall response with Isa+Cemi in mCRPC revealed no complete responses (CRs), one (4.2%) unconfirmed partial response (PR), and five (20.8%) patients with stable disease (SD). Per RECIST V.1.1, patients with NSCLC receiving Isa+Cemi achieved no CR or PR, and 13 (65%) achieved SD. In post-therapy biopsies obtained from patients with mCRPC or NSCLC, Isa+Cemi treatment resulted in a reduction in median CD38+ tumor-infiltrating immune cells from 40% to 3%, with no consistent modulation of PD-L1 on tumor cells or T regulatory cells in the TME. The combination triggered a significant increase in peripheral activated and cytolytic T cells but, interestingly, decreased natural killer cells., Conclusions: The present study suggests that CD38 and PD-1 modulation by Isa+Cemi has a manageable safety profile, reduces CD38+ immune cells in the TME, and activates peripheral T cells; however, such CD38 inhibition was not associated with significant antitumor activity. A lack of efficacy was observed in these small cohorts of patients with mCRPC or NSCLC., Trial Registration Numbers: NCT03367819., Competing Interests: Competing interests: PAZ: Pfizer, Novartis, Sanofi, BMS, MSD, Roche, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Astellas, Janssen, Ipsen, and Bayer. C-CL: Abbvie, BeiGene, Blueprint Medicines, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Daiichi Sankyo, Eli Lilly, Novartis, PharmaEngine, and Roche. BCC, MT, W-CS, GD, MS, AG, SP, Y-CS, MP: nothing to disclose. TMB: AstraZeneca, Lilly, Bristol Myers Squibb, Foundation Medicine, Pfizer, Loxo, Bayer, Guardant Health, Exelixis, Blueprint Medicines, and Sanofi. AI: Epizyme, Lilly, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Novartis, Pharmamar, Roche, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Bristol Myers Squibb, Chugai, Pfizer. RI: Ipsen, Pfizer, Janssen, Sanofi, Merck, Astellas, and MSD. CM: Amgen, Astellas, AstraZeneca, Bayer, BeiGene, BMS, Celgene, Debiopharm, Genentech, Ipsen, Janssen, Lilly, MedImmune, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Sanofi, and Orion. MG: Bristol Myers Squibb, Merck, Eli Lilly, Esanex, Foundation Medicine, AstraZeneca, and Guardant 360. RM, GA, HL, YD, MC, RW, and LLo are employed by Sanofi and may hold stock and/or stock options in the company. LLe is employed by Excelya on behalf of Sanofi and may hold stock and/or stock options in the company. JdB: AstraZeneca, GlaxoSmithKline, Pfizer, Taiho, Daiichi Sankyo, Bayer, Orion Pharma, Roche/Genentech, Merck Serono, Sierra Oncology, MSD, Terumo, Menarini/Silicon Biosystems, Astellas, BioexcelTherapeutics, Cellcentric, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Qiagen, Sanofi Aventis, and Vertex Pharmaceuticals., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Aims: According to The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA), around 9% of bladder carcinomas usually show abnormalities of the murine double minute 2 (MDM2) gene, but a few studies have been investigated them. We profiled MDM2 gene amplification in a series of urothelial carcinomas (UC) considering the molecular subtypes and expression of programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1)., Methods: 117 patients with muscle-invasive UC (pT2-3) without (N0) or with (N+) lymph-node metastases were revised. Only cases with availability of in toto specimens and follow-up were studied. Tissue microarray was built. p53, ER, RB1, GATA-3, CK20, CK5/6, CD44 and PD-L1 (clone sp263) immunoexpression was evaluated. Fluorescent in situ hybridisation was assessed by using the HER-2/neu, FGFR-3, CDKN2A and MDM2 probes. True (ratio 12q/CEP12 >2) MDM2 gene amplification was distinguished from polyploidy/gains (ratio <2, absolute copy number of MDM-2 >2). MDM2 and PD-L1 values were correlated to the TCGA molecular phenotypes. Statistical analysis was performed., Results: 6/50 (12%) cases (5 N0 and 1 N+) were amplified for MDM2 without matching to molecular phenotypes. Of 50, 14 (37%) cases expressed PD-L1 at 1% cut-off; 3/50 (9%) at >50% cut-off; of these, 2 cases on side of neoplasia among inflammatory cells. Only one out of six (17%) cases amplified for MDM2 showed expression (>50% cut-off) of PD-L1. MDM2 amplification was independent to all documented profiles (k test=0.3) and was prevalent in recurrent UC., Conclusion: MDM2 amplification has been seen in both PD-L1 positive and negative muscle-invasive bladder UC independently from the TCGA molecular phenotypes. MDM2 and PD-L1 might be assessed in order to predict a better response to combo/single targeted therapies., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Background: Non-clear cell (ncc) metastatic renal-cell carcinoma (RCC) has dismal results with standard systemic therapies and a generally worse prognosis when compared to its clear-cell counterpart. New systemic combination therapies have emerged for metastatic RCC (mRCC), but the pivotal phase III trials excluded patients with nccRCC, which constitute about 30% of metastatic RCC cases., Aim: To provide a piece of real-life evidence on the use of pazopanib in this patient subgroup., Methods: The present study is a multicenter retrospective observational analysis aiming to assess the activity, efficacy, and safety of pazopanib as first-line therapy for advanced nccRCC patients treated in a real-life setting., Results: Overall, 48 patients were included. At the median follow-up of 40.6 mo, the objective response rate was 27.1%, the disease control rate was 83.3%, and the median progression-free survival and overall survival were 12.3 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 3.6-20.9) and 27.7 (95%CI: 18.2-37.1) mo, respectively. Grade 3 adverse events occurred in 20% of patients, and no grade 4 or 5 toxicities were found., Conclusion: Pazopanib should be considered as a good first-line option for metastatic RCC with variant histology., Competing Interests: Conflict-of-interest statement: Melissa Bersanelli received honoraria as a speaker at scientific events by Bristol-Myers Squibb (BMS), Novartis, Astra Zeneca, Pierre Fabre, and Pfizer and as a consultant for advisory role by Novartis, BMS, IPSEN, and Pfizer; she also received fees for copyright transfer by Sciclone Pharmaceuticals and research funding by Roche S.p.A., Seqirus UK, Pfizer, Novartis, BMS, Astra Zeneca, and Sanofi Genzyme. Sebastiano Buti received honoraria as a speaker at scientific events and advisory role by Bristol-Myers Squibb (BMS), Pfizer; MSD, Ipsen, Roche, Eli-Lilly, AstraZeneca, and Novartis; he also received research funding from Novartis. Orazio Caffo received honoraria as a speaker by Astellas, Bayer, Astra Zeneca, Janssen, Pfizer, Sanofi, and a consultant for advisory role by Astellas, Janssen, MSD. Camillo Porta received honoraria a Consultant or Speaker for Angelini, Astra Zeneca, BMS, Eisai, EUSA, General Electric, Ipsen, Janssen, Merck, MSD, Novartis and Pfizer, acted as an Expert Testimony for EUSA and Pfizer and was a Protocol Steering Committee Member ofr BMS, Eisai, and EUSA. Finally, he did receive travel support from Roche. All other authors have no conflict of interest to declare., (©The Author(s) 2021. Published by Baishideng Publishing Group Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Prostate cancer (PC) is a heterogeneous disease that requires a personalized treatment approach for proper patient management., Aim: We analyzed a selected overview of the most important news recently presented at the 2021 ASCO genitourinary cancer symposium., Results: In particular, we focused on the identification of predictive biomarkers as potential targets for therapy. Molecular signatures of increased T cell activity, proliferation, and hormone dependence were associated with greater probability of response to apalutamide in non-metastatic CRPC. Pathogenic variants of DDR genes mutations detected with circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) analysis, which had a high concordance with tumor tissue analysis, might represent a useful way for selecting mutated patients for poly (adenosine diphosphate [ADP]-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors therapy. Loss of PTEN could be a target for ipatasertib (a pan-AKT inhibitor) associated with abiraterone in mCRPC patients., Conclusions: The 2021 ASCO Genitourinary Cancers Symposium significantly contributed to the complex research goal of intimately understanding PC carcinogenesis with the ultimate aim of improving patient outcomes.

Background: The 2021 American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) Genitourinary Cancers Symposium represents an unmissable event for oncologists who deal with renal cell carcinoma (RCC)., Aim and Results: This article describes the main acquisitions of RCC management, including the advent of a new combo (pembrolizumab+lenvatinib) as first-line therapy, the confirmation of an OS advantage of ICI plus VEGFR-TKI combinations over sunitinib at longer follow-up, the persistent benefit from these combinations in particular subgroups (clear cell mRCC tumors with sarcomatoid differentiation), and possible new approaches in subsequent lines of therapy (including the HIF-2α inhibitor belzutifan)., Conclusions: This 2021 ASCO Genitourinary Cancer Symposium laid the foundations for further knowledge development necessary for an increasingly personalized management of mRCC.

Background: Combinations of PD-1/PD-L1 immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) with VEGFR-TKIs as first-line therapy significantly improve outcomes of metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) patients. The benefit of these combinations is well evident in the IMDC intermediate- and poor-risk population, but remains unclear in the subgroup of patients with favorable prognosis. Our meta-analysis aims at evaluating whether the addition of ICIs to VEGFR-TKIs is able to improve the outcome compared to VEGFR-TKIs alone in mRCC patients with favorable prognosis., Methods: This meta-analysis searched MEDLINE/PubMed, the Cochrane Library and ASCO Meeting abstracts for randomized clinical trials (RCTs) testing the combination of VEGFR-TKI + ICI in mRCC. Data extraction was conducted according to the PRISMA statement. Summary hazard ratio (HR) was calculated using random- or fixed-effects models, depending on studies heterogeneity., Results: Four RCTs were selected. VEGFR-TKI + ICI combinations improved PFS compared to sunitinib (fixed-effect, HR = 0.63; p < 0.00001). However, VEGFR-TKI + ICI combinations did not significantly prolong OS (fixed-effect; HR = 0.99; 95% CI 0.74-1.33; p = 0.95)., Conclusion: VEGFR-TKI + ICI combinations improved PFS but not OS as first-line therapy for mRCC patients with favorable IMDC prognosis. Longer follow-up and further studies will increase the power of our analysis, suggesting the best first-line therapy for mRCC patients with favorable prognosis., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: There is growing evidence that a high neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) is associated with poor overall survival (OS) for patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). In the CARD study (NCT02485691), cabazitaxel significantly improved radiographic progression-free survival (rPFS) and OS versus abiraterone or enzalutamide in patients with mCRPC previously treated with docetaxel and the alternative androgen-receptor-targeted agent (ARTA). Here, we investigated NLR as a biomarker., Patients and Methods: CARD was a multicenter, open-label study that randomized patients with mCRPC to receive cabazitaxel (25 mg/m 2 every 3 weeks) versus abiraterone (1000 mg/day) or enzalutamide (160 mg/day). The relationships between baseline NLR [< versus ≥ median (3.38)] and rPFS, OS, time to prostate-specific antigen progression, and prostate-specific antigen response to cabazitaxel versus ARTA were evaluated using Kaplan-Meier estimates. Multivariable Cox regression with stepwise selection of covariates was used to investigate the prognostic association between baseline NLR and OS., Results: The rPFS benefit with cabazitaxel versus ARTA was particularly marked in patients with high NLR {8.5 versus 2.8 months, respectively; hazard ratio (HR) 0.43 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.27-0.67]; P < 0.0001}, compared with low NLR [7.5 versus 5.1 months, respectively; HR 0.69 (95% CI 0.45-1.06); P = 0.0860]. Higher NLR (continuous covariate, per 1 unit increase) independently associated with poor OS [HR 1.05 (95% CI 1.02-1.08); P = 0.0003]. For cabazitaxel, there was no OS difference between patients with high versus low NLR (15.3 versus 12.9 months, respectively; P = 0.7465). Patients receiving an ARTA with high NLR, however, had a worse OS versus those with low NLR (9.5 versus 13.3 months, respectively; P = 0.0608)., Conclusions: High baseline NLR predicts poor outcomes with an ARTA in patients with mCRPC previously treated with docetaxel and the alternative ARTA. Conversely, the activity of cabazitaxel is retained irrespective of NLR., Competing Interests: Disclosure RdW provided an advisory role for Sanofi, Janssen, Merck, Bayer, and Astellas, and received institutional grants from Sanofi and Bayer. DC has received personal fees from Pfizer, Roche, Sanofi, Janssen, Astellas, Bayer, Bristol-Myers Squibb (BMS), Merck Sharp & Dohme (MSD), Merck Serono, Pierre Fabre, AstraZeneca, and Lilly. GK received personal fees from Sanofi, Astellas, Takeda, Bayer, Janssen, Novartis, Ipsen, and AstraZeneca, and has received grants from Sanofi and Bayer. J-CE has received honoraria from and provided an advisory role for Astellas, BMS, Ipsen, Janssen, Pfizer, and Sanofi Aventis, and has received travel and accommodation fees from Pfizer and BMS. CNS has received honoraria from Janssen, AstraZeneca, Sanofi and Astellas, received consultancy fees from Sanofi, Bayer, and Pfizer, and received institutional funding from Genentech/Roche, Bayer, Sanofi Genzyme, Janssen, Medivation, MSD, and Exelixis. KF has received honoraria and provided an advisory role for Astellas, AAA Pharmaceutical Inc, Bayer, Essa, Janssen, Orion, CureVac, Clovis, Sanofi, and Endocyte. BT has received personal fees and research grants from Astellas, Janssen, Sanofi Genzyme, Amgen, and Ferring, and received non-financial support from Sanofi Genzyme. AB has received honoraria and research support from and provided an advisory role to Astellas, Janssen, and Sanofi. JC has provided an advisory role for Astellas, AstraZeneca, Bayer, BMS, MSD Oncology, Johnson & Johnson, Sanofi, Roche, and Pfizer, and has attended speaker bureaus for Asofarma, Astellas, Bayer, and Johnson & Johnson. RI received honoraria and provided an advisory role for Sanofi, Janssen, Pfizer, Ipsen, Novartis, BMS, and MSD. BM received travel fees, honoraria, and provided an advisory role for BMS and Merck Serono, and received honoraria and provided an advisory role for MSD, Sanofi, Roche, Janssen, Bayer, Astellas, Amgen, Novartis, Servier, AstraZeneca, Eisai, E. Lilly, Ipsen, Pierre Fabre, and Pfizer. CH has received consultancy fees from Sanofi, Janssen, and Astellas. MCF and CG-R are employees of Sanofi. AO is an employee and stockholder of Sanofi. JdB has received honoraria from AstraZeneca, Sanofi, Astellas Pharma, Pfizer, Genentech/Roche, Janssen Oncology, Menarini Silicon Biosystems, Daiichi Sankyo, Sierra Oncology, and BioXcel Therapeutics, and provided an advisory role for AstraZeneca, Sanofi, Genentech/Roche, Astellas Pharma, Bayer, Pfizer, MSD, Merck Serono, Boehringer Ingelheim, Sierra Oncology, Menarini Silicon Biosystems, Celgene, Taiho Pharmaceutical, Daiichi Sankyo, Janssen Oncology, Genmab, GlaxoSmithKline, Orion Pharma GmbH, Eisai, and BioXcel Therapeutics. All other authors have declared no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2021 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Background: In the CARD study (NCT02485691), cabazitaxel significantly improved median radiographic progression-free survival (rPFS) and overall survival (OS) versus abiraterone/enzalutamide in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) who had previously received docetaxel and progressed ≤12 mo on the alternative agent (abiraterone/enzalutamide)., Objective: To assess cabazitaxel versus abiraterone/enzalutamide in older (≥70 yr) and younger (<70 yr) patients in CARD., Design, Setting, and Participants: Patients with mCRPC were randomized 1:1 to cabazitaxel (25 mg/m 2 plus prednisone and granulocyte colony-stimulating factor) versus abiraterone (1000 mg plus prednisone) or enzalutamide (160 mg)., Outcome Measurements and Statistical Analysis: Analyses of rPFS (primary endpoint) and safety by age were prespecified; others were post hoc. Treatment groups were compared using stratified log-rank or Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel tests., Results and Limitations: Of the 255 patients randomized, 135 were aged ≥70 yr (median 76 yr). Cabazitaxel, compared with abiraterone/enzalutamide, significantly improved median rPFS in older (8.2 vs 4.5 mo; hazard ratio [HR] = 0.58; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.38-0.89; p = 0.012) and younger (7.4 vs 3.2 mo; HR = 0.47; 95% CI = 0.30-0.74; p < 0.001) patients. The median OS of cabazitaxel versus abiraterone/enzalutamide was 13.9 versus 9.4 mo in older patients (HR = 0.66; 95% CI = 0.41-1.06; p = 0.084), and it was 13.6 versus 11.8 mo in younger patients (HR = 0.66; 95% CI = 0.41-1.08; p = 0.093). Progression-free survival, prostate-specific antigen, and tumor and pain responses favored cabazitaxel, regardless of age. Grade ≥3 treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) occurred in 58% versus 49% of older patients receiving cabazitaxel versus abiraterone/enzalutamide and 48% versus 42% of younger patients. In older patients, cardiac adverse events were more frequent with abiraterone/enzalutamide; asthenia and diarrhea were more frequent with cabazitaxel., Conclusions: Cabazitaxel improved efficacy outcomes versus abiraterone/enzalutamide in patients with mCRPC after prior docetaxel and abiraterone/enzalutamide, regardless of age. TEAEs were more frequent among older patients. The cabazitaxel safety profile was manageable across age groups., Patient Summary: Clinical trial data showed that cabazitaxel improved survival versus abiraterone/enzalutamide with manageable side effects in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer who had previously received docetaxel and the alternative agent (abiraterone/enzalutamide), irrespective of age., (Copyright © 2021. Published by Elsevier B.V.)

Background: Renal cell carcinoma with sarcomatoid differentiation is a highly aggressive form of kidney cancer., Objective: We aimed to analyze the outcomes of patients treated with cabozantinib for metastatic renal cell carcinoma with sarcomatoid features., Methods: We retrospectively collected data from 16 worldwide centers. Overall survival and progression-free survival were analyzed using Kaplan-Meier curves. Cox proportional models were used for univariate and multivariate analyses., Results: We collected data from 66 patients with metastatic sarcomatoid renal cell carcinoma receiving cabozantinib as second-line (51%) or third-line (49%) therapy. The median progression-free survival from the start of cabozantinib was 7.59 months (95% confidence interval [CI] 5.75-17.49) and was longer in male patients (8.81 vs 5.95 months, p = 0.042) and in patients without bone metastases (7.59 vs 5.11 months, p = 0.010); the median overall survival was 9.11 months (95% CI 7.13-23.80). At the multivariate analysis, female sex (hazard ratio = 1.81; 95% CI 1.02-3.37, p = 0.046), bone metastases (hazard ratio = 2.62; 95% CI 1.34-5.10, p = 0.005), and International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium criteria (hazard ratio = 3.04; 95% CI 1.54-5.99, p = 0.001) were significant predictors of worse overall survival., Conclusions: Our data show that cabozantinib is active in pretreated patients with sarcomatoid renal cell carcinoma. Biomarkers are needed in this field to select patients for multi-kinase inhibitors or other options., (© 2021. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature Switzerland AG.)

Introduction: Altered receptor tyrosine kinase (RTK) signaling contributes to tumorigenesis and suppression of immune-mediated destruction of cancer cells. Cabozantinib is an oral tyrosine kinase inhibitor that inhibits several RTKs involved in tumorigenesis, and is approved for the treatment of patients with progressive metastatic medullary thyroid cancer, advanced renal cell carcinoma, and hepatocellular carcinoma that has been previously treated with sorafenib., Areas Covered: We present an up-to-date evaluation of preclinical evidence for RTK inhibition with cabozantinib, specifically VEGFR, MET, KIT, RET, AXL, FLT3, and associated antitumor effects. Preclinical investigations of cabozantinib in combination with other anticancer drugs are also reviewed., Expert Opinion: Preclinical evidence shows that cabozantinib has antitumor activity against various cancer cells and exhibits synergy with other anticancer agents, including immune checkpoint inhibitors and hormone receptor or metabolic pathway inhibitors. Further optimization of cabozantinib treatment requires the identification of biomarkers of response and resistance, and exploration of complementary drug targets. Investigation of mechanisms of adaptive resistance, such as epithelial to mesenchymal transition (cancer intrinsic) and immunomodulation by the tumor microenvironment (cancer extrinsic), as well as identification of novel drug targets based on characterization of cancer stem cell metabolomic phenotypes, appear to be promising approaches.

Background: Pre-clinical data suggest that docetaxel and enzalutamide interfere with androgen receptor translocation and signalling. The aim of this study is to assess the efficacy of their concurrent administration in the first-line treatment for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC)., Methods: In this open-label, randomised, phase II trial, previously untreated mCRPC patients were randomised 1:1 to receive eight 21-d courses of docetaxel 75 mg/m 2 , oral prednisone 5 mg twice daily and oral enzalutamide 160 mg/d (arm DE), or the same treatment without enzalutamide (arm D). The primary end-point was the percentage of patients without investigator-assessed disease progression 6 months after the first docetaxel administration., Results: The 246 eligible patients were randomly assigned to receive docetaxel, prednisone and enzalutamide (n = 120) or docetaxel and prednisone (n = 126). The 6-month progression rate was 12.5% (95% confidence interval [CI] 8.1-20.6) in arm DE and 27.8% (95% CI 22.8-39.4) in arm D (chi-squared test 10.01; P = 0.002). The most frequent grade III-IV adverse events were fatigue (12.5% in arm DE versus 5.6% in arm D), febrile neutropenia (9.3% versus 4.0%) and neutropenia (7.6% versus 5.6%)., Conclusions: The combination of enzalutamide and docetaxel appears to be more clinically beneficial than docetaxel alone in previously untreated mCRPC patients, although serious adverse events were more frequent. Our findings suggest that first-line treatment with this combination could lead to an additional clinical benefit when prompt and prolonged disease control is simultaneously required. Clearly, these results should be considered cautiously because of the study's phase II design and the absence of an overall survival benefit., Trial Registration Numbers: EudraCT 2014-000175-43 - NCT02453009., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest statement The authors declare the following financial interests/personal relationships which may be considered as potential competing interests: Orazio Caffo is an advisor to Janssen, MSD and Bayer, and a speaker for Astellas, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Janssen, MSD, Pfizer and Sanofi. Cinzia Ortega is an advisor to Janssen, Astellas, Pfizer, Novartis and MSD, and a speaker for MSD, BMS and Sanofi. Donatello Gasparro is a speaker for and an advisor to Sanofi and Astellas. Vittorina Zagonel is an advisor to Bristol-Myers Squibb, MSD, Eisai and Italfarmaco, and a speaker for Roche, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Astellas Pharma, Servier, AstraZeneca, MSD, Janssen and Ipsen. Roberto Iacovelli is an advisor to Pfizer, Ipsen, Janssen, Astellas, MSD and BMS. Ugo De Giorgi is a consultant of Astellas Pharma, Bayer, BMS, Ipsen, Janssen, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche and Sanofi. Elena Verri is an advisor to Astellas, Bayer, Janssen and Sanofi. Sebastiano Buti is a speaker for and advisor to BMS, Pfizer, Pierre-Fabre, MSD, Ipsen, Roche, Eli-Lilly, AstraZeneca and Novartis. Marco Maruzzo is an advisor to Pfizer, BMS, Janssen, MSD, Merck Serono and Ipsen. Giovanni Pappagallo is a counsellor and trainer for Astellas, AstraZeneca, Daiichi-Sankyo, Ipsen, Janssen, MSD, Pierre Fabre, Pfizer, Roche, Servier and Teva. Massimo Aglietta is an advisor to Bayer, BMS, Merck and Novartis, and has received travel support from BMS, Merck and Tesaro. Maurizio Nicodemo is a speaker for and an advisor to Bristol-Myers Squibb, Ipsen, Molteni and Janssen. Roberto Sabbatini is an advisor to Janssen, and a speaker for Astellas, Janssen and Sanofi. Franco Morelli is a speaker for MSD and Pfizer. Francesco Carrozza is a speaker for Janssen. Camillo Porta is a consultant of and speaker for Angelini, AstraZeneca, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Eisai, EUSA, General Electric, Ipsen, Merck, MSD, Novartis and Pfizer; an expert witness for EUSA and Pfizer; a member of the Protocol Steering Committee of Bristol-Myers Squibb, Eisai and EUSA and has received travel support from Roche. The remaining authors have no conflict of interest to be declared, (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Nonribosomal peptide synthetases (NRPS) are large multimodular enzymes that synthesize a diverse variety of peptides. Many of these are currently used as pharmaceuticals, thanks to their activity as antimicrobials (penicillin, vancomycin, daptomycin, echinocandin), immunosuppressant (cyclosporin) and anticancer compounds (bleomycin). Because of their biotechnological potential, NRPSs have been extensively studied in the past decades. In this review, we provide an overview of the main structural and functional features of these enzymes, and we consider the challenges and prospects of engineering NRPSs for the synthesis of novel compounds. Furthermore, we discuss secondary metabolism and NRP synthesis in the filamentous fungus Penicillium rubens and examine its potential for the production of novel and modified β-lactam antibiotics., (© The Author(s) 2021. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of Society of Industrial Microbiology and Biotechnology.)

Currently, conventional treatments for metastatic RCC (mRCC) include immune-based combination regimens and/or targeted therapies, the latter mainly acting on angiogenesis, a key element of the process of tumor growth and spread. Although these agents proved able to improve patients' outcomes, drug resistance and disease progression are still experienced by a substantial number of VEGFR-TKIs-treated mRCC patients. Following the inhibition of the VEGF/VEGFRs axis, two strategies have emerged: either specifically targeting resistance pathways, at the same time continuing to inhibit angiogenesis, or using a completely different approach aimed at re-activating the immune system through the use of inhibitors of specific negative immune checkpoints. These two approaches, practically represented by the use of either cabozantinib or nivolumab, seem to remain a rational therapeutic approach also when first-line immune-based combinations are used. The objective of this study is to design a preferential therapeutic pathway for the second-line treatment of mRCC. The procedure applied in this project was a group discussion, based on the Nominal Group Technique (NGT) method in a meeting session, aimed at defining the therapeutic choice for the second-line treatment of mRCC. The NGT process defined the most relevant parameters that, according to the interviewed panelists, clinicians should consider for the selection of the second-line therapy in the context of advanced renal cell carcinoma of mRCC. The algorithm developed for the treatment selection as a result of this process should thus be considered by clinicians as reference for therapy selection., Plain Language Summary: The result of this paper was the definition of an algorithm intended to suggest a preferential therapeutic pathway considering both the outputs of the Nominal Group Technique (NGT) process and the actual clinical practice and the experience of selected panelists. During the NGT process and the discussion phase, panelists defined the most important parameters to be included in the algorithm that are important for the treatment definition. Cabozantinib and nivolumab are identified as the most reasonable therapeutic options for patients progressing after first-line treatment and are the medication options included in the algorithm for therapy selection., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest statement: - Valentina Guadalupi in the last two years has had financial or working relationships with Janssen - Giacomo Cartenì works as responsible for research and development at Kerubin Digital Therapeutic - Roberto Iacovelli acted as a Consultant and/or a Speaker for Pfizer, Ipsen, MSD, Sanofi, Janssen - Camillo Porta acted as a Consultant and/or a Speaker for Ipsen, BMS, MSD, Astra Zeneca, Pfizer, Eisai, EUSA and General Electrics; he acted also as an Expert Testimony for both Pfizer and EUSA and is a protocol steering committee member for BMS, EUSA and Eisai - Giovanni Pappagallo acted as a Consultant and/or Speaker (training or advisory board or clinical epidemiological evaluations) for Astellas, AstraZeneca, Clovis, Ipsen, Janssen, MSD. Pierre Fabre, Pfizer, Roche, Sanofi, Servier, Teva - Riccardo Ricotta acted as a Consultant and/or a Speaker for BMS, Ipsen, Janssen, MSD, Pfizer, Sanofi-Genzyme - Giuseppe Procopio acted as a Consultant and/or a Speaker for Bayer, BMS, Novartis, Amgen, Pfizer, Janssen, Ipsen, Boehringer, (© The Author(s), 2021.)

Background: The aim of our study was to analyze adverse events (AEs) associated with radium-223 using real life data from Eudra-Vigilance (EV) database., Methods: EV database is the system for managing and analyzing information on suspected adverse reactions to medicines which have been authorized or being studied in clinical trials in the European economic area (EEA). We recorded number of AEs for radium-223 per category and severity from 2013 to May 2019. We recorded AEs per age group (<65 years old; between 65 and 85 years; >85 years old) pooled relative risk (PRR) were used to compare groups. The number of individual cases identified in EV database was 4339., Results: According to the registry study the most frequent AEs in patients treated with radium-223 were hematological, general and gastrointestinal disorders and they were confirmed as the most frequent AEs in the EV database. In the EV database over 90% of the reported AEs were defined as serious and 8% were fatal. Older patients (>85 years) treated with radium-223 were at increased risk of cardiac, infectious, and metabolism disorders when compared to younger patients (<65). However, we have no information on the number of patients under treatment in the EV database., Conclusions: EV database highlights several AEs which are not reported in registry studies as well as different AEs profiles according to age. Clinicians should consider these data when treating patients with radium-223.

Background: Despite the survival advantage, not all metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) patients achieve a long-term benefit from immunotherapy. Moreover, the identification of prognostic biomarkers is still an unmet clinical need., Methods: This multicenter retrospective study investigated the prognostic role of peripheral-blood inflammatory indices and clinical factors to develop a novel prognostic score in mRCC patients receiving at least second-line nivolumab. The complete blood count before the first cycle of therapy was assessed by calculating neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR), derived NLR (dNLR), lymphocyte-to-monocyte ratio (LMR), platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio (PLR), systemic inflammation index (SII), and systemic inflammation response index (SIRI). Clinical factors included pre-treatment International Metastatic RCC Database Consortium (IMDC) score, line of therapy, and metastatic sites., Results: From October 2015 to November 2019, 571 mRCC patients received nivolumab as second- and further-line treatment in 69% and 31% of cases. In univariable and multivariable analyses all inflammatory indices, IMDC score, and bone metastases significantly correlated with overall survival (OS). The multivariable model with NLR, IMDC score, and bone metastases had the highest c-index (0.697) and was chosen for the developing of the score (Schneeweiss scoring system). After internal validation (bootstrap re-sampling), the final index (Meet-URO score) composed by NLR, IMDC score, and bone metastases had a c-index of 0.691. It identified five categories with distinctive OSs: group 1 (median OS - mOS = not reached), group 2 (mOS = 43.9 months), group 3 (mOS = 22.4 months), group 4 (mOS = 10.3 months), and group 5 (mOS = 3.2 months). Moreover, the Meet-URO score allowed for a fine risk-stratification across all three IMDC groups., Conclusion: The Meet-URO score allowed for the accurate stratification of pretreated mRCC patients receiving nivolumab and is easily applicable for clinical practice at no additional cost. Future steps include its external validation, the assessment of its predictivity, and its application to first-line combinations., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest statement: Dr Fornarini services advisory boards for Astellas, Janssen, Pfizer, Bayer, MSD, and Merck, and received travel accommodation from Astellas, Janssen, and Bayer. Dr Buti received honoraria as a speaker at scientific events and in an advisory role by BMS, Pfizer; MSD, Ipsen, Roche, Eli Lilly, AstraZeneca, Pierre-Fabre, Novartis. Dr Banna reports personal fees from AstraZeneca, Janssen-Cilag, Boehringer Ingelheim, Roche, and non-financial support from Bristol-Myers Squibb, AstraZeneca, MedImmune, Pierre Fabre, IPSEN, outside the submitted work. Dr De Giorgi services as an advisory/board member of Astellas, Bayer, Bristol-Myers Squibb, IPSEN, Janssen, Merck, Pfizer, and Sanofi, received research grant/funding to the institution from AstraZeneca, Roche, Sanofi, and travel/accommodations/expenses from Bristol-Myers Squibb, IPSEN, Janssen, and Pfizer. Dr Zucali services advisory boards/consulting for Pfizer, Bristol-Myers Squibb, MSD, IPSEN, Novartis, Roche, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Sanofi, Janssen, and Astellas. Dr Masini received personal fees as a speaker from Astellas, as a consultant from IPSEN, MSD, and Janssen, and for travel accommodation from BMS, Pfizer, Astellas, Janssen, and IPSEN. Dr Procopio services advisory boards/consulting for Astellas, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Janssen, IPSEN, Merk, MSD, Novartis, and Pfizer. Dr Cortellini receives speaker fees/grant consultancies from Astrazeneca, BMS, MSD, Roche, Novartis, and Astellas. Dr Morelli received grants from MSD and Pfizer. Dr Bersanelli received research funding to the institution from Roche, Pfizer, Seqirus UK, AstraZeneca, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Novartis, and Sanofi, and received personal fees for advisory role, copyright transfer, consultancies, and as speaker at scientific events from Sciclone Pharmaceuticals, Bristol-Myers Squibb, AstraZeneca, Pierre-Fabre, Novartis, and Pfizer. The other authors have no conflicts of interest to disclose., (© The Author(s), 2021.)

Background: From 10% to 26% of patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) experience rapidly progressive disease (PD) on treatment with sunitinib., Objective: To investigate the benefit of subsequent treatment with another tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) or a mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) inhibitor in such primary refractory patients., Design, Setting, and Participants: A total of 150 mRCC patients with rapidly PD on first-line sunitinib (within two cycles, n=93, or four cycles, n=57) were identified: median age 59yr; nephrectomy 86%; histological subtypes: clear cell (77.8%), papillary (14%), and sarcomatoid features (18%); according to the Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center and French classifications: good risk (11% and 7%, respectively), intermediate (68% and 63%, respectively), and poor (21% and 29%, respectively)., Outcome Measurements and Statistical Analysis: Data were retrospectively collected by a questionnaire from 19 European oncology centers between March 2005 and March 2011. Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were calculated (Kaplan-Meier method)., Results and Limitations: Median OS from the start of first-line treatment was 7.4mo. Second-line treatment was administered to 86 (57%) patients (44 mTOR inhibitors: 23 everolimus and 21 temsirolimus; 39 TKIs alone or in combination; three chemotherapy). Second-line PFS was not significantly different between TKIs and mTOR inhibitors (2.0 vs 0.9mo; p=0.536). Median OS from the start of second-line treatment was 5.0mo for mTOR inhibitors and 6.6mo for TKIs (p=0.15)., Conclusions: Treatment with further TKIs or mTOR inhibitors for mRCC patients primarily refractory to first-line sunitinib in the observed time period achieved very minimal benefit, suggesting avoiding TKI rechallenge and possibly preferring alternative strategies, such as immune checkpoint inhibitors, after PD to a treatment line including a TKI in this setting., Patient Summary: The present work collected data about 150 patients affected by metastatic renal cell carcinoma, who received one of the current standard of care as first-line treatment, namely, the antiangiogenic drug sunitinib, and experienced rapid worsening of the disease. We investigated and described the subsequent outcome of such patients treated with two different types of drug, administered as second-line therapy, to better understand the best strategy to adopt for patients who got no benefit from sunitinib and to describe the current therapeutic approach in such cases., (Copyright © 2019 European Association of Urology. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Understanding the distribution of prostate cancer (PC) at various clinical stages of disease is of utmost importance to quantify the cancer care needs of patients and to adequately plan health services. The aim of this analysis is thus to provide a model-based estimation of the number of prevalent PC patients at different clinical stages in the Italian setting. A simulation model of patient transitions was constructed on a yearly basis using data obtained through a literature review on the incidence, prevalence, progression and mortality of PC, with specific focus on disease stage. A total of 462,570 prevalent PC patients were estimated at 1 January 2019. According to the model, 94.8% of them had non-metastatic PC and 5.2% had metastatic disease. Among the non-metastatic patients, most had T1/T2 PC (85.6%), followed by T3/T4 (10.9%) and T0/Tx PC (3.6%). About 20% of the T3/T4 patients had biochemically recurrent PC. Among the metastatic PC patients, 66.1% had castration-resistant PC and 33.9% had hormone-sensitive PC. This study provided original information on the distribution of PC according to different clinical stages that may be useful to define strategies, understand the PC disease pathway, estimate treatment-related needs and, possibly, plan targeted interventions for public health management of prostate cancer in Italy.

Aims: Bladder EpiCheck is one of several urinary tests studied to identify bladder tumours and analyses 15 methylation biomarkers determining bladder cancer presence on the basis of methylation profile., Methods: 374 patients diagnosed with high-grade non-muscle invasive bladder cancer were treated and followed for 1 year with voided urine cytology and white-light cystoscopy and biopsies according to European Association of Urology Guidelines. 268 cases were diagnosed with high-grade papillary carcinoma, while 106 cases were carcinoma in situ. Bladder EpiCheck test was performed together with cytology in all cases., Results: Comparing cytological categories of negative for high-grade urothelial carcinoma (NHGUC) and atypical urothelial cells (AUCs), we found that an EpiScore <60 correlates with NHGUC (p=0.0003, Fisher's exact test), while comparing AUC and suspicious for high-grade urothelial carcinoma (SHGUC) or SHGUC and high-grade urothelial carcinoma (HGUC) categories, an EpiScore ≥60 correlates with SHGUC and HGUC, respectively (p=0.0031 and p=0.0027, Fisher's exact test). In each TPS category, we found that sensitivity, specificity, Positive Predicitve Value (PPV) and Negative Predictive Value (NPV) of the Bladder EpiCheck test in HGUC category were higher than those observed in SHGUC group (sensitivity=98%, specificity=100%, NPV=85.7%, PPV=100% vs sensitivity=86.6%, specificity=52.3%, NPV=84.6%, PPV=56.5%)., Conclusions: Analysing methylation study results, we demonstrated that different TPS cytological categories also carry a distinct molecular signature. Moreover, our results confirm that cytological categories SHGUC and HGUC are different entities also from a molecular point of view and should continue to represent distinct groups in TPS., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2021. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

The l-δ-(α-aminoadipoyl)-l-cysteinyl-d-valine synthetase (ACVS) is a trimodular nonribosomal peptide synthetase (NRPS) that provides the peptide precursor for the synthesis of β-lactams. The enzyme has been extensively characterized in terms of tripeptide formation and substrate specificity. The first module is highly specific and is the only NRPS unit known to recruit and activate the substrate l-α-aminoadipic acid, which is coupled to the α-amino group of l-cysteine through an unusual peptide bond, involving its δ-carboxyl group. Here we carried out an in-depth investigation on the architecture of the first module of the ACVS enzymes from the fungus Penicillium rubens and the bacterium Nocardia lactamdurans. Bioinformatic analyses revealed the presence of a previously unidentified domain at the N-terminus which is structurally related to condensation domains, but smaller in size. Deletion variants of both enzymes were generated to investigate the potential impact on penicillin biosynthesis in vivo and in vitro. The data indicate that the N-terminal domain is important for catalysis., (© 2021 The Authors. MicrobiologyOpen published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background: Cancer-related pain, usually associated with bone metastases, is a frequent and debilitating morbidity in patients with prostate cancer. To date there are only limited data regarding the prognostic role of pain in men with metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer (mCSPC). The objective of our analysis was to assess if the presence of pain can be considered an independent prognostic factor in mCSPC patients., Methods: A retrospective analysis was performed on patients with mCSPC referring to six oncology centers in Italy. Clinical and pathological features were recorded. Patients were considered to have pain if this was reported within the patient's file or in case of a chronic analgesic therapy was found among the concomitant medications. Survivals were estimated by the Kaplan-Meier method, and compared across groups using the log-rank test. Cox proportional hazard models, stratified according to the baseline characteristics, were used to estimate hazard ratios for overall survival (OS). All the variables were significant if p < 0.05., Results: Data about pain were available for 365 cases and pain was present in 34.8% of patients. Pain was mainly associated with high value of prostate-specific antigen, metastatic bone extension regardless of the site, and lymph node involvement. mCSPC patients with pain had in most of the cases high-volume or Hr disease, and significant shorter OS (27.0 vs. 58.2 months, p < 0.001) and PFS (10.1 vs. 17.4 months, p < 0.001) compared to those without pain. The negative impact of pain on OS remained significant even if adjusted for CHAARTED or LATITUDE classification, and other significant baseline prognostic factors., Conclusions: This analysis supports the poor prognostic role of cancer-related pain in the setting of mCSPC patients. A prospective validation is required.

Background: Immunotherapy has brought clinical benefits to patients with metastatic renal cell cancer (mRCC). Most patients tolerate immunotherapy but serious immune-related adverse events (irAEs) have been reported. Some studies indicate a correlation between irAEs and clinical response in other cancer types (eg, lung cancer and melanoma). For patients with mRCC, the impact of irAE on clinical outcome is unknown., Patients and Methods: A retrospective review of 167 patients with mRCC treated with nivolumab as standard of care between March 2017 and January 2018 in 16 Italian centers was performed. irAEs were assessed using Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) v.4.0., Results: Any grade and grade 3/4 irAEs occurred in 46% and 8.9% of patients, respectively. The median time to appearance of irAEs was 10 weeks; 38.8% of patients required steroid treatment. The most common irAEs were cutaneous (33.7%) and gastrointestinal (23.3%). The median overall survival and progression-free survival were 20.13 and 7.86 months, respectively. Patients with irAEs showed a greater overall survival (hazard ratio, 0.38; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.23-0.63) and progression-free survival (hazard ratio, 0.44; 95% CI, 0.29-0.66) benefit as well as better overall response rate (27.3% vs. 13.7%; odds ratio, 2.36; 95% CI, 1.03-5.44) and disease control rate (68.8% vs. 48%; odds ratio, 2.4; 95% CI, 1.23-4.67) if compared with those without irAEs. No correlation was found between steroid use and clinical outcomes., Conclusions: Our analysis revealed that the appearance of irAEs was associated with better outcomes in patients treated with nivolumab. This data may be limited by sample size and the retrospective nature of the study., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: In the CARD study, cabazitaxel significantly improved radiographic progression-free survival and overall survival versus abiraterone or enzalutamide in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer previously treated with docetaxel and the alternative androgen signalling-targeted inhibitor. Here, we report the quality-of-life outcomes from the CARD study., Methods: CARD was a randomised, multicentre, open-label, phase 4 study involving 62 clinical sites across 13 European countries. Patients (aged ≥18 years, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status ≤2) with confirmed metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer were randomly assigned (1:1) by means of an interactive voice-web response system to receive cabazitaxel (25 mg/m 2 intravenously every 3 weeks, 10 mg daily prednisone, and granulocyte colony-stimulating factor) versus abiraterone (1000 mg orally once daily plus 5 mg prednisone twice daily) or enzalutamide (160 mg orally daily). Stratification factors were ECOG performance status, time to disease progression on the previous androgen signalling-targeted inhibitor, and timing of the previous androgen signalling-targeted inhibitor. The primary endpoint was radiographic progression-free survival; here, we present more detailed analyses of pain (assessed using item 3 on the Brief Pain Inventory-Short Form [BPI-SF]) and symptomatic skeletal events, alongside preplanned patient-reported outcomes, assessed using the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Prostate (FACT-P) questionnaire and the EuroQoL-5 dimensions, 5 level scale (EQ-5D-5L). Efficacy analyses were done in the intention-to-treat population. Pain response was analysed in the intention-to-treat population with baseline and at least one post-baseline assessment of BPI-SF item 3, and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) were analysed in the intention-to-treat population with baseline and at least one post-baseline assessment of either FACT-P or EQ-5D-5L (PRO population). Analyses of skeletal-related events were also done in the intention-to-treat population. The CARD study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02485691, and is no longer enrolling., Findings: Between Nov 17, 2015, and Nov 28, 2018, of 303 patients screened, 255 were randomly assigned to cabazitaxel (n=129) or abiraterone or enzalutamide (n=126). Median follow-up was 9·2 months (IQR 5·6-13·1). Pain response was observed in 51 (46%) of 111 patients with cabazitaxel and 21 (19%) of 109 patients with abiraterone or enzalutamide (p<0·0001). Median time to pain progression was not estimable (NE; 95% CI NE-NE) with cabazitaxel and 8·5 months (4·9-NE) with abiraterone or enzalutamide (hazard ratio [HR] 0·55, 95% CI 0·32-0·97; log-rank p=0·035). Median time to symptomatic skeletal events was NE (95% CI 20·0-NE) with cabazitaxel and 16·7 months (10·8-NE) with abiraterone or enzalutamide (HR 0·59, 95% CI 0·35-1·01; log-rank p=0·050). Median time to FACT-P total score deterioration was 14·8 months (95% CI 6·3-NE) with cabazitaxel and 8·9 months (6·3-NE) with abiraterone or enzalutamide (HR 0·72, 95% CI 0·44-1·20; log-rank p=0·21). There was a significant treatment effect seen in changes from baseline in EQ-5D-5L utility index score in favour of cabazitaxel over abiraterone or enzalutamide (p=0·030) but no difference between treatment groups for change from baseline in EQ-5D-5L visual analogue scale (p=0·060)., Interpretation: Since cabazitaxel improved pain response, time to pain progression, time to symptomatic skeletal events, and EQ-5D-5L utility index, clinicians and patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer can be reassured that cabazitaxel will not reduce quality of life when compared with treatment with a second androgen signalling-targeted inhibitor., Funding: Sanofi., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: Bladder cancer is a condition characterized by a broad spectrum of histological variants and clinical courses. The morphological description of histological variants is becoming increasingly important. The 75% of cases of these cancers are classified as pure urothelial carcinoma, while the remaining 25% is represented by other histological variants. The clear cell carcinoma is part of urothelial group and is a very rare entity. Oncological outcomes of this variant are still uncertain, but seems to be worst than for patiens with pure urothelial carcinoma. Moreover it seems to metastasize more easily to the lymph nodes., Case Report: We present a case of a Caucasian 73 year old woman who, after an episode of gross hematuria, underwent an ultrasound of the urinary system, a cystoscopy and a total body computed tomography (CT) which confirmed the presence of a bladder neoformation. A transurethral resection of the bladder (TURB) was performed: the result of the histological examination was "poorly differentiated clear cell carcinoma". Given the rarity of histological characterization, we required a PET CT scan for more accurate staging, at which a suspected right pelvic lymph node was detected. We proposed a radical cystectomy with hysteroannessiectomy and extended lymphadenectomy. During the pre-hospitalization process, the patient developed anuria, with acute renal failure and bilateral hydronephrosis, which required the placement of bilateral nephrostomies; we performed the planned surgical procedure and the histological exam confirmed: high grade urothelial carcinoma with a high percentage (more than 70%) of clear cell carcinoma, with a strong local aggression and lymphnode metastates. We referred the patient to the oncologist who suggested a treatment plan within an immunotherapy based clinical trial and cisplatin., Conclusions: The morphological description of histological variants in bladder cancer is gaining increasing importance, especially for infiltrating and aggressive forms. The clear cell carcinoma is a very rare entity part of the urothelial group; they would seem more aggressive forms with an early lymph node involvement. This evidence is confirmed by the clinical case described, in which we have seen a large local aggression with an involvement of the lymph nodes of the right side of the pelvis of the pre-sacral ones. In these cases, the multimodal approach is crucial.

Background: A major breakthrough with immunotherapy is its potential to achieve complete responses (CR) in a subset of advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC) patients. We aim at evaluating the incidence and relative risk (RR) of CR in RCC patients treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs)., Materials and Methods: Searching the MEDLINE/PubMed, Cochrane Library and ASCO Meeting abstracts prospective studies were identified. The proportion of patients with CR events and the derived 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated for each study. Combined relative risks (RRs) and 95% CIs were calculated using fixed- or random-effects methods. The analysis was performed in the intention to treat population, in the PD-L1 expressing (≥1%) RCC tumors and in patients treated with the combination of ICIs and anti-VEGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors., Results: Six articles were considered for final analysis (total of 4.531 patients). The incidence of CR was 6.2% with ICIs and 2.6% with SOC. Treatment with ICIs significantly increased the risk of achieving CR compared to SOC (RR = 2.40; P = 0.001). This data was confirmed for patients treated with the combination of ICIs plus anti-VEGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors (RR = 2.50; P = 0.002). In PD-L1 positive tumors, the incidence of CR was 10.0% with ICIs and 4.0% in the SOC arm (RR = 2.49; P < 0.0001)., Conclusions: ICIs provide higher rates of CR compared to SOC, even higher in patients with PD-L1 positive tumors., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Sarcomatoid renal cell carcinoma (sRCC) represents a rare form of renal cell carcinoma marked by an aggressive biology, poor prognosis and little benefit from anti-angiogenic targeted therapy. More promising results come from the recent therapeutic strategy based on immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) combinations., Materials and Methods: For this meta-analysis, we searched MEDLINE/PubMed, the Cochrane Library and American Society of Medical Oncology (ASCO) Meeting abstracts for phase II or III randomised clinical trials. Data extraction was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis statement. The hazard ratios (HRs) for progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) with the relative 95% confidence intervals were extracted from studies. Summary HRs were calculated using random- or fixed-effects models, depending on the heterogeneity of the included studies., Results: Four studies were selected for final analysis, including 467 patients (226 treated in with ICI combinations and 241 received sunitinib in the control arms). ICI-based combinations were associated with an improved PFS and OS compared with sunitinib, with a reduction of more than 40% of progression (HR = 0.56; p < 0.0001) and mortality (HR = 0.56; p = 0.001) risk. Moreover, ICI-based combinations are associated with a objective response rate (ORR) of more than 50% (versus 20% with sunitinib), corresponding to a doubled risk of achieving an ORR compared with controls (relative risk [RR] = 2.15; p < 0.00001). Finally, immunotherapy significantly increased the possibility to obtain complete responses (RR = 8.15, p = 0.0002) with an incidence of 11%., Conclusion: Our data support the efficacy of ICI-based combinations for sRCC therapy, redefining the first-line treatment., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest statement R.I. reports serving as a consultant or playing an advisory role for Pfizer, Janssen, Sanofi, IPSEN, MSD and Novartis and receiving travel accommodations from Pfizer, Janssen and Ipsen. C.C. reports serving as a consultant of IPSEN and Merk. E.B. reports receiving funds from the Italian Association for Cancer Research AIRC-IG20583, the International Association for Lung Cancer (IASLC), the LILT (Lega Italiana per la Lotta contro i Tumori) and Fondazione Cariverona; receiving fee for speak’ and travel’ from MSD, AstraZeneca, Pfizer, Helsinn, Eli-Lilly, BMS, Novartis and Roche; receiving consultant fee from Roche and Pfizer and receiving institutional research grants from Astra-Zeneca and Roche. S.B. reports serving as a consultant or playing an advisory role for Pfizer, BMS, MSD, Roche, Astellas, Janssen, Ipsen, Bayer, Merck and AstraZeneca and reports receiving travel accommodations from Pfizer, BMS, Roche, Astellas, Janssen, Ipsen, AstraZeneca and Exelixis. G.P. reports serving as a consultant or playing an advisory role for AstraZeneca, Bayer, BMS, Ipsen, MSD, Novartis and Pfizer. C.P. reports serving a consultant and speaker for EUSA, Bristol-Myers Squibb, MSD, Pfizer, Ipsen, Eisai, AstraZeneca, Janssen, Novartis and General Electrics and reports receiving honoraria from Roche. G.T. reports serving a consultant or playing an advisory role for BMS and Novartis., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Diarrhoea is one of the most burdensome and common adverse events of chemotherapeutics, and has no standardised therapy to date. Increasing evidence suggests that the gut microbiome can influence the development of chemotherapy-induced diarrhoea. Here we report findings from a randomised clinical trial of faecal microbiota transplantation (FMT) to treat diarrhoea induced by tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKI) in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (ClinicalTrials.gov number: NCT04040712). The primary outcome is the resolution of diarrhoea four weeks after the end of treatments. Twenty patients are randomised to receive FMT from healthy donors or placebo FMT (vehicle only). Donor FMT is more effective than placebo FMT in treating TKI-induced diarrhoea, and a successful engraftment is observed in subjects receiving donor faeces. No serious adverse events are observed in both treatment arms. The trial meets pre-specified endpoints. Our findings suggest that the therapeutic manipulation of gut microbiota may become a promising treatment option to manage TKI-dependent diarrhoea.

Background: Angiogenesis has been recognized as the most important factor for tumor invasion, proliferation, and progression in metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). However, few clinical data are available regarding the efficacy of cabozantinib following immunotherapy., Objective: To describe the outcome of cabozantinib in patients previously treated with immunotherapy., Patients and Methods: Patients with mRCC who received cabozantinib immediately after nivolumab were included. The primary endpoint was to assess the outcome in terms of efficacy and activity., Results: Eighty-four mRCC patients met the criteria to be included in the final analysis. After a median follow-up of 9.4 months, median overall survival was 17.3 months. According to the IMDC criteria, the rates of patients alive at 12 months in the good, intermediate, and poor prognostic groups were 100%, 74%, and 33%, respectively (p < 0.001). The median progression-free survival (PFS) was 11.5 months (95% CI 8.3-14.7); no difference was found based on duration of previous first-line therapy or nivolumab PFS. The overall response rate was 52%, stable disease was found as the best response in 25.3% and progressive disease in 22.7% of patients. Among the 35 patients with progressive disease on nivolumab, 26 (74.3%) patients showed complete/partial response or stable disease with cabozantinib as best response after nivolumab. The major limitations of this study are the retrospective nature and the short follow-up., Conclusions: Cabozantinib was shown to be effective and active in patients previously receiving immune checkpoint inhibitors. Therefore, cabozantinib can be considered a valid therapeutic option for previously treated mRCC patients, irrespective of the type and duration of prior therapies.

Background: Data from clinical trials do not always provide adequate information to judge the impact of new treatments when used in a real-world setting. The aim of our study was to analyze adverse events (AEs) associated with enzalutamide (ENZ) and abiraterone (ABI) using real-life data from the EudraVigilance (EV) database., Methods: The EV database is the system for managing and analyzing information on suspected adverse reactions to medicines, which have been authorized or are being studied in clinical trials in the European Economic Area. We recorded the number of AEs for ABI and ENZ per category and severity from January 2013 to January 2019. In addition, we recorded AEs per age group. A meta-analysis of AEs reported in registrational phase III studies (AFFIRM, PREVAIL, COU-AA) was performed., Results: The number of individual cases identified in EV database was 13,562 for ABI and 40,599 for ENZ. Over 90% of the reported AEs were defined as serious for both drugs. Older patients (>85 years and 65-85 years) treated with ABI or ENZ are at increased risk of cardiac, infectious, metabolic, and respiratory disorders when compared with younger patients (<65). According to registrational phase III studies, the most frequent AEs in patients treated with ABI are hepatobiliary disorders, while the most frequent AEs in patients treated with ENZ are psychiatric and vascular disorders. Several AEs present in the EV database are not reported in the registrational phase III studies. It is important to note that we have no information on the number of patients under treatment in the EV database., Conclusions: The EV database highlights several AEs that are not reported in registrational phase III studies as well as different AEs profiles according to age. Clinicians should consider these data when treating patients with castration-resistant prostate cancer with ABI or ENZ.

The L-δ-(α-aminoadipoyl)-L-cysteinyl-D-valine synthetase (ACVS) is a nonribosomal peptide synthetase (NRPS) that fulfills a crucial role in the synthesis of β-lactams. Although some of the enzymological aspects of this enzyme have been elucidated, its large size, at over 400 kDa, has hampered heterologous expression and stable purification attempts. Here we have successfully overexpressed the Nocardia lactamdurans ACVS in E. coli HM0079. The protein was purified to homogeneity and characterized for tripeptide formation with a focus on the substrate specificity of the three modules. The first L-α-aminoadipic acid-activating module is highly specific, whereas the modules for L-cysteine and L-valine are more promiscuous. Engineering of the first module of ACVS confirmed the strict specificity observed towards its substrate, which can be understood in terms of the non-canonical peptide bond position., Competing Interests: The authors confirm that author R. A. L. Bovenberg receiving salary from DSM Biotechnology does not alter adherence to PLOS ONE policies on sharing data and materials. Furthermore, there are no relevant patents, products in development or marketed products to declare.

Limited prospective data about the activity of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) are available for elderly patients. The aim of our analysis was to determine the relative efficacy of ICIs versus available standard therapies [standard of care (SOC)] in subgroups defined by patients' age. Searching the MEDLINE/PubMed, Cochrane Library, and American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) Meeting abstracts randomized clinical trials were identified. Data extraction was conduced according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) statement. The measured outcome was overall survival (OS). Twenty-nine randomized clinical trials (18,839 patients) were selected. As for the distribution of patients by age, all but 3 of the selected studies considered young the patients younger than 65 years (n=10,832) and elderly those with 65 years and older (n=7723); 7 studies identified a third subgroup of very elderly patients aged 75 years and above (n=421). In elderly and very elderly patients ICIs significantly reduced the risk of death by 23% compared with SOC [hazard ratio (HR), 0.77; P<0.00001)]. On the contrary, a lack of a survival advantage of immunotherapy was observed in the subgroup of very elderly patients (HR, 0.85; P=0.39). When comparing the efficacy of ICIs between the 2 subpopulations (elderly vs. young), no significant difference in OS was observed (HR, 0.76; P=0.66). ICIs prolonged OS compared with SOC in both elderly and young patients affected by lung cancer, melanoma, and renal carcinoma, regardless of the age. In conclusion, ICIs (as monotherapy or combinations) significantly improved OS compared with SOC in both young and elderly patients with advanced cancers, regardless of the tumor type. The magnitude of this benefit is debated in patients aged 75 years and above.