Search

Metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer; Olaparib; Pembrolizumab Cáncer de próstata metastásico resistente a la castración; Olaparib; Pembrolizumab Càncer de pròstata metastàtic resistent a la castració; Olaparib; Pembrolizumab Background Pembrolizumab and olaparib have shown single-agent activity in patients with previously treated metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). Objective To evaluate the efficacy and safety of pembrolizumab plus olaparib in mCRPC. Design, setting, and participants Cohort A of the phase 1b/2 KEYNOTE-365 study enrolled patients with molecularly unselected, docetaxel-pretreated mCRPC whose disease progressed within 6 mo of screening. Intervention Pembrolizumab 200 mg intravenously every 3 wk plus olaparib 400-mg capsule or 300-mg tablet orally twice daily. Outcome measurements and statistical analysis The primary endpoints were safety, confirmed prostate-specific antigen (PSA) response rate, and objective response rate (ORR) as per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST), version 1.1, by blinded independent central review. The secondary endpoints included radiographic progression-free survival (rPFS) and overall survival (OS). Results and limitations Of 104 enrolled patients, 102 were treated. The median age was 70 yr (interquartile range [IQR], 65–76), and 59 patients (58%) had measurable disease as per RECIST v1.1. The median time from the first dose to database cutoff was 24 mo (IQR, 22–47). The confirmed PSA response rate was 15%. The confirmed ORR was 8.5% (five partial responses) for patients with measurable disease. The median rPFS was 4.5 mo (95% confidence interval [CI], 4.0–6.5) and median OS was 14 mo (95% CI, 10.4–18.2). Clinical activity was consistent across the programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1)-positive and homologous recombination repair mutation subgroups. Treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) occurred in 93 patients (91%). Grade 3–5 TRAEs occurred in 49 patients (48%). Six deaths (5.9%) were due to adverse events; two (myocardial infarction and unknown cause) were attributed to treatment. Limitations of the study include the single-arm design. Conclusions Pembrolizumab plus olaparib had a safety profile consistent with the profiles of the individual agents and demonstrated antitumor activity in previously treated patients with molecularly unselected, docetaxel-pretreated mCRPC.

Proton pump inhibitors (PPI) may influence the gut microbiome and thus impact the effectiveness of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI). The effect of PPIs on the outcomes of ICI has not been fully explored and investigated in metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC).This retrospective analysis used prospectively collected data from the GETUG-AFU 26 NIVOREN (NCT03013335) phase II study which enrolled 729 mRCC patients of whom 720 were treated with nivolumab. The main objective of this analysis was to evaluate the impact of PPI on the efficacy and safety outcomes of mRCC patients. PPI use was defined as PPI administration on the day of ICI initiation.Of the 707 patients with mRCC analyzed in this study, 196 (27.7%) were PPI users. The majority of PPI users were males (80.6%), had an ECOG performance status of 0-1 (78.9%) and a nephrectomy (82.1%). Almost two-thirds of the patients had a favorable and intermediate IMDC risk category and 52% received nivolumab in the third line and beyond. PPI use did not correlate with PFS or OS (HR = 0.89, 95% CI 0.74-1.08 and HR = 1.24; 95% CI, 0.98-1.58, respectively). Grade 3-5 nivolumab-related adverse events were more common among PPI users (25.5% vs. 15.3%).This real-world study suggests that PPI use in patients with mRCC does not impact the efficacy outcomes but may influence the safety of nivolumab which warrants further investigations.

In metastatic seminoma, a strategy is needed for selecting patients for less intensive chemotherapy, to limit toxicities.To assess whether men with good-prognosis metastatic seminoma could be treated with two cycles of etoposide-cisplatin (EP) followed by only one cycle of carboplatin (CARBO) based on negative interim fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography (FDG-PET)/computed tomography (CT).A nonrandomised, multicentre, phase 2 trial was conducted (NCT01887340).All patients with baseline-positive FDG-PET/CT received EP for two cycles. After completing the first two cycles, the patients underwent a second FDG-PET/CT to assess the response. Patients with positive FDG-PET/CT proceeded directly to two additional EP cycles; those who achieved FDG-PET/CT negativity received one cycle of CARBO.The proportion of patients with negative interim FDG-PET/CT who received carboplatin was determined.Between 2013 and 2017, 102 patients were enrolled. After the first two EP cycles, FDG-PET/CT was available in 98 patients. Overall, 67 patients (68.4%; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 58.2-77.4) had negative FDG-PET/CT and proceeded to a single CARBO cycle. Twenty-seven patients (27.6%; 95% CI: 19.0-37.5) had positive FDG-PET/CT after two EP cycles. The 3-yr progression-free survival rate was 90.0% (95% CI: 74.4-96.5) in the EP group and 90.8% (95% CI: 81.4-95.7) in the CARBO group. The cumulative incidences of peripheral neuropathy and ototoxicity were significantly higher in the EP group.Omission of two cycles of EP based on negative FDG-PET/CT after two cycles of chemotherapy appears to be feasible. However, the absence of consensus criteria for FDG-PET/CT interpretation and the short follow-up need additional studies. This strategy does not warrant routine integration yet.Men with good-prognosis metastatic seminoma were treated with fewer cycles of chemotherapy based on interim fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography (FDG-PET/CT). Omission of two cycles of chemotherapy based on negative FDG-PET/CT after two initial cycles appears to be feasible, thereby limiting the burden of treatment and toxicity.

Patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) frequently receive docetaxel after they develop resistance to abiraterone or enzalutamide and need more efficacious treatments.To evaluate the efficacy and safety of pembrolizumab plus docetaxel and prednisone in patients with mCRPC.The trial included patients with mCRPC in the phase 1b/2 KEYNOTE-365 cohort B study who were chemotherapy naïve and who experienced failure of or were intolerant to ≥4 wk of abiraterone or enzalutamide for mCRPC with progressive disease within 6 mo of screening.Pembrolizumab 200 mg intravenously (IV) every 3 wk (Q3W), docetaxel 75 mg/mThe primary endpoints were safety, the prostate-specific antigen (PSA) response rate, and the objective response rate (ORR) according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1 (RECIST v1.1) by blinded independent central review (BICR). Secondary endpoints included time to PSA progression; the disease control rate (DCR) and duration of response (DOR) according to RECIST v1.1 by BICR; ORR, DCR, DOR, and radiographic progression-free survival (rPFS) according to Prostate Cancer Working Group 3-modified RECIST v1.1 by BICR; and overall survival (OS).Among 104 treated patients, 52 had measurable disease. The median time from allocation to data cutoff (July 9, 2020) was 32.4 mo, during which 101 patients discontinued treatment, 81 (78%) for disease progression. The confirmed PSA response rate was 34% and the confirmed ORR (RECIST v1.1) was 23%. Median rPFS and OS were 8.5 mo and 20.2 mo, respectively. Treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) occurred in 100 patients (96%). Grade 3-5 TRAEs occurred in 46 patients (44%). Seven AE-related deaths (6.7%) occurred (2 due to treatment-related pneumonitis). Limitations of the study include the single-arm design and small sample size.Pembrolizumab plus docetaxel and prednisone demonstrated antitumor activity in chemotherapy-naïve patients with mCRPC treated with abiraterone or enzalutamide for mCRPC. Safety was consistent with profiles for the individual agents. Further investigation is warranted.We evaluated the efficacy and safety of the anti-PD-1 antibody pembrolizumab combined with the chemotherapy drug docetaxel and the steroid prednisone for patients with metastatic prostate cancer resistant to androgen deprivation therapy , and who never received chemotherapy. The combination showed antitumor activity and manageable safety in this patient population. This trial is registered on ClinicalTrials.gov as NCT02861573.

Association between DFS and genotype subgroups within each treatment group or the combined sunitinib and placebo groups

Purpose:In the S-TRAC trial, adjuvant sunitinib prolonged disease-free survival (DFS) versus placebo in patients with loco-regional renal cell carcinoma at high risk of recurrence after nephrectomy. An exploratory analysis evaluated associations between SNPs in several angiogenesis- or hypoxia-related genes and clinical outcomes in S-TRAC.Patients and Methods:Blood samples were genotyped for 10 SNPs and one insertion/deletion mutation using TaqMan assays. DFS was compared using log-rank tests for each genotype in sunitinib versus placebo groups and between genotypes within each of three (sunitinib, placebo, and combined sunitinib plus placebo) treatment groups. P values were unadjusted.Results:In all, 286 patients (sunitinib, n = 142; placebo, n = 144) were genotyped. Longer DFS [HR; 95% confidence interval (CI)] was observed with sunitinib versus placebo for VEGFR1 rs9554320 C/C (HR 0.44; 95% CI, 0.21–0.91; P = 0.023), VEGFR2 rs2071559 T/T (HR 0.46; 95% CI, 0.23–0.90; P = 0.020), and eNOS rs2070744 T/T (HR 0.53; 95% CI, 0.30–0.94; P = 0.028). Shorter DFS was observed for VEGFR1 rs9582036 C/A versus C/C with sunitinib, placebo, and combined therapies (P ≤ 0.05), and A/A versus C/C with sunitinib (P = 0.022). VEGFR1 rs9554320 A/C versus A/A was associated with shorter DFS in the placebo (P = 0.038) and combined (P = 0.006) groups.Conclusions:Correlations between VEGFR1 and VEGFR2 SNPs and longer DFS with sunitinib suggest germline SNPs are predictive of improved outcomes with adjuvant sunitinib in patients with renal cell carcinoma. Independent validation studies are needed to confirm these findings.

Neoadjuvant cisplatin-based chemotherapy (NAC) followed by radical cystectomy and pelvic lymph node dissection is the optimal treatment for patients with muscle-invasive bladder cancer. In recent years, the VESPER trial showed a statistically significant higher progression-free survival with dd-MVAC (dose dense methotrexate, vinblastine, doxorubicin, and cisplatin) compared to GC (gemcitabine and cisplatin). In the present report, we refine the characterization and outcome of patients whose cystectomy specimens were pathologically free of cancer (pathological complete response, pCR). We confirm that these patients portend a better outcome as compared to patients with invasive disease (≥pT1N0) at cystectomy. Nested variant and lymphovascular invasion were identified as adverse predictive factors of pCR. Progression-free survival probability three years after pCR on cystectomy was about 85%, regardless of the NAC regimen. A lower creatinine clearance and the delivery of less than four cycles were associated with a higher risk of relapse. Predicting the efficacy of NAC remains a major challenge. The planned analysis of molecular subtypes in the VESPER trial could help predict which patients may achieve complete response and better outcome.

Background : Cisplatin-based combination chemotherapy before surgery is the standard of care for muscle-invasive bladder cancer. However, the optimal chemotherapy modalities have not been precisely defined to date. Patients and Methods : In the VESPER trial, patients received after randomization either gemcitabine and cisplatin (GC, 4 cycles) or methotrexate, vinblastine, doxorubicin and cisplatin (dose dense [dd]-MVAC, 6 cycles). Creatinine clearance (CrCl) was calculated before each cycle according to the Cockroft and Gault formula. Definition criteria for local control after neoadjuvant chemotherapy included pathological complete response (ypT0N0), pathological downstaging ( Results : A total of 2,128 cycles of chemotherapy were delivered, including 2,120 (99.6%) with cisplatin. Full doses of cisplatin were given in 1866 (88%) cycles. Twenty-three (4.7%) patients had to stop chemotherapy (12 GC, 11 dd-MVAC) because of renal failure. No difference in CrCl median values was observed between the two regimens during the first four cycles. A mild decrease occurred thereafter in patients treated with two additional cycles of dd-MVAC. A minimum total dose of 270 mg/m2 for cisplatin was mandatory to optimize pathological complete responses. Conclusion : At least 4 cycles of cisplatin-based chemotherapy should be delivered before cystectomy. Increasing the number of cycles beyond 4 cycles does not lead to a clinically significant deterioration in renal function but without obvious gain on local control. MicroAbstractCGC : A deep analysis of data from a randomized trial of perioperative chemotherapy in muscle-invasive bladder cancer shows that a minimum number of 4 cycles is required to optimize the chances of pathological complete response at cystectomy. Increasing the number beyond 4 cycles does not lead to a clinically significant deterioration in renal function without any obvious gain on pathological complete response.

Background Cabazitaxel was shown to improve overall survival (OS) in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) after abiraterone/enzalutamine and docetaxel failure, though benefit by the presence of DNA damage repair (DDR) defects is unknown. With the advent of poly(adenosine diphosphate–ribose) polymerase inhibitors (PARPi) in partially overlapping indications with cabazitaxel, we aimed to determine cabazitaxel activity in men with mCRPC according to their DDR status. Methods This is a retrospective multicenter study that enrolled patients with mCRPC treated with cabazitaxel who had undergone DDR tumour tissue profiling. Patients with at least one deleterious germline or somatic alterations were considered DDR positive (DDR+). Each DDR + patient has been matched with a DDR negative (DDR-) from the same institution who underwent the same test. An exploratory cohort of patients found to be DDR + by liquid biopsy was also included. Prostate specific antigen (PSA) decline≥50% (PSA50), PSA progression-free survival (PFS, PSA-PFS), radiographic PFS (rPFS), clinical PFS or radiographic PFS (c/rPFS) and OS were evaluated. Results Among 190 men (95 DDR+, 95 DDR-) with tissue sequencing, PSA50 was achieved with cabazitaxel in 29/92 (32%) and 33/92 (36%) in patients with DDR+ and DDR- (P = 0.64). The median rPFS was 5.33 months [95%CI 4.34–7.04] versus 5.75 months [95%CI 4.67–7.27] (P = 0.55). The median OS was 15.4 months [95%CI 12.16–26.6] and 11.5 months [95%CI 9.76–14.4] (P = 0.036), respectively. No PSA50 responses on cabazitaxel were observed in BRCA1/2 patients previously treated with PARPi (n = 10). Similar outcomes with cabazitaxel were observed in the liquid biopsy cohort (n = 63 DDR+). Conclusions Our study suggests that cabazitaxel is active in patients with mCRPC regardless of their DDR status, although its activity in men pretreated with a PARPi may be lower.

Background The CARMENA trial in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) demonstrated that treatment with sunitinib alone was noninferior to cytoreductive nephrectomy (CN) followed by sunitinib (nephrectomy⬜sunitinib). Objective The objective of this study was to provide updated overall survival (OS) outcomes of CARMENA and assess whether some subgroups may still benefit from upfront CN. Design, setting, and participants CARMENA was a phase III trial in 450 patients with mRCC enrolled from 2009 to 2017. Intervention Patients in the intention-to-treat population received nephrectomy⬜sunitinib (standard of care [SOC]; n = 226) or sunitinib alone (n = 224). Outcome measurements and statistical analysis Primary endpoint was OS, assessed using an updated data cut-off (October 2018; median OS event-free follow-up, 36.6 mo). Patients were reclassified by risk using International Metastatic RCC Database Consortium (IMDC) criteria. Results and limitations Sunitinib alone was noninferior to nephrectomy⬜sunitinib (hazard ratio [HR], 0.97; 95% confidence interval, 0.79⬜1.19; p = 0.8) and demonstrated longer median OS (19.8 mo vs 15.6 mo, respectively). For patients with two or more IMDC risk factors, OS was significantly longer with sunitinib alone than with nephrectomy⬜sunitinib (31.2 mo vs 17.6 mo, respectively; HR, 0.65; p = 0.03). For patients with one IMDC risk factor, OS was longer for nephrectomy⬜sunitinib versus sunitinib alone although not significantly (31.4 mo vs 25.2 mo; HR, 1.30; p = 0.2). The post hoc nature of the subgroup analyses may limit their interpretation. Conclusions Sunitinib alone was noninferior compared with nephrectomy⬜sunitinib, suggesting that CN should not be considered SOC in patients with mRCC requiring systemic treatment. Certain subgroups, including patients with one IMDC risk factor, may still benefit from upfront CN. Patient summary We assessed the survival of patients with metastatic kidney cancer in a clinical trial. Patients treated with sunitinib on its own had the same survival as patients who had surgery before sunitinib treatment. We conclude that surgery may not be necessary for some patients with metastatic kidney cancer.

Introduction Cabazitaxel multiple rechallenges may be a treatment option in heavily pretreated patients with metastatic castration‐resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) who had a good initial response to cabazitaxel and who are still fit to receive it. Our objective was to assess the efficacy and toxicity of multiple rechallenges. Patients and methods We retrospectively identified 22 mCRPC patients previously treated with docetaxel and/or androgen receptor‐targeted agents who received multiple cabazitaxel rechallenges in 9 French centers. Cabazitaxel was initiated at a dose of 25 mg/m2 q3week. A reduced dose (20 mg/m2 q3w) or an alternative schedule (mainly 16 mg/m2 q2w) was increasingly used for subsequent rechallenges. Progression‐free survival, prostate‐specific antigen (PSA) response, best clinical response, and grade ≥3 toxicities were collected. Overall survival was calculated from various time points. Results Twenty‐two patients with an initial response to cabazitaxel were rechallenged at least twice. The median number of cabazitaxel cycles was 7 at first cabazitaxel treatment, 6 at first rechallenge, and 5 at subsequent rechallenges. Median progression‐free survival at first rechallenge was 9.6 months and 5.6 months at second rechallenge. Median overall survival was 50.9 months from the first cabazitaxel dose, 114.9 months from first life‐extending therapy initiation in mCRPC, and 105 months from mCRPC diagnosis. There was no cumulative grade ≥3 neuropathy or nail disorder and one case of febrile neutropenia. Conclusion Cabazitaxel multiple rechallenges may be a treatment option without cumulative toxicity in heavily pretreated patients having a good response to first cabazitaxel use and still fit to receive it. Novelty & Impact Statements Patients with metastatic castration‐resistant prostate cancer can be treated with Cabazitaxel after docetaxel and androgen receptor‐targeted agent. This chemotherapy can be used multiple times with efficacy and manageable toxicity., We assessed the efficacy and toxicity of multiple rechallenges with cabazitaxel for 22 patients with metastatic castration‐resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). Median overall survival was 50.9 months from the first cabazitaxel dose, 114.9 months from first life‐extending therapy initiation in mCRPC, and 105 months from mCRPC diagnosis. Cabazitaxel rechallenge may be an effective option in heavily pretreated mCRPC patients with a good initial response to cabazitaxel and still fit to receive it, without cumulative grade ≥3 toxicity.

Summary Background PD-1 and PD-L1 inhibitors are active in metastatic urothelial carcinoma, but positive randomised data supporting their use as a first-line treatment are lacking. In this study we assessed outcomes with first-line pembrolizumab alone or combined with chemotherapy versus chemotherapy for patients with previously untreated advanced urothelial carcinoma. Methods KEYNOTE-361 is a randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial of patients aged at least 18 years, with untreated, locally advanced, unresectable, or metastatic urothelial carcinoma, with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of up to 2. Eligible patients were enrolled from 201 medical centres in 21 countries and randomly allocated (1:1:1) via an interactive voice-web response system to intravenous pembrolizumab 200 mg every 3 weeks for a maximum of 35 cycles plus intravenous chemotherapy (gemcitabine [1000 mg/m2] on days 1 and 8 and investigator's choice of cisplatin [70 mg/m2] or carboplatin [area under the curve 5] on day 1 of every 3-week cycle) for a maximum of six cycles, pembrolizumab alone, or chemotherapy alone, stratified by choice of platinum therapy and PD-L1 combined positive score (CPS). Neither patients nor investigators were masked to the treatment assignment or CPS. At protocol-specified final analysis, sequential hypothesis testing began with superiority of pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy versus chemotherapy alone in the total population (all patients randomly allocated to a treatment) for the dual primary endpoints of progression-free survival (p value boundary 0·0019), assessed by masked, independent central review, and overall survival (p value boundary 0·0142), followed by non-inferiority and superiority of overall survival for pembrolizumab versus chemotherapy in the patient population with CPS of at least 10 and in the total population (also a primary endpoint). Safety was assessed in the as-treated population (all patients who received at least one dose of study treatment). This study is completed and is no longer enrolling patients, and is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov , number NCT02853305 . Findings Between Oct 19, 2016 and June 29, 2018, 1010 patients were enrolled and allocated to receive pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy (n=351), pembrolizumab monotherapy (n=307), or chemotherapy alone (n=352). Median follow-up was 31·7 months (IQR 27·7–36·0). Pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy versus chemotherapy did not significantly improve progression-free survival, with a median progression-free survival of 8·3 months (95% CI 7·5–8·5) in the pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy group versus 7·1 months (6·4–7·9) in the chemotherapy group (hazard ratio [HR] 0·78, 95% CI 0·65–0·93; p=0·0033), or overall survival, with a median overall survival of 17·0 months (14·5–19·5) in the pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy group versus 14·3 months (12·3–16·7) in the chemotherapy group (0·86, 0·72–1·02; p=0·0407). No further formal statistical hypothesis testing was done. In analyses of overall survival with pembrolizumab versus chemotherapy (now exploratory based on hierarchical statistical testing), overall survival was similar between these treatment groups, both in the total population (15·6 months [95% CI 12·1–17·9] with pembrolizumab vs 14·3 months [12·3–16·7] with chemotherapy; HR 0·92, 95% CI 0·77–1·11) and the population with CPS of at least 10 (16·1 months [13·6–19·9] with pembrolizumab vs 15·2 months [11·6–23·3] with chemotherapy; 1·01, 0·77–1·32). The most common grade 3 or 4 adverse event attributed to study treatment was anaemia with pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy (104 [30%] of 349 patients) or chemotherapy alone (112 [33%] of 342 patients), and diarrhoea, fatigue, and hyponatraemia (each affecting four [1%] of 302 patients) with pembrolizumab alone. Six (1%) of 1010 patients died due to an adverse event attributed to study treatment; two patients in each treatment group. One each occurred due to cardiac arrest and device-related sepsis in the pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy group, one each due to cardiac failure and malignant neoplasm progression in the pembrolizumab group, and one each due to myocardial infarction and ischaemic colitis in the chemotherapy group. Interpretation The addition of pembrolizumab to first-line platinum-based chemotherapy did not significantly improve efficacy and should not be widely adopted for treatment of advanced urothelial carcinoma. Funding Merck Sharp and Dohme, a subsidiary of Merck, Kenilworth, NJ, USA.

International audience; Aims First described in 2014, renal cell carcinoma (RCC) with TFEB amplification (6p21) is a rare molecular subgroup whose diagnosis is challenging. The prognosis and therapeutic implications remain unclear. Methods We report here the clinical, histological, immunohistochemical, and genetic features of nine novel cases. The pathological and immunohistochemical features were centrally reviewed by expert uropathologists. Fluorescence in situ hybridisation (FISH) confirmed the diagnosis and comparative genomic hybridisation (CGH) was performed to determine quantitative genomic alterations. We also performed an exhaustive review of the literature and compiled our data. Results TFEB-amplified RCC were locally advanced, with initial lymph node involvement in one case and liver metastasis in another case. They were high-grade eosinophilic tumours with papillary/pseudopapillary architecture, frequent positivity for melanocytic markers, and frequent PDL1 expression. FISH demonstrated high-level TFEB amplification in six cases. One case showed concomitant TFEB translocation. CGH analysis identified complex alterations with frequent losses of 1p, 2q, 3p, 6p, and frequent 6p and 8q gains. VEGFA coamplification was identified in all cases with a lower level than TFEB. The prognosis was poor, with five patients having lymph node or distant metastases. Conclusion TFEB-amplified RCC is a rare molecular subgroup with variable morphology whose diagnosis is confirmed by FISH analysis. The complex alterations identified by CGH are consistent with an aggressive clinical behaviour. The coamplification of VEGFA and the expression of PDL1 could suggest a potential benefit from antiangiogenics and targeted immunotherapy in combination for these aggressive tumours.

International audience; Background: Real-world data on cabozantinib in metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) is limited. This study (CABOREAL) reports treatment patterns and outcomes for patients treated with cabozantinib through the French Early Access Program.Patients and methods: This multicentre (n = 26), observational, retrospective study enrolled patients with mRCC who had received ≥1 dose of cabozantinib. Overall survival (OS) was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method; subgroups were compared using the log-rank test. A multiple Cox regression model assessed predictive factors of OS after cabozantinib initiation.Results: Four hundred and ten recruited patients started treatment between September 2016 and February 2018: the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status ≥2, 39.3%; poor International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium (IMDC) risk, 31.7%; 0-1, 2 and ≥3 previous treatment lines, 25.3%, 33.4% and 41.2%, respectively; bone metastases, 55.9%; brain metastases, 16.8%. Median (min-max) follow-up was 14.4 (0-30) months. Overall, 57.0% of patients had a dose reduction, 15.6% an alternative dose schedule. The median average daily dose was 40.0 mg. Median (quartile [Q]1-Q3) treatment duration was 7.6 (0.1-29.1) months, median OS was 14.4 months, and the 12-month OS rate was 56.5% (95% confidence interval: 51.5-61.2). Most patients (54.4%) received subsequent treatment. Predictive factors associated with longer OS were body mass index ≥25 kg/m2 (p = 0.0021), prior nephrectomy (p = 0.0109), favourable or intermediate IMDC risk (p < 0.0001) and cabozantinib initiation at 60 mg/day (p = 0.0486).Conclusions: In the largest real-world study to date, cabozantinib was effective in unselected, heavily pretreated patients with mRCC. Initiation at 60 mg/day was associated with improved outcomes. CLINICALTRIALS.

International audience; Background: We previously reported a 35-gene expression classifier identifying four clear-cell renal cell carcinoma groups (ccrcc1 to ccrcc4) with different tumour microenvironments and sensitivities to sunitinib in metastatic clear-cell renal cell carcinoma. Efficacy profiles might differ with nivolumab and nivolumab-ipilimumab. We therefore aimed to evaluate treatment efficacy and tolerability of nivolumab, nivolumab-ipilimumab, and VEGFR-tyrosine kinase inhibitors (VEGFR-TKIs) in patients according to tumour molecular groups.Methods: This biomarker-driven, open-label, non-comparative, randomised, phase 2 trial included patients from 15 university hospitals or expert cancer centres in France. Eligible patients were aged 18 years or older, had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-2, and had previously untreated metastatic clear-cell renal cell carcinoma. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) using permuted blocks of varying sizes to receive either nivolumab or nivolumab-ipilimumab (ccrcc1 and ccrcc4 groups), or either a VEGFR-TKI or nivolumab-ipilimumab (ccrcc2 and ccrcc3 groups). Patients assigned to nivolumab-ipilimumab received intravenous nivolumab 3 mg/kg plus ipilimumab 1 mg/kg every 3 weeks for four doses followed by intravenous nivolumab 240 mg every 2 weeks. Patients assigned to nivolumab received intravenous nivolumab 240 mg every 2 weeks. Patients assigned to VEGFR-TKIs received oral sunitinib (50 mg/day for 4 weeks every 6 weeks) or oral pazopanib (800 mg daily continuously). The primary endpoint was the objective response rate by investigator assessment per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1. The primary endpoint and safety were assessed in the population who received at least one dose of study drug. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02960906, and with the EU Clinical Trials Register, EudraCT 2016-003099-28, and is closed to enrolment.Findings: Between June 28, 2017, and July 18, 2019, 303 patients were screened for eligibility, 202 of whom were randomly assigned to treatment (61 to nivolumab, 101 to nivolumab-ipilimumab, 40 to a VEGFR-TKI). In the nivolumab group, two patients were excluded due to a serious adverse event before the first study dose and one patient was excluded from analyses due to incorrect diagnosis. Median follow-up was 18·0 months (IQR 17·6-18·4). In the ccrcc1 group, objective responses were seen in 12 (29%; 95% CI 16-45) of 42 patients with nivolumab and 16 (39%; 24-55) of 41 patients with nivolumab-ipilimumab (odds ratio [OR] 0·63 [95% CI 0·25-1·56]). In the ccrcc4 group, objective responses were seen in seven (44%; 95% CI 20-70) of 16 patients with nivolumab and nine (50% 26-74) of 18 patients with nivolumab-ipilimumab (OR 0·78 [95% CI 0·20-3·01]). In the ccrcc2 group, objective responses were seen in 18 (50%; 95% CI 33-67) of 36 patients with a VEGFR-TKI and 19 (51%; 34-68) of 37 patients with nivolumab-ipilimumab (OR 0·95 [95% CI 0·38-2·37]). In the ccrcc3 group, no objective responses were seen in the four patients who received a VEGFR-TKI, and in one (20%; 95% CI 1-72) of five patients who received nivolumab-ipilimumab. The most common treatment-related grade 3-4 adverse events were hepatic failure and lipase increase (two [3%] of 58 for both) with nivolumab, lipase increase and hepatobiliary disorders (six [6%] of 101 for both) with nivolumab-ipilimumab, and hypertension (six [15%] of 40) with a VEGFR-TKI. Serious treatment-related adverse events occurred in two (3%) patients in the nivolumab group, 38 (38%) in the nivolumab-ipilimumab group, and ten (25%) patients in the VEGFR-TKI group. Three deaths were treatment-related: one due to fulminant hepatitis with nivolumab-ipilimumab, one death from heart failure with sunitinib, and one due to thrombotic microangiopathy with sunitinib.Interpretation: We demonstrate the feasibility and positive effect of a prospective patient selection based on tumour molecular phenotype to choose the most efficacious treatment between nivolumab with or without ipilimumab and a VEGFR-TKI in the first-line treatment of metastatic clear-cell renal cell carcinoma.

Background: The first interim analysis of the KEYNOTE-564 study showed improved disease-free survival with adjuvant pembrolizumab compared with placebo after surgery in patients with clear cell renal cell carcinoma at an increased risk of recurrence. The analysis reported here, with an additional 6 months of follow-up, was designed to assess longer-term efficacy and safety of pembrolizumab versus placebo, as well as additional secondary and exploratory endpoints. Methods: In the multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 KEYNOTE-564 trial, adults aged 18 years or older with clear cell renal cell carcinoma with an increased risk of recurrence were enrolled at 213 hospitals and cancer centres in North America, South America, Europe, Asia, and Australia. Eligible participants had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1, had undergone nephrectomy 12 weeks or less before randomisation, and had not received previous systemic therapy for advanced renal cell carcinoma. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) via central permuted block randomisation (block size of four) to receive pembrolizumab 200 mg or placebo intravenously every 3 weeks for up to 17 cycles. Randomisation was stratified by metastatic disease status (M0 vs M1), and the M0 group was further stratified by ECOG performance status and geographical region. All participants and investigators involved in study treatment administration were masked to the treatment group assignment. The primary endpoint was disease-free survival by investigator assessment in the intention-to-treat population (all participants randomly assigned to a treatment). Safety was assessed in the safety population, comprising all participants who received at least one dose of pembrolizumab or placebo. As the primary endpoint was met at the first interim analysis, updated data are reported without p values. This study is ongoing, but no longer recruiting, and is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03142334. Findings: Between June 30, 2017, and Sept 20, 2019, 994 participants were assigned to receive pembrolizumab (n=496) or placebo (n=498). Median follow-up, defined as the time from randomisation to data cutoff (June 14, 2021), was 30·1 months (IQR 25·7–36·7). Disease-free survival was better with pembrolizumab compared with placebo (HR 0·63 [95% CI 0·50–0·80]). Median disease-free survival was not reached in either group. The most common all-cause grade 3–4 adverse events were hypertension (in 14 [3%] of 496 participants) and increased alanine aminotransferase (in 11 [2%]) in the pembrolizumab group, and hypertension (in 13 [3%] of 498 participants) in the placebo group. Serious adverse events attributed to study treatment occurred in 59 (12%) participants in the pembrolizumab group and one (

Collecting duct carcinoma (CDC) and renal medullary carcinoma (RMC) are two rare subtypes of kidney cancer with a poor prognosis in the metastatic setting. Beyond first-line treatment, there are no standard-of-care therapies. This retrospective study assessed the efficacy of treatments after first-line chemotherapy in 57 patients with metastatic (m) CDC (n = 35) or RMC (n = 22) treated between 2010 and 2019 at 11 French centers. The median age was 53 years; overall, 60% (n = 34) of patients were metastatic at diagnosis. After a median follow-up of 13 months, the median overall survival was 12 (95% CI, 11–16) months. All patients received first-line platinum chemotherapy ± bevacizumab, with a median time to progression of 7.27 (95% CI, 7–100 months and an objective response rate (ORR) of 39% (95% CI, 26–52%). Patients received a median of two (1–5) treatment lines. Subsequent treatments included tyrosine kinase inhibitors (n = 12), chemotherapy (n = 34), and checkpoint inhibitors (n = 20), with ORR ranging 10–15% and disease control rates ranging 24–50%. The duration of response for all treatments was ~2 months. Notably, nine patients with CDC were still alive > two years after metastatic diagnosis. Beyond first-line therapy, treatments showed very low antitumor activity in mCDC/RMC. A better understanding of the biology of those rare tumors is urgently needed in order to identify potential targets.

Background Ramucirumab-an IgG1 vascular endothelial growth factor receptor 2 antagonistplus docetaxel was previously reported to improve progression-free survival in platinum-refractory, advanced urothelial carcinoma. Here, we report the secondary endpoint of overall survival results for the RANGE trial.Methods We did a randomised, double-blind, phase 3 trial in patients with advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma who progressed during or after platinum-based chemotherapy. Patients were enrolled from 124 investigative sites (hospitals, clinics, and academic centres) in 23 countries. Previous treatment with one immune checkpoint inhibitor was permitted. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) using an interactive web response system to receive intravenous ramucirumab 10 mg/kg or placebo 10 mg/kg volume equivalent followed by intravenous docetaxel 75 mg/m 2 (60 mg/m 2 in Korea, Taiwan, and Japan) on day 1 of a 21-day cycle. Treatment continued until disease progression, unacceptable toxicity, or other discontinuation criteria were met. Randomisation was stratified by geographical region, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status at baseline, and visceral metastasis. Progression-free survival (the primary endpoint) and overall survival (a key secondary endpoint) were assessed in the intention-to-treat population. The study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02426125; patient enrolment is complete and the last patient on treatment is being followed up for safety issues.Findings Between July 20, 2015, and April 4, 2017, 530 patients were randomly allocated to ramucirumab plus docetaxel (n=263) or placebo plus docetaxel (n=267) and comprised the intention-to-treat population. At database lock (March 21, 2018) for the final overall survival analysis, median follow-up was 7.4 months (IQR 3.5-13.9). In our sensitivity analysis of investigator-assessed progression-free survival at the overall survival database lock, median progression-free survival remained significantly improved with ramucirumab compared with placebo (4.1 months [95% CI 3.3-4.8] vs 2.8 months [2.6-2.9]; HR 0.696 [95% CI 0.573-0.845]; p=0.0002). Median overall survival was 9.4 months (95% CI 7.9-11.4) in the ramucirumab group versus 7.9 months (7.0-9.3) in the placebo group (stratified HR 0.887 [95% CI 0.724-1.086]; p=0.25). Grade 3 or worse treatment-related treatment-emergent adverse events in 5% or more of patients and with an incidence more than 2% higher with ramucirumab than with placebo were febrile neutropenia (24 [9%] of 258 patients in the ramucirumab group vs 16 [6%] of 265 patients in the placebo group) and neutropenia (17 [7%] of 258 vs six [2%] of 265). Serious adverse events were similar between groups (112 [43%] of 258 patients in the ramucirumab group vs 107 [40%] of 265 patients in the placebo group). Adverse events related to study treatment and leading to death occurred in eight (3%) patients in the ramucirumab group versus five (2%) patients in the placebo group.Interpretation Additional follow-up supports that ramucirumab plus docetaxel significantly improves progression-free survival, without a significant improvement in overall survival, for patients with platinum-refractory advanced urothelial carcinoma. Clinically meaningful benefit might be restricted in an unselected population. Copyright (C) 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

607 Background: To date, no biomarker of efficacy of nivolumab+/-ipilimumab (N+/-I) or anti-VEGFR TKI has been prospectively validated in mRCC. The BIONIKK trial showed promising objective response rate (ORR) and progression-free survival (PFS) with these treatments in first line (L1) after selection by tumour molecular group. We report OS and efficacy results of the second-line (L2) treatment. Methods: BIONIKK is a French multicentre non-comparative phase II trial, randomising 199 mRCC pts to receive N (58), NI (101) or TKI (40) in L1 according to four molecular groups (ccrcc1-4). ORR and PFS were already reported. With an additional follow-up of ≥20 months, we report OS from randomization and from the start of L2, as well as ORR and PFS with a TKI in L2 by molecular group. Results: With a median follow-up of 42.1 months (40.5-45.2), 86 (43%) patients died: 27/58 (46.5%), 39/101 (39%) and 20/40 (50%) in the N, NI, and TKI arm, respectively. Median OS were 43.4 months (95%CI=31.4-NR) with N, 52.7 months (95%CI=46-NR) with NI and 38.1 months (95%CI=33.2-NR) with TKI (table). 175 (88%) patients discontinued first-line treatment, including 20 deaths, and 129 (74%) received a L2, 38/58 (65.5%), 64/101 (63%), and 27/40 (67.5%) after N, NI and TKI, respectively. The most frequent L2 received after N+/-I was a TKI in 96/102 (94%) pts, including cabozantinib in 49, sunitinib/pazopanib in 32, axitinib in 13, and lenvatinib in 2. N was the most frequent L2 after TKI, 20/27 (74%). ORR with TKI in L2 was 28.5% (10/35) after N, 39% (24/61) after NI and 80% (4/5) after TKI, with marked benefit in ccrcc2 pts (table). The mPFS with TKI in L2 was 8.2 (95%CI=6.9-19.3) after N, 11.4 (95%CI= 8.9-16.8) after NI, and 12.1 (95%CI =11.4-NR) months after TKI, with a higher benefit in ccrcc2 pts (vs. ccrcc1+4, p=0.04). Conversely, ORR and mPFS with N after TKI in ccrcc2-pts were 12.5% (2/16) and 5.4 (2.6-NR) months, respectively. Median OS L2 was reported in the table. The updated ORR and PFS in L1 will presented at the Meeting, as well as PFS2 and efficacy by TKI type in L2. Conclusions: We report for the first-time OS and L2 efficacy results by molecular group in a randomized trial. Molecular selection also has an impact on treatment efficacy in L2. These results, together with those reported in L1, can inform clinicians on the best treatment sequence in L1-2. Clinical trial information: NCT02960906 . [Table: see text]

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVE:The phase 1/2 KEYNOTE-365 study (NCT02861573) previously showed that pembro+olaparib was associated with antitumor activity and acceptable safety in molecularly unselecte...

International audience; Introduction: To evaluate the value of image-based texture analysis for predicting progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) in patients with metastatic clear cell renal carcinoma (cCCR) treated with nivolumab.Methods: This retrospective study included 48 patients with metastatic cCCR treated with nivolumab. Nivolumab was used as a second- or third-line monotherapy. Texture analysis of metastatic lesions was performed on CT scanners obtained within 1 month before treatment. Texture features related to the gray-level histogram, gray-level co-occurrence, run-length matrix features, autoregressive model features, and Haar wavelet feature were extracted. Lasso penalized Cox regression analyses were performed to identify independent predictors of PFS and OS.Results: Median PFS and OS were 5.7 and 13.8 months. 39 patients experienced progression and 27 died. The Lasso penalized Cox regression analysis identified three texture parameters as potential predictors of PFS: skewness, S.2.2. Correlat and S.1.1. SumVarnc. Multivariate Cox regression analysis confirmed skewness (HR (95% CI) 1.49 [1.21-1.85], p < 0.001) as an independent predictor of PFS. Regarding OS, the Lasso penalized Cox regression analysis identified three texture parameters as potential predictors of OS: S20SumVarnc, S22Contrast and S22Entropy. Multivariate Cox regression analysis confirmed S22Entropy (HR (95% CI) 1.68 (1.31-2.14), p < 0.001) as an independent predictor of OS.Conclusions: Results from this preliminary study suggest that CT texture analysis might be a promising quantitative imaging tool that predicts oncological outcomes after starting nivolumab treatment.

PURPOSE Nivolumab is standard of care for patients with metastatic clear cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC) after failure of antiangiogenic therapies, but its activity on brain metastases from ccRCC remains unknown, because these patients were excluded from pivotal studies. We aimed to assess the activity of nivolumab in this population. METHODS The GETUG-AFU 26 NIVOREN phase II trial assessed the activity and safety of nivolumab in patients with metastatic ccRCC who failed vascular endothelial growth factor–directed therapies ( ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03013335 ). Patients with asymptomatic brain metastases were prospectively identified and underwent dedicated brain evaluation. Two cohorts were constituted: cohort A comprised patients with previously untreated brain metastases, and cohort B comprised patients whose brain metastases underwent prior therapy. The primary end point was intracranial response rate in cohort A. RESULTS Seventy-three patients with brain metastases were included: 39 in cohort A and 34 in cohort B. Intracranial response rate was 12% in cohort A; no objective response was reported in patients with brain lesions that were multiple or larger than 1 cm. Median intracranial progression-free survival was 2.7 months (95% CI, 2.3 to 4.6 months) in cohort A and 4.8 months (95% CI, 3.0 to 8.0 months) in cohort B, with adjusted hazard ratio of 2.04 (95% CI, 1.08 to 3.83). Overall survival rate at 12 months was 67% (95% CI, 49.6% to 79.1%) in cohort A and 59% (95% CI, 40.6% to 73.2%) in cohort B. Most patients in cohort A (72%) needed subsequent focal brain therapy. Nivolumab was well tolerated, with no unexpected toxicity. CONCLUSION Nivolumab activity is limited in patients with untreated brain metastases from ccRCC. Brain imaging and focal therapy should be considered before immune checkpoint inhibitors in patients with metastatic ccRCC.

Purpose Fumarate hydratase–deficient (FHdef) renal cell carcinoma (RCC) is a rare entity associated with the hereditary leiomyomatosis and RCC syndrome with no standard therapy approved. The aim of this retrospective study was to evaluate the efficacy of different systemic treatments in this population. Methods We performed a multicentre retrospective analysis of Fhdef RCC patients to determine the response to systemic treatments. The endpoints were objective response rate (ORR), time-to-treatment failure (TTF), and overall survival (OS). The two latter were estimated using the Kaplan–Meier method. Results Twenty-four Fhdef RCC patients were identified, and 21 under systemic therapy were included in the analysis: ten received cabozantinib, 14 received sunitinib, nine received “other antiangiogenics” (sorafenib, pazopanib, and axitinib), three received erlotinib-bevacizumab (E-B), three received mTOR inhibitors, and 11 received immune checkpoint blockers (ICBs). ORR for treatments were 50% for cabozantinib, 43% for sunitinib, 63% for “other antiangiogenics,” and 30% for E-B, whereas ORR was 0% for mTOR inhibitors and 18% for ICBs. The median TTF (mTTF) was significantly higher with antiangiogenics (11.6 months) than with mTOR inhibitors (4.4 months) or ICBs (2.7 months). In the first-line setting, antiangiogenics presented a higher ORR compared with nivolumab-ipilimumab (64% versus 25%) and a significantly superior mTTF (11.0 months vs 2.5 months; p = 0.0027). The median OS from the start of the first systemic treatment was 44.0 months (95% confidence interval: 13.0–95.0). Conclusions We report the first European retrospective study of Fhdef RCC patients treated with systemic therapy with a remarkably long median OS of 44.0 months. Our results suggest that antiangiogenics may be superior to ICB/mTOR inhibitors in this population.

Primary tumour response may impact therapeutic strategies in metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) but remains unknown in the era of immune checkpoint inhibitors. We aimed to describe the response of the primary tumour in patients who did not undergo upfront cytoreductive nephrectomy (uCN) and were treated with nivolumab in the GETUG-AFU-26 NIVOREN phase 2 trial. Primary tumour response was prospectively assessed, as well as the overall response rate (ORR), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS). Among 720 patients, 111 did not undergo uCN, mainly patients with intermediate (45%) and poor (49%) International mRCC Database Consortium (IMDC) risk. In the 111 patients, nivolumab was used in the second line for 63% of patients and the third line or more for 37%, with an ORR of 16% (95% confidence interval [CI] 1025%); with a median follow-up of 24.5 mo (95% CI 21.6-27.1), median PFS was 2.7 mo (95% CI 2.5-4.0) and median OS was 15.9 mo (95% CI 9.5-19.8). A total of 67 patients had an evaluable primary renal lesion, four of whom (6%) experienced shrinkage of more than 30%. Overall, patients who did not undergo uCN had adverse baseline characteristics and nivolumab activity against the primary tumour was limited. PATIENT SUMMARY: In this report, we observed that nivolumab was associated with a limited response of the primary tumour in previously treated patients with metastatic kidney cancer.

OBJECTIVE: Papillary renal cell carcinoma (papRCC) is a rare (10%-15%) subtype of renal cancer. Few prognostic biomarkers have been described in metastatic papRCC (m-papRCC) patients treated with vascular endothelial growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitors (VEGFR-TKIs). We aimed to study the prognostic impact of bone metastases (BM) on response rate, progression-free and overall survival (PFS and OS) in patients with m-papRCC treated with first agent VEGFR-TKIs. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A multicentric, retrospective analysis of patient records was conducted. BM were detected by computed tomography and/or bone scintigraphy. The International Metastatic RCC Database Consortium (IMDC) score was calculated at start of first agent VEGFR-TKI treatment. RESULTS: Forty-nine patients were included. Best objective response was partial response in 20%, stable disease in 60% and early progressive disease in 20% of patients. Median PFS (mPFS) was 6.0 months and median OS (mOS) 14.0 months after start of first agent VEGFR-TKI. The IMDC score correlated with mOS: 77.5 months in good, 17.0 months in intermediate and 8.0 months in poor risk patients (P = 0.002). Patients with BM had a poorer outcome compared to patients without BM: mPFS was 4.0 vs. 7.0 months (P = 0.006) and mOS 7.5 vs. 19.0 months (P = 0.002). On bivariate analysis, the presence of BM was independently associated with PFS (P = 0.02) and OS (P = 0.049), independent of the IMDC risk groups. CONCLUSION: In m-papRCC patients treated with first agent VEGFR-TKIs, the presence of BM is an unfavorable prognostic factor, associated with shorter PFS and OS. ispartof: UROLOGIC ONCOLOGY-SEMINARS AND ORIGINAL INVESTIGATIONS vol:38 issue:8 ispartof: location:United States status: published

Background Perioperative chemotherapy (neoadjuvant or adjuvant) has been developed to increase overall survival for nonmetastatic muscle-invasive bladder cancer (MIBC). Retrospective studies or prospective phase II trials have been reported to use dose-dense methotrexate, vinblastine, doxorubicin, and cisplatin (dd-MVAC) or gemcitabine and cisplatin (GC). As dd-MVAC has shown higher response rates in metastatic disease, better efficacy is expected in the perioperative setting. Objective We designed a randomized phase III trial to compare the efficacy of dd-MVAC or GC in MIBC perioperative (neoadjuvant or adjuvant) setting. Design, setting and participants A total of 500 patients were randomized from February 2013 to March 2018 in 28 centers and received either six cycles of dd-MVAC every 2 wk or four cycles of GC every 3 wk. Outcome measurements and statistical analysis The primary endpoint (progression-free survival at 3 yr) was not reported. We focused on secondary endpoints: chemotherapy toxicity and pathological responses. Results and limitations In the neoadjuvant group, 218 patients received dd-MVAC and 219 received GC. Of the patients, 60% received six cycles in the dd-MVAC arm and 84% received four cycles in the GC arm; 199 (91%) and 198 (90%) patients underwent surgery, respectively. Complete pathological response (ypT0pN0) was observed in 84 (42%) and 71 (36%) patients, respectively (p = 0.2). An organ-confined status ( Conclusions The toxicity of dd-MVAC was manageable with more severe asthenia and GI side effects than that of GC in perioperative chemotherapy. A higher local control rate (complete pathological response, tumor downstaging, or organ confined) was observed in the dd-MVAC arm (p = 0.021). However, such data have to be confirmed on progression-free survival, with primary endpoint data expected in mid-2021. Patient summary The authors have designed a randomized phase III controlled study comparing the efficacy of gemcitabine and cisplatin, and dose-dense methotrexate, vinblastine, doxorubicin, and cisplatin (dd-MVAC) in patients for whom chemotherapy has been decided, before or after radical cystectomy. Higher toxicity regarding asthenia and gastrointestinal side effects along with a better bladder control rate were observed in the dd-MVAC arm. However, such data have to be confirmed on progression-free survival, with primary endpoint data expected in mid-2021.

BACKGROUND: Previously, we have shown a correlation between single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) rs307826 in vascular endothelial growth factor receptor-3 (VEGFR3) and outcome in metastatic clear-cell renal cell carcinoma (m-ccRCC) patients treated with sunitinib. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to validate this finding in an independent patient series. METHODS: m-ccRCC patients receiving sunitinib as first-line targeted therapy were included in a validation cohort. Endpoints were response rate (RR), progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). We also updated survival data of our discovery cohort as described previously. RESULTS: Eighty-four patients were included in the validation cohort. rs307826 AG/GG-carriers had a shorter PFS (8 versus 12 months, p = 0.04) and a trend towards a shorter OS (18 versus 27 months, p = 0.22) compared to AA-carriers. In the total series of 168 patients (from the discovery cohort, as described previously, and the validation cohort), rs307826 AG/GG-carriers had a poorer RR (29% versus 53%, p = 0.008), PFS (8 versus 15 months, p = 0.0002) and OS (22 versus 31 months, p = 0.004) compared to AA-carriers. rs307826 was independently associated with PFS and OS on multivariate analysis. CONCLUSION: VEGFR3 rs307826 seems to be associated with outcome on sunitinib in m-ccRCC. Its impact highlights the role of VEGFR3 in ccRCC pathogenesis and as a target of sunitinib.

International audience; Renal cell carcinoma is the third type of urologic cancer and has a poor prognosis with 30% of metastatic patients at diagnosis. The antiangiogenics and targeted immunotherapies led to treatment remodeling emphasizing the role of the tumour microenvironment. However, long-term responses are rare with a high rate of resistance. New strategies are emerging to improve the efficacy and the emerging drugs are under evaluation in ongoing trials. With the different treatment options, there is an urgent need to identify biomarkers in order to predict the efficacy of drugs and to better stratify patients. Owing to the limitations of programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1), the most studied immunohistochemistry biomarkers, and of the tumor mutational burden, the identification of more reliable markers is an unmet need. New technologies could help in this purpose.

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVE:The mechanisms of action of enzalutamide (enza) and pembrolizumab (pembro) may be synergistic in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) and previous work...

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVE:To evaluate the value of radiomic data for predicting progression free survival (PFS) in patients with metastatic metastatic clear cell renal carcinoma (cCCR) treated wit...

Background: Negative positron emission tomography/computed tomography (FDG-PET/CT) predicts the absence of viable seminoma cells in residual disease after chemotherapy in men with metastatic seminoma. In this study, we assessed whether men with good-prognosis metastatic seminoma could be treated with 2 cycles of etoposide-cisplatin (EP) followed by only one cycle of carboplatin (CARBO) based on a negative interim FDG-PET/CT, thereby limiting the burden of treatment and toxicity. Methods: In this non-randomised, multicentre, phase 2 trial (NCT01887340), we enrolled patients with good-prognosis metastatic seminoma (stage IIB, IIC and III with a good prognosis according to the Medical Research Council classification). All patients with baseline-positive FDG-PET/CT received EP for two cycles. After completing the first two cycles, the patients underwent a second FDG-PET/CT scan to assess the response between days 17 and 20. Patients with persistent positive FDG-PET/CT (based on local review) proceeded directly to two additional EP cycles (for a total of 4 cycles); those who achieved FDG-PET/CT negativity received only one cycle of CARBO AUC=7. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients with a negative FDG-PET/CT on interim assessment who received de-escalating chemotherapy. Secondary endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). Findings: Between June 2013 and July 2017, 102 patients were enrolled in the study. Three patients were deemed ineligible or not evaluable; thus, 99 patients received treatment. After the first 2 EP cycles, FDG-PET/CT was available in 98 pts. Overall, 67 patients (68.4%; 95% CI: 58.2-77.4) had a negative FDG-PET/CT and proceeded to a single CARBO cycle. Twenty-seven patients (27.6%; 95% CI: 19.0-37.5) still had a positive FDG-PET/CT after 2 EP cycles; overall, 31 patients received two additional cycles of EP. After a median follow-up of 39.4 months, only 9 patients relapsed (3/31 in the EP group and 6/67 in the CARBO group). The 3-year PFS rate was 90.0% (95% CI: 74.4-96.5) in the EP group and 90.2% (95% CI: 80.2-95.5) in the CARBO group. One patient died from sepsis during the first two cycles. Interpretation: De-escalating treatment based on a negative FDG-PET/CT after 2 cycles of chemotherapy appears to be safe and feasible in most men with good-prognosis metastatic seminoma. Trial Registration: The trial was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT01887340). Funding Statement: Programme Hospitalier de Recherche Clinique (PHRC) from the Institut National du Cancer (INCA), France. Declaration of Interests: Yohann Loriot: Dr Loriot reports grants from CELSIUS, grants from SANOFI, grants and personal fees from JANSSEN, personal fees from ASTELLAS, grants and personal fees from MSD, personal fees from ASTRA ZENECA, personal fees from BMS, personal fees from SEATTLE GENETICS, personal fees from PFIZER, personal fees from ROCHE, personal fees from IMMUNOMEDICS outside the submitted work; Matthieu Texier: Dr Texier has nothing to disclose; Stephane Culine: Dr Culine has nothing to disclose; Aude Flechon: Dr Flechon has nothing to disclose; Antoine Thierry-Vuillemin: Dr Thierry-Vuillemin reports personal fees from Pfizer, Astra Zeneca, Sanofi, Janssen, Novartis, Ipsen, Roche, Bristol-Myers Squibb, MSD, Astellas; Gwenaelle Gravis: Dr Gravis has nothing to disclose; Lionel Geoffrois: Dr Geoffrois reports personal fees from BMS, personal fees from NOVARTIS, personal fees and other from IPSEN, personal fees from PFIZER, personal fees from A-Z, personal fees from MSD, outside the submitted work; Christine Chevreau: Dr Chevreau has nothing to disclose; Marine Gross-Goupil: Dr Gross-Goupil has nothing to disclose; Philippe Barthelemy: Dr Barthelemy reports advisory board and travels from BMS, advisory board from MSD, advisory board and travels from IPSEN, advisory board from EUSAPHARMA, advisory board from NOVARTIS, advisory board and travels from ROCHE, advisory board and travels from PFIZER, advisory board and travels from JANSSEN, advisory board from ASTELLAS, outside the submitted work; Emmanuelle Bompas: Dr Bompas has nothing to disclose; Hakim Mahammedi : Dr Mahammedi reports personal fees from Bayer, personal fees from BMS , personal fees from Roche , personal fees from MSD , personal fees from Astra Zeneca , personal fees from Sanofi , personal fees and other from Janssen , personal fees and other from Astellas , outside the submitted work; Brigitte Laguerre: Dr Laguerre has nothing to disclose; Sophie Abadie Lacourtoisie : Dr Abadie Lacourtoisie has nothing to disclose; Carole Helissey: Dr Helissey reports personal fees from Sanofi, Janssen, Astellas and Roche; Sylvain Ladoire : Dr Ladoire reports grants from Pfizer, grants from Astellas, grants from Roche , grants from Novartis , grants from BMS, grants from Ipsen, grants from Janssen, grants from Sanofi, outside the submitted work; Christine Abraham: Dr Abraham has nothing to disclose; Christophe Massard: Dr Massard reports Consultant/Advisory fees from Amgen, Astellas, Astra Zeneca, Bayer, BeiGene, BMS, Celgene, Debiopharm, Genentech, Ipsen, Janssen, Lilly, MedImmune, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Sanofi, Orion; Serena Grimaldi: Dr Grimaldi has nothing to disclose; Karim Fizazi: Dr Fizazi reports Consultant/Advisory fees from Amgen, Astellas, Bayer, Jansen, Takeda, Sanofi, Orion, Essa, Genentech, Astra Zeneca, Clovis. Ethics Approval Statement: Written informed consent was obtained from all the patients. The study was approved by the ethics committee of Ile de France II (N°2013-02-12 MS1) and the French Healthcare Agency (N°130253B-12).

Background: After promising results from TPEx phase II trial in first line recurrent/metastatic head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (R/M HNSCC), this trial compared the TPEx regimen (docetaxel-platinum-cetuximab) to the standard EXTREME regimen. Methods: Patients with R/M HNSCC unsuitable for curative treatment were randomized between TPEx (four cycles docetaxel-cisplatin-cetuximab followed by cetuximab maintenance 500 mg/m² every two weeks) and EXTREME (six cycles 5FU-cisplatin-cetuximab followed by weekly cetuximab 250 mg/m² maintenance). Main inclusion criteria were patients fit for cisplatin, performance status (PS) ≤1, creatinine clearance >60ml/min, and age

348 Background: Glandular metastases (GMs) (adrenal, pancreas, thyroid, ovary, breast, or prostate) are rare in mccRCC. Several studies have observed significantly longer overall survival (OS) for GM patients treated with anti-angiogenic therapy. This study assesses outcomes from mccRCC treated with nivolumab with or without GMs. Methods: The GETUG-AFU 26 NIVOREN, phase II trial assessed the activity and safety of nivolumab in pts with mccRCC who failed antiangiogenic therapies (NCT03013335). Pts were stratified in two subgroups according to the presence of at least one GM. Specific analyzes were performed for pancreatic and adrenal metastases. Primary endpoint was OS, secondary endpoint were progression free survival (PFS) and overall response rate (ORR). Results: Between February 2016 and July 2017, among 720 patients treated by nivolumab 217 patients had GM (151: adrenal and 86: pancreatic metastases). Clinical characteristics were comparable between the two subgroups except for IMDC poor subgroup (19% vs 28%) and for Furhman grade IV (13.5% vs 23.4%) for GM and non GM respectively. Median time between metastatic disease and nivolumab was 3.2 years (y) vs 2 y for GM and non GM respectively and 2.8 vs 2.1 y with or without adrenal metastasis. There was no statistical difference in outcomes between pts with or without GMs. However, pts with adrenal metastases had worse OS (12-months survival: 64% vs 71.1%; HR 1.51 (1.19-1.92)); shorter PFS (6-months survival: 27.2% vs 36.6%; HR 1.29 (1.07-1.57)) and lower ORR (12.5% [7.6%; 19.0%] vs 23.2% [19.8%; 27.0%]; p = 0.005) than non-adrenal metastases. Conversely, patients with pancreatic metastases had significantly longer overall survival (12-months survival: 82.3% vs 67.9%; HR 0.59 (0.40-0.85)) in univariate analysis compared to non-pancreatic metastases. In multivariate analysis, only adrenal metastasis remained associated with dismal prognosis (Table). Conclusions: Adrenal metastasis is an independent poor prognostic factor for response and survival in the GETUG-AFU 26 NIVOREN phase II trial. Limited activity with nivolumab is observed for patients with adrenal metastases from mccRCC without difference with previous anti angiogenic therapy. Molecular characterization could help to identify the angiogenic profile of adrenal metastases. Clinical trial information: NCT03013335. [Table: see text]

118 Background: Abi + p is a standard of care for mCRPC. Cohort D of the phase 1b/2 KEYNOTE-365 study (NCT02861573) was used to evaluate safety and efficacy of the PD-1 inhibitor pembro + abi and p in patients (pts) who had not received chemotherapy for mCRPC. Methods: Chemotherapy-naive pts who had not previously used next-generation hormonal agents (NHAs) for mCRPC or were intolerant to enzalutamide or for whom enzalutamide was ineffective for mCRPC, whose disease progressed ≤6 months before screening, and who had ECOG PS score 0/1 were eligible. Enrolled pts received pembro 200 mg IV Q3W + abi 1000 mg PO QD and p 5 mg PO BID. Primary end points were PSA response rate (PSA decrease ≥50% from baseline), confirmed ORR per RECIST v1.1 by blinded independent central review, and safety. Secondary end points included rPFS per PCWG3-modified RECIST v1.1, DCR (CR + PR + SD or non-CR/non-PD ≥6 mo), DOR, OS, time to symptomatic skeletal-related event, radiographic bone progression, and radiographic soft tissue progression. Results: Of 103 treated pts, 35.9% had RECIST-measurable disease and 26.2% had previously received enzalutamide. Median (range) time from enrollment to data cutoff was 17.6 (9.7-27.0) months. Confirmed PSA response rate in all 103 pts was 56.3%. Overall, 78.6% of pts had a reduction in PSA level from baseline (confirmed and unconfirmed). For 37 pts with RECIST-measurable disease, ORR was 16.2% (1 CR; 5 PRs) overall, 7.7% for those who previously received enzalutamide (n = 13) and 21.7% for those who had not previously received NHAs (n = 23). Two pts with RECIST-nonmeasurable disease had a CR. DOR was not reached (NR; range, 2.1+ to 19.4+ mo); 4 pts had a response ≥12 months. DCR was 44.7% overall, 11.1% in pts who previously received enzalutamide (n = 27), and 57.3% in pts who had not previously used NHAs (n = 75). Additional analyses are listed in the table. Treatment-related AEs (TRAEs) were experienced by 90.3% of pts; 36.9% experienced grade 3-5 TRAEs. Overall, 18.4% of pts had a grade 3/4 ALT laboratory elevation and 12.6% had a grade 3/4 AST elevation. Five pts died of AEs; 1 was treatment-related (myasthenic syndrome). Conclusions: Pembro + abi and p showed antitumor activity in chemotherapy-naive pts with mCRPC. Safety was generally consistent with individual profiles of each agent, although there was an increased incidence of grade 3/4 ALT/AST laboratory elevations than reported for the individual treatments. Clinical trial information: NCT02861573. [Table: see text]

342 Background: Bone metastases (BM) in renal cell carcinoma (RCC) are associated with a poor prognosis based on retrospective studies in which patients were treated with antiangiogenic agents. Since the development of immune checkpoint inhibitors, few data are available regarding the prognosis impact of BM or the efficacy and safety of checkpoint inhibitors in patients with bones metastatic RCC. GETUG-AFU26-NIVOREN (NIVOREN) is a French multicenter prospective study in which patients were treated with nivolumab after failure of one or more antiangiogenic tyrosine kinase inhibitors. We therefore aim to evaluate the impact of BM on prognosis, and the efficacy and safety of nivolumab in patients with BM enrolled in NIVOREN trial. Methods: All adult patients with BM at inclusion were included in our study. The primary endpoint of this ancillary study was overall survival (OS). Secondary endpoints were progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate (ORR), safety, and skeletal-related events (SRE) in patients with BM. Clinical data were collected prospectively, except for SRE data which were collected retrospectively in a complementary consent report form. Results: Among 720 patients treated with nivolumab in the NIVOREN study, 194 had BM at inclusion. After a median follow-up of 23.9 months, the median OS was 17.9 months in patients with BM versus 26.1 months in patients without BM (HR = 1.42 CI95% [1.13-1.79], p = 0.0023). After adjustment on sex, age, IMDC group and line of treatments, the difference was not significant (HR = 1.24, CI95% [0.98-1.56], p = 0.0707). The median PFS was shorter in patients with BM even after adjustment (2.8 versus 4.6 months, HR = 1.30 CI95% [1.08-1.56]), as well as the ORR (14.8% versus 23.3%). The safety profile was similar between patients with or without BM at inclusion. The incidence of SRE in the BM population was 36% during the treatment period with nivolumab. A post-hoc analysis evaluating the impact of bone-targeting agents in association with nivolumab on SRE incidence was performed. There was a statistically significant benefit in patients treated with bone-targeting agents on the incidence of SRE (OR = 0.367, CI95% [0.151-0.895], p = 0.0276). Conclusions: Nivolumab is associated with shorter OS, PFS, and lower ORR in patients with BM. Our study confirms, in the era of immunotherapy that patients with BM are associated with poorer prognosis and suggests that association with bone-targeting agents decreases the incidence of SRE. Clinical trial information: 2015-004117-24.

Purpose To investigate the effect of adding concurrent chemotherapy (CT) to cetuximab plus radiotherapy (RT; CT-cetux-RT) compared with cetuximab plus RT (cetux-RT) in locally advanced squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (LA-SCCHN). Patients and Methods In this phase III randomized trial, patients with N0-2b, nonoperated, stage III or IV (nonmetastatic) LA-SCCHN were enrolled. Patients received once-daily RT up to 70 Gy with weekly cetuximab or with weekly cetuximab and concurrent carboplatin and fluorouracil (three cycles). To detect a hazard ratio (HR) of 0.64 for progression-free survival (PFS) with 85% power at a two-sided significance level of P = .05, 203 patients needed to be included in each arm. Results Four hundred six patients were randomly assigned to either CT-cetux-RT or cetux-RT. Patient and tumor characteristics were well balanced between arms, including p16 status. With a median follow-up of 4.4 years, the HR for PFS favored the CT-cetux-RT arm (HR, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.57 to 0.94; P = .015), with 3-year PFS rates of 52.3% and 40.5% and median PFS times of 37.9 and 22.4 months in the CT-cetux-RT and cetux-RT arms, respectively. The HR for locoregional control was 0.54 (95% CI, 0.38 to 0.76; P < .001) in favor of CT-cetux-RT. These benefits were observed regardless of p16 status for oropharynx carcinomas. Overall survival (HR, 0.80; P = .11) and distant metastases rates (HR, 1.19; P = .50) were not significantly different between the two arms. The CT-cetux-RT arm, compared with cetux-RT, had a higher incidence of grade 3 or 4 mucositis (73% v 61%, respectively; P = .014) and of hospitalizations for toxicity (42% v 22%, respectively; P < .001). Conclusion The addition of concurrent carboplatin and fluorouracil to cetux-RT improved PFS and locoregional control, with a nonsignificant gain in survival. To our knowledge, this is the first evidence of a clinical benefit for treatment intensification using cetux-RT as a backbone in LA-SCCHN.

Background Sorafenib is the standard treatment of advanced hepatocellular carcinoma. Because of its unique toxicities, improving patients' tolerance merits close follow-up. Nurses can play a crucial role by leading a patient educational program (EP). Objectives The aim of this study was to assess whether adding EP to usual care (UC) improves patient's care. Methods Since 2011, oncologists referred patients treated by sorafenib to the EP led by clinical nurses. The EP included a visit before the first administration, weekly telephone calls, and a visit with the nurse before each oncologist consultation. We retrospectively compared patients in the EP with those in UC followed by an oncologist and patients included in a clinical trial. Results Since 2005, 129 patients were treated with sorafenib for hepatocellular carcinoma: 31 in the EP (24%), 22 in a clinical trial (17%), and 76 with UC (59%). Seventy-one percent of the patients in the EP had toxicities identified during a telephone call, which prompted symptomatic measures in 65% of the patients, leading to treatment modification before the planned on-site visit in 29% of the patients. Educational program patients required fewer dose reductions (39% vs 61% for UC, P = .04), and median time to first dose reduction was shorter with EP than with UC (25 vs 45 days, P = .036). Conclusions This study suggests a clinical benefit of EP related to improved toxicity management of sorafenib that resulted in fewer dose reductions. Implications for practice Patients treated with sorafenib may benefit from an EP. Different types of EP should be compared prospectively, focusing on patients' quality of life.

International audience; BACKGROUND:Neuroendocrine carcinoma of the urinary bladder (NCUB) is rare, accounting for < 1% of bladder cancer cases, with scarce reported data available.MATERIALS AND METHODS:We retrospectively reviewed the data from patients with NCUB treated at French institutions. The objectives were to describe the patient characteristics, treatments received, and outcomes (ie, disease-free survival [DFS], progression-free survival, overall survival [OS]) and investigate the prognostic factors.RESULTS:From 1997 to 2017, we included 236 patients, 173 with early-stage NCUB and 63 with advanced-stage NCUB. For those with early-stage disease, the median DFS was better for the patients who had received cisplatin-based chemotherapy compared with carboplatin (hazard ratio [HR], 1.95; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.1-3.46), with no difference found between the neoadjuvant and adjuvant settings (HR, 1.1; 95% CI, 0.61-1.97). The median OS was 36 months (95% CI, 29-43 months) for stage I and II, 26 months (95% CI, 18 months to not reached) for stage IIIA, 16 months (95% CI, 12-21 months) for stage IIIB. The HR for stage IIIB compared with stage I/II was 2.6 (95% CI, 1.5-4.4). The DFS at 6 months was associated with OS (HR, 7.8; 95% CI, 4.1-15.0). For patients with metastases at diagnosis who had received chemotherapy, the median progression-free survival was 9 months (95% CI, 8-11) for first-line cisplatin and 6 months (95% CI, 4-13 months) for carboplatin; the median OS was 13 months (95% CI, 9-15 months). A high-risk Bajorin score (HR, 11.5; 95% CI, 1.2-112.6) and the use of carboplatin (HR, 2.26; 95% CI, 1.03-4.96) were associated with worse outcomes.CONCLUSIONS:In early-stage disease, a shorter DFS was associated with worse OS, and the use of cisplatin was associated with better OS. For the patients with metastases at diagnosis, a high-risk Bajorin score and the use of carboplatin were associated with worse outcomes.

International audience; Background: We previously described 4 molecular subtypes of metastatic clear cell renal cell carcinoma (mccRCC), named ccrcc1-4 (Beuselinck et al, 2015). These have both prognostic and predictive value for patients treated with first-line sunitinib, with distinctive objective response rate (ORR), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS). The ccrcc2 and ccrcc3 tumors have the best outcomes, followed by ccrcc1 and then ccrcc4. We hypothesized that these molecular subtypes would show similar outcomes with first-line pazopanib treatment.Patients and methods: We classified 28 mccRCC tumors treated with pazopanib as first-line therapy, as described previously. The primary endpoints were PFS and OS from the start of pazopanib. A secondary endpoint was ORR. Because there were only 2 ccrcc3 tumors, they were pooled with the ccrcc2 tumors for outcome analysis.Results: PFS was 9 months for the ccrcc2 and ccrcc3 tumors, 5 months for ccrcc1 tumors, and 3 months for the ccrcc4 tumors (P = .011). The corresponding OS duration was 69, 19, and 5 months (P = .003). The corresponding ORR was 50%, 33%, and 0%. The corresponding mean tumor size decreased by 34%, 6%, and 2% (P = .032). The ccrcc1-4 classification was a stronger predictor of outcome than the International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium score on univariate analysis (P = .011 vs. P = .094 for PFS and P = .003 vs. .013 for OS). Both remained independent on bivariate analysis.Conclusion: The molecular subtypes of mccRCC are associated with outcome on pazopanib as first-line therapy. The prognostic and predictive value of the ccrcc1-4 molecular classification requires validation in prospective trials.

Background Androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) plus docetaxel is the standard of care in fit men with metastatic castration-naive prostate cancer (mCNPC) following results from GETUG-AFU 15, CHAARTED, and STAMPEDE. No data are available on the efficacy of treatments used for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) in men treated upfront with ADT plus docetaxel for mCNPC. Objective To investigate the efficacy and tolerance of subsequent treatments in patients treated upfront with chemo-hormonal therapy for mCNPC. Design, setting, and participants Retrospective data from the GETUG-AFU 15 phase 3 trial were collected for treatments received for mCRPC. Outcome measurements and statistical analysis For the first three lines of salvage treatment for mCRPC we investigated the biochemical progression-free survival, maximum prostate-specific antigen (PSA) decline, overall survival, and tolerance. Results and limitations Overall, 245 patients received at least one treatment for mCRPC. For docetaxel used in first-line, a PSA decline ≥50% was observed in 25/66 (38%) and in 4/20 patients (20%) who had received upfront ADT alone and ADT plus docetaxel ( p =0.14). The median biochemical progression-free survival was 6.0 mo (95% confidence interval: 3.6–7.7) and 4.1 mo (95% confidence interval: 1.3–4.9), respectively. For docetaxel used in first- or second-line, a PSA decline ≥50% was observed in 36/80 (45%) and in 4/29 patients (14%) who had received upfront ADT alone and ADT plus docetaxel ( p =0.07). PSA declines ≥50% were observed with bicalutamide in 12/28 (43%) and 4/23 patients (17%) who had received upfront ADT alone and ADT plus docetaxel. Among men treated upfront with ADT plus docetaxel who received abiraterone or enzalutamide for mCRPC, 10/19 patients (53%) achieved a PSA decline ≥50%. Few grade 3–4 events occurred. Study limitations include the observational design and retrospective characteristics of this analysis, without standardized therapeutic salvage protocols, and the limited number of patients in some of the treatment subgroups. Conclusions Docetaxel rechallenge following progression to mCRPC after upfront ADT plus docetaxel for mCNPC was active only in a limited number of patients. Available data on abiraterone and enzalutamide support maintained efficacy in this setting. The lack of standardized therapeutic protocols for men developing mCRPC limits the comparability between patients. Patient summary Rechallenging docetaxel at castration-resistance was active only in a limited number of patients treated upfront with chemo-hormonal therapy for metastatic castration-naive prostate cancer. Anticancer activity was suggested with abiraterone or enzalutamide in this setting.

Resume Objectif Il s’agit de mesurer la surveillance et l’incidence des effets indesirables renovasculaires des anti-angiogeniques en population reelle. Methode Sont inclus dans cette etude de pratique descriptive, retrospective, monocentrique, les patients âges d’au moins 18 ans, traites oralement par anti-angiogeniques et suivis en consultation par les infirmieres cliniciennes. La variable d’interet principale est l’incidence de l’hypertension arterielle (HTA) a trois mois de traitement. Resultats Du 1er janvier 2011 au 31 juillet 2014, 324 patients ont ete inclus, dont 53 % d’hommes. L’âge moyen est de 62 ± 13 ans. Les antecedents sont : 37 % d’HTA, 17 % d’insuffisance renale chronique, 21 % de nephrectomie, 13 % de diabete. Les cancers les plus frequents sont : rein (31 %), foie (23 %), sein (16 %). Les molecules le plus utilisees sont le sorafenib (30 %), le sunitinib (23 %) et l’everolimus (16 %). La pression arterielle a ete mesuree a l’initiation du traitement chez 157 patients (48 %). Parmi eux, 55 (35 %) vont presenter une HTA selon la definition « oncologique » au cours des trois premiers mois de traitement, contre 59 (38 %) selon la definition classique ; 30 patients (19 %) ne repondent qu’a une seule definition. En analyse multivariee, les variables significativement associees a la survenue d’une HTA sont l’âge (OR = 1,04 ; IC 95 % 1,02–1,08 ; p Conclusion Dans notre cohorte, seuls 48 % des patients ont eu une mesure de la pression arterielle avant traitement. L’HTA sous anti-angiogeniques est probablement sous-estimee car non systematiquement recherchee. L’âge et l’antecedent de nephrectomie semblent etre correles a la survenue d’une HTA.