Search

The incidence of early-onset cancers in adolescents and young adults (AYA) has been increasing worldwide since the 1990s. In Italy, a significant increased rate of 1.6 % per year has been reported for early-onset cancers among females between 2008 and 2016. This is mainly attributable to melanoma, thyroid, breast and endometrial cancer. The aim of our work was to describe temporal trends of the main established lifestyle risk factors (tobacco use, alcohol consumption, obesity, physical inactivity, dietary westernization and reproductive factors) over the last 20 years in the Italian AYA population. Available data on behavioural risk factors, individual and household daily life have been obtained and elaborated from PASSI, ISTAT and Eurostat reports. Lowering age of smoking initiation, an increase in alcohol drinkers among young females, and an obesity and overweight epidemic, particularly among children and adolescents as a result of physical inactivity and dietary habits, may be contributing factors behind this cancer epidemic, especially among females. In-depth investigations are needed to understand the exact role of each contributing factor, the effects of exposure to nicotine-containing products and environmental factors such as endocrine disruptors that could play a role in this phenomenon., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare that are relevant to the content of this manuscript., (Copyright © 2024 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Rationale: Metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer has a poor prognosis especially when harboring DNA damage repair gene mutations, nevertheless, in the case of pathogenic BRCA gene mutations, PARPi demonstrated a survival benefit and is a validated treatment. Nowadays, there is no data regarding unusual metastases after these drugs. Cutaneous metastases appear rarely in prostate cancer and were associated with a worse prognosis. Moreover, there are no consolidated data concerning skin tropism of prostate cancer cells, neither in the case of BRCA-associated cancers., Patient Concerns: Here, we report the case of a patient with a long history of BRCA1-mutated metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer who developed a skin lesion on the scalp while on his fifth line of systemic therapy with olaparib. After a complete radical surgical excision, the pathology report showed prostate cancer localization., Diagnoses: A diagnosis of skin metastasis from prostate cancer was reported., Outcomes: The patient then continued olaparib therapy; after 7 months from excision, he experienced further bone and biochemical progression but not cutaneous progression., Lessons: A literature review of all reported cases of cutaneous metastasis in prostate cancer was conducted to shed light on the incidence, clinical presentation, diagnosis, treatment, and prognosis of this entity. We also reviewed published cases of skin metastasis in BRCA-associated cancers with an effort to correlate skin involvement with PARPi treatment, BRCAness status, and prognosis., Competing Interests: The authors have no conflicts of interest to disclose., (Copyright © 2024 the Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc.)

Background/aim: Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have revolutionized the treatment of metastatic urothelial carcinoma (mUC). However, they could be associated with immune-related adverse events (irAEs), which may be clinically significant. Identifying clinical characteristics that may be associated with a higher risk of irAEs is of great importance., Patients and Methods: We retrospectively collected data from all patients who received anti-PD1 or anti-PD-L1 for metastatic UC at our Institution from January 2017 to December 2022. Patients were dichotomized according to baseline neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR), systemic immune-inflammation index (SII), and platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio (PLR) values. We performed univariate and multivariate logistic regression to determine the association between baseline characteristics and the development of irAEs., Results: A total of 119 patients were identified. At a median follow-up of 29.6 months, 96 patients progressed and 82 died. Forty-five patients developed irAEs of any grade, 8 patients developed grade 3 toxicities. In the univariate analysis PS of 0 (p<0.01), baseline NLR <3.52, baseline PLR <194 (p=0.04) and baseline SII <906 (p=0.01) were significantly associated with a higher risk of developing irAEs, whereas in the multivariate analysis only PS=0 (p<0.01) and NLR <3.52 (p=0.03) maintained their correlation. Median progression-free survival (mPFS) and overall survival (mOS) were significantly longer in patients with NLR <3 (mPFS 3.8 vs. 2.6 months, p=0.01; mOS 15.3 vs. 5.6 months, p=0.002) and PS=0 (mPFS 4.8 vs. 2.1 months, p<0.001; mOS 15.3 vs. 3.8 months, p<0.001)., Conclusion: Low baseline NLR, PLR, and SII and good PS are associated with a higher risk of developing irAEs in patients treated with ICIs for mUC., (Copyright © 2024 International Institute of Anticancer Research (Dr. George J. Delinasios), All rights reserved.)

Introduction: Rare genitourinary tumors are lacking of randomized and observational data. We aimed to describe the clinical characteristics and outcomes of patients with collecting duct carcinoma (CDC) through the Meet-URO 23/I-RARE database., Materials and Methods: We performed a multicentric retrospective-prospective study within the Meet-URO network, enrolling patients from March 2021 (retrospectively up from 2011) until March 2023. The primary objective was to describe the clinical characteristics of patients with CDC, the secondary objectives were to assess the oncological outcomes in terms of relapse-free survival (RFS), progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS) and objective response rate (ORR) to treatment., Results: 37 patients with CDC were enrolled. Four patients underwent only surgery, 33 received first-line systemic therapy. Median OS was 22.1 months (95% CI, 8.9-31.9). Median RFS for patients with localized disease at onset (n = 30) was 3.7 months (95% CI, 1.9-12.8), median PFS for first-line treatment was 3.3 months (95% CI, 2.7-9.9), with an ORR of 27%. Female sex and good performance status (PS) were associated with longer PFS (P = .072 and P < .01, respectively) and OS (P = .030 and P = .141, respectively)., Conclusions: Patients with CDC had dismal prognosis, with scarce benefit from the available treatments. Female sex and good PS seemed to be associated with better prognosis., Competing Interests: Disclosure The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare., (Copyright © 2024 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Importance: The oral pan-fibroblast growth factor receptor inhibitor rogaratinib previously demonstrated encouraging safety and efficacy in a phase 1 study of patients with urothelial cancer (UC) overexpressing FGFR messenger RNA (mRNA)., Objective: To evaluate the safety, pharmacokinetics, and preliminary efficacy of rogaratinib in combination with the programmed cell death 1 ligand 1 (PD-L1) inhibitor atezolizumab in cisplatin-ineligible patients with FGFR mRNA-positive, locally advanced/metastatic UC., Design, Setting, and Participants: The FORT-2 nonrandomized clinical trial was an open-label, single-arm, multicenter study conducted between May 15, 2018, and July 16, 2021, in 30 centers across Asia, Europe, and North America. Eligible patients had locally advanced/metastatic UC with FGFR1/3 mRNA overexpression and were ineligible for cisplatin-based chemotherapy. The data analysis was completed from July 2022 to September 2022., Interventions: Patients received rogaratinib 600 mg or rogaratinib 800 mg twice daily in combination with intravenous atezolizumab 1200 mg every 21 days., Main Outcomes and Measures: Primary end points included safety, tolerability, and the recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D) of rogaratinib in combination with atezolizumab., Results: Among 153 patients screened, 73 (48%) had tumors with FGFR1/3 mRNA overexpression, and 37 patients were enrolled and treated (median [range] age, 75.0 [47.0-85.0] years; 32 [87%] male). The most common treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) included diarrhea in 23 patients (62%), hyperphosphatemia in 19 (51%), and fatigue in 15 (41%). Grade 3 or higher TEAEs were reported in 27 patients (73%), and 4 grade 5 TEAEs were reported, though unrelated to treatment. The RP2D was rogaratinib 600 mg in combination with atezolizumab 1200 mg. At the RP2D, the overall response rate was 53.8% in the rogaratinib 600 mg group, including 4 patients (15%) with complete responses; 12 responders (86%) did not have an FGFR3 gene alteration, and 11 (79%) had low PD-L1 expression., Conclusions and Relevance: In this phase 1b nonrandomized clinical trial, rogaratinib plus atezolizumab demonstrated a manageable safety profile, with no unexpected safety signals. Efficacy for this combination at the RP2D was observed in tumors with low PD-L1 and was not dependent on FGFR3 gene alterations, suggesting broad potential benefit for patients with locally advanced/metastatic UC and FGFR mRNA overexpression., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03473756.

Background: The evolving oncology treatment paradigm has created an unmet need for administration options that improve patient experiences and health care efficiencies., Patients and Methods: CheckMate 67T (NCT04810078) was a phase III, open-label, multicenter, noninferiority trial in which patients with advanced/metastatic clear cell renal cell carcinoma were randomized to subcutaneous nivolumab (1200 mg every 4 weeks; coformulated with recombinant human hyaluronidase PH20 20 000 units) or intravenous nivolumab (3 mg/kg every 2 weeks). The primary objective was to assess the noninferiority of subcutaneous versus intravenous nivolumab by coprimary endpoints determined from a population pharmacokinetics analysis [time-averaged serum concentration over the first 28 days (C avgd28 ), and minimum steady-state serum concentration (C minss ); noninferiority threshold: lower boundary of 90% confidence interval (CI) of the geometric mean ratios (GMR) ≥0.8]. Objective response rate (ORR) was a key secondary endpoint powered for noninferiority [noninferiority threshold: lower boundary of 95% CI of relative risk of ORR (subcutaneous versus intravenous nivolumab) ≥0.60]., Results: Overall, 495 patients were randomized. Relative exposure in the subcutaneous versus intravenous arm reported by the GMR of C avgd28 and C minss was 2.098 (90% CI 2.001-2.200) and 1.774 (90% CI 1.633-1.927), respectively. After 8 months of minimum follow-up, ORR was 24.2% with subcutaneous nivolumab (95% CI 19.0%-30.0%) versus 18.2% with intravenous nivolumab [95% CI 13.6%-23.6%; relative risk: 1.33 (95% CI 0.94-1.87)]. Coprimary endpoints and ORR met noninferiority thresholds. Additional efficacy and safety measures were similar., Conclusions: Subcutaneous nivolumab was noninferior to intravenous nivolumab based on pharmacokinetics and ORR. No new safety signals were observed., (Copyright © 2024 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Background: Pembrolizumab/Axitinib combination is approved as first-line therapy in mRCC. The aim of this study is to evaluate outcomes of PAXI combo in the real-world in Italy., Methods: This is a prospective study including patients diagnosed with mRCC who received combination as first-line therapy in recruiting Italian Centers. Data about patient characteristics, safety and outcome were collected., Results: 170 pts have been treated from December 2020 to September 2023. The majority had clear-cell histology (83%). Sarcomatoid feature was present in 33%of available cases. About one half of patients (55%) had synchronous metastasis. In 58% of cases nephrectomy was performed, of which 27% were cytoreductive and 4% were deferred nephrectomies. Lung metastases were identified in 106 patients (62%), bone and liver involvement in 66 and 29 patients (38.8% and 17.1%) respectively. Stratifying by IMDC criteria, 32 patients (18.8%) were at favorable-risk, 106 (62.4%) at intermediate-risk, and 32 (18.8%) at poor-risk. At time of analysis, treatment was ongoing in 49% of patients. Progression occurred in 45% of patients. Median PFS was 19.2 months (95% CI: 15-NR). With a median follow-up of 19.3 months (range 1.3-34.5), at 24-months and 36-months landmark analysis 62% (95% CI, 53-70) and 58% (95% CI, 47-69) of treated patients are still alive respectively. Disease control rate was achieved in 84.6% of patients: 4.3% reached a complete response, 52% had a partial response and 28.8% a stable disease. Primary progression was observed in 15.3% of patients. In the multivariate analysis, the prognostic significance of age ≥ 65 years, non-clear cell histology, IMDC score, and adverse events and gender interaction as predictors of worse OS were confirmed., Conclusion: This is the first available prospective study on first-line Pembrolizumab/Axitinib combination in real world scenario. Our findings support the effectiveness and safety of first-line this combination in mRCC and reveal that gender emerged as a prognostic factor in relation to the occurrence of adverse events., Competing Interests: Disclosure The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Aim: To identify barriers between health and communication in oncology in order to promote the best possible practice. The areas of communication to be focused on are communication directly with the patient, communication within the scientific community, and communication with the media., Material and Methods: A working group including eminent experts from the national mass media, healthcare system, and patients' advocacy has been established on behalf of the Italian Association of Medical Oncology (AIOM), with the aim of developing suitable recommendations for the best communication in oncology. A literature search has been conducted selecting primary studies related to the best practices applied to communication in oncology. Subsequent to having identified the most representative statements, through a consensus conference using the RAND/University of California Los Angeles modified Delphi method, the panel evaluated the relevance of each statement to support useful strategies to develop effective communication between oncologist physicians and patients, communication within the scientific community, and communication with media outlets, including social media., Results: A total of 292 statements have been extracted from 100 articles. Following an evaluation of relevance, it was found that among the 142 statements achieving the highest scores, 30 of these have been considered of particular interest by the panel., Conclusions: This consensus and the arising document represent an attempt to strengthen the strategic alliance between key figures in communication, identifying high-impact recommendations for the management of communication in oncology with respect to patients, the wider scientific community, and the media., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Background: Neutrophil-to-eosinophil ratio (NER) has been described to be associated with outcomes to immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) in several tumor types, but less is known about its role of in the response to avelumab in advanced urothelial cancer (aUC). Thus, we reported outcomes by NER of aUC patients treated with avelumab as maintenance after initial response to platinum-based chemotherapy and enrolled in the Maintenance with AVeLumAb ([MALVA] in advanced urothelial neoplasms in response to first-line chemotherapy: an observational retrospective study) study (Meet-URO 25)., Patients and Methods: Median NER at baseline and after 3 cycles of avelumab were calculated. Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) by NER were reported., Results: At the cutoff date (April 15, 2023), a total of 109 patients were included. The median NER was 28.05 at baseline and 24.46 after 3 cycles of avelumab, respectively. Median PFS was not reached for patients with baseline NER less than the median (

Background: Immune-checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have significantly improved metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) prognosis, although their efficacy in patients with bone metastases (BMs) remains poorly understood. We investigated the prognostic role of natremia in pretreated RCC patients with BMs receiving immunotherapy., Materials and Methods: This retrospective multicenter study included RCC patients with BMs receiving nivolumab as second-line therapy or beyond. Inclusion criteria involved baseline sodium levels (pre-ICI) and sodium levels after 4 weeks of nivolumab initiation (post-ICI). The population was divided into two groups based on the median value, and response rates, progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS) were assessed., Results: Among 120 eligible patients, those with pre-treatment sodium levels ≥140 mEq/L showed longer OS (18.7 vs. 12.0 months, p=0.04). Pre-treatment sodium levels ≥140 mEq/L were associated with better OS compared to levels <140 mE/L (18.7 vs. 12.0, p=0.04). Post-treatment sodium levels ≥140 mEq/L were associated with improved PFS (9.6 vs . 3.2 months) and OS (25.1 vs. 8.8 months) (p=0.05 and p<0.01, respectively). Patients with consistent sodium levels ≥140 mEq/L at both time points exhibited the best outcomes compared to those with lower values (PFS 11.5 vs. 3.3 months and OS 42.2 vs. 9.0 months, respectively, p<0.01). Disease control rate was significantly higher in the latter group (p<0.01). Multivariate analysis confirmed the prognostic significance of sodium levels., Conclusion: Elevated sodium levels (≥140 mEq/L) pre- and post-ICI treatment correlate with better survival outcomes in mRCC patients with BMs. This finding suggests sodium level assessment as a potential prognostic factor in these patients and warrants further investigation, particularly in combination immunotherapy settings., Competing Interests: GB: Speaker bureau: Astellas, Astrazeneca, Amgen. Patents: n. 4 patents with ST Microelectronics. Travel, Accommodations for scientific conferences: Merck, Janssen. UG: services as advisory/board member of Astellas, Bayer, BMS, IPSEN, Janssen, Merck, Pfizer, Sanofi, received research grant/funding to the institution from AstraZeneca, Roche, Sanofi and travel/accommodations/expenses from BMS BMS, IPSEN, Janssen, Pfizer. LC: has received honoraria for advisory boards, speaker engagements and scientific consultancy for educational purposes from AstraZeneca, EISAI, MSD, Ipsen, BMS, A.A.A.; past MSD employee in Medical Affairs. MS: honoraria as consultant or advisory role from Janssen; grant for participation at scientific events: Astellas Pharma, Sanofi, Roche Novartis, Ipsen, Janssen, Bristol Myers Squibb, Pfizer; research funding: Roche, Merck, Janssen. The remaining authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2024 Catalano, Rebuzzi, Maruzzo, De Giorgi, Buti, Galli, Fornarini, Zucali, Claps, Chiellino, Zampiva, Pipitone, Ricotta, Sorarù, Mollica, Tudini, Fratino, Prati, Caffo, Atzori, Morelli, Prati, Nolè, Vignani, Cavo, Di Napoli, Malgeri, Naglieri, Signori, Banna, Rescigno, Cerbone, Antonuzzo and Roviello.)

Background: Although nivolumab prolongs overall survival (OS) in pretreated patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC), underlining clinical and biological features of long-term responses are still to be determined. This study aims to investigate clinical and pathological characteristics of mRCC patients who achieved long-term responses during nivolumab treatment., Materials and Methods: A retrospective analysis was performed on mRCC patients receiving nivolumab as second or further therapy line between May 2016 and January 2019 in 34 Italian Oncology Centres. Outcome assessments and logistic regression were performed to evaluate factors influencing long-term responses., Results: A total of 571 patients with a median age of 61 years (range 17-85) were included in the analysis. With a median follow-up of 22.1 (1.0-89.0) months, 23.1% of patients were 2-year progression-free on treatment with nivolumab, hence they were categorized as long-term responders. Baseline characteristics, including age, gender, and histology, were similar between long- and short-term responders. Karnofsky Performance Status ≥ 80% was significantly associated with long-term response (p = 0.02), while bone metastases (p = 0.03), International mRCC Database Consortium intermediate-poor risk (p < 0.01) and Neutrophil-to-Lymphocyte Ratio ≥ 3.2 (p = 0.02) were associate with short-term responses. Long-term responders exhibited a median progression-free survival of 55.0 months versus 4.0 months of the short-term responders. The median OS was not reached in long-term responders while it was 17.0 months for short*term responders., Conclusion: This retrospective analysis sheds light on factors associated with long-term response to nivolumab in mRCC. Understanding these clinical features will be essential for selecting patients who may mostly benefit from immunotherapy., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Background: About 20% of patients with renal cell carcinoma present with non-clear cell histology (nccRCC), encompassing various histological types. While surgery remains pivotal for localized-stage nccRCC, the role of cytoreductive nephrectomy (CN) in metastatic nccRCC is contentious. Limited data exist on the role of CN in metastatic nccRCC under current standard of care., Objective: This retrospective study focused on the impact of upfront CN on metastatic nccRCC outcomes with first-line immune checkpoint inhibitor (IO) combinations or tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) monotherapy., Methods: The study included 221 patients with nccRCC and synchronous metastatic disease, treated with IO combinations or TKI monotherapy in the first line. Baseline clinical characteristics, systemic therapy, and treatment outcomes were analyzed. The primary objective was to assess clinical outcomes, including progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). Statistical analysis involved the Fisher exact test, Pearson's correlation coefficient, analysis of variance, Kaplan-Meier method, log-rank test, and univariate/multivariate Cox proportional hazard regression models., Results: Median OS for patients undergoing upfront CN was 36.8 (95% confidence interval [CI] 24.9-71.3) versus 20.8 (95% CI 12.6-24.8) months for those without CN (p = 0.005). Upfront CN was significantly associated with OS in the multivariate Cox regression analysis (hazard ratio 0.47 [95% CI 0.31-0.72], p < 0.001). In patients without CN, the median OS and PFS was 24.5 (95% CI 18.1-40.5) and 13.0 months (95% CI 6.6-23.5) for patients treated with IO+TKI versus 7.5 (95% CI 4.3-22.4) and 4.9 months (95% CI 3.0-8.1) for those receiving the IO+IO combination (p = 0.059 and p = 0.032, respectively)., Conclusions: Our study demonstrates the survival benefits of upfront CN compared with systemic therapy without CN. The study suggests that the use of IO+TKI combination or, eventually, TKI monotherapy might be a better choice than IO+IO combination for patients who are not candidates for CN regardless of IO eligibility. Prospective trials are needed to validate these findings and refine the role of CN in current mRCC management., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Background: Nowadays, different therapeutic options are available for the first-line treatment of metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). Immuno-combinations are the standard first-line therapy in all mRCC patients regardless of the International Metastatic RCC Database Consortium (IMDC) risk category, even though TKI monotherapy is still a therapeutic option in selected patients. However, comparisons between the different first-line treatment strategies are lacking and few real-world data are available in this setting. For this reason, the regimen choice represents an important issue in clinical practice and the optimal treatment sequence remains unclear., Methods: The REGAL study is a multicentric prospective observational study enrolling mRCC patients treated with first-line systemic therapy according to clinical practice in a real-world setting. A retrospective cohort of mRCC patients who received first-line systemic therapy from the 1st of January 2021 will also be included. The primary objective is to identify potential prognostic and predictive factors that could help guide the treatment choice; secondary objectives included the assessment of the prognostic performance of the novel prognostic Meet-URO score (IMDC score + neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio + bone metastases) compared with the IMDC score and the comparison between treatment strategies according to response and survival outcomes and toxicity profile., Discussion: Considering the high number of therapeutic first-line strategies available for mRCC, the identification of clinical prognostic and predictive factors to candidate patients to a preferable systemic therapy is still an unmet clinical need. The Meet-URO 33 study aims to provide a large-scale real-world database on mRCC patients, to identify the clinical predictive and prognostic factors and the different performances between the ICI-based combinations according to response, survival and toxicity., Trial Registration: CESC IOV 2023-78., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Background: Peritoneal metastases (PM) have been reported in approximately 1% of patients with metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma (mRCC). Outcome data are limited due to the rarity of this metastatic site. Therefore, the aim of our study is to describe renal cell carcinoma (RCC) patients with PM treated as per clinical practice., Materials and Methods: Baseline characteristics and outcome data of patients with PM from RCC were retrospectively collected from 18 Italian oncological referral centers adhering to the Meet-Uro group, from January 2016 to January 2023., Results: We collect 81 RCC patients with PM. 78/81 received systemic treatment, 3/81 only best supportive care. First line treatment included tyrosine-kinase inhibitors (TKI) (46/78), ImmuneOncology (IO)-TKI (26/78) and IO-IO (6/78), with different Objective Response Rate (ORR) (43.4% in TKI monotherapy group vs 50% in IO-TKI group, respectively) and Disease Control Rate (DCR) (60.8% in TKI treated patients vs. 76.9% in IO-TKI treated patients). Median PFS was 6.4 months (95%CI 4.18-14.8) in patients treated with TKI monotherapy vs 23.7 months (95%CI 11.1-NR) in patients treated with IO-TKI (p < 0.015). The median OS (mOS) was 22.7 months (95%CI 13.32 - 64.7) in the TKI monotherapy group vs 34.5 mo (95%CI NR-NR) in the IO-TKI group with 53.8% of patients alive at 1 years in the latter group, (p < 0.16). Primary refractory patients were 36.9% for TKI and 15.3% for IO-TKI. According to International Metastatic renal cell carcinoma Database Consortium (IMDC) score, mPFS and mOS were consistent among risk categories. Median PFS was 36.6 months (95%CI 10.9-NR) for good risk patients compared to 10 months (95%CI 7.5-29.8) for intermediate risk and 2.96 months (95%CI 2.43-11.28) for poor risk population (p < 0.0005) whereas mOS was NR (95%CI 28.65-NR) for good risk patients compared to 35.3 months (95%CI 24.6-NA) and 12.4 months (95%CI 3.52-NR) for intermediate and poor risk population, respectively, (p < 0.0002). Only 34/78 (43.5%) received a second line treatment that was TKI (ORR 8.3% and DCR 41.6%) or IO (ORR 18.1% and DCR 40.9%)., Conclusion: We report one of the largest case series regarding PM from RCC. Characteristics of patients suggest a more aggressive behavior of PM from mRCC. Outcome data suggest that TKI-IO as first line treatment, and TKI as second line, confirm their activity for these patients with dismal prognosis., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: Penile squamous cell carcinoma (PSCC) is a rare tumor with an aggressive behavior. The Meet-URO 23/I-RARE registry includes rare genitourinary malignancies. We extracted patients with PSCC to conduct a retrospective study aimed at assessing clinical outcomes and prognostic factors., Patients and Methods: Primary endpoints were overall survival and progression-free survival. Prognostic factors for OS and PFS were analyzed using univariate and multivariate analysis. From the Meet-URO 23/I-RARE database, we extracted 128 patients with diagnosis of PSCC. About 48% of patients underwent first-line of therapy., Results: In the overall population, median OS from diagnosis was 34.6 months. Significant differences in median OS were observed according to ECOG PS at diagnosis (57.3 months vs. 8.3 months; P < .001), and median age (≤77y 88.8 months vs. >77y 26 months; P = .013). At multivariate analysis, ECOG PS 2-4 at diagnosis (HR 3.04) and lymph node metastases (HR 2.49) were independently associated with a higher risk of death. Among patients undergoing first-line therapy (n = 61), median OS was 12.3 months, and a statistically significant difference was found according to type of response to first-line (DCR 24.4 months vs. PD 7.1 months; P < .001). Multivariate analysis showed that only age >77 years was associated with a worse OS (HR 2.16). A statistically significant difference in PFS was found according to platinum plus 5-fluorouracil versus platinum plus taxane (4.9 vs. 3.4 months; P = .036) and regimens with 2 versus 3 drugs (3.4 vs. 8.6 months; P = .019). At the multivariate analysis only regimens with platinum plus taxane were associated with worse PFS (HR 2.83)., Conclusion: In our registry study, PSCC is confirmed to be an aggressive disease. Poor ECOG PS, presence of lymph node metastases, and higher age at diagnosis appear to be associated with worse survival outcomes., Competing Interests: Disclosure The other authors declare no conflict of interest. Francesco Pierantoni: Advisory board: Eli Lilly; Speaker and travel fees: Pfizer, BMS, MSD, AstraZeneca, Jannsen, Takeda, Merck, Astellas, Ipsen. Paola Ermacora: MSD, BMS, AAA, Astellas, Recordati, Eisai (advisory board), Jansenn (travel grant)., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: The Meet-URO 18 study is a multicentric study of patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma receiving nivolumab in the second-line and beyond, categorized as responders (progression-free survival ≥ 12 months) and non-responders (progression-free survival < 3 months). Areas covered: The current study includes extensive immunohistochemical analysis of T-lineage markers (CD3, CD4, CD8, CD8/CD4 ratio), macrophages (CD68), ph-mTOR, CD15 and CD56 expression on tumor cells, and PD-L1 expression, on an increased sample size including 161 tumor samples (113 patients) compared with preliminary presented data. Responders ' tumor tissue (n = 90; 55.9%) was associated with lower CD4 expression ( p = 0.014), higher CD56 expression ( p = 0.046) and higher CD8/CD4 ratio ( p = 0.030). Expert opinion/commentary: The present work suggests the regulatory role of a subpopulation of T cells on antitumor response and identifies CD56 as a putative biomarker of immunotherapy efficacy.

Background: Immune checkpoint inhibitors have changed previous treatment paradigm of advanced urothelial carcinoma (UC). The ARON-2 study (NCT05290038) aimed to assess the real-world effectiveness of pembrolizumab in patients recurred or progressed after platinum-based chemotherapy., Patients and Methods: Medical records of patients with documented metastatic UC treated by pembrolizumab as second-line therapy were retrospectively collected from 88 institutions in 23 countries. Patients were assessed for overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS) and overall response rate (ORR). Cox proportional hazards models were adopted to explore the presence of prognostic factors., Results: In total, 836 patients were included: 544 patients (65%) received pembrolizumab after progression to first-line platinum-based chemotherapy in the metastatic setting (cohort A) and 292 (35%) after recurring within < 12 months since the completion of adjuvant or neoadjuvant chemotherapy (cohort B). The median follow-up time was 15.3 months. The median OS and the ORR were 10.5 months and 31% in the overall study population, 9.1 months and 29% in cohort A and 14.6 months and 37% in cohort B. At multivariate analysis, ECOG-PS ≥ 2, bone metastases, liver metastases and pembrolizumab setting (cohort A vs B) proved to be significantly associated with worst OS and PFS. Stratified by the presence of 0, 1-2 or 3-4 prognostic factors, the median OS was 29.4, 12.5 and 4.1 months (p < 0.001), while the median PFS was 12.2, 6.4 and 2.8 months, respectively (p < 0.001)., Conclusions: Our study confirms that pembrolizumab is effective in the advanced UC real-world context, showing outcome differences between patients recurred or progressed after platinum-based chemotherapy., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Background: The addition of neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio (NLR) and bone metastases to the IMDC classification provided by the Meet-URO score, resulted in higher prognostic accuracy in metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) patients receiving ≥2nd line nivolumab or cabozantinib in 2 retrospective analyses and 1st line nivolumab-ipilimumab in an expanded access programme. Prognostic estimates for older mRCC patients might be key for clinical decision-making., Methods: The outcome of real-world older (≥70 years) mRCC patients treated with any line cabozantinib within the multicenter observational prospective ZEBRA (Meet-URO 9) study was analyzed according to the baseline Meet-URO score. The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS). The discriminative ability by Harrell's c-index and calibration were assessed to compare the Meet-URO and IMDC scores., Results: A total of 104 mRCC patients received cabozantinib as 1st (38%), 2nd (20%), or ≥3rd (41%) line. With a median follow-up of 11.2 months, the median OS (mOS) was of 18.4 months. According to the IMDC score, favorable (15%), intermediate (65%) and poor-risk (19%) patients had a mOS not reached, of 15.6 and 5.7 months respectively (p = .011). According to the Meet-URO score groups, mOS was not reached in both group 1 (10%) and group 2 (25%), while in group 3 (33%), group 4 (25%) and group 5 (8%) mOS was of 13.6, 12.5, and 3.7 months, respectively (p < .001). The discriminative ability of the Meet-URO score was maintained by merging groups 1 to 2 vs. 3 to 4 vs. 5 (p < .001). The Meet-URO score (with either the original 5-group stratification or the modified 3-group one) showed higher accuracy than the IMDC score (c-index of 0.686 and 0.676 vs. 0.622)., Conclusion: This analysis confirmed the prognostic accuracy of the Meet-URO score in older mRCC patients treated with cabozantinib and its role as a convenient tool for informing the patient and clinical decisions., Competing Interests: Disclosure SR received honoraria as a speaker at scientific events and travel accommodation from Amgen, GSK, BMS, and MSD. SB received honoraria as speaker at scientific events and advisory role by BMS, Pfizer, MSD, Ipsen, Roche, Eli Lilly, AstraZeneca, Pierre-Fabre, Novartis. GF services advisory boards for Astellas, Janssen, Pfizer, Bayer, MSD, Merck and received travel accomodation from Astellas, Janssen, Bayer. GP services advisory boards/consulting for Astellas, AstraZeneca, BMS, Janssen, IPSEN, Merk, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer. MS services advisory boards/consulting for Janssen, received research funding from Janssen and received travel accomodation from Ipsen, BMS, Janssen, Pfizer, Astellas Pharma. PR services advisory boards for MSD, AstraZeneca and Janssen. GLB reports personal fees from AstraZeneca and Astellas and non-financial support from Janssen. DS received honoraria for the advisory board from Amgen, Jansen, MSD, BMS, Bayer, Astra Zeneca, Ipsen, Novartis, and Merck. CN received honoraria as a speaker at scientific events from Astellas and BMS. The remaining authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Immunotherapy combinations with tyrosine-kinase inhibitors (TKIs) and immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) had significantly improved outcomes of patients with mRCC. Predictive and prognostic factors are crucial to improve patients' counseling and management. The present study aimed to externally validate the prognostic value of a previously developed red cell-based score, including hemoglobin (Hb), mean corpuscular volume (MCV) and red cell distribution width (RDW), in patients with mRCC treated with first-line immunotherapy combinations (TKI plus ICI or ICI plus ICI). We performed a sub-analysis of a multicentre retrospective observational study (ARON-1 project) involving patients with mRCC treated with first-line immunotherapy combinations. Uni- and multivariable Cox regression models were used to assess the correlation between the red cell-based score and progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS). Logistic regression were used to estimate the correlation between the score and the objective response rate (ORR). The prognostic impact of the red cell-based score on PFS and OS was confirmed in the whole population regardless of the immunotherapy combination used [median PFS (mPFS): 17.4 vs 8.2 months, HR 0.66, 95% CI 0.47-0.94; median OS (mOS): 42.0 vs 17.3 months, HR 0.60, 95% CI 0.39-0.92; p < 0.001 for both]. We validated the prognostic significance of the red cell-based score in patients with mRCC treated with first-line immunotherapy combinations. The score is easy to use in daily clinical practice and it might improve patient counselling., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Background: Combinations of vascular endothelial growth factor receptor (VEGFR) tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) plus immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) against PD1/PD-L1 are the standard first-line therapy for patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC), irrespective of the prognostic class., Objective: To investigate the feasibility and safety of withdrawing VEGFR-TKI but continuing anti-PD1/PD-L1 in patients who achieve a response to their combination., Design, Setting, and Participants: This was a single-arm phase 2 trial in patients with treatment-naïve mRCC with prior nephrectomy, without symptomatic/bulky disease and no liver metastases., Intervention: Enrolled patients received axitinib + avelumab; after 36 wk of therapy those who achieved a tumour response interrupted axitinib and continued avelumab maintenance until disease progression., Outcome Measurements and Statistical Analysis: The primary endpoint was the rate of patients without progression 8 wk after the axitinib interruption. The secondary endpoints were the median value for progression-free (mPFS) and overall (mOS) survival and the safety in the overall population., Results and Limitations: Seventy-nine patients were enrolled and 75 were evaluated for efficacy. A total of 29 (38%) patients had axitinib withdrawn, as per the study design, with 72% of them having no progression after 8 wk and thus achieving the primary endpoint. The mPFS of the overall population was 24 mo, while the mOS was not reached. The objective response rate was 76% (12% complete response and 64% partial response), with 19% of patients having stable disease. In the patients who discontinued axitinib, the incidence of adverse events of any grade was 59% for grade 3 and 3% for grade 4. This study was limited by the lack of a comparative arm., Conclusions: The TIDE-A study demonstrates that the withdrawal of VEGFR-TKI with ICI maintenance is feasible for selected mRCC patients with evidence of a response to the VEGFR-TKI + ICI combination employed in first-line therapy. Axitinib interruption with avelumab maintenance leads to decreased side effects and should be investigated further as a new strategy to delay tumour progression., Patient Summary: We evaluated whether certain patients with advanced kidney cancer treated with the fist-line combination of axitinib plus avelumab can interrupt the axitinib in case of a tumour response after 36 wk of therapy. We found that axitinib interruption improved the safety of the combination, while the maintenance with avelumab might delay tumour progression., (Copyright © 2024 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Instrumental activities of daily living (IADL) are significant health indicators closely related to executive functions and able to detect mild cognitive impairment. A decline in IADL usually precedes ADL limitation, including taking medications, and may therefore predict a cognitive decline. We aimed to investigate the association of patients' IADL score with other clinical factors, with a particular focus on the presence of a caregiver, and the impact on adherence to androgen receptor pathway inhibitors (ARPIs) and survival outcomes within the Meet-URO 5-ADHERE study. It was a large prospective multicentre observational cohort study monitoring adherence to ARPIs in 234 metastatic castrate-resistant PC (mCRPC) patients aged ≥ 70. We observed an association between impaired IADL and lower geriatric G8 scores (p < 0.01), and lower adherence to ARPIs whether assessed by pill counting (p = 0.01) or self-reported by the patient himself (p = 0.03). The combination of an IADL < 6 and the absence of a caregiver resulted in a significantly high risk of non-adherence to the ARPIs at the multivariable analysis (HR 9.23, 95% confidence interval 2.28-37.43, p = 0.01). IADL alongside the geriatric G8 scales represent essential tools to identify frail and less auto-sufficient patients who are extremely vulnerable particularly if not supported by a caregiver and have the highest risk of nonadherence to ARPIs., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Background: Veneto Institute of Oncology has activated a simultaneous care outpatient clinic (SCOC) in which cancer patients with advanced-stage cancer are evaluated by oncologist and palliative care specialists. This cross-sectional study investigated patients' perceptions of the quality of this service., Materials and Methods: An ad-hoc self-administered questionnaire, developed by SCOC team, was used to assess the satisfaction of patients admitted at SCOC consultation. The questionnaire, in addition to the socio-demographic questions, contains eight questions with the Likert scale: time dedicated, feel listened to, feel understood, feel free to speak openly and to express doubts and concerns, feeling about information and indication received, level of empathy of health care and quality of the relationship, level of professional/quality of performance and utility of consultation, and one open-ended question. The questionnaire has been proposed to all 174 consecutively admitted patients at SCOC., Results: One hundred and sixty-two patients filled in the questionnaire: 66.7% were male, median age was 71 years, 88.3% had metastatic disease. The time dedicated to SCOC consultation was judged more than adequate (55%) or adequate (35%) by 90% of subjects. Patients completely satisfied about being listened to were 92.5%, with 80.9% being completely satisfied with understanding of their issues and 92% with the freedom to speak and express doubts. Usefulness of the SCOC was rated as excellent by 40% and good by 54.4% of patients. No statistically significant differences were observed in the responses to the questions by gender, age (< or ≥70 years old) and type of tumor., Conclusion: Our study shows high levels of satisfactions after SCOC consultation in advanced cancer subjects. Patients' feedback confirmed that SCOC model was effective in helping them during their treatment journey and decision at the end of life. This study encouraged us to enhance our practice of SCOC consultation., Implications for Practice: A joint evaluation of patients living with cancer by oncologist and palliative care team (SCOC-embedded model), has shown to enhance patients' experience/satisfaction with care-such as listening, understanding, receiving information, symptom control, and decision about future, independently of age, gender, and kind of tumor., (© 2024 The Authors. Cancer Medicine published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background: Renal c carcinoma (RCC) is one of the most common urinary cancers worldwide, with a predicted increase in incidence in the coming years. Immunotherapy, as a single agent, in doublets, or in combination with anti-vascular endothelial growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs), has rapidly become a cornerstone of the RCC therapeutic scenario, but no head-to-head comparisons have been made. In this setting, real-world evidence emerges as a cornerstone to guide clinical decisions., Objective: The objective of this retrospective study was to assess the outcome of patients treated with first-line immune combinations or immune oncology (IO)-TKIs for advanced RCC., Design, Setting, and Participants: Data from 930 patients, 654 intermediate risk and 276 poor risk, were collected retrospectively from 58 centers in 20 countries. Special data such as sarcomatoid differentiation, body mass index, prior nephrectomy, and metastatic localization, in addition to biochemical data such as hemoglobin, platelets, calcium, lactate dehydrogenase, neutrophils, and radiological response by investigator's criteria, were collected., Outcome Measurements and Statistical Analysis: Overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. The median follow-up was calculated by the inverse Kaplan-Meier method., Results and Limitations: The median follow-up time was 18.7 mo. In the 654 intermediate-risk patients, the median OS and PFS were significantly longer in patients with the intermediate than in those with the poor International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium (IMDC) criteria (38.9 vs 17.3 mo, 95% confidence interval [CI] p < 0.001, and 17.3 vs 11.6 mo, 95% CI p < 0.001, respectively). In the intermediate-risk subgroup, the OS was 55.7 mo (95% CI 31.4-55.7) and 40.2 mo (95% CI 29.6-51.6) in patients treated with IO + TKI and IO + IO combinations, respectively (p = 0.047). PFS was 30.7 mo (95% CI 16.5-55.7) and 13.2 mo (95% CI 29.6-51.6) in intermediate-risk patients treated with IO + TKI and IO + IO combinations, respectively (p < 0.001). In the poor-risk subgroup, the median OS and PFS did not show a statistically significant difference between IO + IO and IO + TKI. Our study presents several limitations, mainly due to its retrospective nature., Conclusions: Our results showed differences between the IO + TKI and IO + IO combinations in intermediate-risk patients. A clear association with longer PFS and OS in favor of patients who received the IO + TKI combinations compared with the IO-IO combination was observed. Instead, in the poor-risk group, we observed no significant difference in PFS or OS between patients who received different combinations., Patient Summary: Renal cancer is one of the most frequent genitourinary tumors. Treatment is currently based on immunotherapy combinations or immunotherapy with tyrosine kinase inhibitors, but there are no comparisons between these.In this study, we have analyzed the clinical course of 930 patients from 58 centers in 20 countries around the world. We aimed to analyze the differences between the two main treatment strategies, combination of two immunotherapies versus immunotherapy + antiangiogenic therapy, and found in real-life data that intermediate-risk patients (approximately 60% of patients with metastatic renal cancer) seem to benefit more from the combination of immunotherapy + antiangiogenic therapy than from double immunotherapy. No such differences were found in poor-risk patients. This may have important implications in daily practice decision-making for these patients., (Copyright © 2023 European Association of Urology. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Aims: Anemia, mean corpuscular volume and red cell distribution width may have some effects on survival outcomes of metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) patients and are incorporated in a red blood cell (RBC)-based score. Its validity in prognostication of mRCC patients treated with second-line nivolumab was assessed. Patients and methods: Retrospective analysis using Meet-URO-15 cohort of mRCC patients receiving nivolumab in the second-line setting or beyond. Outcomes were overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). Results: A total of 390 patients were included. Significant differences in OS and PFS between RBC-based score groups, with group 1 (2 or 3 of the RBC-related prognostic factors) having longer OS (median 29.5 months, 95% CI: 23.1-35.9, versus 11.5 months, 95% CI: 8.5-22.6; p  < 0.001) and PFS (7.5 months, 95% CI: 5.5-10.2, versus 4.2 months, 95% CI: 3.3-5.9; p  = 0.040) than those in group 0 (0 or 1 RBC-related prognostic factors). Belonging to group 1 independently predicted OS (hazard ratio: 0.65, 95% CI: 0.50-0.85; p  = 0.002) but not PFS (hazard ratio: 0.89, 95% CI: 0.70-1.14, p  = 0.370) or disease response (OR 0.68, 95% CI: 0.41-1.10; p  = 0.118) at multivariable analysis. Conclusion: RBC-based group scores independently predicted OS in mRCC patients treated with nivolumab.

Background: Treatment options for penile squamous cell carcinoma are limited. We sought to investigate clinical outcomes and safety profiles of patients with penile squamous cell carcinoma receiving immune checkpoint inhibitors., Methods: This retrospective study included patients with locally advanced or metastatic penile squamous cell carcinoma receiving immune checkpoint inhibitors between 2015 and 2022 across 24 centers in the United States, Europe, and Asia. Overall survival and progression-free survival were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Objective response rates were determined per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours 1.1 criteria. Treatment-related adverse events were graded per the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events, version 5.0. Two-sided statistical tests were used for comparisons., Results: Among 92 patients, 8 (8.7%) were Asian, 6 (6.5%) were Black, and 24 (29%) were Hispanic and/or Latinx. Median (interquartile range) age was 62 (53-70) years. In all, 83 (90%) had metastatic penile squamous cell carcinoma, and 74 (80%) had received at least second-line treatment. Most patients received pembrolizumab monotherapy (n = 26 [28%]), combination nivolumab-ipilimumab with or without multitargeted tyrosine kinase inhibitors (n = 23 [25%]), or nivolumab (n = 16 [17%]) or cemiplimab (n = 15 [16%]) monotherapies. Median overall and progression-free survival were 9.8 months (95% confidence interval = 7.7 to 12.8 months) and 3.2 months (95% confidence interval = 2.5 to 4.2 months), respectively. The objective response rate was 13% (n = 11/85) in the overall cohort and 35% (n = 7/20) in patients with lymph node-only metastases. Visceral metastases, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status of 1 or higher, and a higher neutrophil/lymphocyte ratio were associated with worse overall survival. Treatment-related adverse events occurred in 27 (29%) patients, and 9.8% (n = 9) of the events were grade 3 or higher., Conclusions: Immune checkpoint inhibitors are active in a subset of patients with penile squamous cell carcinoma. Future translational studies are warranted to identify patients more likely to derive clinical benefit from immune checkpoint inhibitors., (© The Author(s) 2023. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Introduction: Evaluation of tumor response according only to dimensional criteria may underestimate treatment benefit in patients treated for metastatic renal cell carcinoma (RCC). In this study we evaluated the role of lesion enhancement modifications and Choi criteria in patients affected by renal cell carcinoma treated with immunotherapy., Methods: We collected data of 60 consecutive patients (with a total of 154 measurable lesions) treated with immunotherapy (nivolumab or ipilimumab plus nivolumab) at a single Institution. We evaluated tumour response using both RECIST1.1 criteria and Choi criteria at the first radiological assessment; we subsequently associated response with progression free survival and overall survival., Results: Choi criteria found a higher rate of objective response compared to RECIST criteria (38.3% vs 18.3%). An objective response according to both criteria was associated with longer progression free survival and overall survival. Response rate for Choi did not vary according to lesion site., Conclusion: Choi criteria seemed to be able to predict clinical benefit in a higher proportion of patients with renal cell carcinoma treated with immunotherapy than RECIST criteria. Partial response according to RECIST was confirmed as a predictor of longer progression-free survival and overall survival., Competing Interests: Declaration of conflicting interestsThe author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Importance: Low sodium levels have been associated with negative outcomes among patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) receiving therapies other than immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs)., Objective: To investigate the role of natremia in patients with mRCC receiving nivolumab as a second-line or subsequent therapy., Design, Setting, and Participants: In this retrospective cohort study, the clinical and biochemical data of patients with mRCC receiving nivolumab were collected from October 2015 to November 2019 as part of a multicenter Italian study. Data analysis was performed from February to March 2023., Exposure: Nivolumab was administered intravenously at a dose of 3 mg/kg every 2 weeks and, since May 2018, at a fixed dose of 240 mg every 2 weeks or 480 mg every 4 weeks. Patients were divided into 2 groups according to their median serum sodium value (<140 or ≥140 mEq/L)., Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcomes were the associations of pre-ICI and post-ICI sodium levels with overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate, and disease control rate (DCR). The Kaplan-Meier method was used to estimate PFS and OS, and differences between groups were compared using the log-rank test., Results: A total of 401 patients with mRCC receiving nivolumab as second-line therapy were evaluated, and 355 eligible patients (median [range] age, 76 [44-84] years; 258 male patients [72.7%]) were included in the final cohort. Among patients with pre-ICI sodium greater than or equal to 140 mEq/L compared with those with sodium less than 140 mEq/L, the median PFS was 9.3 months (95% CI, 6.5-11.5 months) vs 7.4 months (95% CI, 4.6-10.1 months; P = .90), and the median OS was 29.2 months (95% CI, 21.8-35.9 months) vs 20.0 months (95% CI, 14.1-26.8 months; P = .03). Patients with post-ICI sodium values greater than or equal to 140 mEq/L had longer PFS (11.1 months [95% CI, 8.5-1.5 months] vs 5.1 months [95% CI, 4.1-7.5 months]; P = .01) and OS (32.9 months [95% CI, 25.1-42.6 months] vs 17.1 months [95% CI, 12.6-24.5 months]; P = .006) compared with patients with sodium values less than 140 mEq/L. Patients with both pre-ICI and post-ICI sodium values greater than or equal to 140 mEq/L exhibited a significant improvement in clinical outcomes compared with those with a value less than 140 mEq/L (PFS, 11.5 months [95% CI, 8.8-16.4 months] vs 5.8 months [95% CI, 4.4-8.3 months]; P = .008); OS, 37.6 months [95% CI, 29.0-49.9 months] vs 19.4 months [95% CI, 14.1-24.5 months]; P = .01). Moreover, sodium levels greater than or equal to 140 mEq/L were associated with significantly better DCR than lower sodium levels., Conclusions and Relevance: In this retrospective cohort study of patients with mRCC receiving nivolumab, sodium values greater than or equal to 140 mEq/L, both before and/or after ICI, were associated with better OS and PFS, as well as a higher DCR, compared with levels less than 140 mEq/L. These findings suggest that sodium levels may be associated with survival outcomes in patients with mRCC and may have potential use as variables to consider in patients' risk scores.

Introduction: A low fT3/fT4 ratio has been associated with a poorer prognosis in patients treated for different solid malignancies. However, the prognostic role of baseline thyroid function in patients with metastatic urothelial carcinoma (mUC) has not yet been established., Patients and Methods: We analyzed 72 consecutive immunotherapy-treated patients with mUC from a single institution. We recorded clinical data, baseline blood test results, and oncological outcomes. We stratified patients into three groups according to the fT3/fT4 ratio value and analyzed differences in progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and radiological response in the three groups. We also conducted univariate and multivariate analyses to identify prognostic factors for PFS and OS., Results: The median PFS in the low, intermediate, and high fT3/fT4 ratio groups was 2.2, 4.1, and 8.2 months, respectively (P < 0.01). The median OS in the low, intermediate, and high fT3/fT4 groups was 3.6, 10.3, and 19.1 months, respectively (P < .01). The low fT3/fT4 ratio maintained its prognostic role independently of other prognostic factors. Patients with a high fT3/fT4 ratio had an increased radiological response., Conclusion: Thyroid hormone impairment, as measured by the fT3/fT4 ratio, is a strong prognostic factor in patients treated with immunotherapy for urothelial carcinoma., Competing Interests: Disclosure This research received “Ricerca Corrente” funding from the Italian Ministry of Health to cover publication costs., (Copyright © 2023 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

The neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) and systemic immune-inflammatory index (SII) have been reported as prognosticators in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), renal cell carcinoma (RCC), and melanoma. This analysis of the INVIDIa-2 study on influenza vaccination in patients with cancer treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) assessed NLR and SII on overall survival (OS) by literature-reported (LR), receiver operating characteristic curve (ROC)-derived (ROC) cutoffs or as continuous variable (CV). NLR and SII with ROC cutoffs of <3.4 (p < 0.001) and <831 (p < 0.001) were independent factors for OS in multivariate analysis. SII with LR, ROC, or CV significantly predicted OS in NSCLC (p = 0.002, p = 0.003, p = 0.003), RCC (p = 0.034, p = 0.014, p = 0.014), and melanoma (p = 0.038, p = 0.022, p = 0.019). NLR with LR and ROC cutoffs predicted OS in first line (p < 0.001 for both) and second line or beyond (p = 0.006 for both); likewise SII (p < 0.001; p = 0.002 and p < 0.001). NLR and SII are prognosticators in NSCLC, RCC, and melanoma treated with ICIs., Competing Interests: The Federation of Italian Cooperative Oncology Groups (FICOG) received funding for the present study from Roche S.p.A. and Seqirus, and outside the present research from AstraZeneca, Bristol-Myers Squibb (BMS), and Sanofi. G.L.B. received fees for speaker bureau from AstraZeneca and Astellas Pharma. M.B. received funding for the present study from Roche S.p.A. and Seqirus (through FICOG as Institution, no personal fees). She also received, outside the current work, research funding from Pfizer and Novartis (through Institutions); honoraria as a speaker at scientific events (personal fees) by BMS, MSD, IPSEN, Novartis, AstraZeneca, Pierre Fabre, and Pfizer; as a consultant for advisory role (personal fees) from IPSEN, Novartis, Sanofi, Pierre-Fabre, and Merck; and personal fees for copyright transfer from Sciclone Pharmaceuticals, Pierre-Fabre, MSD, IPSEN, Pfizer, and Sanofi. S.B. received honoraria as a speaker at scientific events and in advisory role by BMS, Pfizer; MSD, Ipsen, Roche S.p.A., Eli-Lilly, AstraZeneca, and Novartis; he also received research funding from Novartis. A.C. received speaker fees and grant consultancies by AstraZeneca, MSD, IQVIA, OncoC4, and EISAI. U.D.G. has served as a consultant for Astellas, Bayer, BMS, Ipsen, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, Sanofi, and Pharmamar; he received research funding from AstraZeneca, Roche, and Sanofi; and received travel funds from BMS, Ipsen, Janssen, Pfizer, and Roche during the conduct of the study. P.E. received honoraria for advisory role from MSD, BMS, and Astellas. F.G. received honoraria for advisory role from Eli Lilly, Roche, Boehringer Ingelheim, AstraZeneca, Pierre Fabre, BMS, MSD, Novartis, Merck, Otsuka, Novartis, Takeda, and Bayer; seminar/talks to industry from Eli Lilly, Roche, Boehringer Ingelheim, AstraZeneca, Pierre Fabre, AMGEN, Celgene, BMS, and MSD; and research funding from AstraZeneca, BMS, and MSD. M.D.M. reports personal fees from AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Janssen, Merck Serono, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, and Takeda; has been local principal investigator for trials sponsored by Beigene, Exelixis, Merck Sharp & Dohme, and Pfizer; and received research grant, institutional and financial support, and drug supply for the Meet-URO12 trial from Tesaro GlaxoSmithKline. D.G. received honoraria from Amgen for speaker bureau. M.M. received honoraria for advisory role from MSD and travel and accommodation expenses from Janssen, Roche, and Pfizer. C.P. received honraria for advisory role, speaker bureau, and travel and accommodation expenses from Amgen, Astellas, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Bristol Meyer Squibb, Celgene, Clovis Oncology, Eisai, Ipsen, Janssen, Incyte, Merck-Serono, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Novartis, Roche, Sandoz, Sanofi, and Servier. P.R. received honoraria for advisory role from AstraZeneca, Janssen, Gilead, BMS, and MSD Italy. M.R. received honoraria for advisory role or speaker bureau from Pfizer, Novartis, MSD, AstraZeneca, Bristol-Myers Squibb (BMS), and Merck. V.S. participated, with personal fees, in advisory boards and speaker’s bureaus for Roche S.p.A. S.C. declared his role in an international board for Eli Lilly international. M.S. received honoraria for advisory role from Janssen and grants for participation at scientific events from BMS, Ipsen, Janssen, Astella, Sanofi, Pfizer, and Novartis. E.V. received honoraria for advisory role from MSD, AstraZeneca, Ipsen, and Janssen. P.A.Z. acts in a consultant or advisory role for Sanofi, BMS, Pfizer, MSD, Astellas, Janssen, Ipsen, and Novartis, all outside the scope of work. A.A. undertook consulting or advisory roles from BMS, AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Roche, MSD, Pfizer, Eli Lilly, and Astellas and participated in speaker’s bureaus from Eli Lilly and AstraZeneca. All other authors declare no competing interests., (© 2023 The Authors.)

Purpose: To report the safety and efficacy of ipatasertib (AKT inhibitor) combined with rucaparib (PARP inhibitor) in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) previously treated with second-generation androgen receptor inhibitors., Patients and Methods: In this two-part phase Ib trial (NCT03840200), patients with advanced prostate, breast, or ovarian cancer received ipatasertib (300 or 400 mg daily) plus rucaparib (400 or 600 mg twice daily) to assess safety and identify a recommended phase II dose (RP2D). A part 1 dose-escalation phase was followed by a part 2 dose-expansion phase in which only patients with mCRPC received the RP2D. The primary efficacy endpoint was prostate-specific antigen (PSA) response (≥50% reduction) in patients with mCRPC. Patients were not selected on the basis of tumor mutational status., Results: Fifty-one patients were enrolled (part 1 = 21; part 2 = 30). Ipatasertib 400 mg daily plus rucaparib 400 mg twice daily was the selected RP2D, received by 37 patients with mCRPC. Grade 3/4 adverse events occurred in 46% (17/37) of patients, with one grade 4 adverse event (anemia, deemed related to rucaparib) and no deaths. Adverse events leading to treatment modification occurred in 70% (26/37). The PSA response rate was 26% (9/35), and the objective response rate per Response Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) 1.1 was 10% (2/21). Median radiographic progression-free survival per Prostate Cancer Working Group 3 criteria was 5.8 months [95% confidence interval (CI), 4.0-8.1], and median overall survival was 13.3 months (95% CI, 10.9-not evaluable)., Conclusions: Ipatasertib plus rucaparib was manageable with dose modification but did not demonstrate synergistic or additive antitumor activity in previously treated patients with mCRPC., (©2023 American Association for Cancer Research.)

Background: The advent of immune-checkpoint inhibitors has challenged previous treatment paradigms for advanced urothelial carcinoma (UC) in the post-platinum setting as well as in the first-line setting for cisplatin-ineligible patients. In this study, we investigated the effectiveness of pembrolizumab as first-line treatment for cisplatin-ineligible UC., Methods: Data from patients aged ≥ 18 years with cisplatin-ineligible UC and receiving first-line pembrolizumab from January 1st 2017 to September 1st 2022 were collected. Cisplatin ineligibility was defined according to the Galsky criteria. Thirty-three Institutions from 18 countries were involved in the ARON-2 study., Results: Our analysis included 162 patients. The median follow-up time was 18.9 months (95%CI 15.3-76.9). In the overall study population, the median OS was 15.8 months (95%CI 11.3-32.4). The median OS was significantly longer in males versus females while no statistically significant differences were observed between patients aged < 65y versus ≥ 65y and between smokers and non-smokers. According to Recist 1.1 criteria, 26 patients (16%) experienced CR, 32 (20%) PR, 39 (24%) SD and 55 (34%) PD., Conclusions: Our data confirm the role of pembrolizumab as first-line therapy for cisplatin-unfit patients. Further studies investigating the biological and immunological characteristics of UC patients are warranted in order to optimize the outcome of patients receiving immunotherapy in this setting., (© 2023. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature.)

Background: Non-clear cell renal cell carcinoma (nccRCC) is a heterogeneous group of cancer. Treatment recommendations are extrapolated from ccRCC and lack solid evidence. Here, we review advanced nccRCC patients treated at our institute., Patients and Methods: We collected retrospective data on all advanced nccRCC pts treated at the Istituto Oncologico Veneto from January 2008. We compared overall response rate (ORR), progression free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) according to histological subtypes and type of systemic treatments. Kaplan-Meier method, log-rank test and Cox regression were used to estimate and compare PFS and OS., Results: Of 1370 RCC patients, 289 had a diagnosis of nccRCC and 121 were eligible for the analysis. Fifty-three pts showed papillary histology (pRCC), 15 chromophobe; 37 unclassified RCC (NOS-RCC), 16 other histologies. Pts with chromophobe and other hystologies showed poorer survival rates compared to pRCC and NOS-RCC (mOS 10.7 vs. 20.7 vs. 30.7, p = 0.34). Pts treated with combination regimens achieved a better OS (30.7 vs. 13.7, p = 0.10), PFS (12.7 vs. 6.4, p = 0.10) and ORR (42.4% vs. 13.9%, p = 0.002) than those treated with monotherapy. IMDC and Meet-URO score retained their prognostic value., Conclusion: Our retrospective real-life cohort of advanced nccRCC patients shows that immunotherapy-based combinations could improve ORR, PFS and OS compared to TKI monotherapy. Prospective trials for nccRCC patients utilizing novel therapies are ongoing and their results eagerly awaited.

Background: Renal cell carcinoma (RCC) is the seventh most common neoplasm in high-income countries. New clinical pathways have been developed to deal with this tumor, which includes costly drugs that pose an economic threat to the sustainability of healthcare services. This study provides an estimate of the direct costs of care for patients with RCC by stage of disease (early vs. advanced) at diagnosis, and disease management phase along the pathway recommended by local and international guidelines., Materials and Methods: Considering the clinical pathway for RCC adopted in the Veneto region (north-east Italy) and the latest guidelines, we developed a very detailed "whole-disease" model that covers the probabilities of all potentially necessary diagnostic and therapeutic actions involved in the management of RCC. Based on the cost of each procedure according to the Veneto Regional Authority's official reimbursement tariffs, we estimated the total and average per-patient costs by stage of disease (early or advanced) and phase of its management., Results: In the first year after diagnosis, the mean expected cost of a patient with RCC is €12,991 if it is localized or locally-advanced and reaches €40,586 if it is advanced. For early disease, the main cost is incurred by surgery, whereas medical therapy (first and second line) and supportive care become increasingly important for metastatic disease., Conclusion: It is crucially important to examine the direct costs of care for RCC, and to predict the burden on healthcare services of new oncological therapies and treatments, as the findings could be useful for policy-makers planning the allocation of resources., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: The prospective multicentre observational INVIDIa-2 study investigated the clinical effectiveness of influenza vaccination in patients with advanced cancer receiving immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI). In this secondary analysis of the original trial, we aimed to assess the outcomes of patients to immunotherapy based on vaccine administration., Methods: The original study enrolled patients with advanced solid tumours receiving ICI at 82 Italian Oncology Units from Oct 1, 2019, to Jan 31, 2020. The trial's primary endpoint was the time-adjusted incidence of influenza-like illness (ILI) until April 30, 2020, the results of which were reported previously. Secondary endpoints (data cut-off Jan 31, 2022) included the outcomes of patients to immunotherapy based on vaccine administration, for which the final results are reported herein. A propensity score matching by age, sex, performance status, primary tumour site, comorbidities, and smoking habits was planned for the present analysis. Only patients with available data for these variables were included. The outcomes of interest were overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate (ORR), and disease-control rate (DCR)., Findings: The original study population consisted of 1188 evaluable patients. After a propensity score matching, 1004 patients were considered (502 vaccinated and 502 unvaccinated), and 986 of them were evaluable for overall survival (OS). At the median follow-up of 20 months, the influenza vaccination demonstrated a favourable impact on the outcome receiving ICI in terms of median OS [27.0 months (CI 19.5-34.6) in vaccinated vs. 20.9 months (16.6-25.2) in unvaccinated, p = 0.003], median progression-free survival [12.5 months (CI 10.4-14.6) vs. 9.6 months (CI 7.9-11.4), p = 0.049], and disease-control rate (74.7% vs. 66.5%, p = 0.005). The multivariable analyses confirmed the favourable impact of influenza vaccination in terms of OS (HR 0.75, 95% C.I. 0.62-0.92; p = 0.005) and DCR (OR 1.47, 95% C.I. 1.11-1.96; p = 0.007)., Interpretation: The INVIDIa-2 study results suggest a favourable immunological impact of influenza vaccination on the outcome of cancer patients receiving ICI immunotherapy, further encouraging the vaccine recommendation in this population and supporting translational investigations about the possible synergy between antiviral and antitumour immunity., Funding: The Federation of Italian Cooperative Oncology Groups (FICOG), Roche S.p.A., and Seqirus., Competing Interests: The Federation of Italian Cooperative Oncology Groups (FICOG) received funding for the present study from Roche S.p.A. and Seqirus, and outside the present research from Astra Zeneca, Bristol-Myers Squibb (BMS), and Sanofi. MB received funding for the present study from Roche S.p.A. and Seqirus (through FICOG as Institution, no personal fees). She also received, outside the current work: research funding from Pfizer and Novartis (through Institutions); honoraria as a speaker at scientific events (personal fees) by BMS, MSD, IPSEN, Novartis, Astra Zeneca, Pierre Fabre, and Pfizer; as a consultant for advisory role (personal fees) by IPSEN, Novartis, Sanofi, Pierre-Fabre, and Merck; personal fees for copyright transfer by Sciclone Pharmaceuticals, Pierre-Fabre, MSD, IPSEN, Pfizer, and Sanofi. AC received speakers fees/grant consultancies from Astrazeneca, BMS, MSD, EISAI, IQVIA, and OncoC4. UDG has served as a consultant for Astellas, Bayer, BMS, Ipsen, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, Sanofi, and Pharmamar; he received research funding from AstraZeneca, Roche, and Sanofi; and received travel funds from BMS, Ipsen, Janssen, Pfizer, and Roche during the conduct of the study. MDM reports personal fees from Bristol Myers Squibb, personal fees from Merck Sharp & Dohme, personal fees from AstraZeneca, personal fees from Janssen, personal fees from Astellas, personal fees from Pfizer, personal fees from Eisai, personal fees from Takeda, grants from Tesaro GSK, outside the submitted work. SB received honoraria as a speaker at scientific events and in advisory role by BMS, Pfizer; MSD, Ipsen, Roche S.p.A., Eli-Lilly, AstraZeneca, and Novartis; he also received research funding from Novartis. VS participated, with personal fees, to advisory boards and speaker's bureaus for Roche S.p.A. SC declared his role in an international board for Eli Lilly international. AR declares Advisory Board activity for Bristol, Pfizer, Bayer, and Kyowa Kirin, and speaker honorarium from Roche Diagnostics. PAZ reports outside the submitted work personal fees for advisory role, speaker engagements and travel and accommodation expenses from Merck Sharp & Dohme (MSD), Astellas, Janssen, Sanofi, Ipsen, Pfizer, Novartis, Bristol Meyer Squibb, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Roche, and Bayer. MS received honoraria for advisory role from Janssen, and travel and accommodation expenses from Janssen, IPSEN, BMS, Astellas, and Pfizer. ER had a role as consultant for MSD, Novartis, Pierre Fabre, Immunocore and Pfizer. FG received personal fees from Eli Lilly, Roche, Boehringer Ingelheim, AstraZeneca, MSD, BMS, Pierre Fabre, Novartis, Merck, Takeda, Bayer, Novartis, and AMGEN for consulting activity; from Eli Lilly, Roche, Boehringer Ingelheim, AstraZeneca, BMS, AMGEN, MSD, Celgene, and Pierre Fabre for speakers bureaus. GG declares speaker and advisory fees from MSD; Travels and Accommodations from AstraZeneca. DaS declares honoraria for advisory board from Astellas, Janssen, Bayer, Novartis, Astra-Zeneca, MSD, BMS, Roche. FM received personal fees for advisory role by Roche, MSD, Takeda, Novartis, Sanofi. RRS received travel grants from AIOM and CIPOMO, and declares memberships in AIOM, CIPOMO, ESMO, ASCO and Rotary Club. SP received honoraria as a speaker from Roche, Astra Zeneca, MSD, and GSK. DG received honoraria as a speaker from Amgen. MR received honoraria as speaker/consultant by MSD, Astra Zeneca, Bristol-MyersSquibb (BMS), Novartis, and Pfizer. All the cited competing interests were outside the current work and not related to the content of our manuscript if not differently specified. All remaining authors have declared no conflicts of interest., (© 2023 The Authors.)

Purpose: To assess caregivers' characteristics and influence of the presence or absence of the caregiver on clinical outcomes of older (≥70 years) metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) patients treated with abiraterone (ABI) or enzalutamide (ENZ)., Methods: Patients from the Meet-URO 5 ADHERE study were assessed with a 5-item caregiver evaluation questionnaire focusing on the presence, age, degree of kinship, working status and qualification of the caregiver. We investigated the association between the presence of a caregiver and the clinical characteristics and outcomes of enrolled patients., Results: No differences were found in the main clinical characteristics between patients with or without a caregiver, except for a lower median G8 score (p = 0.0453) in the caregiver group. A longer radiographic PFS (rPFS) was observed in the group without a caregiver, with a trend towards more prolonged overall survival (OS) in the same group., Conclusion: Our work suggests a detrimental effect of caregivers in managing older mCRPC patients treated with ABI or ENZ, especially those identified as frail by the geriatric G8 screening score. Further work is needed to identify and address patients' vulnerability areas, which could have a detrimental effect on prognosis., (© 2023. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature.)

Aims: Inflammation indexes had been associated with overall survival (OS) and immune-related adverse events (irAEs) in patients treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs)., Materials & Methods: in 72 patients treated with ICIs for metastatic urothelial carcinoma (mUC) we evaluate differences in OS, response rate and toxicities, according to baseline inflammation indexes values., Results: neutrophil-to-lymphocite ratio (NLR) <3 was associated to longer progression-free survival (PFS; 4.9 vs 3.1 months) and OS (15.7 vs 7.6 months); monocyte-to-lymphocite ratio (MLR) <0.4 was associated to longer PFS (4.6 vs 2.8 months). Overall response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR) were higher in these patients. Patients with an irAE had longer PFS and OS., Conclusion: baseline inflammatory indexes are prognostic for mUC patients treated with ICIs., Competing Interests: The authors have no other relevant affiliations or financial involvement with any organization or entity with a financial interest in or financial conflict with the subject matter or materials discussed in the manuscript apart from those disclosed., (© 2023 The Authors.)

Introduction: US National Cancer Institute's (NCI) Patient-Reported Outcomes version of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (PRO-CTCAE ® ) is a library of 78 symptom terms and 124 items enabling patient reporting of symptomatic adverse events in cancer trials. This multicenter study used mixed methods to develop an Italian language version of this widely accepted measure, and describe the content validity and reliability in a diverse sample of Italian-speaking patients., Methods: All PRO-CTCAE items were translated in accordance with international guidelines. Subsequently, the content validity of the PRO-CTCAE-Italian was explored and iteratively refined through cognitive debriefing interviews. Participants (n=96; 52% male; median age 64 years; 26% older adults; 18% lower educational attainment) completed a PRO-CTCAE survey and participated in a semi-structured interview to determine if the translation captured the concepts of the original English language PRO-CTCAE, and to evaluate comprehension, clarity and ease of judgement. Test-retest reliability of the finalized measure was explored in a second sample (n=135)., Results: Four rounds of cognitive debriefing interviews were conducted. The majority of PRO-CTCAE symptom terms, attributes and associated response choices were well-understood, and respondents found the items easy to judge. To improve comprehension and clarity, the symptom terms for nausea and pain were rephrased and retested in subsequent interview rounds. Test-retest reliability was excellent for 41/49 items (84%); the median intraclass correlation coefficient was 0.83 (range 0.64-0.94)., Discussion: Results support the semantic, conceptual and pragmatic equivalence of PRO-CTCAE-Italian to the original English version, and provide preliminary descriptive evidence of content validity and reliability.

Background: The current prognostic models for patients with advanced urinary tract cancers were developed and validated in the chemotherapy setting. As immunotherapy has become the backbone of novel treatments, updated prognostic scores are needed., Methods: A comprehensive analysis of inflammatory indexes from peripheral blood and clinical factors was planned on the entire real-world cohort of pretreated patients with advanced urinary tract carcinoma receiving atezolizumab in the prospective, single-arm, phase IIIb SAUL study. Univariable and multivariable analyses with overall survival as the primary endpoint, bootstrap internal validation, Schneeweiss scoring system and calibration test were performed to develop a novel immunotherapy prognostic score., Results: Thirteen clinical variables from 1001 patients were analyzed. The following eight prognostic factors were included in a model: ECOG PS, liver and bone metastases, histology, pre-treatment steroids, systemic immune-inflammatory index (i.e., neutrophils-to-lymphocytes ratio times platelets count), hemoglobin and lactate dehydrogenase. The prognostic model was able to stratify patients into five risk groups with significantly different (P<0.001) median overall survival of NR, 18.0, 8.7, 4.6 and 2.4 months, respectively. The c-index for OS was higher than the Bellmunt Score one (0.702 vs. 0.672)., Conclusions: A novel 5-class prognostic model contemporary to immunotherapy provides robust prognostic discrimination of patients with advanced urinary tract carcinoma homogeneously treated with immunotherapy through baseline affordable and reproducible clinical and laboratory factors. It could be quickly adopted in clinical practice to inform patients about prognosis with immunotherapy and assess the benefit of novel immunotherapy combinations in clinical trials.

Background: The efficacy and safety of treatment with cabozantinib in combination with nivolumab and ipilimumab in patients with previously untreated advanced renal-cell carcinoma are unknown., Methods: In this phase 3, double-blind trial, we enrolled patients with advanced clear-cell renal-cell carcinoma who had not previously received treatment and had intermediate or poor prognostic risk according to the International Metastatic Renal-Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium categories. Patients were randomly assigned to receive 40 mg of cabozantinib daily in addition to nivolumab and ipilimumab (experimental group) or matched placebo in addition to nivolumab and ipilimumab (control group). Nivolumab (3 mg per kilogram of body weight) and ipilimumab (1 mg per kilogram) were administered once every 3 weeks for four cycles. Patients then received nivolumab maintenance therapy (480 mg once every 4 weeks) for up to 2 years. The primary end point was progression-free survival, as determined by blinded independent review according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors, version 1.1, and was assessed in the first 550 patients who had undergone randomization. The secondary end point was overall survival, assessed in all patients who had undergone randomization., Results: Overall, 855 patients underwent randomization: 428 were assigned to the experimental group and 427 to the control group. Among the first 550 patients who had undergone randomization (276 in the experimental group and 274 in the control group), the probability of progression-free survival at 12 months was 0.57 in the experimental group and 0.49 in the control group (hazard ratio for disease progression or death, 0.73; 95% confidence interval, 0.57 to 0.94; P = 0.01); 43% of the patients in the experimental group and 36% in the control group had a response. Grade 3 or 4 adverse events occurred in 79% of the patients in the experimental group and in 56% in the control group. Follow-up for overall survival is ongoing., Conclusions: Among patients with previously untreated, advanced renal-cell carcinoma who had intermediate or poor prognostic risk, treatment with cabozantinib plus nivolumab and ipilimumab resulted in significantly longer progression-free survival than treatment with nivolumab and ipilimumab alone. Grade 3 or 4 adverse events were more common in the experimental group than in the control group. (Funded by Exelixis; COSMIC-313 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03937219.)., (Copyright © 2023 Massachusetts Medical Society.)