Search

[Background] Neoadjuvant immunotherapies hold promise in muscle-invasive bladder cancer (MIBC)., [Objective] To report on 2-yr disease-free (DFS) and overall (OS) survival including novel tissue-based biomarkers and circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) in the ABACUS trial., [Design, setting, and participants] ABACUS was a multicenter, single-arm, neoadjuvant, phase 2 trial, including patients with MIBC (T2-4aN0M0) who were ineligible for or refused neoadjuvant cisplatin-based chemotherapy., [Intervention] Two cycles of atezolizumab were given prior to radical cystectomy. Serial tissue and blood samples were collected., [Outcome measurements and statistical analysis] The primary endpoints of pathological complete response (pCR) rate and dynamic changes to T-cell biomarkers were published previously. Secondary outcomes were 2-yr DFS and OS. A biomarker analysis correlated with relapse-free survival (RFS) was performed, which includes FOXP3, major histocompatibility complex class I, CD8/CD39, and sequential ctDNA measurements., [Results and limitations] The median follow-up time was 25 mo (95% confidence interval [CI] 25–26). Ninety-five patients received at least one cycle of atezolizumab. Eight patients did not undergo cystectomy (only one due to disease progression). The pCR rate was 31% (27/88; 95% CI 21–41). Two-year DFS and OS were 68% (95% CI 58–76) and 77% (95% CI 68–85), respectively. Two-year DFS in patients achieving a pCR was 85% (95% CI 65–94). Baseline PD-L1 and tumor mutational burden did not correlate with RFS (hazard ratio [HR] 0.60 [95% CI 0.24–1.5], p = 0.26, and 0.72 [95% CI 0.31–1.7], p = 0.46, respectively). RFS correlated with high baseline stromal CD8+ (HR 0.25 [95% CI 0.09–0.68], p = 0.007) and high post-treatment fibroblast activation protein (HR 4.1 [95% CI 1.3–13], p = 0.01). Circulating tumor DNA positivity values at baseline, after neoadjuvant therapy, and after surgery were 63% (25/40), 47% (14/30), and 14% (five/36), respectively. The ctDNA status was highly prognostic at all time points. No relapses were observed in ctDNA-negative patients at baseline and after neoadjuvant therapy. The lack of randomization and exploratory nature of the biomarker analysis are limitations of this work., [Conclusions] Neoadjuvant atezolizumab in MIBC is associated with clinical responses and high DFS. CD8+ expression and serial ctDNA levels correlated with outcomes, and may contribute to personalized therapy in the future, [Patient summary] We showed that bladder cancer patients receiving immunotherapy followed by cystectomy have good long-term outcomes. Furthermore, we found that certain biological features can predict patients who might have particular benefit from this therapy., Bernadett Szabados—research funding from MSD and Roche; honoraria from Roche, MSD, and BMS. Mark Kockx—employee of CellCarta. Zoe June Assaf—employee of Roche. Pieter-Jan van Dam—employee of CellCarta. Alejo Rodriguez-Vida—research funding and honoraria from Roche, BMS, and Pfizer; research funding from Novartis and Astellas. Ignacio Duran—research funding and honoraria from Roche, BMS, Pfizer, and Johnson & Johnson; research funding from Astellas. Simon J. Crabb—research funding and honoraria from Roche, MSD, Pfizer, Exelixis, and Clovis. Michiel S. Van Der Heijden—research funding and honoraria from BMS, AstraZeneca, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, MSD, and Seattle Genetics. Albert Font Pous—research funding and honoraria from MSD, Pfizer, and Astellas. Gwenaelle Gravis—research funding and honoraria from Roche, AstraZeneca, Pfizer, and Astellas. Urbano Anido Herranz—research funding and honoraria from Roche, MSD, Exelixis, and Astellas. Andrew Prothoroe—research funding and honoraria from Astellas, Pfizer, Novartis, and BMS. Alain Ravaud—research funding and honoraria from MSD, Roche, BMS, and Pfizer. Denis Maillet—research funding and honoraria from MSD and Roche. Maria Jose Mendez—research funding and honoraria from Roche and Pfizer. Cristina Suarez—research funding and honoraria from Pfizer, BMS, Roche, AstraZeneca, and Astellas. Mark Linch—research funding and honoraria from BMS, Roche, Pfizer, Astellas, and AstraZeneca. Aaron Prendergast and Charlotte Tyson—no conflicts. Diana Stanoeva, Sofie Daelemans, and Miche Rombouts— employee of CellCarta. Sanjeev Mariathasan—employee of Genentech. Joy S. Tea—employee of Roche. Kelly Mousa—no conflicts. Romain Banchereau—employee of Genentech. Daniel Castellano—research funding and honoraria from Astellas, BMS, Roche, and AstraZeneca. Thomas Powles—honoraria from AstraZeneca, BMS, Exelixis, Incyte, Ipsen, Merck, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Seattle Genetics, Merck Serono, Astellas, Johnson & Johnson, Eisai, and Roche; research funding from AstraZeneca, BMS, Exelixis, Ipsen, Merck, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Seattle Genetics, Merck Serono, Astellas, Johnson & Johnson, Eisai, and Roche; travel/accommodation/expenses from Roche, Pfizer, MSD, AstraZeneca, and Ipsen.

BackgroundRisk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy is the 'gold standard' for preventing tubo-ovarian cancer in women at increased risk. However, when performed in pre-menopausal women, it results in premature menopause and associated detrimental health consequences. This, together with acceptance of the central role of the fallopian tube in etiopathogenesis of high-grade serous carcinoma, by far the most common type of tubo-ovarian cancer, has led to risk-reducing early salpingectomy with delayed oophorectomy being proposed as a two-step surgical alternative for pre-menopausal women declining/delaying oophorectomy.Primary ObjectiveTo evaluate the impact on sexual function of risk-reducing early salpingectomy, within a two-step, risk-reducing, early salpingectomy with delayed oophorectomy tubo-ovarian cancer prevention strategy in pre-menopausal women at increased risk of tubo-ovarian cancer.Study HypothesisRisk-reducing early salpingectomy is non-inferior for sexual and endocrine function compared with controls; risk-reducing early salpingectomy is superior for sexual/endocrine function, non-inferior for quality-of-life, and equivalent in satisfaction to the standard risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy.Trial DesignMulti-center, observational cohort trial with three arms: risk-reducing early salpingectomy with delayed oophorectomy; risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy; controls (no surgery). Consenting individuals undergo an ultrasound, serum CA125, and follicle-stimulating hormone measurements and provide information on medical history, family history, quality-of-life, sexual function, cancer worry, psychological well-being, and satisfaction/regret. Follow-up by questionnaire takes place annually for 3 years. Women receiving risk-reducing early salpingectomy can undergo delayed oophorectomy at a later date of their choosing, or definitely by the menopause.Major Inclusion/Exclusion CriteriaInclusion criteria: pre-menopausal; aged >30 years; at increased risk of tubo-ovarian cancer (mutation carriers or on the basis of a strong family history); completed their family (for surgical arms). Exclusion criteria: post-menopausal; previous bilateral salpingectomy or bilateral oophorectomy; pregnancy; previous tubal/ovarian/peritoneal malignancy; Primary EndpointSexual function measured by validated questionnaires.Sample Size1000 (333 per arm).Estimated Dates for Completing Accrual and Presenting ResultsIt is estimated recruitment will be completed by 2023 and results published by 2027.Trial Registration NumberISRCTN registry: 25 173 360 (https://doi.org/10.1186/ISRCTN25173360).

BackgroundAcceptance of the role of the fallopian tube in ‘ovarian’ carcinogenesis and the detrimental sequelae of surgical menopause in premenopausal women following risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy (RRSO) has resulted in risk-reducing early-salpingectomy with delayed oophorectomy (RRESDO) being proposed as an attractive alternative risk-reducing strategy in women who decline/delay oophorectomy. We present the results of a qualitative study evaluating the decision-making process among BRCA carriers considering prophylactic surgeries (RRSO/RRESDO) as part of the multicentre PROTECTOR trial (ISRCTN:25173360).MethodsIn-depth semistructured 1:1 interviews conducted using a predeveloped topic-guide (development informed by literature review and expert consultation) until informational saturation reached. Wording and sequencing of questions were left open with probes used to elicit additional information. All interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim, transcripts analysed using an inductive theoretical framework and data managed using NVIVO-v12.ResultsInformational saturation was reached following 24 interviews. Seven interconnected themes integral to surgical decision making were identified: fertility/menopause/cancer risk reduction/surgical choices/surgical complications/sequence of ovarian-and-breast prophylactic surgeries/support/satisfaction. Women for whom maximising ovarian cancer risk reduction was relatively more important than early menopause/quality-of-life preferred RRSO, whereas those more concerned about detrimental impact of menopause chose RRESDO. Women managed in specialist familial cancer clinic settings compared with non-specialist settings felt they received better quality care, improved hormone replacement therapy access and were more satisfied.ConclusionMultiple contextual factors (medical, physical, psychological, social) influence timing of risk-reducing surgeries. RRESDO offers women delaying/declining premenopausal oophorectomy, particularly those concerned about menopausal effects, a degree of ovarian cancer risk reduction while avoiding early menopause. Care of high-risk women should be centralised to centres with specialist familial gynaecological cancer risk management services to provide a better-quality, streamlined, holistic multidisciplinary approach.

Face masks and personal respirators are used to curb the transmission of SARS-CoV-2 in respiratory droplets; filters embedded in some personal protective equipment could be used as a non-invasive sample source for applications, including at-home testing, but information is needed about whether filters are suited to capture viral particles for SARS-CoV-2 detection. In this study, we generated inactivated virus-laden aerosols of 0.3–2 microns in diameter (0.9 µm mean diameter by mass) and dispersed the aerosolized viral particles onto electrostatic face mask filters. The limit of detection for inactivated coronaviruses SARS-CoV-2 and HCoV-NL63 extracted from filters was between 10 to 100 copies/filter for both viruses. Testing for SARS-CoV-2, using face mask filters and nasopharyngeal swabs collected from hospitalized COVID-19-patients, showed that filter samples offered reduced sensitivity (8.5% compared to nasopharyngeal swabs). The low concordance of SARS-CoV-2 detection between filters and nasopharyngeal swabs indicated that number of viral particles collected on the face mask filter was below the limit of detection for all patients but those with the highest viral loads. This indicated face masks are unsuitable to replace diagnostic nasopharyngeal swabs in COVID-19 diagnosis. The ability to detect nucleic acids on face mask filters may, however, find other uses worth future investigation.

[Background] There are limited data on toxicity and surgical safety associated with neoadjuvant programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) inhibitors prior to radical cystectomy (RC) in patients with muscle-invasive bladder cancer (MIBC)., [Objective] To present a comprehensive safety analysis of the largest neoadjuvant series, with focus on timing and severity of toxicity and surgical complications occurring after neoadjuvant atezolizumab in patients with MIBC enrolled in the ABACUS trial., [Design, setting, and participants] ABACUS (NCT02662309) is an open-label, multicenter, phase II trial for patients with histologically confirmed (T2-T4aN0M0) MIBC, awaiting RC. Patients either were ineligible or refused cisplatin-based neoadjuvant chemotherapy., [Intervention] Two cycles of neoadjuvant atezolizumab (1200 mg, every 3 wk) followed by RC., [Outcome measurements and statistical analysis] Description of atezolizumab toxicity profile in the neoadjuvant setting, impact on surgery, and delayed immune-mediated adverse events (AEs) were assessed., [Results and limitations] Ninety-five patients received treatment. Of them, 44% (42/95) had atezolizumab-related AEs during the neoadjuvant period (fatigue [20%], decreased appetite [6%], and transaminases increased [6%]). Treatment-related grade 3–5 AEs occurred in 11% (10/95) of patients during the study. Of the patients, 21% (20/95) received only one cycle of atezolizumab due to AEs; 92% (87/95) underwent RC. No surgery was delayed due to atezolizumab-related toxicities. Surgical complications occurred in 62% (54/87) of patients. Of these patients, 43% (37/87) and 20% (17/87) had minor (grade 1–2) and major (grade 3–5) complications, respectively. Thirteen of 87 (15%) patients had post-RC atezolizumab-related AEs, including adrenal insufficiency and transaminases increased. Three deaths occurred during the period of study-related interventions (one non–treatment-related aspiration pneumonia, one immune-related myocardial infarction, and one cardiogenic shock after RC). Not all surgical safety parameters were available., [Conclusions] Two cycles of neoadjuvant atezolizumab are well tolerated and do not seem to impact surgical complication rates. Owing to the long half-life, AEs may occur in the postoperative period, including endocrine abnormalities requiring attention and intervention., [Patient summary] Here, we report a comprehensive dataset of patients receiving neoadjuvant immune checkpoint inhibitors before radical cystectomy. Treatment with neoadjuvant atezolizumab is safe and does not seem to complicate surgery significantly., Queen Mary University of London was the Sponsor of the study. Roche granted QMUL funding for the study. J. Bull and M. Jacobson also provided financial support for aspects of the biomarker analysis. We acknowledge Cancer Research UK, the UK Experimental Cancer Medicine Network, and La Roche-Hoffmann for funding.

Background Acceptance of the role of the fallopian tube in ‘ovarian’ carcinogenesis and the detrimental sequelae of surgical menopause in premenopausal women following risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy (RRSO) has resulted in risk-reducing early-salpingectomy with delayed oophorectomy (RRESDO) being proposed as an attractive alternative risk-reducing strategy in women who decline/delay oophorectomy. We present the results of a qualitative study evaluating the decision-making process among BRCA carriers considering prophylactic surgeries (RRSO/RRESDO) as part of the multicentre PROTECTOR trial (ISRCTN:25173360). Methods In-depth semistructured 1:1 interviews conducted using a predeveloped topic-guide (development informed by literature review and expert consultation) until informational saturation reached. Wording and sequencing of questions were left open with probes used to elicit additional information. All interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim, transcripts analysed using an inductive theoretical framework and data managed using NVIVO-v12. Results Informational saturation was reached following 24 interviews. Seven interconnected themes integral to surgical decision making were identified: fertility/menopause/cancer risk reduction/surgical choices/surgical complications/sequence of ovarian-and-breast prophylactic surgeries/support/satisfaction. Women for whom maximising ovarian cancer risk reduction was relatively more important than early menopause/quality-of-life preferred RRSO, whereas those more concerned about detrimental impact of menopause chose RRESDO. Women managed in specialist familial cancer clinic settings compared with non-specialist settings felt they received better quality care, improved hormone replacement therapy access and were more satisfied. Conclusion Multiple contextual factors (medical, physical, psychological, social) influence timing of risk-reducing surgeries. RRESDO offers women delaying/declining premenopausal oophorectomy, particularly those concerned about menopausal effects, a degree of ovarian cancer risk reduction while avoiding early menopause. Care of high-risk women should be centralised to centres with specialist familial gynaecological cancer risk management services to provide a better-quality, streamlined, holistic multidisciplinary approach.

4511 Background: Savolitinib is a potent and selective MET inhibitor with activity in MET-driven papillary renal cancer (PRC). Durvalumab is a PD-L1 inhibitor which has been tested in combination with savolitinib in metastatic PRC with response rates of 29% (12/41). Here we describe the efficacy of this combination in MET-driven metastatic PRC. Methods: This single arm phase I/II trial explored durvalumab (1500mg Q4W) and savolitinib (600mg OD) together in metastatic PRC, with a 4wk savolitinib run in. Biomarker analysis results were compared with responses to treatment as planned in the protocol. The analysis presented here focuses on those patients with MET DNA alterations (central analysis:chromosome 7 gain/MET or HGF amplification/MET kinase domain mutations). Confirmed response rate (RR) (RECIST v1.1), progression-free survival (PFS), tolerability (CTCAE v4.03) and overall survival (OS) were analysed. Results: 42 patients were enrolled in the metastatic papillary cohort, of which 41 patients received treatment. The median follow up was 26.8 months. The confirmed RR was 29% (12/41) and median PFS was 4.9 months (95% CI 2.5-10.0). 14/41 (34%) of these patients had MET-driven disease. 71% (10/14) of MET-driven patients had not previously received systemic therapy and 7% (1/14) were PD-L1 positive. IMDC good, intermediate, and poor risk disease occurred in 36% (5/14), 57% (8/14), and 7% (1/14) of MET-driven patients respectively. Confirmed RR in MET-driven patients was 57% (8/14) with duration of response at 9.4 months (95% CI 3.9-Not reached [NR]). Median PFS and OS in MET-driven patients were 10.5 months (95% CI 2.9-15.7) and 27.4 months (95% CI 7.3-NR) respectively. No new safety signals were seen. Conclusions: The combination of savolitinib and durvalumab has clinical activity in MET-driven PRC. A randomised phase III study is planned based upon these data. Clinical trial information: NCT02819596.

619 Background: There is a strong rationale for investigating MET and PD-L1 inhibition in metastatic papillary renal cancer (PRC). We previously reported response rates (RR) and progression free survival (PFS) for savolitinib (MET inhibitor) and durvalumab (PD-L1 inhibitor) together. Here we report overall survival (OS) data available 12 months after the last patient was enrolled. Methods: This single arm phase I/II trial explores durvalumab (1500mg Q4W) and savolitinib (600mg OD) together in PRC, with a 4wk savolitinib run in. Treatment naïve or previously treated patients with metastatic PRC were included. Confirmed RR (RECIST v1.1), PFS, tolerability (CTCAE v4.03) and overall survival (OS) were analysed. MET and PD-L1 biomarkers were explored (NCT02819596). Results: 42 patients were enrolled with 41 receiving at least one dose of study treatment. Safety and efficacy analyses were performed on these 41 patients. The median follow up was 14.3 months. IMDC good, intermediate and poor risk disease occurred in 29%, 63%, and 7% of patients respectively. Overall confirmed RR was 27% while median PFS was 4.9 months (95% CI: 2.5 – 12.0 months). Median OS was 12.3 months (95% CI: 5.8 – 21.3 months). Confirmed RR and median OS in the previously untreated cohort (N=27) were 33% and 12.3 months (95% CI: 4.7 – not reached (NR) months) respectively. Treatment related Grade 3/4 toxicity occurred in 34% of patients. No new safety signals were seen. PD-L1 and MET expression were not associated with higher RR (25% and 40% respectively) or longer OS. Conclusions: The combination of savolitinib and durvalumab has clinical activity in PRC and outcomes were not enhanced in biomarker positive cancers. Clinical trial information: NCT02819596.