Search

Ovarian cancer is the deadliest gynecological malignancy, representing 2.5 % of all female cancers and accounting for 5 % of female cancer-related fatalities. Despite numerous strategies in its treatment, the disease shows a high recurrence rate and a low survival rate. Consequently, there is a growing focus on targeted therapies in ovarian cancer treatment. It is well-known that VEGFR and LPA pathways undergo alterations in ovarian cancer and stimulate survival, adhesion, migration, invasion, tumor growth and angiogenesis. Cabozantinib (CBZ) is a multi-receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitor that effectively targets MET, VEGFR-1, 2, 3, FLT3, c-KIT, and RET. Ki16425 is a selective inhibitor of LPA receptors 1, 2, and 3. Therefore, targeting LPA receptors and combining with VEGFR inhibitor is a strategic approach for ovarian cancer treatment. In this study, it was aimed to prepare polymer-drug nanoconjugate for both VEGFR and LPAR inhibition. For this, O-(2-Carboxyethyl) polyethylene glycol (PEG 5000 ) which advantages are known in cancer studies, was chosen as the carrier system, and a nanoconjugate containing Ki16425 and CBZ (Ki-PEG-CBZ) was synthesized and its potential was evaluated. Initially, CBZ and Ki16425 were conjugated to the PEG 5000 through pH-sensitive hydrazone and ester bonds. After nanoconjugate characterization, in vitro release and its ovarian cancer treatment potential were evaluated on A2780, OVCAR3 and SKOV3 ovarian cancer cell lines. A nanoconjugate was obtained with a particle size of 169 ± 15.23 nm, a zeta potential of -13.5 ± 1.21 mV, and a release profile lasting 48 h, containing CBZ and Ki16425 with drug loading efficiencies of 73.71 ± 0.53 % and 77.72 ± 2.51 %, respectively. In vitro studies have demonstrated that Ki-PEG-CBZ is highly effective against ovarian cancer. We suggest that the developed polymer-drug nanoconjugate is an effective and safe nanoconjugate for the treatment of ovarian cancer., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Production of patient-specific dosage forms is important to improve patient adherence and effectiveness while reducing the prevalence and severity of adverse effects. Due to its possibility of rapid prototyping 3D printing can be used to produce individual dosages while utilizing techniques such as hot melt extrusion to increase the bioavailability of poorly soluble drugs. In this work, Parteck MXP and Kollicoat IR were used as water-soluble polymer bases for formulation development for 3D printing of various dosages incorporating cabozantinib while enabling immediate release. The effect of tablet design and the excipients sorbitol, croscarmellose sodium, and sodium starch glycolate was investigated for this goal. A way to calculate the size of tablets for predetermined dosages is proposed to enable the printing of individual strengths from one formulation. Rheological data were collected to deepen the understanding of the role of melt viscosity in 3D printing and hot melt extrusion processes. The production of immediate-release cabozantinib tablets containing every therapeutically relevant dosage in a single unit produced by two-step 3D printing was realized., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2024 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: To review the efficacy and safety of oral vismodegib (Erivedge; Genentech) in the management of locally advanced orbital and periorbital basal cell carcinoma (BCC)., Methods: A literature search was conducted last in September 2023 in the PubMed database for English language original research that evaluated the effect of oral vismodegib on orbital and periorbital BCC. Sixty articles were identified and 16 met the inclusion criteria., Results: Most studies demonstrated high response rates, with up to 100% of patients responding to the medication in individual studies and initial complete regression occurring in up to 88% of patients. Vismodegib treatment resulted in significant reductions in tumor volume, resulting in globe preservation for most patients. However, in 12% of patients, the response was partial. Recurrences also occurred with substantial frequency, even after an initial complete response. As such, up to 79.4% of patients required surgical intervention, and up to 23% of patients still required exenteration. Use of these agents resulted in reductions in tumor volume that may delay or prevent the need for exenteration in some, but not all, patients. Importantly, molecular analysis of tissue excised after vismodegib therapy revealed persistent tumor in all patients, with frequent accumulation of mutations that may confer resistance to further hedgehog inhibitor therapy. Although most adverse events were rated as level I or II, side effects were common, with up to 100% of patients in studies experiencing at least 1 event. Muscle cramps, alopecia, weight loss, fatigue, and dysgeusia were the most common adverse events, and several patients discontinued therapy because of them. Furthermore, 1 patient died of sepsis that may have resulted from the therapy., Conclusions: Although level I and II evidence are lacking, most studies indicate a benefit from the use of oral vismodegib to treat orbital and periorbital BCC tumor volume. However, patients should be cautioned about the adverse side effects of treatment and the persistence of tumor cells with mutations that may cause long-term resistance. Use of vismodegib as short-term neoadjuvant therapy may be effective in shrinking tumor volume to reduce surgical morbidity while reducing the frequency and severity of side effects., Financial Disclosure(s): The author(s) have no proprietary or commercial interest in any materials discussed in this article., (Copyright © 2024 American Academy of Ophthalmology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: The current guidelines for treating metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer (mCSPC) recommend treatment intensification of androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) with the addition of an androgen receptor pathway inhibitor (ARPI), with or without docetaxel. However, the adoption of these treatment options has been slow, leading to therapeutic inertia. This real-world study was conducted to investigate the occurrence of adverse events (AEs) among treated patients diagnosed with mCSPC in the United States., Methods: This retrospective claim review estimated the occurrence of AEs among patients with mCSPC from January 2014 to June 2021 in the PharMetrics® Plus data set. The study focused on 10 common AEs (fatigue/asthenia, gastrointestinal [GI] AEs, skin/nail/hair AEs, immunodeficiency/thrombocytopenia, hot flash, sexual function AEs, anemia, hypertension, pain, and edema) known to occur in ≥10% of patients and ≥2% more prevalent than those treated with ADT alone as selected from the US Food and Drug Administration prescribing information and published results from clinical trials. Proportions of patients experiencing these AEs at Day 90, 180, and then every 180 days until month 30 during the follow-up period were estimated using cumulative hazard plots. Results were adjusted using inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) across four treatment groups: ADT alone, ADT + nonsteroidal anti-androgen (NSAA) (bicalutamide, nilutamide, or flutamide), ADT + docetaxel, and ADT + ARPIs (abiraterone, apalutamide, or enzalutamide). ADT-alone cohort was the reference group for all comparisons., Results: A total of 4145 patients were included (ADT alone: 2318, ADT + NSAA: 632, ADT + docetaxel: 471, ADT + ARPIs: 724). At baseline, median (interquartile range [IQR]) age was 64.3 (60.1-73.1) years; most common sites of metastasis were bone only (n = 1886, 45.5%) and node only (n = 1237, 29.8%); most used medications were pain medications (n = 2182, 52.6%) and corticosteroids (n = 1213, 29.3%). Median (IQR) duration of follow-up 10.2 (6.1-16.6) months in ADT alone, 6.7 (4.1-11.5) months in ADT + NSAA, 5.1 (4.3-5.9) months in ADT + docetaxel, and 11.0 (6.6-17.0) months in ADT + ARPI cohort. The reported AEs increased over time for all assessed AEs, across all treatment groups. Compared with ADT alone, no statistically significant difference in the proportion of patients with AEs was seen in the ADT + ARPI or ADT + NSAA cohorts at months 3 and 12; a significantly higher proportion of patients in the ADT + docetaxel cohort experienced 6 of the 10 assessed AEs at month 3 (fatigue/asthenia, GI AEs, skin/nail/hair AEs, immunodeficiency/thrombocytopenia, hot flash, anemia). During the follow-up period, on IPTW analysis, compared with ADT alone, a significantly higher proportion of patients experienced AEs with seven AEs in the ADT + docetaxel group (fatigue/asthenia, GI AEs, skin/nail/hair AEs, immunodeficiency/thrombocytopenia, hot flash, anemia, edema; p < 0.001 for all seven), three AEs in the ADT + ARPI group (hot flash, p = 0.05; anemia, p = 0.01; edema, p = 0.019), and one AE in the ADT + NSAA group (anemia, p = 0.029). The proportion of patients with sexual function AE did not significantly differ between the treatment groups and ADT alone., Conclusion: Results of this large, real-world study demonstrated that all treatment groups experienced an increase in the rates of AEs over time, including ADT alone. Most AE rates with ADT + ARPIs were comparable with ADT + NSAA and not significantly different from ADT alone. ADT + docetaxel cohort was associated with significantly higher rates for all AEs over time except hypertension, sexual dysfunction, and pain. This study provides real-world evidence on AEs, beyond controlled clinical trials, and may assist healthcare providers to make better-informed decisions about disease management among patients with mCSPC., (© 2024 The Author(s). The Prostate published by Wiley Periodicals LLC.)

Several studies have been published describing development of cutaneous malignancy after vismodegib therapy; no systematic review has been conducted to interpret these data. Our objective was to systemically review reported cases of same-site or different-site cutaneous malignancy after smoothened inhibitor (SMOi) therapy for primary basal cell carcinoma (BCC). PubMed, CINAHL, and Scopus were systematically searched January 1, 2012 - March 28, 2024. Inclusion criteria: primary BCC, SMOi therapy, and biopsy-proven secondary malignancy. Exclusion criteria: non-human subjects. Bias was assessed using Risk of Bias in Nonrandomized Studies of Interventions (ROBINS-I) tool. Twenty-three cases describing same-site secondary malignancy were included. Average patient age was 67.2 years, mean treatment time 8.4 months, and average latency period to secondary malignancy development of 10.2 months. Five cases describing different-site secondary cutaneous malignancies were included. Mean patient age was 80.4 years, mean treatment time 2.9 months, and mean latency period 4.5 months. Twenty-seven cases were associated with vismodegib, while one case described vismodegib then sonidegib therapy. Pathologies included squamous cell carcinoma, BCC, basosquamous carcinoma, and malignant melanoma. The mechanism(s) by which same-site and different-site secondary malignancy occur are not known; mechanisms may differ depending on location type and secondary tumor type. We discuss multiple mechanistic hypotheses including pharmacologic selective pressure leading to hedgehog pathway mutant cells and activation of pro-growth signaling, and potential protective effect of hedgehog inhibition from melanoma given reports of rapid growth after SMOi discontinuation. This study is limited by the small number of reported cases. Additional research is needed to investigate these hypotheses., (© 2024. This is a U.S. Government work and not under copyright protection in the US; foreign copyright protection may apply.)

Purpose: Anti-programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1) therapy is a standard of care in recurrent and/or metastatic head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (RMHNSCC). Vascular endothelial growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitors (VEGFR-TKI) have immunomodulatory properties and improve clinical outcomes in combination with anti-PD-1 therapy in different malignancies. We report the long-term efficacy and safety of pembrolizumab and cabozantinib in patients with RMHNSCC and include a correlative biomarker analysis., Patients and Methods: This open-label, single-arm, multicenter, phase 2 study screened 50 patients with RMHNSCC, of whom 36 received pembrolizumab and cabozantinib. The primary endpoint was overall response rate (ORR), safety, and tolerability. Secondary endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and correlative studies of tissue and blood. We report the long-term PFS, OS, and safety of treated patients and describe correlative biomarkers evaluating p-MET expression and tumor immune microenvironment (TIME) using multiplex immunohistochemistry., Results: With median follow-up of 22.4 months, the median PFS was 12.8 months with a 2-year PFS of 32.6% (95% CI, 18.8%-56.3%) and the median OS was 27.7 months with a 2-year OS of 54.7% [95% confidence interval (CI), 38.9%-76.8%]. The median duration of response was 12.6 months with a 2-year rate of 38.5% (95% CI, 30.8%-81.8%). Long-term treatment-related adverse events included manageable hypothyroidism (5.5%) and grade 1 elevated aspartate aminotransferase and alanine aminotransferase (2.8%). Baseline tumor p-MET expression correlated with ORR (P = 0.0055). Higher density of CD8+, CD103+, and CSF1-R+ cells at baseline correlated with improved OS [hazard ratio (HR) = 5.27, P = 0.030; HR = 8.79, P = 0.017; HR = 6.87, P = 0.040, respectively]., Conclusions: Pembrolizumab and cabozantinib provided prolonged encouraging long-term disease control and survival with a maintained favorable safety profile. The prognostic significance of higher density of CD8+, CD103+, and CSF1-R+ cells in TIME deserve further evaluation in similar clinical settings., (©2024 American Association for Cancer Research.)

Background: Efficacy of treatment after failure of check point inhibitors (ICI) therapy remains ill-defined in metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC)., Objective: To evaluate the safety and effectiveness of cabozantinib after failure of ICI-based therapies., Design, Setting and Participants: Patients with mRCC who concluded cabozantinib treatment directly after an ICI-based therapy were eligible. Data was collected retrospectively from participating sites in Germany., Interventions: Cabozantinib was administered as a standard of care., Outcome Measurements and Statistical Analysis: Adverse events (AE) were reported according to CTCAE v5.0. Objective response rate according to RECIST 1.1 and Progression Free Survival (PFS) were collected from medical records. Descriptive statistics and Kaplan-Meyer-plots were utilized., Results and Limitations: About 56 eligible patients (71.4% male) with median age of 66 years and clear cell histology in 66.1% (n = 37) were analyzed. 87.5% (n = 49) had ≥ 2 previous lines. IMDC risk was intermediate or poor in 17 patients (30.4%) and missing in 66.1%. 20 patients (35.7%) started with 60 mg. 55.4% (n = 31) required dose reductions, 26.8% (n = 15) treatment delays and 1.8% (n = 1) treatment discontinuation. Partial response was reported in 10.7% (n = 6), stable and progressive disease were reported in 19.6% (n = 11) and in 12.5% (n = 7). 32 patients were not evaluable (57.1%). Median treatment duration was 6.1 months. Treatment related AE were reported in 76.8% (n = 43) and 19.6% (n = 11) had grade 3-5. Fatigue (26.8%), diarrhea (26.8%) and hand-foot-syndrome (25.0%) were the 3 most frequent AEs of any grade and causality. SAE were reported in 21.4% (n = 12), 2 were fatal. Major limitation was the retrospective data capture in our study., Conclusions: Cabozantinib followed directly after ICI-based therapy was safe and feasible. No new safety signals were reported. A lower starting dose was frequently utilized in this real-world cohort, which was associated with a favorable tolerability profile. Our data supports the use of cabozantinib after ICI treatment., Competing Interests: Disclosure VG: Compensated lectures: AstraZeneca, Astellas, BMS, EISAI, Ipsen, Janssen-Cilag, Merck, MSD, Pfizer, ONO Pharmaceutical, Novartis/AAA. Advisory Board: Apogepha, BMS; EISAI, EUSA Pharm, Cureteq, Debiopharm, Gilead, Janssen-Cilag, Merck, MSD, Pfizer, Novartis, Oncorena, PCI Biotech. Research Grant: AstraZeneca, BMS, MSD, Ipsen, Pfizer. Travel support: AstraZeneca, Ipsen, Merck, Janssen, Pfizer MB: RR: Advisory Board: Apogepha,Ipsen, Merck .Pfizer Travel support: Janssen, Pfizer GN: compensated lectures: Roche Pharma, MEDAC, Pfizer, BMS, AstraZeneca, Merck, Janssen-Cilag, Astellas; Advisory Boards: Roche Pharma, Sanofi, BMS, Merck Serono, Pfizer, MEDAC, Ipsen, Janssen, Travel support:Roche Pharma, Pfizer, Merck, Janssen, maunscript writing: Pfizer, BMS, Merck MJS: Compensated lectures: Astellas, Apogepha, Bayer, BMS, EISAI, Hexal, Ipsen, Merck, Pfizer, Medac, MSD, Janssen-Cilag. Advisory board: BMS, Gilead, Ipsen, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, MSD, Janssen-Cilag. Congress: Apogepha, Janssen-Cilag, Ipsen, Pfizer. Research Grants: Gilead, Ipsen, Janssen-Cilag, AstraZeneca, QED, MSD. FA: none, MM: none, MC: none, MOZ: none AW: Compensated lectures: AIO, BMS, Gilead, Janssen, Lilly, iOMEDICO Advisory Board: BMS;Gilead, Lilly Merck, MSD, Pfizer,Janssen Research Grant: AIO, iOMEDICO AH: none JC: none CD: Compensated lectures from Janssen-Cilag, Ipsen. Advisory Board: Janssen-Cilag, Ipsen. Travel support: Janssen-Cilag, Ipsen and Bayer HT: none, MS: none, DS: none PI: Compensated lectures: AstraZeneca, BMS, EISAI, Merck, MSD, Pfizer, Novartis/AAA. Advisory Board: Apogepha, BMS; EISAI, EUSA Pharm, Gilead, Ipsen, Merck, MSD, Pfizer, Novartis, Oncorena, PCI Biotech. Research Grant: AstraZeneca, BMS, MSD, Ipsen, Pfizer. Travel support: AstraZeneca, Ipsen, Merck, Pfizer, (Copyright © 2024 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: The administration of proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) is a common practice to reduce gastro-esophageal adverse events associated with drug treatments but may impair absorption and exposure to oncology drugs. This study investigated the effect of concomitant administration of PPIs and pazopanib, sunitinib and cabozantinib on survival of patients with metastatic clear cell renal carcinoma (mRCC)., Patients and Methods: Total 451 patients receiving pazopanib, sunitinib and cabozantinib as first line treatment were enrolled in this retrospective study. Patients were defined as "no concomitant PPIs (PPI-)" if no PPIs were administered during TKIs, and as "concomitant PPIs (PPI+)" if the administration of PPIs was at least 75% of the time during which TKIs were given., Results: Eighty patients administered pazopanib were PPI- and 86 PPI+; no difference in PFS was observed (10.7 vs. 11.9 months, P = .79). If patients were stratified as short (n = 89) and long (n = 77) responders, there was a significant difference in terms of PFS in PPI+ (n = 47) versus PPI- (n = 30) in long responders, being 24.7 versus 38 months (P = .04), respectively. In the sunitinib cohort, no significant difference of PFS in PPI+ (n = 102) versus PPI- (n = 131) was found, being 11.3 versus 18.1 months, respectively (P=0.15). In the cabozantinib cohort, there was a statistically significant difference in PFS of PPI+ versus PPI- (6 months vs. not reached, P = .04). No correlation with adverse events was found., Conclusions: This study demonstrates an association between PPIs and impaired PFS in mRCC patients given pazopanib and cabozantinib and recommends caution on their concomitant use., Competing Interests: Disclosure CP acted as a consultant and/or a speaker for Angelini Pharma, Biorek, BMS, Eisai, General Electric, Ipsen, Medendi, and MSD, and as a protocol steering committee member for BMS, Eisai, and MSD. MR received honoraria as a speaker/consultant by Astra Zeneca, MSD, BMS, Janssen, Merck and Gilead. MDR received fees from Astellas, AstraZeneca, Celgene, Novartis, Pfizer, Bio-Rad, Janssen, Sanofi-Aventis, Roche, and Ipsen; RD reports receiving speaker bureau/advisor's fee from Ipsen, Novartis, Pfizer, Sanofi Genzyme, AstraZeneca, Janssen, Gilead, Lilly, Gilead, and EUSA Pharma. All other authors have declared no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2024. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Background: To review the literature to outline findings from clinical trials assessing interventions for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) in patients who have progressed on androgen receptor-axis-targeted (ARAT) therapies., Methods: A systematic literature review was performed to identify trials that assessed the efficacy and safety of interventions used in patients that progressed on prior ARAT therapies. A literature search was conducted using the OVID platform that searched the EMBASE, MEDLINE, and CENTRAL bibliographic databases., Results: Of the 10,114 citations identified, a total of 36 studies representing 33 unique trials were included in the review. Of the 33 trials, 21 were randomized controlled trials and 12 were single-arm trials. A total of 11 were phase III trials, 13 were phase II trials, and 2 were phase I trials. The majority of included trials were open-label ( n  = 29) and the remaining were double-blind ( n  = 4). A total of 16 trials evaluated ARAT based therapies, 7 trials evaluated taxane-based treatments, 10 trials evaluated PARP inhibitors, 8 trials evaluated immunotherapies, and 8 trials evaluated other therapies (i.e. cabozantinib, mitoxantrone, radium-223, 177 [Lu-177]-PNT2002, 177 Lu-PSMA-617, samotolisib)., Conclusions: This systematic review demonstrated there are limited effective treatment options in this patient population. Unlike other cancer types, immunotherapy agents appear to provide little to no benefit. Conversely, agents such as taxane-based chemotherapy (e.g. cabazitaxel) and radionuclide therapy provide the most value in this patient population. Further research is needed to explore new therapies in this disease area and to optimize existing treatment strategies with more effective combination therapies.

Background: This retrospective observational study explored the therapeutic potential of combined androgen blockade (CAB) with bicalutamide (Bic-CAB) as an initial treatment for metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC) in Japan., Methods: The electronic health records of 159 patients with mHSPC from three Japanese institutions who received initial treatment with Bic-CAB between 2007 and 2017 were analyzed. The time to prostate-specific antigen (PSA) progression, duration of Bic-CAB treatment, and overall survival (OS), with various definitions for PSA progression, were assessed. A multivariate Cox proportional hazards model was constructed using clinical parameters to predict time to the end of Bic-CAB treatment and OS., Results: The median observation period was 46.4 months, and the median age of patients at diagnosis was 71 years. A total of 46.5% patients experienced PSA progression with a median survival duration of 29 months (according to Prostate Cancer Clinical Trials Working Group 3 criteria), and 49.1% patients achieved a PSA nadir < 0.2 ng/mL in a median time of 4.7 months. When stratified by PSA nadir and PSA change, patients at low risk for disease progression with a small PSA change due to low initial PSA had a 5-year OS of 100% and a 10-year OS of 75%. The OS during the observation period was 72.9 months., Conclusion: These findings highlight the potential effect of Bic-CAB in patients with mHSPC who were at low risk for disease progression. Initial treatment with Bic-CAB and adjusting treatment early based on PSA dynamics may be a reasonable treatment plan for these patients., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Although smoothened inhibitors (SMOi) have demonstrated efficacy in the management of basal cell carcinoma, no guidelines are available on how to utilize SMOi in the treatment of Gorlin syndrome (GS). This review's objective is to assess the clinical response to SMOi in GS, provide practical guidance for clinicians, and identify areas for future research. Through comprehensive searches of previous publications and expert opinion, this review demonstrates that intermittent dosing of SMOi and daily dosing have similar efficacy. While the adverse events of SMOi may result in their discontinuation during treatment of GS, intermittent dosing may improve compliance., Competing Interests: Conflicts of interest None disclosed., (Copyright © 2024 American Academy of Dermatology, Inc. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: Real-world data are limited on treatment sequencing and outcomes after first-line (1L) immune checkpoint inhibitor (CPI)-based combination treatment of advanced renal cell carcinoma (aRCC)., Patients and Methods: In this real-world, UK-based, retrospective study (CARINA; NCT04957160), data were obtained from hospital and electronic prescribing records. Patients were aged ≥ 18 years at aRCC diagnosis and had received 1L CPI-CPI or tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI)-CPI combination therapy before second-line (2L) therapy including cabozantinib. We describe treatment outcomes including 1L and 2L durations of treatment (DoT) and overall survival (OS)., Results: Data from April 2015 to June 2022 were collected on 281 patients from nine UK centres. Median 1L DoT was 2.3 months for CPI-CPI therapy (n = 171) and 5.0 months for TKI-CPI therapy (n = 58). After 1L CPI-CPI or TKI-CPI therapy, median 2L DoT was 5.8 versus 4.2 months, respectively, for cabozantinib (n = 163), and 3.8 versus 2.4 months for other therapies (n = 118); median 2L OS was 15.2 and 15.3 months, respectively, for cabozantinib, and 14.6 and 24.2 months for other therapies., Conclusion: DoT for 2L treatment was numerically better for cabozantinib than for other therapies, and after 1L CPI-CPI therapy than after 1L TKI-CPI therapy. Median OS was similar for 2L cabozantinib and other 2L therapies, and median OS for 2L cabozantinib was similar after both 1L therapy types. These results demonstrate the antitumour effect of 2L therapies, including cabozantinib, after 1L CPI-based combination treatment, regardless of whether 1L CPI-CPI or TKI-CPI therapy is used., (Copyright © 2024 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Salivary duct carcinoma (SDC) is a rare and aggressive subtype of salivary gland cancer, frequently associated with incurable recurrences and distant metastases (R/M). Proliferation of SDC relies on androgen receptor (AR) signalling, prompting the use of combined androgen blockade (CAB, i.e., luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone agonist and/or AR antagonists) to R/M SDC patients. However, only a subset of patients benefits from such treatments. We have shown that response to CAB is associated with steroid 5α-reductase 1 (SRD5A1) mRNA expression. SRD5A1 catalyses the intracellular conversion of testosterone into the more potent AR-agonist dihydrotestosterone. This conversion can be inhibited by dutasteride, a potent SRD5A1-inhibitor, which is currently prescribed for benign prostatic hyperplasia. We hypothesize that repurposing dutasteride to target AR signalling in SDC could enhance therapeutic response and clinical outcome in SDC patients., Methods: This prospective, open-label, randomized controlled phase II clinical trial, is designed to investigate whether dutasteride as an adjunct drug to CAB improves response rate and clinical outcome in patients with AR-positive R/M SDC. Patients are divided in two cohorts based on their prior systemic treatments. In cohort A, CAB-naïve patients (n = 74) will be randomly assigned to either a control arm (Arm 1) receiving CAB (goserelin 10.8 mg/3m and bicalutamide 50 mg/OD) or an experimental arm (Arm 2) where dutasteride (0.5 mg/OD) is added to the CAB regimen. In cohort B, patients with disease progression after adjuvant or first-line palliative CAB therapy (max. n = 24) will receive goserelin, bicalutamide, and dutasteride to assess whether the addition of dutasteride can overcome therapy resistance. The primary endpoints are the objective response rate and duration of response. Secondary endpoints are progression-free survival, overall survival, clinical benefit rate, quality of life, and safety. Translational research will be performed to explore molecular target expression differences and their correlation with clinical outcome., Discussion: The DUCT study addresses an unmet medical need by investigating the repurposing of dutasteride to enhance treatment response and improve clinical outcome for patients with R/M SDC, especially those with limited alternative treatment options, such as HER2-negative cases. By repurposing a registered low-cost drug, this trial's findings could be readily applied into clinical practice., Trial Registration: Clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT05513365. Date of registration: August 24, 2022., Protocol Version: Current protocol version 4.0, February 21, 2024., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Context: Multikinase inhibitors (MKIs) improve the treatment of refractory thyroid cancer, including radioactive iodine-refractory differentiated thyroid cancer (RAIR-DTC) and advanced medullary thyroid carcinoma (aMTC)., Objective: This study aims to compare the efficacy of MKIs in improving survival outcomes and safety., Data Sources: Comprehensive database searches of MEDLINE via PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane were performed from inception to December 2023., Study Selection: Three independent authors selected these studies. Randomized controlled trials that compared the use of a MKI to other MKIs or placebo were included., Data Extraction and Synthesis: This review followed Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis guidelines. Risk of bias was analyzed using the Cochrane risk of bias 2 tool. Bayesian network meta-analysis was performed. Treatments were grouped into common nodes based on the type of MKI., Main Outcomes and Measures: Primary outcomes were progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). Secondary outcomes included objective response rate, disease control rate, clinical benefit rate, and adverse events., Results: Cabozantinib 60 mg/day (CAB60) was associated with the highest prolonged PFS in RAIR-DTC patients, followed by lentivatinib 18 or 24 mg/day (LEN18 or LEN24), and apatinib. PFS was also improved in aMTC patients who received CAB 140 mg/day (CAB140), CAB60, or anlotinib. A significantly greater improvement on the performance of OS was seen in CAB60, LEN24, anlotinib, and sorafenib in RAIR-DTC patients, but in aMTC patients there were lack of statistical differences. Compared with the low-dose MKIs, high-dose MKIs such as CAB, LEN, and vandetanib increased the incidence of adverse events., Conclusion: CAB60, LEN, and apatinib are promising topical MKIs with statistically significant primary outcomes in RAIR-DTC patients, while CAB and anlotinib are effective in prolonging PFS in aMTC patients., (© The Author(s) 2024. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Endocrine Society. All rights reserved. For commercial re-use, please contact reprints@oup.com for reprints and translation rights for reprints. All other permissions can be obtained through our RightsLink service via the Permissions link on the article page on our site—for further information please contact journals.permissions@oup.com. See the journal About page for additional terms.)

Concomitant direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) and tyrosine kinase inhibitor targeting vascular endothelial growth factor receptor (anti-VEGF TKI) have been associated with a higher risk of bleeding. Nevertheless, concomitant administration seems frequent in clinical practice in patients with cancer-associated thrombosis and appears to be safe according to the retrospective study by Boileve A. et al. But the risk of an additional pharmacokinetic interaction between anti-VEGF TKI and DOACs must be considered, in case of P-glycoprotein (P-gp) inhibition by the TKI. We describe a case report with a major bleeding event in a renal metastatic cancer patient treated with cabozantinib and rivaroxaban. This case highlights the difficult therapeutic decision in a complex patient with cancer-associated thrombosis, who refused the anticoagulant subcutaneous route. Accumulation of bleeding risk factors (genito-urinary tumor localization) was additive to several pharmacodynamic interactions (acetylsalicylic acid, venlafaxine) and a potential pharmacokinetic interaction between cabozantinib and rivaroxaban. Indeed, cabozantinib-related P-glycoprotein inhibition could have led to a supratherapeutic level of rivaroxaban, contributing partly to the bleeding event. Before combining an anti-VEGF TKI and DOACs, a multidisciplinary pretherapeutic assessment seems crucial to evaluate the patient's bleeding risk factors, pharmacodynamic interactions, and the risk of pharmacokinetic interactions mediated by P-gp., (© 2024. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature.)

Prostate cancer (PC) is the fifth leading cause of cancer-related deaths among men worldwide. Prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA), a molecular target of PC, is clinically used for the treatment and diagnosis of PC using radioligand approaches. However, no PSMA-based chemotherapies have yet been approved by the FDA. Here, we present a novel therapeutic approach using PSMA-targeted 2-deoxyglucose-dendrimer (PSMA-2DG-D) for targeted delivery of a potent tyrosine kinase inhibitor, cabozantinib (Cabo), selectively to PC cells. PSMA-2DG-D demonstrates intracellular localization in PSMA (+) PC cells through PSMA-mediated internalization. This PSMA-specific targeting translates to enhanced efficacy of Cabo compared to the free drug when conjugated to PSMA-2DG-D. Furthermore, systemically administered fluorescently labeled PSMA-2DG-D-Cy5 specifically targets PSMA (+) tumors with minimal off-target accumulation in the PC3-PIP tumor xenograft mouse model. This demonstrates that the PSMA-2DG-D platform is a promising new delivery system for potent chemotherapeutics, where systemic side effects are a significant concern.

Aim: To investigate the outcomes of cabozantinib in patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (uHCC), focusing on dose setting and modification., Methods: We retrospectively analyzed 34 Japanese patients who received cabozantinib for uHCC. Trough concentrations (C trough ) of cabozantinib were also measured weekly for 6 weeks in the 18 patients., Results: Sixteen patients received ≥40 mg (high-dose group), and 18 patients received 20 mg (low-dose group). Dose escalations were performed in 27.8% of the patients in the low-dose group. Although median duration of the first dose reduction or interruption in the low-dose group was twice that in the high-dose group (28 vs. 14 days, p < 0.001), there were no significant differences in the relative dose intensity (RDI) during 6 weeks, progression free survival (PFS), and overall survival (p = 0.162, p = 0.950, p = 0.817, respectively) between the two groups. Patients who received RDI during 6 weeks ≥33.4% showed a trend toward longer median PFS (p = 0.054). Each serum aldolase value during the 6 weeks was significantly correlated with the C trough at any point (r = 0.500, p < 0.001). In multivariate analyses, aldolase ≥8.7 U/L within 2 weeks was significantly associated with the very early dose reduction or interruption (odds ratio 20.0, p = 0.002)., Conclusions: An initial dose of 20 mg cabozantinib could be a safe option in Japanese patients. The serum aldolase value could be useful for making appropriate dose modifications of cabozantinib., (© 2024 The Author(s). Cancer Medicine published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background: Therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) - performing dose adjustments based on measured drug levels and established pharmacokinetic (PK) targets - could optimise treatment with drugs that show large interpatient variability in exposure. We evaluated the feasibility of TDM for multiple oral targeted therapies. Here we report on drugs for which routine TDM is not feasible., Methods: We evaluated drug cohorts from the Dutch Pharmacology Oncology Group - TDM study. Based on PK levels taken at pre-specified time points, PK-guided interventions were performed. Feasibility of TDM was evaluated, and based on the success and practicability of TDM, cohorts could be closed., Results: For 10 out of 24 cohorts TDM was not feasible and inclusion was closed. A high incidence of adverse events resulted in closing the cabozantinib, dabrafenib/trametinib, everolimus, regorafenib and vismodegib cohort. The enzalutamide and erlotinib cohorts were closed because almost all PK levels were above target. Other, non-pharmacological reasons led to closing the palbociclib, olaparib and tamoxifen cohort., Conclusions: Although TDM could help personalising treatment for many drugs, the above-mentioned reasons can influence its feasibility, usefulness and clinical applicability. Therefore, routine TDM is not advised for cabozantinib, dabrafenib/trametinib, enzalutamide, erlotinib, everolimus, regorafenib and vismodegib. Nonetheless, TDM remains valuable for individual clinical decisions., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Objective: The objective of this study was to compare the prognostic outcomes between metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer (mCSPC) patients receiving conventional androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) and those receiving ADT plus a novel androgen-receptor signaling inhibitor (ARSI) in routine clinical practice in Japan., Methods: This was conducted as a retrospective multicenter study including 581 mCSPC patients, consisting of 305 receiving ADT alone or in combination with bicalutamide (group 1) and 276 receiving ADT plus one of the following ARSIs: abiraterone acetate, apalutamide, or enzalutamide (group 2). Prognostic outcomes between these 2 groups were comprehensively compared., Results: In the entire cohort, prostate-specific antigen-progression-free survival (PSA-PFS) in group 2 was significantly longer than that in group 1, while no significant difference was noted in overall survival (OS) between the two groups. In patients corresponding to the LATITUDE high-risk group, however, both PSA-PFS and OS in group 2 were significantly longer than those in group 1. Of several factors examined, the following were identified as independent predictors of poor PSA-PFS in the entire cohort as well as the LATITUDE high-risk group: high C-reactive protein, high lactate dehydrogenase, high alkaline phosphatase, high Gleason score, and group 1. Furthermore, it was possible to precisely classify both the entire cohort and LATITUDE high-risk group into 3 risk groups regarding PSA-PFS according to the positive numbers of independent factors: positive for ≤1 factor, favorable; 2 factors, intermediate; and ≥3 factors, poor., Conclusion: Combined use of ARSIs with ADT could improve the prognostic outcomes of mCSPC patients, particularly those in the LATITUDE high-risk group, in real-world clinical practice in Japan., (© 2024 The Japanese Urological Association.)

Hedgehog pathway inhibitors (HHIs) have broadened the treatment options available for patients with advanced basal cell carcinoma (BCC) for whom traditional therapeutic approaches are not feasible or effective. Sonidegib and vismodegib are oral HHIs that were approved for treatment of patients with advanced BCC after demonstrating promising efficacy in the pivotal Phase II BOLT (NCT01327053) and ERIVANCE (NCT00833417) trials, respectively. However, the incidence and types of treatment-emergent adverse events (AEs) observed with these agents may limit continuous use of HHIs and ultimately impact clinical outcomes. In this review, we summarize the safety and tolerability profiles of sonidegib and vismodegib and discuss potential management strategies for HHI class-effect AEs, including muscle spasms, creatine phosphokinase increase, alopecia, and dysgeusia. These AEs primarily occur early in treatment and can lead to treatment discontinuation. Differences in the pharmacokinetic profiles of sonidegib and vismodegib may contribute to the variability noted in times to onset and resolution of these and other AEs. Evidence suggests that protocol modifications, such as treatment interruptions and dose reductions, are effective ways to manage AEs while maintaining disease control. Nonpharmacologic and pharmacologic interventions may also be considered as part of an AE management strategy. Overall, healthcare providers and patients with advanced BCC should be aware of the HHI class-effect AEs and plan effective management strategies to avoid treatment discontinuation and optimize therapeutic response., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Introduction: Bone metastases negatively affect prognosis in patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma (aRCC). We conducted a systematic literature review to identify clinical trial publications including patients with aRCC with and without bone metastases., Methods: The review was conducted according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta‑Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines and registered with PROSPERO (CRD42022355436). MEDLINE and Embase databases were searched (September 2, 2022) to identify publications reporting efficacy and safety outcomes for patients with/without bone metastasis from clinical trials of systemic RCC therapies. Risk of bias was assessed using Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE)., Results: Of 526 publications screened, 19 were eligible: seven (from five studies) reported phase 3 trials, six reported phase 2 trials, one reported phase 1b/2 trials, and five were pooled analyses. Five publications reported moderate-quality evidence, while 14 were graded as low- or very low-quality evidence, suggesting a high potential for uncertainty. Five studies reported benefits of investigational therapies versus comparators in patients with and without bone metastases; these studies included cabozantinib, nivolumab, cabozantinib plus nivolumab, and lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab treatment arms. Data were also available for nivolumab plus ipilimumab. Bone metastases were consistently associated with poor prognosis in patients with aRCC. Preliminary data support the hypothesis that therapies targeting pathways implicated in the development of bone metastases may be beneficial, and warrant further investigation. However, data to support treatment decision-making are lacking., Conclusion: Our findings highlight the need for clinical data to assist in defining the optimal treatment for patients with aRCC and bone metastasis., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare the following financial interests/personal relationships which may be considered as potential competing interests: Janet Brown: Honoraria: Novartis, Bayer, Amgen, Ipsen, MSD Oncology, Bristol Myers Squibb. Consulting or Advisory Role: Novartis, Bayer, Amgen, Ipsen, MSD Oncology, Bristol Myers Squibb. Speakers’ Bureau: Ipsen, Amgen, MSD. Research Funding: Amgen (Inst), Bayer (Inst). Travel, Accommodations, Expenses: Ipsen, MSD Oncology, Amgen, Novartis, Bayer. Daniele Santini: Honoraria: Speaker honoraria with AstraZeneca, MSD, BMS, Astellas, Janssenn, EISAI, Merck, Pfizer, Bayer, Novartis, AstraZeneca, Lilly. Consulting or Advisory Role: Advisory Board role with AstraZeneca, MSD, BMS, Astellas, Janssenn, EISAI, Merck, Pfizer, Bayer, Novartis, AstraZeneca, Lilly. Natalie Charnley: Honoraria: Lecture fees from Pfizer, Ipsen, and Janssen. Consulting or Advisory Role: Advisory boards with Pfizer, Ipsen, and Janssen. Alessia Ogareva: Employment: Employee of Ipsen. Alison Chisholm: Employee of Oxford PharmaGenesis. Robert Jones: Honoraria: Roche, AstraZeneca, Bristol Myers Squibb, Bayer, Astellas, Janssen, MSD, Pfizer, Merck Serono. Consulting or Advisory Role: Roche, AstraZeneca, Bristol Myers Squibb, Bayer, Novartis/AAA, Astellas, Janssen, MSD, Pfizer, Merck Serono. Research Funding: Received educational grants from Astellas, Bayer, Clovis and Exelixis., (Copyright © 2024. Published by Elsevier Ltd.)

Supplementation with CBM588, a bifidogenic live bacterial product, has been associated with improved clinical outcomes in persons with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) receiving nivolumab and ipilimumab. However, its effect on those receiving tyrosine kinase inhibitor-based combinations is unknown. In this open-label, randomized, investigator-initiated, phase 1 study, 30 participants with locally advanced or mRCC with histological confirmation of clear cell, papillary or sarcomatoid component were randomized in a 2:1 fashion to receive cabozantinib (an inhibitor of vascular endothelial growth factor receptor, MET and AXL) and nivolumab (anti-programmed cell death protein 1) with or without CBM588 as first-line treatment. Metagenomic sequencing was performed on stool samples to characterize their gut microbiome at baseline and 13 weeks into treatment. The primary endpoint was a change in the relative abundance of Bifidobacterium spp.; secondary endpoints included objective response rate (ORR), progression-free survival (PFS) and toxicity profile. The primary endpoint of the study was not met and the addition of CBM588 to cabozantinib and nivolumab did not result in a difference in the relative abundance of Bifidobacterium spp. or alpha diversity (as measured by the Shannon index). However, ORR was significantly higher in participants treated with CBM588 compared to those in the control arm (14 of 19, 74% versus 2 of 10, 20%; P = 0.01). PFS at 6 months was 84% (16 of 19) and 60% (6 of 10) in the experimental and control arms, respectively. No significant difference in toxicity profile was seen between the study arms. Our results provide a preliminary signal of improved clinical activity with CBM588 in treatment-naive participants with mRCC receiving cabozantinib and nivolumab. Further investigation is needed to confirm these findings and better characterize the underlying mechanism driving this effect.ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT05122546., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Background: Sonic hedgehog inhibitors (SHHis) are an effective treatment in locally advanced basal cell carcinoma (laBCC). However, the use of these drugs is limited by adverse events, and relapse at discontinuation in around one-half of patients. A few cases of patients treated concomitantly by radiotherapy (RT) and SHHis have been reported in the literature, suggesting that the combination results in an improved overall response. Maintaining complete response after stopping treatment is a concern, especially as resuming treatment in the case of relapse does not guarantee a new therapeutic response. The optimal combination and sequence of treatment to improve local control of laBCCs are not yet defined., Objectives: We hypothesized that consolidation RT after complete response to SHHis could reduce the risk of relapse at discontinuation., Methods: We present a case series of patients with laBCCs who achieved complete response after SHHi treatment and were treated with consolidation RT. Patients were evaluated by a skin cancer board. The closure RT technique and dosage were refined by a radiotherapist., Results: Eleven patients were included. SHHis were prescribed for a median 5 months (range 4-11). Consolidation RT was performed after complete response to SHHis and discontinuation. RT was delivered at a median dose of 45 Gy (range 40.5-66) in 10 fractions (range 9-33). With a median follow-up of 23 months, all patients maintained complete clinical response. This strategy was well tolerated with no grade 3 adverse events., Conclusions: SHHi treatment followed by consolidation RT after drug discontinuation seems effective and safe. Further studies are needed to develop a precise strategy for the management of laBCCs., Competing Interests: Conflicts of interest N.M. is an occasional consultant for Roche and Novartis. L.M. is an occasional consultant for Novartis, Pierre Fabre Medicament, Bristol-Myers-Squibb, Viatris medical, UCB Pharma SA, Leo Pharma, Almirall SAS, Edimark and MSD France. The other authors declare no conflicts of interest., (© The Author(s) 2024. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of British Association of Dermatologists. All rights reserved. For commercial re-use, please contact reprints@oup.com for reprints and translation rights for reprints. All other permissions can be obtained through our RightsLink service via the Permissions link on the article page on our site—for further information please contact journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Purpose: Bempegaldesleukin (BEMPEG) is a pegylated interleukin (IL)-2 cytokine prodrug engineered to provide controlled and sustained activation of the clinically validated IL-2 pathway, with the goal of preferentially activating and expanding effector CD8 + T cells and natural killer cells over immunosuppressive regulator T cells in the tumor microenvironment. The open-label, phase III randomized controlled PIVOT-09 trial investigated the efficacy and safety of BEMPEG plus nivolumab (NIVO) as first-line treatment for advanced/metastatic clear cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC) with intermediate-/poor-risk disease., Methods: Patients with previously untreated advanced/metastatic ccRCC were randomly assigned (1:1) to BEMPEG plus NIVO, or investigator's choice of tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI; sunitinib or cabozantinib). Coprimary end points were objective response rate (ORR) by blinded independent central review and overall survival (OS) in patients with International Metastatic RCC Database Consortium (IMDC) intermediate-/poor-risk disease., Results: Overall, 623 patients were randomly assigned to BEMPEG plus NIVO (n = 311) or TKI (n = 312; sunitinib n = 225, cabozantinib n = 87), of whom 514 (82.5%) had IMDC intermediate-/poor-risk disease. In patients with IMDC intermediate-/poor-risk disease, ORR with BEMPEG plus NIVO versus TKI was 23.0% (95% CI, 18.0 to 28.7) versus 30.6% (95% CI, 25.1 to 36.6; difference, -7.7 [95% CI, -15.2 to -0.2]; P = .0489), and median OS was 29.0 months versus not estimable (hazard ratio, 0.82 [95% CI, 0.61 to 1.10]; P = .192), respectively. More frequent all-grade treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) with BEMPEG plus NIVO versus TKI included pyrexia (32.6% v 2.0%) and pruritus (31.3% v 8.8%). Grade 3/4 TRAEs were less frequent with BEMPEG plus NIVO (25.8%) versus TKI (56.5%)., Conclusion: First-line BEMPEG plus NIVO for advanced/metastatic ccRCC did not improve efficacy in patients with intermediate-/poor-risk disease but led to fewer grade 3/4 TRAEs versus TKI.

Background: Most patients with metastatic gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma (mGEA) progress on immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs). Novel approaches to overcome resistance to ICI in mGEA are needed. Cabozantinib is a multi-tyrosine kinase inhibitor thought to enhance the immunomodulatory effects of ICI. This study evaluated the combination of cabozantinib and pembrolizumab in ICI refractory or resistant mGEA., Methods: Investigator-initiated, single-arm, single institution, and phase II study in patients with mGEA. Patients had progressed on ICI and/or had PD-L1 CPS score ≤10%. Cabozantinib dose was 40 mg p.o. daily on days 1-21 of a 21-day cycle, with pembrolizumab 200 mg i.v. on day 1. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival at 6 months (PFS-6)., Results: Twenty-seven patients were enrolled. Median age 58 years (24-87), female (n = 14), ECOG 0/1 = 13/14, GC/GEJ = 16/11, and non-Hispanic White/Hispanic/Asian = 12/8/7. The primary endpoint was met. After a median follow-up of 31.4 months (range 3.3-42.5), PFS-6 was 22.2% (95% CI 9.0-39.0). The median PFS and OS are 2.3 months (95% CI 1.7-4.1) and 5.5 months (3.1-14.0), respectively. The most common mutations were TP53 (78.3%) and CDH1/PIK3CA/CTNNB1 (17.4% each). The most common grade (G) treatment-related adverse events (TRAE) were diarrhea (25.9%), fatigue (18.5%), hypertension, and muscle cramps (14.8% each). G3-4 TRAE were seen in n = 3 patients (hypertension, thromboembolic event, esophageal perforation; each n = 1). No G5 was observed., Conclusions: The addition of cabozantinib to pembrolizumab shows clinical benefit in ICI-resistant or refractory mGEA with a tolerable safety profile. (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04164979. IRB Approved: UCI 18-124, University of California Irvine IRB#20195426.)., (© The Author(s) 2024. Published by Oxford University Press.)

Background & Aims: Prospective data on treatment after immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) therapy in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) are lacking. We conducted a phase II multicentre study on cabozantinib after ICI treatment in HCC., Methods: This is an investigator-initiated, single-arm, clinical trial involving academic centres in Hong Kong and Korea. Key eligibility criteria included diagnosis of HCC, refractoriness to prior ICI-based treatment, and Child-Pugh A liver function. A maximum of two prior lines of therapy were allowed. All patients were commenced on cabozantinib at 60 mg/day. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS)., Results: Forty-seven patients were recruited from Oct 2020 to May 2022; 27 and 20 patients had received one and two prior therapies, respectively. Median follow-up was 11.2 months. The median PFS was 4.1 months (95% CI 3.3-5.3). The median overall survival (OS) was 9.9 months (95% CI 7.3-14.4), and the 1-year OS rate was 45.3%. Partial response and stable disease occurred in 3 (6.4%) and 36 (76.6%) patients, respectively. When used as a second-line treatment (n = 27), cabozantinib was associated with a median PFS and OS of 4.3 (95% CI 3.3-6.7) and 14.3 (95% CI 8.9-NR) months, respectively. The corresponding median PFS and OS were 4.3 (95% CI 3.3-11.0) and 14.3 (95% CI 9.0-NR) months, respectively, for those receiving ICI-based regimens with proven benefits (n = 17). The most common grade 3-4 treatment-related adverse event was thrombocytopenia (6.4%). The median dose of cabozantinib was 40 mg/day. The number of prior therapies was an independent prognosticator (one vs. two; hazard ratio = 0.37; p = 0.03)., Conclusions: Cabozantinib demonstrated efficacy in patients who had received prior ICI regimens; survival data for second-line cabozantinib following first-line ICI regimens provide a reference for future clinical trial design. The number of prior lines of treatment may be considered a stratification factor in randomised studies., Impact and Implications: Prospective data on systemic treatment following prior immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) therapy for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) are lacking. This phase II clinical trial provides efficacy and safety data on cabozantinib in patients who had received prior ICI-based treatment. Exploratory analyses showed that the performance of cabozantinib differed significantly when used as a second- or third-line treatment. The above data could be used as a reference for clinical practice and the design of future clinical trials on subsequent treatment lines following ICIs., Gov Identifier: NCT04588051., (Copyright © 2024 European Association for the Study of the Liver. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: Although checkpoint inhibitors have improved first-line treatment for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), a therapeutic need remains for patients whose disease does not respond or who experience disease progression after anti-PD-L1/PD-1 immunotherapy. CONTACT-01 (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT04471428) evaluated atezolizumab plus cabozantinib versus docetaxel in patients with metastatic NSCLC who developed disease progression after concurrent or sequential treatment with anti-PD-L1/PD-1 and platinum-containing chemotherapy., Methods: This multicenter, open-label, phase III trial randomly assigned patients 1:1 to atezolizumab 1,200 mg intravenously once every 3 weeks (q3w) plus cabozantinib 40 mg orally once daily or docetaxel 75 mg/m 2 intravenously once every 3 weeks. The primary end point was overall survival (OS)., Results: One hundred eighty-six patients were assigned atezolizumab plus cabozantinib, and 180 docetaxel. Minimum OS follow-up was 10.9 months. Median OS was 10.7 months (95% CI, 8.8 to 12.3) with atezolizumab plus cabozantinib and 10.5 months (95% CI, 8.6 to 13.0) with docetaxel (stratified hazard ratio [HR], 0.88 [95% CI, 0.68 to 1.16]; P = .3668). Median progression-free survival was 4.6 months (95% CI, 4.1 to 5.6) and 4.0 months (95% CI, 3.1 to 4.4), respectively (stratified HR, 0.74 [95% CI, 0.59 to 0.92]). Serious adverse events (AEs) occurred in 71 (38.4%) patients receiving atezolizumab plus cabozantinib and 58 (34.7%) receiving docetaxel. Grade 3/4 treatment-related AEs occurred in 73 (39.5%) patients receiving atezolizumab plus cabozantinib and 58 (34.7%) receiving docetaxel. Grade 5 AEs occurred in 14 (7.6%) and 10 (6.0%) patients in the atezolizumab plus cabozantinib and docetaxel arms, respectively (treatment-related in four [2.2%] and one [0.6%], respectively)., Conclusion: Atezolizumab plus cabozantinib after disease progression following anti-PD-L1/PD-1 immunotherapy and platinum-containing chemotherapy for metastatic NSCLC did not improve OS compared with docetaxel. Safety was consistent with known profiles of these agents.

Objectives: Epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) inhibition with cetuximab is a standard treatment for head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC). Activation of the receptor tyrosine kinases AXL, MET and VEGFR can mediate resistance to cetuximab. Cabozantinib, a multikinase inhibitor (MKI) targeting AXL/MET/VEGFR, has demonstrated antitumor activity in preclinical models of HNSCC. This investigator- initiated phase I trial evaluated the safety and efficacy of cetuximab plus cabozantinib in patients with recurrent/metastatic (R/M) HNSCC., Materials and Methods: Patients received cetuximab concurrently with cabozantinib daily on a 28-day cycle. Using a 3 + 3 dose-escalation design, the primary endpoint was to determine the maximally tolerated dose (MTD) of cabozantinib. Secondary endpoints included overall response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS) RESULTS: Among the 20 patients enrolled, most had prior disease progression on immune checkpoint inhibitors (95 %), platinum-based chemotherapy (95 %), and cetuximab (80 %). No dose-limiting toxicities were recorded and the MTD for cabozantinib was established to be 60 mg. Grade ≥ 3 adverse events occurred in 65 % of patients (n = 13). ORR was 20 %, with 4 partial responses (PRs). Two PRs were observed in cetuximab-naïve patients (n = 4), with an ORR of 50 % in this subgroup. In the overall population, DCR was 75 %, median PFS was 3.4 months and median OS was 8.1 months., Conclusion: Cetuximab plus cabozantinib demonstrated a manageable toxicity profile and preliminary efficacy in patients with heavily treated R/M HNSCC. The combination of cetuximab with MKIs targeting the AXL/MET/VEGFR axis warrants further investigation, including in cetuximab-naïve patients., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: Locally advanced, unresectable basal cell carcinoma (LA BCC) can be treated with radiation therapy (RT), but locoregional control (LRC) rates are unsatisfactory. Vismodegib is a hedgehog pathway inhibitor (HPI) active in BCC that may radiosensitize BCC. We evaluated the combination of vismodegib and RT for patients with LA BCC., Methods: In this multicenter, single-arm, phase II study, patients with unresectable LA BCC received 12 weeks of induction vismodegib, followed by 7 weeks of concurrent vismodegib and RT. The primary end point was LRC rate at 1 year after the end of treatment. Secondary end points included objective response, progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), safety, and patient-reported quality of life (PRQOL)., Results: Twenty-four patients received vismodegib; five were unable to complete 12 weeks of induction therapy. LRC was achieved in 91% (95% CI, 68 to 98) of patients at 1 year. The response rate was 63% (95% CI, 38 to 84) after induction vismodegib and 83% (95% CI, 59 to 96) after concurrent vismodegib and RT. With a median follow-up of 5.7 years, 1-year PFS and OS rates were 100% and 96%, and at 5 years PFS and OS rates were 78% and 83%, respectively. Distant metastasis or BCC-related death has not been observed. The most frequent treatment-related adverse events (AEs) were dysgeusia, fatigue, and myalgias occurring in 83%, 75%, and 75% of patients. No grade 4 to 5 treatment-related AEs occurred. PRQOL demonstrated clinically meaningful improvements in all subscales, with emotions and functioning improvements persisting for a year after the end of treatment., Conclusion: In patients with unresectable LA BCC, the combination of vismodegib and RT yielded high rates of LRC and PFS and durable improvements in PRQOL.

Objective: Advanced clear cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC) seriously affects the life and health of patients, but effective treatment for this disease is still lacking in clinic. This study investigated the efficacy of nivolumab plus cabozantinib versus sunitinib in the treatment of elderly patients with advanced ccRCC., Methods: The clinical data of 216 elderly patients with advanced ccRCC in our hospital from January 2020 to January 2022 were retrospectively analysed. On the basis of different treatment regimens, patients were divided into the cabozantinib group (n = 111, receiving nivolumab and cabozantinib) and the sunitinib group (n = 105, receiving nivolumab and sunitinib). The overall survival time, disease control rates, health status, incidence of adverse events and identification of prognostic risk were compared between the two groups., Results: The cabozantinib group had higher overall survival time, disease control rate and scores in the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Kidney Symptom Index and EuroQol-Five Dimensions-Three Levels Questionnaire than the sunitinib group. The incidence of adverse events in the cabozantinib group was lower than that in the sunitinib group ( p < 0.001). However, no difference existed in the identification of prognostic risk between the two groups ( p > 0.05)., Conclusions: The effect of nivolumab plus cabozantinib on the treatment of elderly patients with advanced ccRCC is better than that of nivolumab plus sunitinib, with fewer adverse reactions and higher safety. However, the research results require further clinical studies to confirm and promote., Competing Interests: The authors declare no conflict of interest., (© 2024 The Author(s).)

Background: No head-to-head clinical trials have compared the differences in adverse events (AEs) between nivolumab plus ipilimumab (NIVO-IPI) and nivolumab plus cabozantinib (NIVO-CABO) in the treatment of metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC)., Aim: We analysed the two largest real-world databases, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) and the World Health Organization's VigiBase, to elucidate the differences in AEs between NIVO-IPI and NIVO-CABO., Method: In total, 40,376 and 38,022 records were extracted from FAERS and VigiBase, and 193 AEs were analysed. The reporting odds ratios (ROR) with 95% confidence interval were calculated using a disproportionality analysis (NIVO-CABO/NIVO-IPI)., Results: The reported numbers of immune-related AEs, including myocarditis, colitis, and hepatitis, were significantly higher with NIVO-IPI (ROR = 0.18 for FAERS and 0.13 for VigiBase). Contrarily, the reported numbers of other AEs, including gastrointestinal disorders (ROR = 2.68 and 2.92) and skin and subcutaneous tissue disorders (ROR = 2.94 and 3.55), considered to be potentiated by the combination of NIVO and CABO, were higher with NIVO-CABO., Conclusion: Our findings contribute to the selection and clinical management of NIVO-IPI and NIVO-CABO, which minimizes the risk of AEs for individual patients with mRCC by considering distinctive differences in the AE profiles., (© 2024. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature Switzerland AG.)

Background: Cabozantinib, an oral multi-targeted tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI), has demonstrated efficacy in metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). The association between toxicity and therapeutic effectiveness has been established with other TKIs. We investigated whether cabozantinib dose reductions, a surrogate for toxicity and adequate drug exposure, were associated with improved clinical outcomes in mRCC., Methods: Employing the CKCis database, we analyzed patients treated with cabozantinib in the second line or later between 2011 to 2021. The cohort was stratified into those needing dose reductions (DR) during treatment and those not (no-DR). Outcomes, including objective response rate (ORR), time to treatment failure (TTF), and overall survival (OS), were compared based on dose reduction status. The influence of the initial dose on outcomes was also explored., Results: Among 319 cabozantinib-treated patients, 48.3% underwent dose reductions. Response rates exhibited no significant difference between the DR and no-DR groups (15.1% vs. 18.2%, P = .55). Patients with DR had superior median OS (26.15 vs. 15.47 months, P = .019) and TTF (12.74 vs. 6.44 months, P = .022) compared to no-DR patients. These differences retained significance following adjustment for IMDC risk group (OS HR = 0.67, P = .032; TTF HR = 0.65, P = .008). There was no association between the initial dose and ORR, OS, or TTF., Conclusion: This study highlights the link between cabozantinib dose reductions due to toxicity and improved survival and time to treatment failure in mRCC patients. These findings underscore the potential of using on-treatment toxicity as an indicator of adequate drug exposure to individualize dosing and optimize treatment effectiveness. Larger studies are warranted to validate these results and develop individualized strategies for cabozantinib when given alone or in combination with immunotherapy., Competing Interests: Disclosure The authors have stated that they have no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: Cabozantinib is one of the preferred treatment options in the latest metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) guidelines. Cabozantinib is also associated with high drug expenses irrespective of the used dose, because a flat-prizing model has been implemented. In addition, concomitant intake with a high-fat meal increases its bioavailability on average by 57%. Combined with the long terminal half-life of cabozantinib (99 h), this creates possibilities to extend the dosing interval to reduce drug expenses whilst maintaining equivalent exposure., Objectives: The primary objective was to evaluate the population pharmacokinetic (POPPK) model of cabozantinib developed for its registration using real-world patients' therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) data. The secondary objective was to design, simulate, and evaluate alternative dose regimens with the aim to reduce drug expenses whilst maintaining comparable exposure., Methods: Retrospective TDM data from mRCC patients treated with cabozantinib were obtained. The data were evaluated using the published Food and Drug Administration (FDA) cabozantinib POPPK model, a two-compartment disposition model with a dual (fast and slow) lagged first-order absorption process derived from FDA registration documents, as a basis. Subsequently, simulations of alternative drug expenses saving regimens were evaluated., Results: Twenty-seven mRCC patients with 75 pharmacokinetic observations were included. Patients were treated for a median of 75 days with a median dose of 40 mg. Model evaluation results showed that the cabozantinib TDM concentrations were adequately predicted by the published FDA cabozantinib POPPK model, except for a slightly higher clearance (CL) of 3.11 L/h compared to the reported value (2.23 L/h). The simulation study indicated that an alternative dose regimen that consists of taking 60 mg of cabozantinib for 2 days and then skipping 1 day results in comparable average exposure when compared with a 40 mg daily dose, both without food interaction, while saving 33.3% of the total drug expenses per month. The food effect of a high-fat meal was also taken into account when simulating other alternative dose regimens; 40 mg every 72 h combined with a high-fat meal resulted in comparable exposure when compared with a 20 mg daily dose fasted, while saving 66.7% in drug expenses., Conclusions: In this study, the optimized cabozantinib POPPK model resulted in adequate prediction of real-world cabozantinib pharmacokinetic data. Alternative dosing regimens with and without using known food interactions were proposed that resulted in potential strategies to significantly reduce cabozantinib drug expenses., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Background: Previous evidence indicates that adjuvant, short-course androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) improves metastasis-free survival when given with primary radiotherapy for intermediate-risk and high-risk localised prostate cancer. However, the value of ADT with postoperative radiotherapy after radical prostatectomy is unclear., Methods: RADICALS-HD was an international randomised controlled trial to test the efficacy of ADT used in combination with postoperative radiotherapy for prostate cancer. Key eligibility criteria were indication for radiotherapy after radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer, prostate-specific antigen less than 5 ng/mL, absence of metastatic disease, and written consent. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) to radiotherapy alone (no ADT) or radiotherapy with 6 months of ADT (short-course ADT), using monthly subcutaneous gonadotropin-releasing hormone analogue injections, daily oral bicalutamide monotherapy 150 mg, or monthly subcutaneous degarelix. Randomisation was done centrally through minimisation with a random element, stratified by Gleason score, positive margins, radiotherapy timing, planned radiotherapy schedule, and planned type of ADT, in a computerised system. The allocated treatment was not masked. The primary outcome measure was metastasis-free survival, defined as distant metastasis arising from prostate cancer or death from any cause. Standard survival analysis methods were used, accounting for randomisation stratification factors. The trial had 80% power with two-sided α of 5% to detect an absolute increase in 10-year metastasis-free survival from 80% to 86% (hazard ratio [HR] 0·67). Analyses followed the intention-to-treat principle. The trial is registered with the ISRCTN registry, ISRCTN40814031, and ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT00541047., Findings: Between Nov 22, 2007, and June 29, 2015, 1480 patients (median age 66 years [IQR 61-69]) were randomly assigned to receive no ADT (n=737) or short-course ADT (n=743) in addition to postoperative radiotherapy at 121 centres in Canada, Denmark, Ireland, and the UK. With a median follow-up of 9·0 years (IQR 7·1-10·1), metastasis-free survival events were reported for 268 participants (142 in the no ADT group and 126 in the short-course ADT group; HR 0·886 [95% CI 0·688-1·140], p=0·35). 10-year metastasis-free survival was 79·2% (95% CI 75·4-82·5) in the no ADT group and 80·4% (76·6-83·6) in the short-course ADT group. Toxicity of grade 3 or higher was reported for 121 (17%) of 737 participants in the no ADT group and 100 (14%) of 743 in the short-course ADT group (p=0·15), with no treatment-related deaths., Interpretation: Metastatic disease is uncommon following postoperative bed radiotherapy after radical prostatectomy. Adding 6 months of ADT to this radiotherapy did not improve metastasis-free survival compared with no ADT. These findings do not support the use of short-course ADT with postoperative radiotherapy in this patient population., Funding: Cancer Research UK, UK Research and Innovation (formerly Medical Research Council), and Canadian Cancer Society., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests AN reports honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers bureaus, manuscript writing, or educational events from Merck. ADC reports research grants for the STAMPEDE trial from Janssen, Astellas, Novartis, Sanofi, and Clovis. ACT reports research grants to their institution from Elekta, Varian, and Accuracy; honoraria for talks from Elekta, Accuracy, and Janssen; travel assistance for radiotherapy conferences from Elekta; serving on the data safety board for two academic trials; and roles as the Chair of the MR-Linac Consortium and the genitourinary lead editor for the International Journal of Radiation Oncology, Biology, Physics. AC reports receiving grants or contracts from the National Institute for Health and Care Research, Manchester Biomedical Research Centre, Cancer Research UK, Medical Research Council (MRC) UK, Prostate Cancer UK, Bayer UK, and Elekta; and payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers bureaus, manuscript writing, or educational events from the American Society for Radiation Oncology, the American Society of Clinical Oncology, Cancer Research UK, Roche, AstraZeneca, and Bristol Myers Squibb (BMS). CNC reports support for the present manuscript from the Canadian Cancer Trials Group; and payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers bureaus, manuscript writing, or educational events from Bayer Corp, Knight Therapeutics, and AbbVie. CLG reports participating in the independent data monitoring and steering committee for the BARCODE study at the Institute of Cancer Research in London (principal investigator Prof Ros Eeles). CCP reports consulting fees from AAA, ITM Radiopharma, Myovant, and Clarity Pharmaceuticals to his institution; and payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers bureaus, manuscript writing, or educational events from Janssen and Bayer to his institution. CM reports that they are employed by University College London (UCL) as Trial Manager for RADICALS. FS reports grants or contracts from Janssen, Bayer, Merck, Pfizer, Astellas, BMS, Novartis, Sanofi, and AstraZeneca to his institution; consulting fees from Janssen, Bayer, Astellas, BMS, Novartis, Sanofi, AstraZeneca, Merck, and Pfizer to him; and payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers bureaus, manuscript writing, or educational events from Janssen, Bayer, Myovant, Astellas, BMS, Novartis, Sanofi, AstraZeneca, Merck, and Pfizer to him. LCB reports their previous Institute of Cancer role was funded in part by a Biomedical Research Centre grant which was paid to the institution; the role was not connected to the RADICALS trial. MRS reports research grants and biomarker testing costs, all to their institution and all active in the past 36 months but on research outside of this research, from Astellas, Clovis Oncology, Janssen, Novartis, and Sanofi-Aventis; consulting fees from Eli Lilly; speaker fees at a clinical trial statistics training meeting for clinicians (no discussion of particular drugs) from Lilly Oncology, Janssen, and Eisai; and is an independent member of many independent data monitoring committees but all for academic sponsors and unpaid. NWC reports honoraria for lectures, advisory boards, and symposia from AstraZeneca, Janssen, Bayer, and Pfizer; support for travel to and attendance at a European meeting from Bayer; participation on the independent data monitoring committee for the Probio trial (Karolinska), and the trial steering committee for the Capi 28 trial (AstraZeneca) and the STAMPEDE trial (MRC); and is the Joint National Clinical Lead for the National Prostate Cancer Audit. PWMC reports grants or contracts from the Canadian Association of Radiation Oncology ACURA program and the Canadian Institute of Health Research; payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers bureaus, manuscript writing, or educational events from Pfizer and EMD Serono; and participation on a data safety monitoring board or advisory board from TerSera, AbbVie, Tolmar, and Knight Therapeutics. PMP reports participation on a data safety monitoring board or advisory board for AAA Nordic, MSD, and Pfizer Denmark. SCM reports honoraria from Janssen, Astellas, Knight Therapeutics, AMGEN Pharmaceutical, AstraZeneca, AbbVie, and Bayer; and support for attending meetings or travel from TerSera and Sanofi. VK reports a Cancer Research UK grant for the CORE trial to his institution; honoraria from Accuracy, Astellas, Bayer, and Boston Scientific; meeting attendance support from Accuray, Astellas, AstraZeneca, Bayer, BMS, Boston Scientific, Janssen, Merck Sharp & Dohme, and Norvatis; is an unpaid member of the independent data monitoring committee for the EPIC trial and the advisory board for Bayer and Janssen; and is the unpaid Chair of National Cancer Research Institute Penile subgroup of the Bladder and Renal Clinical Studies Group. WRC reports consulting fees from Bayer and Janssen; payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers bureaus, manuscript writing, or educational events from Astellas, Bayer, Janssen, AAA Novartis, and Myriad Genetics; and support for attending meetings or travel from Janssen, AAA Novartis, and Bayer. All other authors declare no competing interests., (Copyright © 2024 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article under the CC BY 4.0 license. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Background: To date, no studies have compared the treatment outcomes of second-line therapies in patients with metastatic clear cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC). This study retrospectively evaluated the efficacy of cabozantinib and axitinib as second-line treatments in patients with metastatic ccRCC who previously received immune-oncology combination therapy., Patients and Methods: Patients with metastatic ccRCC treated with cabozantinib and axitinib as second-line therapy after nivolumab-ipilimumab treatment were identified among 243 patients with RCC treated between August 1, 2018 and January 31, 2022 at 34 institutions belonging to the Japanese Urological Oncology Group. Patients were assessed for treatment outcomes, including progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival, objective response rate (ORR), and incidence rate of treatment-related adverse events (AEs)., Results: Forty-eight patients treated with cabozantinib and 60 treated with axitinib as second-line therapy after nivolumab-ipilimumab treatment for metastatic ccRCC were identified. The median PFS (95% confidence interval) was 11.0 months (9.0-16.0) with cabozantinib and 9.5 months (6.0-13.0) with axitinib. The ORRs were 37.5% (cabozantinib) and 38.3% (axitinib). The rates of any-grade AEs and grade ≥3 AEs were 79.2% (cabozantinib) versus 63.3% (axitinib; P = .091) and 35.4% (cabozantinib) versus 23.3% (axitinib; P = .202), respectively. In the poor-risk group, PFS was longer in the cabozantinib group than in the axitinib group (P = .033)., Conclusion: The efficacy and safety of cabozantinib and axitinib were comparable. In the poor-risk group, cabozantinib was more effective than axitinib. These findings provide valuable insights into the selection of second-line treatment options after nivolumab-ipilimumab treatment in patients with metastatic ccRCC., Competing Interests: Disclosure HK: Honoraria, Advisory, or Research support: Bristol-Myers Squibb and Takeda. HM: Honoraria: Takeda, MSD, Pfizer, and Ono. JF: Honoraria: Takeda, MSD, and Ono., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Previous evidence supports androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) with primary radiotherapy as initial treatment for intermediate-risk and high-risk localised prostate cancer. However, the use and optimal duration of ADT with postoperative radiotherapy after radical prostatectomy remains uncertain., Methods: RADICALS-HD was a randomised controlled trial of ADT duration within the RADICALS protocol. Here, we report on the comparison of short-course versus long-course ADT. Key eligibility criteria were indication for radiotherapy after previous radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer, prostate-specific antigen less than 5 ng/mL, absence of metastatic disease, and written consent. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) to add 6 months of ADT (short-course ADT) or 24 months of ADT (long-course ADT) to radiotherapy, using subcutaneous gonadotrophin-releasing hormone analogue (monthly in the short-course ADT group and 3-monthly in the long-course ADT group), daily oral bicalutamide monotherapy 150 mg, or monthly subcutaneous degarelix. Randomisation was done centrally through minimisation with a random element, stratified by Gleason score, positive margins, radiotherapy timing, planned radiotherapy schedule, and planned type of ADT, in a computerised system. The allocated treatment was not masked. The primary outcome measure was metastasis-free survival, defined as metastasis arising from prostate cancer or death from any cause. The comparison had more than 80% power with two-sided α of 5% to detect an absolute increase in 10-year metastasis-free survival from 75% to 81% (hazard ratio [HR] 0·72). Standard time-to-event analyses were used. Analyses followed intention-to-treat principle. The trial is registered with the ISRCTN registry, ISRCTN40814031, and ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT00541047., Findings: Between Jan 30, 2008, and July 7, 2015, 1523 patients (median age 65 years, IQR 60-69) were randomly assigned to receive short-course ADT (n=761) or long-course ADT (n=762) in addition to postoperative radiotherapy at 138 centres in Canada, Denmark, Ireland, and the UK. With a median follow-up of 8·9 years (7·0-10·0), 313 metastasis-free survival events were reported overall (174 in the short-course ADT group and 139 in the long-course ADT group; HR 0·773 [95% CI 0·612-0·975]; p=0·029). 10-year metastasis-free survival was 71·9% (95% CI 67·6-75·7) in the short-course ADT group and 78·1% (74·2-81·5) in the long-course ADT group. Toxicity of grade 3 or higher was reported for 105 (14%) of 753 participants in the short-course ADT group and 142 (19%) of 757 participants in the long-course ADT group (p=0·025), with no treatment-related deaths., Interpretation: Compared with adding 6 months of ADT, adding 24 months of ADT improved metastasis-free survival in people receiving postoperative radiotherapy. For individuals who can accept the additional duration of adverse effects, long-course ADT should be offered with postoperative radiotherapy., Funding: Cancer Research UK, UK Research and Innovation (formerly Medical Research Council), and Canadian Cancer Society., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests AN reports honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers bureaus, manuscript writing, or educational events from Merck. ADC reports research grants for the STAMPEDE trial from Janssen, Astellas, Novartis, Sanofi, and Clovis. CMH is an executive committee member for the British Uro-Oncology Group. CNC reports support for the present manuscript from the Canadian Cancer Trials Group; payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers bureaus, manuscript writing, or educational events from Bayer Corp, Knight Therapeutics, and AbbVie. CLG reports that they participate in the independent data monitoring and steering committee for the BARCODE study at the Institute of Cancer Research in London (principal investigator Ros Eeles). CB reports stock or stock options from GSK; and has been an employee at GSK since August, 2023. CCP reports consulting fees from AAA, ITM Radiopharma, Myovant, and Clarity Pharmaceuticals to his institution; and payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers bureaus, manuscript writing, or educational events from Janssen and Bayer to his institution. FS reports grants or contracts from Janssen, Bayer, Merck, Pfizer, Astellas, Bristol Myers Squibb (BMS), Novartis, Sanofi, and AstraZeneca to his institution; consulting fees from Janssen, Bayer, Astellas, BMS, Novartis, Sanofi, AstraZeneca, Merck, and Pfizer to him; and payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers bureaus, manuscript writing, or educational events from Janssen, Bayer, Myovant, Astellas, BMS, Novartis, Sanofi, AstraZeneca, Merck, and Pfizer to him. LCB reports that their previous Institute of Cancer role was funded in part by a Biomedical Research Centre grant which was paid to the institution; the role was not connected to the RADICALS trial. MRS reports research grants and biomarker testing costs, all to institution and all active in past 36 months but on research outside of this research, from Astellas, Clovis Oncology, Janssen, Novartis, and Sanofi-Aventis; consulting fees from Eli Lilly; speaker fees at a clinical trial statistics training meeting for clinicians (no discussion of particular drugs) from Lilly Oncology, Janssen, and Eisai; and is an independent member of many independent data monitoring committees but all for academic sponsors and unpaid. NDJ is a Senior Investigator for the National Institute for Health and Care Research. NWC reports honoraria for lectures, advisory boards, and symposia from AstraZeneca, Janssen, Bayer, and Pfizer; support for travel to and attendance at a European meeting from Bayer; participation on an independent data monitoring committee for the Probio trial (Karolinska), and the trial steering committee for the Capi 28 Trial (AstraZeneca) and the STAMPEDE Trial (Medical Research Council [MRC]); and is the Joint National Clinical Lead for National Prostate Cancer Audit. PW reports an educational event payment from Astellas; conference and travel cost support from AstraZeneca and Aventis; and participation on the advisory board for Ferring and Roche. PWMC reports grants or contracts from CARO-ACURA and the Canadian Institutes of Health Research; payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers bureaus, manuscript writing, or educational events from Pfizer and EMD Serono; and participation on a data safety monitoring board or advisory board for TerSera, AbbVie, Tolmar, and Knight Therapeutics. PMP reports participation on a data safety monitoring board or advisory board for AAA Nordic, MSD, and Pfizer Denmark. SCM reports honoraria from Janssen, Astellas, Knight Therapeutics, Amgen Pharmaceutical, AstraZeneca, AbbVie, and Bayer; and support for attending meetings or travel from TerSera and Sanofi. WRC reports consulting fees from Bayer and Janssen; payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers bureaus, manuscript writing, or educational events from Astellas, Bayer, Janssen, AAA Novartis, and Myriad Genetics; and support for attending meetings or travel from Janssen, AAA Novartis, and Bayer. All other authors declare no competing interests., (Copyright © 2024 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article under the CC BY 4.0 license. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Background: Alternative anti-androgen therapy has been widely used as a first-line treatment for castration-resistant prostate cancer, and it may affect treatment outcome of subsequent agents targeting the androgen receptor axis. We conducted the prospective observational DELC (Determination of Enzalutamide Long-term safety and efficacy for Castration-resistant prostate cancer patients after combined anti-androgen blockade followed by alternative anti-androgen therapy) study to evaluate the efficacy of enzalutamide in patients with castration-resistant prostate cancer who underwent prior combined androgen blockade with bicalutamide and then alternative anti-androgen therapy with flutamide., Methods: The DELC study enrolled 163 Japanese patients with castration-resistant prostate cancer who underwent alternative anti-androgen therapy with flutamide following failure of initial combined androgen blockade with bicalutamide in multiple institutions between January 2016 and March 2019. Primary endpoint was overall survival. Administration of enzalutamide was started at 160 mg orally once daily in all patients., Results: The rate of decline of prostate-specific antigen by 50% or more was 72.2%, and median overall survival was 42.05 months. Multivariate analysis revealed that higher pretreatment serum levels of prostate-specific antigen (≥11.3 ng/mL; P = 0.004), neuron-specific enolase (P = 0.014) and interleukin-6 (≥2.15 pg/mL; P = 0.004) were independent risk factors for overall survival. Fatigue (30.0%), constipation (19.6%) and appetite loss (17.8%) were the most common clinically relevant adverse events. The enzalutamide dose was not reduced in any patient under the age of 70, but adherence was decreased in those over 70., Conclusions: In the DELC study, the safety of enzalutamide was comparable to that in previous reports. Serum levels of neuron-specific enolase and interleukin-6 were suggested as prognostic factors for castration-resistant prostate cancer with potential clinical utility., (© The Author(s) 2024. Published by Oxford University Press.)

Introduction: In advanced basal cell carcinoma (BCC), the issue of whether Hedgehog inhibitors (HHIs) should be stopped or not after clinical complete response (cCR) achievement remains an unmet clinical need., Materials and Methods: We conducted a retrospective, multicenter study across 7 Italian dermato-oncology units including patients with BCC who continued vismodegib after cCR between 2012 and 2019. We assessed the relationship between the duration of vismodegib intake (days to cCR [DTCR], days to stop after cCR [DTS], total treatment days [TTD]), and disease-free survival (DFS). Reasons to stop vismodegib were (R1) toxicity and (R2) disease recurrence. The relationship between DTCR, DTS, TTD, and DFS in the whole population and in R1 subgroup was assessed by Pearson's correlation coefficient (P < .05) and Bayesian statistics (BF10)., Results: Sixty-eight BCC patients with a median (m) age of 75.5 years (39-100) were included. Most patients were male (N = 43, 63%), without Gorlin syndrome (N = 56, 82%) and with head and neck area as primary site (N = 51, 75%). After cCR, out of 68 patients, 90% (N = 61/68) discontinued vismodegib: 82% (N = 50/61) due to toxicity (R1), and 18% (N = 11/61) due to recurrence (R2). Conversely, 10% (N = 7/68) continued vismodegib until last follow-up. In the whole population (N = 68), cCR was achieved with a mDTCR of 180.50 days. DFS showed a significant correlation with DTS (P < .01, BF10 = 39.2) and TTD (P < .01, BF10 = 35566), while it was not correlated to DTCR (BF10 < 0.1). The analysis of R1 subgroup (N = 50) confirmed these results. DFS correlated with DTS in all recurrent patients (N = 38, r = 0.44, P < .01) and in the recurrent patients who stopped vismodegib for toxicity (N = 26, r = 0.665, P < .01). DFS was longer when vismodegib was maintained for >2 months after cCR (mDFS > 2 months, N = 54 vs. ≤ 2 months, N = 14: 470 vs. 175 d, P < .01)., Conclusions: Our retrospective results suggest that HHIs should be continued after cCR to improve DFS in BCC., (© The Author(s) 2023. Published by Oxford University Press.)

Objectives: To provide a more comprehensive understanding of the efficacy and safety profile of cabozantinib versus placebo in malignant tumors, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis. This involved analyzing a collection of published randomized controlled trials to assess the outcomes., Methods: We used RevMan5.3 software to evaluate the outcomes of the collected studies. The primary outcome we focused on was progression-free survival (PFS), and the secondary outcomes included overall survival (OS) and disease control rate (DCR)., Results: Our findings revealed that compared to placebo, cabozantinib significantly extended the PFS of patients [hazard ratios (HR) 0.37, 95% confidence intervals (CI): 0.32, 0.43, p  < 0.00001]. Additionally, cabozantinib improved the OS of patients [HR 0.78, 95%CI: 0.68, 0.91, p  = 0.002]. While it is important to note that cabozantinib was associated with a higher likelihood of causing digestive, cutaneous, and cardiovascular related adverse events [relative risk (RR) 4.40, 95% CI: 3.10, 6.25, p  < 0.00001]., Conclusion: Based on our analysis, cabozantinib significantly prolonged the PFS and OS of patients with malignant tumors ( p  < 0.01). We recommend the use of cabozantinib in treating advanced malignant tumors. However, it is important to continuously monitor and manage the drug-related adverse events., Registration: PROSPERO (No. CRD42023449261).

Background: Adrenocortical carcinoma is a rare malignancy with poor response to systemic chemotherapy. Mitotane is the only approved therapy for adrenocortical carcinoma. Cabozantinib is a multikinase inhibitor approved in multiple malignancies. This is the first prospective trial to explore the anti-tumour activity, safety, and pharmacokinetic profile of cabozantinib in patients with advanced adrenocortical carcinoma., Methods: This investigator-initiated, single-arm, phase 2 trial in adult patients (aged ≥18 years) with advanced adrenocortical carcinoma was done at the University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center (Houston, TX, USA). Eligible patients had histologically confirmed adrenocortical carcinoma, were not candidates for surgery with curative intent, had measurable disease, had an estimated life expectancy of at least 3 months, and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status of 0-2 with adequate organ function. Patients who had used mitotane within 6 months of study participation were required to have a serum mitotane level of less than 2 mg/L. Patients were given oral cabozantinib 60 mg daily with the option of dose reduction to manage adverse events. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival at 4 months, assessed in all patients who received at least one dose of study drug per protocol. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03370718, and is now complete., Findings: Between March 1, 2018, and May 31, 2021, we enrolled 18 patients (ten males and eight females), all of whom received at least one dose of study treatment. Of the 18 patients, eight (44%) had an ECOG performance status of 0, nine (50%) patients had a performance status of 1, and one (6%) patient had a performance status of 2. Median follow-up was 36·8 months (IQR 30·2-50·3). At 4 months, 13 (72·2%; 95% CI 46·5-90·3) of 18 patients had progression-free survival and median progression-free survival was 6 months (95% CI 4·3 to not reached). One patient remains on treatment. Treatment-related adverse events of grade 3 or worse occurred in 11 (61%) of 18 patients. The most common grade 3 adverse events were lipase elevation (three [17%] of 18 patients), elevated γ-glutamyl transferase concentrations (two [11%] patients), elevated alanine aminotransferase concentrations (two [11%] patients), hypophosphatemia (two [11%] patients), and hypertension (two [11%] patients). One (6%) of 18 patients had grade 4 hypertension. No treatment related deaths occurred on study., Interpretation: Cabozantinib in advanced adrenocortical carcinoma showed promising efficacy with a manageable and anticipated safety profile. Further prospective studies with cabozantinib alone and in combination with immune checkpoint therapy are ongoing., Funding: Exelixis., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests MTC reports institutional research funding from ApricityHealth, AstraZeneca, Exelixis, Janssen, Pfizer, SeaGen, and the United States Department of Defense; speaker's Bureau participation with Curio Science, Dava Oncology, and MJH Life Sciences; and advisory board fees or honorarium from Exelixis, Eisai, and SeaGen. CJ reports research grants paid to their institution from Exelixis, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Progenics pharmaceuticals, and Lantheus pharmaceuticals; and participation of scientific advisory boards for Merck Sharp & Dohme and Lantheus pharmaceuticals. CH reports research grants to their institution from Avenge Bio, Dragonfly Therapeutics, BTG, Sanofi, and Iovance; stock options from BriaCell as a scientific advisory board member; and travel expenses or honoraria from the Hope Foundation and the Society for Immunotherapy of Cancer, outside the scope of the submitted work. MAH reports research grants to their institution from Exelixis, Merck, and Corcept; and honoraria from HRA pharma. All other authors declare no competing interests., (© 2024 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved, including those for text and data mining, AI training, and similar technologies.)

With immunotherapy historically focused on cutaneous melanoma, there has been a new wave of systemic medications available for treating non-melanoma skin cancers including basal cell carcinoma (BCC), squamous cell carcinoma (SCC), and Merkel cell carcinoma (MCC). The immune checkpoint inhibitors approved by the FDA target programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1) and the Hedgehog (Hh) signaling pathway. These medications have expanded treatment options; however, side effects are an important consideration. We used the FDA Adverse Events Reporting System (FAERS) to characterize the most prevalent, real-world side effects experienced by patients on these agents. Muscle spasms (23.45%), alopecia (16.06%), ageusia (12.02%), taste disorder (11.91%), and fatigue (11.67%) were the five most common side effects reported with medications used for BCC treatment. Logistic regression analysis showed males on vismodegib for BCC having greater odds of experiencing muscle spasms (aOR 1.33, P&lt;0.001) and ageusia (aOR 1.34,&nbsp; P&lt;0.001) versus females, who were more likely to exhibit alopecia (aOR 1.82, P&lt;0.001) and nausea (aOR 1.96, P&lt;0.001). With SCC treatment, the 5 most reported adverse events were fatigue (5.58%), rash (3.59%), asthenia (3.59%), pruritus (3.19%), and pyrexia (2.79%). Patients taking cemiplimab-rwlc for BCC compared to SCC were more likely to experience disease progression (aOR 10.98, P=0.02). With medication labels providing an excessively daunting list of side effects, we characterize practical side effects seen in patients receiving systemic treatments for non-melanoma skin cancers.&nbsp; J Drugs Dermatol. 2024;23(5):301-305. doi:10.36849/JDD.7968.

Basal cell carcinoma (BCC) is highly curable by surgical excision or radiation. In rare cases, BCC can be locally destructive or difficult to surgically remove. Hedgehog inhibition (HHI) with vismodegib or sonidegib induces a 50-60% response rate. Long-term toxicity includes muscle spasms and weight loss leading to dose decreases. This retrospective chart review also investigates the impact of CoQ10 and calcium supplementation in patients treated with HHI drugs at a single academic medical center from 2012 to 2022. We reviewed the charts of adult patients diagnosed with locally advanced or metastatic BCC treated with vismodegib or sonidegib primarily for progression-free survival (PFS). Secondary objectives included overall survival, BCC-specific survival, time to and reasons for discontinuation, overall response rate, safety and tolerability, use of CoQ10 and calcium supplements, and insurance coverage. Of 55 patients assessable for outcome, 34 (61.8%) had an overall clinical benefit, with 25 (45.4%) having a complete response and 9 (16.3%) a partial response. Stable disease was seen in 14 (25.4%) and 7 (12.7%) progressed. Of the 34 patients who responded to treatment, 9 recurred. Patients who were rechallenged with HHI could respond again. The median overall BCC-specific survival rate at 5 years is 89%. Dose reductions or discontinuations for vismodegib and sonidegib occurred in 59% versus 24% of cases, or 30% versus 9% of cases, respectively. With CoQ10 and calcium supplementation, only 17% required a dose reduction versus 42% without. HHI is highly effective for treating advanced BCC but may require dosing decreases. Sonidegib was better tolerated than vismodegib. CoQ10 and calcium supplementation can effectively prevent muscle spasms., Competing Interests: Heather Armbruster: Bristol Myers Squibb, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Regeneron, (Copyright: © 2024 Patel et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.)

Background: Although immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) show a significant overall survival advantage over standard advanced renal cell carcinoma (aRCC) therapies, tumor response to these agents remains poor. Some studies have shown that combination therapy including an ICI appears to be the best treatment; however, the overall benefit in terms of efficacy and toxicity still needs to be assessed. Thus, we performed a network meta-analysis to evaluate the differences in the efficacy of several combinations that include an ICI to provide a basis for clinical treatment selection., Methods: We conducted a thorough search of PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library for articles from January 2010 to June 2023. R 4.4.2 and STATA 16.0 were used to analyze data; hazard ratio (HR) and odds ratio (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were used to assess the results., Results: An indirect comparison showed that nivolumab plus cabozantinib and pembrolizumab plus lenvatinib were the most effective treatments for progression-free survival (PFS), with no significant differences between the two interventions (HR, 1.31; 95% CI, 0.96-1.78; P=0.08); rank probability showed that pembrolizumab plus lenvatinib had a 57.1% chance of being the preferred treatment. In the absence of indirect comparisons between pembrolizumab plus axitinib, nivolumab plus ipilimumab, avelumab plus axitinib, nivolumab plus cabozantinib, and pembrolizumab plus lenvatinib, pembrolizumab plus axitinib (40.2%) was the best treatment option for overall survival (OS). Compared to pembrolizumab plus lenvatinib, nivolumab plus ipilimumab (OR, 0.07; 95% CI, 0.01-0.65; P=0.02) and pembrolizumab plus axitinib (OR, 0.05; 95% CI, 0.00-0.78; P<0.001) had a lower incidence of overall adverse events (AEs)., Conclusion: Pembrolizumab plus lenvatinib and pembrolizumab plus axitinib resulted in the highest PFS and OS rates, respectively. Pembrolizumab plus axitinib may be the best option when AEs are a concern., Systematic Review Registration: https://inplasy.com/, identifier INPLASY202410078., Competing Interests: The 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 © 2024 Chen, Xu, Wu, Xie, Wang and Liu.)

This study investigates the effects of peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor gamma (PPARγ) inhibition on bone and immune cell profiles in aged female mice, as well as in vitro stromal stem cell osteogenic differentiation and inflammation gene expression. The hypothesis was that inhibition of PPARγ would increase bone mass and alter immune and other cellular functions. Our results showed that treatment with PPARγ antagonist GW9662 for 6 weeks reduced bone volume and trabecular number and increased trabecular spacing. However, inhibition of PPARγ had no significant effect on marrow and spleen immune cell composition in aged female mice. In vitro experiments indicated that GW9662 treatment increased the expression of osteogenic genes but did not affect adipogenic genes. Additionally, GW9662 treatment decreased the expression of several inflammation-related genes. Overall, these findings suggest that PPARγ inhibition may have adverse effects on bone in aged female mice., (© The Author(s) 2023. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of The Gerontological Society of America. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Real-world cabozantinib use has increased since its approval to treat patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC) in 2016. We reviewed cabozantinib use in real-world clinical practice and compared outcomes with pivotal cabozantinib randomized control trials (RCTs). This PRISMA-standard systematic literature review evaluated real-world effectiveness and tolerability of cabozantinib in patients with RCC (PROSPERO registration: CRD42021245854). Systematic MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane database searches were conducted on November 2, 2022. Eligible publications included ≥ 20 patients with RCC receiving cabozantinib. After double-screening for eligibility, standardized data were abstracted, qualitatively summarized, and assessed for risk of bias using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Of 353 screened publications, 41 were included, representing approximately 11,000 real-world patients. Most publications reported cabozantinib monotherapy cohort studies (40/41) of retrospective (39/41) and multicenter (32/41) design; most included patients from North America and/or Europe (30/41). Baseline characteristics were demographically similar between real-world and pivotal RCT populations, but real-world populations showed greater variation in prevalence of prior nephrectomy, multiple-site/brain metastasis, and nonclear-cell RCC histology. Cabozantinib activity was reported across real-world treatment lines and tumor types. Overall survival, progression-free survival, and objective response rate values from pivotal RCTs were within the ranges reported for equivalent outcomes across real-world studies. Common real-world grade ≥ 3 adverse events were consistent with those in pivotal RCTs (fatigue, palmar-plantar erythrodysesthesia syndrome, diarrhea, hypertension), but less frequent. No new tolerability concerns were identified. Real-world RCC survival outcomes for cabozantinib monotherapy were broadly consistent with pivotal RCTs, despite greater heterogeneity in real-world populations., Competing Interests: Disclosure MG-G: Consultancy or advisory role: Amgen, Astellas Medivation, AstraZeneca, Bayer/Onyx, Bristol Myers Squibb, Eisai, Ipsen, Janssen-Cilag, MSD Oncology, Pfizer, Roche, and Sanofi; Research funding (to institution): AstraZeneca, Ipsen, Janssen-Cilag, Merck, MSD Oncology, Pfizer, and Roche; Travel, accommodations, and expenses: Astellas Pharma, AstraZeneca, Ipsen, Janssen-Cilag, Pfizer, and Roche. LB: Consultancy or advisory role: AstraZeneca, Ipsen, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, and Roche. MTC: Consultancy or advisory role: Astellas, AstraZeneca, AXDev, Eisai, EMD Serono, Exelixis, Genentech, Pfizer, and SeaGen; Research funding: ApricityHealth, Aravive, AstraZeneca, Exelixis, Janssen, and Pfizer/EMD Serono; Nonbranded educational programs: Bristol Myers Squibb, Merck, Pfizer/EMD Serono, and Roche. AM: Consultancy or advisory role: Bristol Myers Squibb, Clovis Oncology, Eisai, GSK, Ipsen, Pfizer, and Tesaro. BV: Consultancy or advisory role: Bristol Myers Squibb, EUSA Pharma, and Merck Sharp & Dohme; travel/accommodation/expenses: Bristol Myers Squibb, EUSA Pharma, and Ipsen; Research funding (institution): Bristol Myers Squibb, Exelixis, Ipsen, Merck Sharp & Dohme, and Pfizer; Honoraria (self): Bristol Myers Squibb, Ipsen, and Pfizer; Speaker bureau/expert testimony: Bristol Myers Squibb, Eisai, EUSA Pharma, Merck Serono, Merck Sharp & Dohme, and Pfizer. JZ: Research funding: Ipsen. PD: Employment: Ipsen; Stock and other ownership interests: Biogen and Ipsen. GP: Consulting or advisory role: Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Bristol Myers Squibb, Eisai, Janssen, Ipsen, Lilly, Merck, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, and Roche. LA: Consulting or advisory role: Astellas Pharma, Bristol Myers Squibb, Ipsen, Janssen, Merck, MSD, Pfizer, and Roche; Travel, accommodation, expenses: Bristol Myers Squibb, Ipsen, and MSD., (Copyright © 2023 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: The existing large prospective study demonstrates the benefits of primary radiotherapy in patients with low-volume oligometastatic prostate cancer (OMPC), and there is additional evidence of the benefits of local metastasis-directed therapy (MDT) for metastatic lesions. However, there are no results from a prospective study to demonstrate the efficacy of radiotherapy for prostate and oligometastases. Therefore, the aim of the protocol is to illustrate the efficacy of radiotherapy for prostate and oligometastatic lesions in patients with low-volume de novo hormone-sensitive OMPC., Methods and Analysis: This study involves a prospective, single-center, limited-sample, single-arm exploration of radiotherapy for prostate and oligometastatic lesions in patients diagnosed with low-volume hormone-sensitive OMPC. Eligible participants undergo thorough assessments and treatment involving endocrine therapy alongside radiation targeting metastatic lesions and the pelvic region. The primary site is treated with volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT), while metastatic sites are treated with either VMAT or stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) depending on their location. All patients received radiation therapy for both the primary and metastatic lesions combined with endocrine therapy. Endocrine therapy with an antiandrogen (bicalutamide, for 4 weeks) androgen deprivation therapy combined with novel hormonal agents (acetate abiraterone) will be continued for 2 years. The primary objective is to evaluate progression-free survival-2 (PFS-2), while secondary endpoints include androgen deprivation therapy (ADT)-free survival, quality of life (QoL), overall survival, time to castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC), radiation-related complications, and endocrine therapy-related adverse events., Ethics and Dissemination: Approval was obtained from the ethics committee of the First Affiliated Hospital of Naval Medical University (CHEC2023-220). This is a single-arm exploration pilot trial evaluating radiotherapy for prostate and oligometastatic lesions in patients with OMPC. It aims to disseminate its findings through peer-reviewed journals and relevant medical conferences, with the intention of publication and presentation at these events., Trial Registration Numbers: Clinicaltrials.gov identifier NCT06198387., Competing Interests: Declaration of Conflicting InterestsThe author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Background and Objectives: Novel immunotherapy-based combination treatments have drastically improved clinical outcomes for previously untreated patients with advanced/metastatic renal cell carcinoma (aRCC). This study aimed to assess the temporal trends in grade 3/4 adverse event (AE) rates and associated costs of nivolumab plus cabozantinib combination therapy versus sunitinib monotherapy in previously untreated patients with aRCC., Methods: Individual patient data from the CheckMate 9ER trial (nivolumab plus cabozantinib: N = 320; sunitinib: N = 320) were used to calculate the proportion of patients experiencing grade 3/4 AEs. AE unit costs were obtained from the United States (US) 2017 Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project (HCUP) and inflated to 2020 US dollars. Per-patient-per-month (PPPM) all-cause and treatment-related grade 3/4 AE costs over 18-months, temporal trends, and top drivers of AE costs were evaluated in both treatment arms., Results: Overall, the proportion of patients experiencing grade 3/4 AEs decreased over time, with the highest rates observed in the first 3 months for the nivolumab plus cabozantinib and sunitinib arms. Compared with sunitinib, nivolumab plus cabozantinib was associated with consistently lower average all-cause AE costs PPPM [month 3: $2021 vs. $3097 (p < 0.05); month 6: $1653 vs. $2418 (p < 0.05); month 12: $1450 vs. $1935 (p > 0.05); month 18: $1337 vs. $1755 (p > 0.05)]. Over 18 months, metabolism and nutrition disorders ($244), laboratory abnormalities ($182), and general disorders and administration site conditions ($122) were the costliest all-cause PPPM AE categories in the nivolumab plus cabozantinib arm, and laboratory abnormalities ($443), blood and lymphatic system disorders ($254), and metabolism and nutrition disorders ($177) were the costliest in the sunitinib arm. Trends of treatment-related AE costs were consistent with all-cause AE costs., Conclusions: Nivolumab plus cabozantinib was associated with lower costs of grade 3/4 AE management PPPM than sunitinib, which accumulated over the 18-month study period., (© 2022. The Author(s).)

Aim: In the registration trial, cabozantinib exposure ≥ 750 ng/mL correlated to improved tumor size reduction, response rate and progression free survival (PFS) in patients with metastatic renal cell cancer (mRCC). Because patients in routine care often differ from patients in clinical trials, we explored the cabozantinib exposure-response relationship in patients with mRCC treated in routine care., Methods: Cabozantinib trough concentrations (C min ) were collected and average exposure was calculated per individual. Exposure-response analyses were performed using the earlier identified target of C min  > 750 ng/mL and median C min . In addition, the effect of dose reductions on response was explored. PFS was used as measure of response., Results: In total, 59 patients were included:10% were classified as favourable, 61% as intermediate and 29% as poor IMDC risk group, respectively. Median number of prior treatment lines was 2 (0-5). Starting dose was 60 mg in 46%, 40 mg in 42% and 20 mg in 12% of patients. Dose reductions were needed in 58% of patients. Median C min was 572 ng/mL (IQR: 496-701). Only 17% of patients had an average C min  ≥ 750 ng/mL. Median PFS was 52 weeks (95% CI: 40-64). No improved PFS was observed for patients with C min  ≥ 750 ng/mL or ≥ 572 ng/ml. A longer PFS was observed for patients with a dose reduction vs. those without (65 vs. 31 weeks, p = .001). After incorporating known covariates (IMDC risk group and prior treatment lines (< 2 vs. ≥ 2)) in the multivariable analysis, the need for dose reduction remained significantly associated with improved PFS (HR 0.32, 95% CI:0.14-0.70, p = .004)., Conclusion: In these explorative analyses, no clear relationship between increased cabozantinib exposure and improved PFS was observed. Average cabozantinib exposure was below the previously proposed target in 83% of patients. Future studies should focus on validating the cabozantinib exposure required for long term efficacy., (© 2022. The Author(s).)

Background: Albumin-bilirubin (ALBI) grade is an objective measure of liver function for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). The tyrosine kinase inhibitor cabozantinib is approved for patients with advanced HCC who have received prior sorafenib based on the phase 3 CELESTIAL trial (NCT01908426). Cabozantinib improved overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) versus placebo in patients with previously treated HCC., Methods: Patients were randomised 2:1 to receive cabozantinib 60 mg or placebo orally every day. Clinical outcomes in patients with ALBI grade 1 or 2 at baseline were evaluated in CELESTIAL. ALBI scores were retrospectively calculated based on baseline serum albumin and total bilirubin, with an ALBI grade of 1 defined as  ≤ -2.60 score and a grade of 2 as a score of > -2.60 to  ≤ -1.39., Results: Cabozantinib improved OS and PFS versus placebo in both ALBI grade 1 (hazard ratio [HR] [95% CI]: 0.63 [0.46-0.86] and 0.42 [0.32-0.56]) and ALBI grade 2 (HR [95% CI]: 0.84 [0.66-1.06] and 0.46 [0.37-0.58]) subgroups. Adverse events were consistent with those in the overall population. Rates of grade 3/4 adverse events associated with hepatic decompensation were generally low and were more common among patients in the ALBI grade 2 subgroup., Discussion: These results provide initial support of cabozantinib in patients with advanced HCC irrespective of ALBI grade 1 or 2., Trial Registration Number: ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01908426., (© 2021. The Author(s).)