Search

Modern advances in systemic and localized therapies for patients with renal cell carcinoma (RCC) have significantly improved patients' outcomes. If disease progression occurs after initial treatment, clinicians often have multiple options for a first salvage therapy. Because salvage and initial treatments both may affect overall survival time, and they may interact in unanticipated ways, there is a growing need to determine sequences of initial therapy and first salvage therapy that maximize overall survival while maintaining quality of life. The complexity of this problem grows if a second salvage therapy must be chosen for patients with treatment-resistant disease or a second progression occurs following first salvage. On November 9, 2023, a think tank was convened during the International Kidney Cancer Symposium (IKCS) North America to discuss challenges in accounting for postprogression therapies when estimating overall survival (OS) time based on randomized controlled trial (RCT) data. The present manuscript summarizes the topics discussed, with the aim to encourage adoption of statistical methods that account for salvage therapy effects to obtain scientifically valid OS estimation. We highlight limitations of traditional methods for estimating OS that account for initial treatments while ignoring salvage therapy effects and discuss advantages of applying more sophisticated statistical methods for estimation and trial design. These include identifying multistage treatment strategies, correcting for confounding due to salvage therapy effects, and conducting Sequentially Multiple Assignment Randomized Trials (SMARTs) to obtain unbiased comparisons between multistage strategies. We emphasize the critical role of patient input in trial design, and the potential for information technology (IT) advances to support complex trial designs and real-time data analyses. By addressing these challenges, future RCTs can better inform clinical decision-making and improve patient outcomes in RCC., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest Pavlos Msaouel reports honoraria for scientific advisory board membership for Mirati Therapeutics, Bristol Myers Squibb, and Exelixis; consulting fees from Axiom Healthcare; nonbranded educational programs supported by Exelixis, Pfizer, and DAVA Oncology; leadership or fiduciary roles as a Medical Steering Committee member for the Kidney Cancer Association and a Kidney Cancer Scientific Advisory Board member for KCCure; and research funding from Takeda, Bristol Myers Squibb, Mirati Therapeutics, Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, and Gateway for Cancer Research. Eric A. Singer reports honoraria for data safety monitoring board membership for Aura Biosciences and leadership or fiduciary roles as a Medical Steering Committee member for the Kidney Cancer Association. Kathryn E Beckermann received funding to the institution for preclinical awards including BMS-IASLC-LCFA, Pionyr, Arsenal Bio, and Aravive, as well as funds as a consultant to Aravive, Aveo, Arcus, Alpine Bioscience, BMS, Exelixis, Merck, Eisai, Nimbus, and Adicet. Bradley A. McGregor reports consulting fees from Arcus, BMS, Daiichi, Eisai, Exelixis, Gilead, Lily, Pfizer as well as research funding to institution from BMS, Exelixis, Gilead, and Pfizer. Ulka N. Vaishampayan reports consulting fees from BMS. Novartis, Merck, Exelixis, Pfizer, Glilead and Alkermes, as well as speaker fees from Bayes and Exelixis. Eric Jonasch reports research support from Abbvie, Arrowhead, Aveo, BMS, Corvus, Merck, NiKang, ProFoundBio, Telix, honoraria from Aveo, Clinical Care Options, DAVA, EBSCO, Eisai, Exelixis, GSK, IDEO Oncology, i3 Health, Ipsen, Kaplan, Merck, Novartis, NiKang, Petra Drugstore, Plexus, leadership position in NCCN Guidelines (Vice-Chair Kidney Cancer Panel), member of the NCI RCC Steering Committee, and board Member of the International Kidney Cancer Coalition. Katie Coleman is employed by the Rare Cancer Research Foundation and has received honoraria from Exelixis for a speaking engagement related to patient advocacy. Nizar M. Tannir reported receiving and personal fees (honoraria) from Calithera Biosciences during the conduct of the study; and grants (sponsored trial) from Calithera Biosciences, Bristol Myers Squibb (BMS), Nektar Therapeutics, Arrowhead Pharmaceuticals, and Novartis, as well as personal fees (honoraria) from Calithera Biosciences, BMS, Eisai Medical Research, Merck Sharp & Dohme (MSD), Deka Biosciences, Neoleukin Therapeutics, Exelixis, and Ono Pharmaceutical outside the submitted work. Daniel M Geynisman reports honoraria from Targeted Oncology, consulting fees from Pfizer, Exelixis, AstraZeneca, Seattle Genetics/Astellas, Merck, and Bristol-Myers Squibb, as well as research funding to institution from Merck, Astellas Pharma, Harpoon Therapeutics, Arvinas, and CG Oncology. Walter M. Stadler reports consulting fees for participation in Data and Safety Monitoring Board from Astra-Zeneca, Merck, Pfizer, and Treadwell Therapeutics, other consulting fees from Astra-Zeneca, Aveo, Caremark/CVS, EMA Wellness, Fortress Biotech, and Xencor, speakers bureau for CME programs from Dava Oncology, Global Academyc for Medical Education, OncLive, PeerView, Research to Practice, and Vindico, research funding to institution from Abbvie, Amgen, Astra-Zeneca, Astellas (Medivation), Bayer, Bristol-Myers-Squibb, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Calithera, Corvus, Eisai, Exilixis, Genentech (Roche), Johnson & Johnson (Janssen), Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Seattle Genetics, X4Pharmaceuticals, Xencor, stock holdings from Fortress Biotech, Expert Witness for Sandoz, as well as miscellaneous fees from Cancer (ACS), Up-To-Date, and the Kidney Cancer Journal. Yousef Zakharia reports advisory board / consulting fees from Bristol Myers Squibb, Amgen, Janssen, Eisai, Exelixis, Genzyme Corporation, Pfizer, EMD Serono, Astellas, and Seagen, Grant/research institutional support from Pfizer, Exelixis, and Eisai, as well as honoraria for data safety monitoring board membership from Janssen Research and Development. Daniel D. Shapiro has no disclosures., (Copyright © 2024 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background and Objective: EVEREST is a phase 3 trial in patients with renal cell cancer (RCC) at intermediate-high or very high risk of recurrence after nephrectomy who were randomized to receive adjuvant everolimus or placebo. Longer recurrence-free survival (RFS) was observed with everolimus (hazard ratio [HR] 0.85, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.72-1.00; p = 0.051), but the nominal significance level (p = 0.044) was not reached. To contextualize these results with positive phase 3 trials of adjuvant sunitinib and pembrolizumab, we conducted a secondary analysis in a similar population of EVEREST patients with very high-risk disease and clear cell histology., Methods: Postnephrectomy patients with any clear cell component and very high-risk disease, defined as pT3a (grade 3-4), pT3b-c (any grade), T4 (any grade), or node-positive status (N+), were identified. A Cox regression model stratified by performance status was used to compare RFS and overall survival (OS) between the treatment arms., Key Findings and Limitations: Of 1499 patients, 717 had clear cell histology and very high-risk disease; 699 met the eligibility criteria, of whom 348 were randomized to everolimus arm, and 351 to the placebo arm. Patient characteristics were similar between the arms. Only 163/348 (47%) patients in the everolimus arm completed all treatment as planned, versus 225/351 (64%) in the placebo arm. Adjuvant everolimus resulted in a statistically significant improvement in RFS (HR 0.80; 95%CI 0.65-0.99, p = 0.041). Evidence of a survival benefit was not seen (HR 0.85; 95%CI 0.64-1.14, p = 0.3) CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: In patients with clear cell RCC at very high-risk for recurrence, adjuvant everolimus resulted in significantly improved RFS compared to placebo but resulted in a high discontinuation rate due to adverse events. Although the treatment HR for OS was consistent with RFS findings, it did not reach statistical significance. With a focus on risk stratification tools and/or biomarkers to minimize toxicity risk in those not likely to benefit, this information can help inform the design of future adjuvant trials in high-risk RCC., (Copyright © 2024 European Association of Urology. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Background: KEYNOTE-199 (NCT02787005) is a multicohort phase 2 study evaluating pembrolizumab in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). Results from cohorts 4 (C4) and 5 (C5) are presented., Methods: Eligible patients had not received chemotherapy for mCRPC and had responded to enzalutamide prior to developing resistance as defined by Prostate Cancer Clinical Trials Working Group 3 guidelines. Patients with RECIST-measurable disease were enrolled in C4, and patients with bone-only or bone-predominant disease were enrolled in C5. All patients received pembrolizumab 200 mg every 3 weeks for ≤35 cycles with ongoing enzalutamide until progression, unacceptable toxicity, or withdrawal. The primary end point was objective response rate (ORR) per RECIST v1.1 by blinded independent central review in C4. Secondary end points included disease control rate (DCR), overall survival, and safety in each cohort and both cohorts combined., Results: A total of 126 patients were treated (C4, n = 81; C5, n = 45). Median age was 72 years (range 43-92), and 87.3% had received ≥6 months of enzalutamide prior to study entry. Confirmed ORR was 12.3% (95% CI 6.1-21.5%) for C4. Median duration of response in C4 was 8.1 months (range, 2.5+ to 15.2), and 5 of these patients experienced an objective response lasting ≥6 months. DCR was 53.1% (95% CI 41.7-64.3%) in C4 and 51.1% (95% CI 35.8-66.3%) in C5. Median overall survival was 17.6 months (95% CI 14.0-22.6) in C4 and 20.8 months (95% CI 14.1-28.9) in C5. Grade ≥3 treatment-related adverse events occurred in 35 patients (27.8%); 2 patients in C4 died from immune-related adverse events (myasthenic syndrome and Guillain-Barré syndrome)., Conclusions: The addition of pembrolizumab to ongoing enzalutamide treatment in patients with mCRPC that progressed on enzalutamide after initial response demonstrated modest antitumor activity with a manageable safety profile., Clinical Trial Registry and Id: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02787005., (© 2024. This is a U.S. Government work and not under copyright protection in the US; foreign copyright protection may apply.)

Importance: Clinical trial data on adjuvant therapy in patients with non-clear cell renal cell carcinoma (RCC) are scant., Objective: To evaluate the effect of adjuvant everolimus after nephrectomy on recurrence-free survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS) in patients with localized papillary and chromophobe RCC., Design, Setting, and Participants: This prespecified subgroup analysis of a phase 3 randomized clinical trial, EVEREST, included patients enrolled between April 1, 2011, and September 15, 2016. Eligible patients had fully resected RCC at intermediate-high risk (pT1 grade 3-4, N0 to pT3a grade 1-2, N0) or very-high risk (pT3a grade 3-4 to pT4 any grade or N+) for recurrence who had received radical or partial nephrectomy. Final analyses was completed in March 2022., Intervention: The intervention group received 54 weeks of everolimus (10 mg orally daily); the control group received a matching placebo., Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcomes were RFS, OS, and rates of adverse events. For testing the hazard ratio (HR) for treatment effect, a Cox regression model was used for both OS and RFS., Results: Of 1545 adult patients with treatment-naive, nonmetastatic, fully resected RCC in EVEREST, 109 had papillary RCC (median [range] age, 60 [19-81] years; 82 [75%] male; 50 patients [46%] with very high-risk disease) and 99 had chromophobe RCC (median [range] age 51 [18-71] years; 53 [54%] male; 34 patients [34%] with very high-risk disease). Among 57 patients with papillary RCC in the intervention group, 26 (46%) completed 54 weeks of treatment, and among 53 patients with chromophobe RCC in the intervention group, 26 (49%) completed 54 weeks of treatment. With a median (IQR) follow-up of 76 (61-96) months, adjuvant everolimus did not improve RFS compared with placebo in either papillary RCC (5-year RFS: 62% vs 70%; HR, 1.19; 95% CI, 0.61-2.33; P = .61) or chromophobe RCC (5-year RFS: 79% vs 77%; HR, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.37-2.13; P = .79). In the combined non-clear RCC cohort, grade 3 or higher adverse events occurred in 48% of patients who received everolimus and 9% of patients who received placebo., Conclusions and Relevance: In this clinical trial assessing the use of adjuvant everolimus, postoperative everolimus did not show evidence of improved RFS among patients with papillary or chromophobe RCC, and results from the study do not support adjuvant everolimus for this cohort. However, since the lower bounds of the 95% CIs were 0.61 and 0.89, respectively, potential treatment benefit in these subgroups cannot be ruled out., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01120249.

Purpose: CDK12 inactivation in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) may predict immunotherapy responses. This phase 2 trial evaluated the efficacy of immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) therapy in patients with CDK12-altered mCRPC., Patients and Methods: Eligible patients had mCRPC with deleterious CDK12 alterations and any prior therapies except ICI. Cohort A received ipilimumab (1 mg/kg) with nivolumab (3 mg/kg) every 3 weeks for up to four cycles, followed by nivolumab 480 mg every 4 weeks. Cohort C received nivolumab alone 480 mg every 4 weeks. Patients with CDK12-altered nonprostate tumors were enrolled in cohort B and not reported. The primary endpoint was a 50% reduction in PSA (PSA50). Key secondary endpoints included PSA progression-free survival, overall survival, objective response rate, and safety., Results: PSA was evaluable in 23 patients in cohort A and 14 in cohort C. Median lines of prior therapy were two in cohorts A and C, including any prior novel hormonal agent (74% and 79%) and chemotherapy (57% and 36%). The PSA50 rate was 9% [95% confidence interval (CI), 1%-28%] in cohort A with two responders; neither had microsatellite instability or a tumor mutational burden >10 mutations/megabase. No PSA50 responses occurred in cohort C. Median PSA progression-free survival was 7.0 months (95% CI, 3.6-11.4) in cohort A and 4.5 months (95% CI, 3.4-13.8) in cohort C. Median overall survival was 9.0 months (95% CI, 6.2-12.3) in cohort A and 13.8 months (95% CI, 3.6-not reached) in cohort C., Conclusions: There was minimal activity with ICI therapy in patients with CDK12-altered mCRPC., (©2024 American Association for Cancer Research.)

Sipuleucel-T is an autologous cellular immunotherapy that targets prostatic acid phosphatase (PAP) and is available for treatment of men with asymptomatic or minimally symptomatic metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). In this single-arm, two-cohort, multicenter clinical study, potential racial differences in immune responses to sipuleucel-T in men with mCRPC were explored. Patients' blood samples were obtained to assess serum cytokines, humoral responses, and cellular immunity markers before and after treatment. Baseline cumulative product parameters (total nucleated and CD54+ cell counts and CD54 upregulation) were evaluated. IgM titers against the immunogen PA2024, the target antigen PAP, prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) and prostate-specific antigen (PSA) were quantified by ELISA. Cytotoxic T-lymphocyte activity was determined by ELISpots, and cytokine and chemokine concentrations were determined by Luminex.Twenty-nine African American (AA) men and 28 non-African American (non-AA) men with mCRPC received sipuleucel-T. Baseline total nucleated cell count, CD54+ cell count, CD54 expression, and cumulative product parameters were higher in non-AA men. Although PSA baseline levels were higher in AA men, there were no racial differences in IgM antibody and IFNγ ELISpots responses against PA2024, PAP, PSA, and PSMA before and after treatment. Expression of co-stimulatory receptor ICOS on CD4+ and CD8+ T cells, and the levels of Th1 cytokine granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor and chemokines CCL4 and CCL5, were significantly higher in AA men before and/or after treatment. Despite no difference in the overall survival, PSA changes from baseline were significantly different between the two races. The data suggest that immune correlates in blood differ in AA and non-AA men with mCRPC pre- and post-sipuleucel-T., Significance: Our novel findings of higher expression of co-stimulatory receptor ICOS on CD4+ and CD8+ T cells in African American patients with metastatic castrate-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) prior and post-sipuleucel-T suggest activation of CD4+ and CD8+ T cells. The data indicate that racial differences observed in these and other immune correlates before and after sipuleucel-T warrant additional investigation to further our understanding of the immune system in African American men and other men with mCRPC., (©2024 The Authors; Published by the American Association for Cancer Research.)

Extragonadal germ cell tumors (EGCTs) are rare, representing <5% of all germ cell tumors (GCTs). Whilst EGCTs share morphological and immunohistochemical features with their gonadal counterparts, they tend to be more aggressive and are frequently associated with secondary somatic malignancies. The aim of our study was to evaluate the clinical, morphological and immunohistochemical features, and to analyze tumors for chromosomal abnormalities of 12p, in addition to any novel genetic alterations, in a series of EGCTs. Seventy-seven EGCTs were included. Anterior mediastinum was the most common anatomic site, followed by central nervous system, retroperitoneum, sacroccygeal area, and neck. Whole genome SNP array identified isochromosome 12p in 26% of tumors. Additional cytogenetic abnormalities included the presence of gain of chr 21 in 37% of tumors. Somatic-type malignancies were identified in 8% of patients. Disease progression (metastasis and/or recurrence) was documented in 8 patients, most of whom died from their relapse. Three patients who died of disease had somatic-type malignancies. Mediastinal seminomas had a significantly better overall survival when compared to mediastinal non-seminomatous GCTs. Our study demonstrates that EGCTs share similar histologic features, but diverse clinical outcomes compared to their gonadal counterparts. Outcomes vary according to anatomic location and histologic subtypes. Our data corroborate that somatic-type malignancies are frequently encountered in mediastinal EGCTs and that their presence portends a poorer prognosis., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest None of the authors has any conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Recently recognized as one of the hallmarks of cancer, the microbiome consists of symbiotic microorganisms that play pivotal roles in carcinogenesis, the tumor microenvironment, and responses to therapy. With recent advances in microbiome metagenomic sequencing, a growing body of work has demonstrated that changes in gut microbiome composition are associated with differential responses to immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) because of alterations in cytokine signaling and cytotoxic T-cell recruitment. Therefore, strategies to shape the gut microbiome into a more favorable, immunogenic profile may lead to improved responses with ICIs. Immunotherapy is commonly used in genitourinary (GU) cancers such as renal cell carcinoma, urothelial cancer, and to a limited extent, prostate cancer. However, a subset of patients do not derive clinical benefit with ICIs. Gut microbiome-based interventions are of particular interest given the potential to boost responses to ICIs in preclinical and early-phase prospective studies. Novel approaches using probiotic therapy (live bacterial supplementation) and fecal microbiota transplantation in patients with GU cancers are currently under investigation.

Study Aim: ModraDoc006, an oral formulation of docetaxel, is co-administered with the cytochrome P450-3A4 and P-glycoprotein inhibitor, ritonavir (r): ModraDoc006/r. The preliminary efficacy and safety of oral ModraDoc006/r was evaluated in a global randomized phase II trial and compared to the current standard chemotherapy regimen of intravenous (i.v.) docetaxel and prednisone., Methods: 103 mCRPC patients, chemotherapy-naïve with/without abiraterone and/or enzalutamide pretreated, with adequate organ function and evaluable disease per RECIST v1.1 and PCWG3 guidelines were randomized 1:1 into two cohorts. In Cohort 1, 49 patients received docetaxel 75 mg/m 2 i.v. every 3 weeks (Q3W). In Cohort 2, 52 patients received ModraDoc006/r; 21 patients with a starting dose of ModraDoc006 30 mg with ritonavir 200 mg in the morning and ModraDoc006 20 mg with ritonavir 100 mg in the evening (30-20/200-100 mg) bi-daily-once-weekly (BIDW) on Days 1, 8, and 15 of a 21-day cycle. To alleviate tolerability, the starting dose was amended to ModraDoc006/r 20-20/200-100 mg in another 31 patients. All patients received prednisone 10 mg daily. Primary endpoint was rPFS., Results: There was no significant difference in rPFS between the 2 arms (p = 0.1465). Median rPFS was 9.5 months and 11.1 months (95% CI) for ModraDoc006/r and i.v. docetaxel, respectively. Partial response was noted in 44.1% and 38.7% measurable disease patients, and 50% decline of PSA was seen in 23 (50%) and 26 (56.5%) evaluable cases treated with ModraDoc006/r and i.v. docetaxel, respectively. The safety profile of ModraDoc006/r 20-20/200-100 mg dose was significantly better than i.v. docetaxel, with mild (mostly Grade 1) gastrointestinal toxicities, no hematologic adverse events, and neuropathy and alopecia incidence of 11.5% and 25%, respectively., Conclusions: ModraDoc006/r potentially represents a widely applicable, convenient, effective, and better tolerated oral taxane therapy option for mCRPC. Further investigation of ModraDoc006/r in a large randomized trial is warranted., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare the following financial interests/personal relationships which may be considered as potential competing interests: Modra Pharmaceuticals BV was founded as a spin-off company of the Netherlands Cancer Institute, enabling the further clinical development of novel oral taxane formulations, after their pharmaceutical and preclinical development in the Netherlands Cancer Institute. Marianne Keessen is a full-time employee of Modra Pharmaceuticals BV. The other authors declare no relevant conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: Bladder cancer is predominantly a disease of older individuals. Concurrent chemotherapy and radiation is a bladder-sparing strategy for management of muscle-invasive bladder cancer; however, many patients are not candidates for chemotherapy due to comorbidities or impaired performance status. We conducted a study in a chemotherapy-ineligible patient population with the objectives of evaluating the safety, efficacy, and quality-of-life effect of the combination of nivolumab and radiation therapy in patients with localized/locally advanced urothelial cancer., Methods and Materials: Eligible patients had muscle-invasive bladder cancer and were not candidates for standard chemoradiation strategy due to at least one of the following: performance status of 2, creatinine clearance ≤60 mL/min, cardiac disease, neuropathy, and intolerance to previous treatment. Creatinine clearance ≥40 mL/min, normal marrow, and liver function were required. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival at 12 months. Nivolumab was started within 3 days of radiation therapy and administered at a dose of 240 mg intravenously every 2 weeks for a maximum of 6 months. Radiation therapy was per standard of care for bladder cancer. Imaging and cystoscopy and biopsy evaluation were required at months 3, 6, and 12 and then annually until progression., Results: Twenty patients were enrolled, with a median age of 78.5 years (range, 58-95 years); 80% of patients were >70 years of age, and 8 (40%) were >80 years of age. Median creatinine clearance was 52 mL/min. Nine patients (48%) were progression free at 12 months. Median progression-free survival was 11.4 months (90% CI, 7.5-23.7 months), and median overall survival was 15.6 months (90% CI, 9.1-26.1 months)., Conclusions: Concurrent nivolumab and radiation therapy is tolerable but demonstrated limited efficacy in an older population with multiple comorbidities. Immune correlates demonstrated that patients with baseline programmed cell death ligand 1 combined prognostic score ≥5% had numerically longer progression-free survival., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Germline inactivation of the Von Hippel-Lindau ( VHL ) tumor suppressor is the defining hallmark in hereditary VHL disease and VHL-associated renal cell carcinoma (RCC). However, somatic VHL mutations are also observed in patients with sporadic RCC. Loss of function VHL mutations result in constitutive activation of hypoxia-inducible factor-2 alpha (HIF-2α), which leads to increased expression of HIF target genes that promote angiogenesis and tumor growth. As of 2023, belzutifan is currently the only approved HIF-2α inhibitor for both VHL-associated and sporadic metastatic RCC (mRCC). However, there is potential for resistance with HIF-2α inhibitors which warrants novel HIF-2α-targeting strategies. In this review, we discuss the potential resistance mechanisms with belzutifan and current clinical trials evaluating novel combinations of belzutifan with other targeted therapies and immune checkpoint inhibitors which may enhance the efficacy of HIF-2α targeting. Lastly, we also discuss newer generation HIF-2α inhibitors that are currently under early investigation and outline future directions and challenges with HIF-2α inhibitors for mRCC.

Background: Patients undergoing resection of renal cell carcinoma are at risk of disease relapse. We evaluated the effectiveness of the mammalian target of rapamycin inhibitor everolimus administered after surgery., Methods: In this randomised, double-blind, phase 3 trial, we enrolled adults with histologically confirmed renal cell carcinoma who had undergone a full surgical resection and were at intermediate-high or very high risk of recurrence at 398 academic and community institution centres in the USA. After nephrectomy, patients were randomly assigned (1:1) via a central web-based application using a dynamic balancing algorithm to receive 10 mg oral everolimus daily or placebo for 54 weeks. The primary endpoint was recurrence-free survival. Efficacy analyses included all eligible, randomly assigned patients; safety analysis included all patients who received treatment. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01120249 and is closed to new participants., Findings: Between April 1, 2011, and Sept 15, 2016, a total of 1545 patients were randomly assigned to receive everolimus (n=775) or placebo (n=770), of whom 755 assigned to everolimus and 744 assigned to placebo were eligible for inclusion in the efficacy analysis. With a median follow-up of 76 months (IQR 61-92), recurrence-free survival was longer with everolimus than with placebo (5-year recurrence-free survival 67% [95% CI 63-70] vs 63% [60-67]; stratified log-rank p=0·050; stratified hazard ratio [HR] 0·85, 95% CI 0·72-1·00; p=0·051) but did not meet the prespecified p value for statistical significance of 0·044. Recurrence-free survival was longer with everolimus than with placebo in the very-high-risk group (HR 0·79, 95% CI 0·65-0·97; p=0·022) but not in the intermediate-high-risk group (0·99, 0·73-1·35; p=0·96). Grade 3 or higher adverse events occurred in 343 (46%) of 740 patients who received everolimus and 79 (11%) of 723 who received placebo., Interpretation: Postoperative everolimus did not improve recurrence-free survival compared with placebo among patients with renal cell carcinoma at high risk of recurrence after nephrectomy. These results do not support the adjuvant use of everolimus for renal cell carcinoma after surgery., Funding: US National Institutes of Health, National Cancer Institute, National Clinical Trials Network, Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation, and The Hope Foundation., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests CWR reports research funding from Ayala, Bristol Myers Squibb, Daiichi Sankyo, Deciphera, Exelixis, Genentech, Novartis, Karyopharm, Merck, Nektar, Pfizer, Xynomic, Bayer, OSI, PF Argentum IP Holdings, Rain Therapeutics, and Shasqi; consulting fees from Synox, Daiichi-Sankyo, AVEO, Exelixis, AstraZeneca, and Bristol Myers Squibb; and payment for expert testimony from Pfizer, GSK, and Boehringer Ingelheim. EIH reports research funding from Astellas Pharma, Arvinas, AstraZeneca, BioXcel Therapeutics, Bristol Myers Squibb, Calibr, Calithera Biosciences, Caris Life Sciences, Corcept Therapeutics, Corvis Pharmaceuticals, Daiichi Sankyo, Eisai, Exelixis, Five Prime Therapeutics, Fortis Therapeutics, GSK, Gilead Sciences, Harpoon Therapeutics, Roche, Infinity Pharmaceuticals, iTeos Therapeutics, Janssen, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Merck, Mirati Therapeutics, Modra Pharmaceuticals, Oncolys BioPharma, Peloton Therapeutics, Pfizer, Pharmacyclics, POINT Biopharma, and Seattle Genetics; consulting fees from Astellas Pharma; honoraria from Bayer, Sanofi, and Seattle Genetics; support for attending meetings and travel from Astellas Pharma, Caris Life Sciences, Sanofi, and Seattle Genetics; participation on a data safety monitoring board or advisory board for Astellas Pharma, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Sanofi, and Janssen; and leadership or fiduciary role for Zero End of Cancer and Michigan American Cancer Society. MNS reports grants or contracts from Advaxis, Harpoon, Bristol Myers Squibb, Genocea, Bellicum, Xencor, Exelixis, and Seattle Genetics; consulting fees from Janssen, Exelixis, Bristol Myers Squibb, and Xencor; and data safety monitoring board or advisory board participation for AstraZeneca. ASA reports consulting fees from Bristol Myers Squibb, Pfizer, and AstraZeneca; data safety monitoring board or advisory board participation for Eisai; and research grants paid from Merck, Bristol Myers Squibb, V Foundation, AstraZeneca, and NCCN. SKP reports support for attending meetings and travel from Ipsen and CRISPR Therapeutics. IP reports consulting fees from Nouscom, Iovance, Nektar, and Regeneron. JIC reports grants or contracts from Merck, Bristol Myers Squibb, Aveo, Instil Bio, Hookipa, and Castle Biosciences. TKC reports support for research, advisory boards, consultancy, and honoraria from AstraZeneca, Aravive, Aveo, Bayer, Bristol Myers Squibb, Calithera, Circle Pharma, Eisai, EMD Serono, Exelixis, GSK, IQVA, Infinity, Ipsen, Janssen, Kanaph, Lilly, Merck, Nikang, Nuscan, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Sanofi/Aventis, Surface Oncology, Takeda, Tempest, Up-To-Date, and CME events (Peerview, OncLive, MJH, and others); institutional patents filed on molecular alterations and immunotherapy response and toxicity, and ctDNA; equity interest in Tempest, Pionyr, Osel, Precede Bio, and CureResponse; committee participation in NCCN, NCI GU Steering Committee, ASCO/ESMO, ACCRU, and KidneyCan; and grant funding from Dana-Farber/Harvard Cancer Center Kidney SPORE (2P50CA101942-16) and Program 5P30CA006516-56, the Kohlberg Chair at Harvard Medical School and the Trust Family, Michael Brigham, Pan Mass Challenge, Hinda and Arthur Marcus Fund, and Loker Pinard Funds for Kidney Cancer Research at DFCI. NA reports research funding from Arnivas, Astellas, AstraZeneca, Bavarian Nordic, Bayer, Bristol Myers Squibb, Calithera, Celldex, Clovis, Crispr, Eisai, Eli Lilly, EMD Serono, Exelixis, Genentech, Gilead, GSK, Immunomedics, Janssen, Lava, Medivation, Merck, Nektar, Neoleukin, New Link Genetics, Novartis, Oric, Pfizer, Prometheus, Rexahn, Roche, Sanofi, Seattle Genetics, Takeda, and Tracon; and consulting fees from Eisai, Seattle Genetics, EMD Serono, Janssen, Exelixis, Bayer, Astellas, AstraZeneca, Immunomedics, Bristol Myers Squibb, Aveo, Genentech, Merck, Lilly, Gilead, and Foundation Medicine. RGU reports a leadership or fiduciary role for Haymarket Media, Genentech, and Merck. NBH reports grants or contracts from DOD KCRC Clinical Consortium Award; consulting fees from Merck, Eisai, Bristol Myers Squibb, Aveo, and Exelixis; participation on a data safety monitoring board or advisory board for Roche; a leadership or fiduciary role for NIH GU Steering Committee; and being ECOG-ACRIN GU co-chair. UNV reports grants or contracts from Merck and Bristol Myers Squibb; consulting fees from Bayer, Exelixis, Merck, Gilead, Bristol Myers Squibb, and Alekermes; honoraria from Sanofi, Bayer, and Exelixis; and a leadership or fiduciary role for Michigan Society of Hematology/Oncology. IMT reports NCI and SWOG funding for SWOG GU Committee Chair. All other authors declare no competing interests., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Introduction. Chromophobe renal cell carcinoma (chromophobe RCC) is the third major subcategory of renal tumors after clear cell RCC and papillary RCC, accounting for approximately 5% of all RCC subtypes. Other oncocytic neoplasms seen commonly in surgical pathology practice include the eosinophilic variant of chromophobe RCC, renal oncocytoma, and low-grade oncocytic unclassified RCC. Methods. In our recent next-generation sequencing based study, we nominated a lineage-specific novel biomarker LINC01187 (long intergenic non-protein coding RNA 1187) which was found to be enriched in chromophobe RCC. Like KIT (cluster of differentiation 117; CD117), a clinically utilized chromophobe RCC related biomarker, LINC01187 is expressed in intercalated cells of the nephron. In this follow-up study, we performed KIT immunohistochemistry and LINC01187 RNA in situ hybridization (RNA-ISH) on a cohort of chromophobe RCC and other renal neoplasms, characterized the expression patterns, and quantified the expression signals of the two biomarkers in both primary and metastatic settings. Results. LINC01187 , in comparison to KIT, exhibits stronger and more uniform expression within tumors while maintaining temporal and spatial consistency. LINC01187 also is devoid of intra-tumoral heterogeneous expression pattern, a phenomenon commonly noted with KIT. Conclusions. LINC01187 expression can augment the currently utilized KIT assay and help facilitate easy microscopic analyses in routine surgical pathology practice.

Purpose: A subset of renal cell carcinoma (RCC) cases occur because of a hereditary predisposition. However, the prevalence and profiling of germline alterations in RCC have not been fully characterized. Additionally, clinicopathologic factors associated with pathogenic or likely pathogenic (P/LP) germline variants in patients with RCC remain poorly understood., Methods: A retrospective analysis of patients with RCC who underwent genetic evaluation was performed. The frequency of P/LP germline variants and genes was evaluated in this cohort. The association between genetic testing outcomes and clinicopathologic features was also assessed., Results: A total of 321 patients with RCC who had germline testing were identified. Within this cohort, 42 patients (13.1%) had P/LP variants. Genes with the most frequent germline mutations were FLCN (n = 10, 3.1%), SDHB (n = 4, 1.2%), VHL (n = 4, 1.2%), MLH1 (n = 3, 0.9%), and CHEK2 (n = 4, 1.2%). Among patients with P/LP variants, 19 (45.2%) had a potentially targetable mutation. The presence of bilateral or multifocal tumors was associated with P/LP variants ( P = .0012 and P = .0098, respectively). Patients who had targeted gene testing had higher rates of P/LP variants compared with multigene panel testing ( P = .015). Age and family history of cancers (RCC and non-RCC) did not have any statistically significant association with germline testing outcomes., Conclusion: Among patients with RCC, unselected for a known familial predisposition, 13.4% had P/LP variants. Almost half of patients with P/LP variants had a potentially targetable mutation. Targeted gene panel testing is a feasible option for patients, particularly if syndromic features are present. Age and family history were not associated with P/LP variants. Future studies are needed to optimize current genetic evaluation criteria to expand the detection of patients with RCC who may have germline mutations.

Renal cell carcinoma (RCC) of variant histology comprises approximately 20% of kidney cancer diagnoses, yet the optimal therapy for these patients and the factors that impact immunotherapy response remain largely unknown. To better understand the determinants of immunotherapy response in this population, we characterized blood- and tissue-based immune markers for patients with variant histology RCC, or any RCC histology with sarcomatoid differentiation, enrolled in a phase II clinical trial of atezolizumab and bevacizumab. Baseline circulating (plasma) inflammatory cytokines were highly correlated with one another, forming an "inflammatory module" that was increased in International Metastatic RCC Database Consortium poor-risk patients and was associated with worse progression-free survival (PFS; P = 0.028). At baseline, an elevated circulating vascular endothelial growth factor A (VEGF-A) level was associated with a lack of response (P = 0.03) and worse PFS (P = 0.021). However, a larger increase in on-treatment levels of circulating VEGF-A was associated with clinical benefit (P = 0.01) and improved overall survival (P = 0.0058). Among peripheral immune cell populations, an on-treatment decrease in circulating PD-L1+ T cells was associated with improved outcomes, with a reduction in CD4+PD-L1+ [HR, 0.62; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.49-0.91; P = 0.016] and CD8+PD-L1+ T cells (HR, 0.59; 95% CI, 0.39-0.87; P = 0.009) correlated with improved PFS. Within the tumor itself, a higher percentage of terminally exhausted (PD-1+ and either TIM-3+ or LAG-3+) CD8+ T cells was associated with worse PFS (P = 0.028). Overall, these findings support the value of tumor and blood-based immune assessments in determining therapeutic benefit for patients with RCC receiving atezolizumab plus bevacizumab and provide a foundation for future biomarker studies for patients with variant histology RCC receiving immunotherapy-based combinations., (©2023 American Association for Cancer Research.)

Introduction: The diagnosis of metastatic prostatic cancer (MPC) by fine needle aspiration (FNA) can usually be rendered by typical cytomorphologic and immunohistochemical (IHC) features. However, MPC diagnosis may be complicated by transformation to atypical phenotypes such as small cell carcinoma, typically under pressure from androgen deprivation therapy (ADT). Predictive and prognostic biomarkers can also be assessed by IHC. This study illustrates how careful assessment of cytologic and biomarker features may provide therapeutic and prognostic information in MPC., Design: We reviewed our anatomic pathology archives for MPC diagnosed by FNA from January 2014 to June 2021. Clinical histories, cytology slides, and cell blocks were reviewed. Extensive IHC biomarker workup was performed, including markers of prostate lineage, cell-cycle dysfunction, Ki-67, neuroendocrine markers, PDL1, and androgen receptor splice variant 7. Cases were reclassified into three categories: conventional type, intermediary type, and high-grade neuroendocrine carcinoma (HGNC)., Results: Eighteen patients were identified. Twelve had conventional MPC, including six of six ADT-naive patients. Six of twelve (50%) with prior ADT were reclassified as intermediary or HGNC. Four intermediary cases included two with squamous differentiation and two with pro-proliferative features. Two HGNC cases had typical small cell carcinoma cytomorphology. Expression of PDL1 was identified in two cases and ARv7 in three cases. Five of five intermediary and HGNC patients died of disease versus six of eleven with with conventional type., Conclusions: Aggressive cytomorphologic variants were commonly identified in patients with prior ADT. Identification of nonconventional cytomorphology and increased proliferation can provide important prognostic information. Recognition of these changes is important for an accurate diagnosis, and the identification of high-grade variants can affect therapeutic decision-making. Clinically actionable biomarkers such as PDL1 and ARv7 can be assessed by IHC., (© 2022 The Authors. Cancer Cytopathology published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American Cancer Society.)

Purpose: Cediranib, a pan-vascular endothelial growth factor receptor inhibitor, suppresses expression of homologous recombination repair (HRR) genes and increases sensitivity to poly-(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibition in preclinical models. We investigated whether cediranib combined with olaparib improves the clinical outcomes of patients with prostate cancer., Methods: Patients with progressive metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) were randomly assigned 1:1 to arm A: cediranib 30 mg once daily plus olaparib 200 mg twice daily or arm B: olaparib 300 mg twice daily alone. The primary end point was radiographic progression-free survival (rPFS) in the intention-to-treat patients. The secondary end points were rPFS in patients with HRR-deficient and HRR-proficient mCRPC., Results: In the intention-to-treat set of 90 patients, median rPFS was 8.5 (95% CI, 5.4 to 12.0) and 4.0 (95% CI, 3.2 to 8.5) months in arms A and B, respectively. Cediranib/olaparib significantly improved rPFS versus olaparib alone (hazard ratio [HR], 0.617; 95% CI, 0.392 to 0.969; P = .0359). Descriptive analyses showed a median rPFS of 10.6 (95% CI, 5.9 to not assessed [NA]) and 3.8 (95% CI, 2.33 to NA) months (HR, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.272 to 1.504) among patients with HRR-deficient mCRPC, and 13.8 (95% CI, 3.3 to NA) and 11.3 (95% CI, 3.8 to NA) months (HR, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.321 to 2.988) among patients with BRCA2 -mutated mCRPC in arms A and B, respectively. The incidence of grades 3-4 adverse events was 61% and 18% in arms A and B, respectively., Conclusion: Cediranib combined with olaparib improved rPFS compared with olaparib alone in men with mCRPC. This combination was associated with an increased incidence of grades 3-4 adverse events. BRCA2 -mutated subgroups treated with olaparib with or without cediranib were associated with a numerically longer median rPFS.

Purpose: A phase II study was conducted to evaluate the safety and efficacy of the combination of HER2 bispecific antibody (HER2Bi)-armed activated T cells (HER2 BAT) and programmed death 1 inhibitor, pembrolizumab., Patients and Methods: Patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) with 0 to 1 performance status and normal liver, kidney, and marrow function, pre- or post-docetaxel chemotherapy were eligible. Primary endpoint was 6-month progression-free survival (PFS). Peripheral blood mononuclear cells were obtained by a single apheresis, shipped to University of Virginia, activated with OKT3 and expanded for 14 days in IL2, harvested, and armed with HER2Bi and cryopreserved. HER2 BATs were infused twice weekly for 4 weeks and pembrolizumab was administered every 21 days for a maximum duration of 6 months starting 1 to 3 weeks prior to HER2 BATs infusion., Results: Fourteen patients were enrolled with a median age of 69 (range 57-82 years) and median PSA of 143.4 (range 8.2-4210 ng/dL). Two patients had peritoneal metastases, 1 had lymph node (LN) only metastases and 11 had bone metastases of which 7 had bone and LN metastases. All were pretreated with androgen receptor axis targeted agents and 7 (50%) had prior docetaxel chemotherapy. The toxicities were grade1-2 infusion reactions with fever, chills, headaches, nausea and/or myalgias. Primary endpoint of 6 month PFS was achieved in 5 of 14 patients (38.5%; 95% confidence interval, 19.5%-76.5%). Median PFS was 5 months and median survival was 31.6 months., Conclusions: The safety and promising efficacy makes this combination worthy of future investigation in mCRPC., (©2022 American Association for Cancer Research.)

Background: This Phase 1b study (B2151002) evaluated the PI3K/mTOR inhibitor gedatolisib (PF-05212384) in combination with other anti-tumour agents in advanced solid tumours., Methods: Patients with various malignancies were administered gedatolisib (90‒310 mg intravenously every week [QW]) plus docetaxel (arm A) or cisplatin (arm B) (each 75 mg/m 2 intravenously Q3W) or dacomitinib (30 or 45 mg/day orally). The safety and tolerability of combination therapies were assessed during dose escalation; objective response (OR) and safety were assessed during dose expansion., Results: Of 110 patients enrolled, 107 received gedatolisib combination treatment. Seven of 70 (10.0%) evaluable patients had dose-limiting toxicities; the most common was grade 3 oral mucositis (n = 3). Based upon reprioritisation of the sponsor's portfolio, dose expansion focused on arm B, gedatolisib (180 mg QW) plus cisplatin in patients (N = 22) with triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC). OR (95% CI) was achieved in four of ten patients in first-line (overall response rate 40.0% [12.2-73.8%]) and four of 12 in second/third-line (33.3% [9.9-65.1%]) settings. One patient in each TNBC arm (10%, first-line; 8.3%, second/third-line) achieved a complete response., Conclusions: Gedatolisib combination therapy showed an acceptable tolerability profile, with clinical activity at the recommended Phase 2 dose in patients with TNBC., Clinical Trial: ClinicalTrial.gov: NCT01920061., (© 2022. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature Limited.)

Prostate cancer is one of the most common malignancies in men. Over time, it can metastasize and become lethal once it exhausts hormonal therapies and transitions into castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC). Several therapies have been recently approved for advanced prostate cancer, but identifying biomarkers for current treatments and searching for more effective treatments are urgently needed. Liquid biopsy is a powerful tool for isolating genetic material, proteins, and whole tumor cells from the blood. In recent decades, this technology has rapidly advanced, allowing for better insights into the pathogenesis and treatment response in different stages of prostate cancer. In this review, we summarize important clinical studies involving liquid biopsies in prostate cancer with a focus on advanced disease, notably regarding circulating tumor DNA, circulating tumor cells, and exosomes. We highlight the progress and the challenges that still exist for these technologies. Finally, we discuss promising avenues that will further expand the importance of liquid biopsy in the care for prostate cancer patients., Competing Interests: Dr Ulka N Vaishampayan reports personal fees from AAA, grants from BMS, grants, personal fees from Merck, personal fees from Sanofi, personal fees from Exelixis, personal fees from Bayer, personal fees from Aveo, personal fees from Gilead, personal fees from Pfizer, outside the submitted work. Dr Pedro C Barata reports (Institutional) consulting services from EMD Serono, Astellas, Eisai, Janseen, (Institutional) consulting services; (Institutional) educational grant from Dendreon, (Institutional) consulting services from Pfizer, (Institutional) consulting services; (Institutional) contracted research from Seagen, (Institutional) consulting services from BMS and from Bayer, (Institutional) consulting services; (Institutional) contracted research from Guardant and from BlueEarth Diagnostics, (Institutional) consulting services from Myovant, (Institutional) consulting services; (Institutional) contracted research from Caris Life Sciences, during the conduct of the study. The authors report no conflicts of interest in this work., (© 2022 Jang et al.)

Background: Trametinib is an oral MEK 1/2 inhibitor, with a single agent recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D) of 2 mg daily (QD). This study was designed to evaluate RP2D, maximum tolerated dose (MTD), and pharmacokinetic (PK) profile of trametinib in patients with advanced solid tumors who had various degrees of hepatic dysfunction (HD)., Methods: Advanced cancer patients were stratified into 4 HD groups based on Organ Dysfunction Working Group hepatic function stratification criteria: normal (Norm), mild (Mild), moderate (Mod), severe (Sev). Dose escalation was based on "3 + 3" design within each HD group. PK samples were collected at cycle 1 days 15-16., Results: Forty-six patients were enrolled with 44 evaluable for safety [Norm=17, Mild=7, Mod (1.5 mg)=4, Mod (2 mg)=5, Sev (1 mg)=9, Sev (1.5 mg)=2] and 22 for PK analysis. Treatment related adverse events were consistent with prior trametinib studies. No treatment related deaths occurred. Dose limiting toxicities (DLTs) were evaluable in 15 patients (Mild=6, Mod (1.5 mg)=3, Mod (2 mg)=2, Sev (1 mg)=3 and Sev (1.5 mg)=1). One DLT (grade 3 acneiform rash) was observed in a Sev patient (1.5 mg). Dose interruptions or reductions due to treatment related adverse events occurred in 15 patients (34%) [Norm=9, 53%; Mild=2, 29%; Mod (1.5 mg)=1, 33%; Mod (2 mg)=2, 33%; Sev (1 mg)=1, 11%; Sev (1.5 mg)=1; 50%]. There were no significant differences across HD groups for all PK parameters when trametinib was normalized to 2 mg. However, only limited PK data were available for the Mod (n = 3) and Sev (n = 3) groups compared to Norm (n = 10) and Mild (n = 6) groups. Trametinib is heavily protein bound, with no correlation between serum albumin level and unbound trametinib fraction (p = 0.26)., Conclusions: RP2D for trametinib in Mild HD patients is 2 mg QD. There are insufficient number of evaluable patients due to difficulty of patient accrual to declare RP2D and MTD for Mod and Sev HD groups. DLTs were not observed in the highest dose cohorts that reached three evaluable patients - 1.5 mg QD in Mod group, and 1 mg QD in Sev group., Trial Registration: This study was registered in the ClinicalTrials.gov website ( NCT02070549 ) on February 25, 2014. ., (© 2022. The Author(s).)

Background: Fit patients with metastatic urothelial carcinoma (mUC) receive first-line platinum-based combination chemotherapy (fPBC) as standard of care and may receive additional later-line chemotherapy after progression. Our study compares outcomes with subsequent platinum-based chemotherapy (sPBC) versus subsequent non-platinum-based chemotherapy (sNPBC)., Materials and Methods: Patients from 27 international centers in the Retrospective International Study of Cancers of the Urothelium (RISC) who received fPBC for mUC and at least two cycles of subsequent chemotherapy were included in this study. A multivariable Cox proportional hazards model compared overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS)., Results: One hundred thirty-five patients received sPBC and 161 received sNPBC. Baseline characteristics were similar between groups, except patients who received sPBC had higher baseline hemoglobin, higher disease control rate with fPBC, and longer time since fPBC. OS was superior in the sPBC group (median 7.9 vs 5.5 months) in a model adjusting for comorbidity burden, performance status, liver metastases, number of fPBC cycles received, best response to fPBC, and time since fPBC (hazard ratio, 0.72; 95% confidence interval, 0.53-0.98; p = .035). There was no difference in PFS. More patients in the sPBC group achieved disease control than in the sNPBC group (57.4% vs 44.8%; p = .041). Factors associated with achieving disease control in the sPBC group but not the sNPBC group included longer time since fPBC, achieving disease control with fPBC, and absence of liver metastases., Conclusion: After receiving fPBC for mUC, patients who received sPBC had better OS and disease control. This may help inform the choice of subsequent chemotherapy in patients with mUC., Implications for Practice: Patients with progressive metastatic urothelial carcinoma after first-line platinum-based combination chemotherapy may now receive immuno-oncology agents, erdafitinib, enfortumab vedotin, or sacituzumab govitecan-hziy; however, those ineligible for these later-line therapies or who progress after receiving them may be considered for subsequent chemotherapy. In this retrospective study of 296 patients, survival outcomes and disease control rates were better in those receiving subsequent platinum-based rechallenge compared with non-platinum-based chemotherapy, suggesting that patients should receive platinum rechallenge if clinically able. Disease control with platinum rechallenge was more likely with prior first-line platinum having achieved disease control, longer time since first-line platinum, and absence of liver metastases., (© 2021 AlphaMed Press.)

Background: Phase 2 trial endpoints that can be utilized in high-risk biochemical recurrence (BCR) after prostatectomy as a way of more rapidly identifying treatments for phase 3 trials are urgently needed. The efficacy of abiraterone acetate plus prednisone (AAP) in BCR is unknown., Objective: To compare the rates of complete biochemical responses after testosterone recovery after 8 mo of AAP and degarelix, a gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonist, alone or in combination., Design Setting and Participants: Patients with BCR (prostate-specific antigen [PSA] ≥1.0 ng/ml, PSA doubling time ≤9 mo, no metastases on standard imaging, and testosterone ≥150 ng/dl) after prostatectomy (with or without prior radiotherapy) were included in this study., Intervention: Patients were randomized to AAP (arm 1), AAP with degarelix (arm 2), or degarelix (arm 3) for 8 mo, and monitored for 18 mo., Outcome Measurements and Statistical Analysis: The primary endpoint was undetectable PSA with testosterone >150 ng/dl at 18 mo. Secondary endpoints were undetectable PSA at 8 mo and time to testosterone recovery., Results and Limitations: For the 122 patients enrolled, no difference was found between treatments for the primary endpoint (arm 1: 5.1% [95% confidence interval {CI}: 1-17%], arm 2: 17.1% [95% CI: 7-32%], arm 3: 11.9% [95% CI: 4-26%]; arm 1 vs 2, p = 0.93; arm 2 vs 3, p = 0.36). AAP therapy showed the shortest median time to testosterone recovery (36.0 wk [95% CI: 35.9-36.1]) relative to degarelix (52.9 wk [95% CI: 49.0-56.0], p < 0.001). Rates of undetectable PSA at 8 mo differed between AAP with degarelix and degarelix alone ( p = 0.04), but not between AAP alone and degarelix alone ( p = 0.12). Limitations of this study include a lack of long-term follow-up., Conclusions: Rates of undetectable PSA levels with testosterone recovery were similar between arms, suggesting that increased androgen suppression with AAP and androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) is unlikely to eradicate recurrent disease compared with ADT alone., Patient Summary: We evaluated the use of abiraterone acetate plus prednisone (AAP) and androgen deprivation therapy (ADT), AAP alone, or ADT alone in men with biochemically recurrent, nonmetastatic prostate cancer. While more men who received the combination had an undetectable prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level at 8 mo on treatment, once men came off treatment and testosterone level rose, there was no difference in the rates of undetectable PSA levels. This suggests that the combination is not able to eradicate disease any better than ADT alone., (© 2021 The Authors.)

Biomarkers are needed in patients with non-clear cell renal cell carcinomas (NC-RCC), particularly papillary renal cell carcinoma, in order to inform on initial treatment selection and identify potentially novel targets for therapy. We enrolled 108 patients in ASPEN, an international randomized open-label phase 2 trial of patients with metastatic papillary, chromophobe, or unclassified NC-RCC treated with the mTOR inhibitor everolimus (n=57) or the vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) receptor inhibitor sunitinib (n=51), stratified by MSKCC risk and histology. The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS) and secondary efficacy endpoints for this exploratory biomarker analysis were radiographic progression-free survival (rPFS) defined by intention-to-treat using the RECIST 1.1 criteria and radiographic response rates. Tissue biomarkers (n=78) of mTOR pathway activation (phospho-S6 and -Akt, c-kit) and VEGF pathway activation (HIF-1α, c-MET) were prospectively explored in tumor tissue by immunohistochemistry prior to treatment and associated with clinical outcomes. We found that S6 activation was more common in poor risk NC-RCC tumors and S6/Akt activation was associated with worse PFS and OS outcomes with both everolimus and sunitinib, while c-kit was commonly expressed in chromophobe tumors and associated with improved outcomes with both agents. C-MET was commonly expressed in papillary tumors and was associated with lower rates of radiographic response but did not predict PFS for either agent. In multivariable analysis, both pAkt and c-kit were statistically significant prognostic biomarkers of OS. No predictive biomarkers of treatment response were identified for clinical outcomes. Most biomarker subgroups had improved outcomes with sunitinib as compared to everolimus.

Purpose: In patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC), resistance to androgen receptor (AR)-targeted therapies, such as enzalutamide, remains an issue. Inactivation of inhibitory PTEN activates PI3K/AKT signaling and contributes to resistance to androgen deprivation therapy and poor outcomes. Therefore, dual targeting of AR and PI3K/AKT pathways may limit tumor growth and reverse resistance., Patients and Methods: In this phase I study (NCT02215096), patients with PTEN-deficient mCRPC who progressed on prior enzalutamide received once-daily enzalutamide 160 mg plus PI3Kβ inhibitor GSK2636771 at 300 mg initial dose, with escalation or de-escalation in 100-mg increments, followed by dose expansion. Primary objectives were to evaluate safety/tolerability, determine the recommended phase II dose, and assess the 12-week non-progressive disease (PD) rate., Results: Overall, 37 patients were enrolled; 36 received ≥1 dose of GSK2636771 (200 mg: n = 22; 300 mg: n = 12; 400 mg: n = 2) plus 160 mg enzalutamide. Dose-limiting toxicities occurred in 5 patients (200 mg: n = 1; 300 mg: n = 2, 400 mg: n = 2). No new or unexpected adverse events or evidence of drug-drug interaction were observed. At the recommended dose of GSK2636771 (200 mg) plus enzalutamide, the 12-week non-PD rate was 50% (95% confidence interval: 28.2-71.8, n = 22); 1 (3%) patient achieved a radiographic partial response lasting 36 weeks. Four of 34 (12%) patients had prostate-specific antigen reduction of ≥50%., Conclusions: Although there was acceptable safety and tolerability with GSK2636771 plus enzalutamide in patients with PTEN-deficient mCRPC after failing enzalutamide, limited antitumor activity was observed., (©2021 American Association for Cancer Research.)

Background: Non-clear cell renal cell carcinoma (nccRCC) accounts for ≤20% of RCC cases. Lenvatinib (a multitargeted tyrosine kinase inhibitor) in combination with everolimus (an mTOR inhibitor) is approved for the treatment of advanced RCC after one prior antiangiogenic therapy., Objective: To determine the safety and efficacy of lenvatinib plus everolimus as a first-line treatment for patients with advanced nccRCC., Design, Setting, and Participants: This open-label, single-arm, multicenter, phase 2 study enrolled patients with unresectable advanced or metastatic nccRCC and no prior anticancer therapy for advanced disease., Intervention: Lenvatinib (18 mg) plus everolimus (5 mg) orally once daily., Outcome Measurements and Statistical Analysis: The primary endpoint was the objective response rate (ORR) as assessed by investigators according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1. Secondary endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and safety assessments. The 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for ORRs were calculated using the two-sided Clopper-Pearson method. Median PFS and median OS were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier product-limit method and their 95% CIs were estimated via a generalized Brookmeyer and Crowley method., Results and Limitations: The study (start date: February 20, 2017) enrolled 31 patients with nccRCC (papillary, n = 20; chromophobe, n = 9; unclassified, n = 2). At the data cutoff date (July 17, 2019), the best overall response was a partial response (eight patients: papillary, n = 3; chromophobe, n = 4; unclassified, n = 1) for an overall ORR of 26% (95% CI 12-45). Median PFS was 9.2 mo (95% CI 5.5-not estimable), and median OS was 15.6 mo (95% CI 9.2-not estimable). The most common treatment-emergent adverse events were fatigue (71%), diarrhea (58%), decreased appetite (55%), nausea (55%), and vomiting (52%). Limitations include the small sample size and single-arm design., Conclusions: Lenvatinib plus everolimus showed promising anticancer activity in patients with advanced nccRCC with an ORR of 26% and is worthy of further study. The safety profile was consistent with the established profile of the study-drug combination., Patient Summary: We examined the combination of lenvatinib plus everolimus as the first therapy for 31 patients who had advanced nccRCC. We found that this treatment seemed effective, because most patients had a decrease in tumor size and manageable treatment-related side effects., Clinical Registration: This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.Gov as NCT02915783., (Copyright © 2021 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Lessons Learned: Cediranib and olaparib combination did not result in clinically meaningful activity in patients with metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma without known BRCA mutation., Background: Cediranib, a vascular endothelial growth factor receptor inhibitor, suppresses expression of BRCA1/2 and RAD51 inducing homologous recombination DNA repair deficiency (HRD) in several cancer cell lines and xenograft models [1]. Olaparib provides a clinical benefit in patients with metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma (mPDAC) with germline BRCA mutation (gBRCAmt) [2]. We hypothesized that cediranib induces HRD in the absence of gBRCAmt and synergizes with olaparib, resulting in an objective response in patients with mPDAC., Methods: Patients with mPDAC with at least one prior systemic chemotherapy were enrolled. Patients with known gBRCAmt were excluded. Patients took cediranib 30 mg daily and olaparib 200 mg twice daily, orally. The primary endpoint was objective response (OR) rate., Results: Nineteen patients received the study drugs. Seven patients came off treatment before the first restaging scan: six because of clinical progression and one because of an adverse event. No OR was observed. Six patients had stable disease (SD) as a best overall response. The median duration of SD was 3.1 months. The median overall survival was 3.4 months. Common treatment-related adverse events were fatigue, hypertension, and diarrhea., Conclusion: Cediranib and olaparib combination did not result in clinically meaningful activity in patients with mPDAC without gBRCAmt., (© 2021 The Authors. The Oncologist published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of AlphaMed Press.)

Purpose: Biomarkers are needed in patients with non-clear cell renal cell carcinomas (NC-RCC) to inform treatment selection but also to identify novel therapeutic targets. We thus sought to profile circulating angiokines in the context of a randomized treatment trial of everolimus versus sunitinib., Patients and Methods: ASPEN (NCT01108445) was an international, randomized, open-label phase II trial of patients with metastatic papillary, chromophobe, or unclassified NC-RCC with no prior systemic therapy. Patients were randomized to everolimus or sunitinib and treated until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. The primary endpoint was radiographic progression-free survival (PFS) defined by RECIST 1.1. Plasma angiokines were collected at baseline, cycle 3, and progression and associated with PFS and overall survival (OS)., Results: We enrolled 108 patients, 51 received sunitinib and 57 everolimus; of these, 99 patients had evaluable plasma for 23 angiokines. At the final data cutoff, 94 PFS and 64 mortality events had occurred. Angiokines that were independently adversely prognostic for OS were osteopontin (OPN), TIMP-1, thrombospondin-2 (TSP-2), hepatocyte growth factor (HGF), and VCAM-1, and these were also associated with poor-risk disease. Stromal derived factor 1 (SDF-1) was associated with improved survival. OPN was also significantly associated with worse PFS. No statistically significant angiokine-treatment outcome interactions were observed for sunitinib or everolimus. Angiopoeitin-2 (Ang-2), CD-73, HER-3, HGF, IL6, OPN, PIGF, PDGF-AA, PDGF-BB, SDF-1, TGF-b1-b2, TGFb-R3, TIMP-1, TSP-2, VCAM-1, VEGF, and VEGF-R1 levels increased with progression on everolimus, while CD-73, ICAM-1, IL6, OPN, PlGF, SDF-1, TGF-b2, TGFb-R3, TIMP-1, TSP-2, VEGF, VEGF-D, and VCAM-1 increased with progression on sunitinib., Conclusions: In patients with metastatic NC-RCC, we identified several poor prognosis angiokines and immunomodulatory chemokines during treatment with sunitinib or everolimus, particularly OPN., (©2021 American Association for Cancer Research.)

Background: In metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC), assessing treatment response and bone lesions with technetium-99m is limited by image resolution and subjectivity. We evaluated bone scan lesion area (BSLA), a quantitative imaging assessment of response in patients with mCRPC receiving radium-223 alone or in combination with androgen receptor pathway inhibitors (abiraterone/prednisone or enzalutamide)., Patients and Methods: This randomized, non-comparative phase IIa three-arm trial (NCT02034552) evaluated technetium-99m-based BSLA response rate (RR), safety, radiologic progression-free survival (rPFS), and time to first symptomatic skeletal event (SSE) in men with mCRPC and bone metastases receiving radium-223 with/without abiraterone/prednisone or enzalutamide. The primary endpoint was week 24 BSLA RR., Results: Overall, 63 patients received treatment (abiraterone/prednisone combination, n = 22; enzalutamide combination, n = 22; radium-223 monotherapy, n = 19). Median treatment duration (first to last dose of any study treatment) was 12 months (abiraterone/prednisone combination), 10 months (enzalutamide combination), and 3 months (radium-223 monotherapy). Week 24 BSLA RR was 58% [80% confidence interval (CI) 41% to 74%; one-sided P < 0.0001; 11/19 patients] with abiraterone/prednisone combination, 50% (32% to 68%; one-sided P < 0.0001; 8/16 patients) with enzalutamide combination, and 22% (10% to 40%; one-sided P = 0.0109; 4/18 patients) with radium-223 monotherapy. Median rPFS was not evaluable for combination arms and 4 months (80% CI 4 to 12) for monotherapy. SSEs were reported in 32% of patients; median time to first SSE was not estimable. Fatigue and back pain were the most commonly reported treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs); more patients receiving combination therapy than monotherapy had TEAEs. Fractures were reported in 18% receiving abiraterone/prednisone, 32% receiving enzalutamide, and 11% receiving radium-223 monotherapy. Fracture rates were lower in patients taking bone health agents versus not taking bone health agents at baseline., Conclusions: Technetium-99m imaging BSLA may offer objective, quantifiable assessment of isotope uptake changes, and potentially treatment response, in patients with mCRPC and bone metastases treated with radium-223 alone or in combination with abiraterone/prednisone or enzalutamide. In this largely treatment-naive population, BSLA RR was numerically lower with radium-223 monotherapy versus combination therapy, indicating a limited role as first-line treatment. Use of radium-223 should follow evidence-based treatment guidelines and the licensed indication., Competing Interests: Disclosure DPP has received honoraria from Advanced Accelerator Applications, Amgen, Astellas, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Clovis Oncology, Eli Lilly, Exelixis, Incyte, Janssen, Pfizer, Pharmacyclics, Roche, Seattle Genetics, and UroGen; and has received research grants/funding from Advanced Accelerator Applications, Astellas, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Clovis Oncology, Eli Lilly, Endocyte, Genentech, Innocrin, MedImmune, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Progenics, Roche, Sanofi Aventis, and Seattle Genetics. UNV has received honoraria, has acted as an advisor/consultant, and has received research grants/funding from Bayer, Sanofi Inc., Exelixis, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Pfizer, and EMD Serono Inc. CSH has acted as an advisor/consultant for Aptevo, Asana, Astellas, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Blue Earth Diagnostics, Churchill Pharma, Clovis Oncology, Dendreon, Endocyte, Ferring, Hinova Pharma, Janssen, Myriad Genetics, Orion Corporation, and Pfizer; has received research grants/funding from Aptevo, Bayer, Aragon Pharma, Astellas, AstraZeneca, Dendreon, Genentech, Hoffman-La Roche, Medivation, Sanofi, and Pfizer; and has received travel, accommodation, and expenses from Bayer, Blue Earth Diagnostics, Clovis Oncology, Ferring, Genentech, Hinova, Janssen, Myriad Genetics, Orion Corporation, and Pfizer. CA has acted as a speaker bureau/expert testimony for Sanofi. NAD has acted as a speaker bureau/expert testimony for Astellas/Pfizer and Janssen. BAM has received honoraria, travel, and accommodation expenses, and acted as an advisor/consultant for Astellas, Amgen, Bayer, Janssen, and Pfizer; and has received grants/funding from Astellas, Bayer, Janssen, and Pfizer. DIQ has received research grants/funding from Seattle Genetics, MSD, and Novartis; has acted as an advisor/consultant for Astellas, AstraZeneca, Bayer, BMS, Dendreon, Exelixis, Roche, Janssen, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, and Sanofi; and has received travel, accommodation, and expenses from Pfizer, MSD, AstraZeneca, BMS, and Roche. OS reports grand and/or fees from Advanced Accelerator Applications, Astellas, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Bellicum, Blue Earth Diagnostics, Inc., Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Constellation, Dendreon, EMD Serono, Innocrin, Invitae, Johnson & Johnson, Merck, Myovant, Pfizer, Sanofi, and SOTIO. VJW, JS, and LT are employees of Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals. All other authors have declared no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2021. Published by Elsevier Ltd.)

Background: Optimal chemotherapy for patients who received cisplatin for localized urothelial carcinoma (UC) and develop metastatic disease is unclear. We compared the efficacy of platinum-based (PBC) versus non-platinum-based (NPBC) first-line chemotherapy for metastasis., Patients and Methods: Data were collected from the Retrospective International Study of Cancers of the Urothelial Tract (RISC), a database of 3024 patients from 28 international academic centers from 2005 to 2012. Patient inclusion criteria included: (1) predominant UC; (2) any primary tumor site; (3) cT2-4, cN0-N2, cM0; (4) prior receipt of perioperative/radiation cisplatin-containing chemotherapy; and (5) receipt of cytotoxic chemotherapy in the first-line metastatic setting. Multivariate Cox proportional hazards models were used to show progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) from the first day of chemotherapy for metastatic disease to date of censor., Results: Eligibility criteria was met by 132 patients (n = 74 PBC; n = 58 NPBC). The median OS was 8.13 months (interquartile range, 4.87-16.64 months) and 8.77 months (interquartile range, 4.01-13.49 months) for PBC and NPBC, respectively. Neither OS (hazard ratio [HR], 1.04; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.64-1.69; P = .87) nor PFS (HR, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.56-1.31; P = .48) differed for PBC versus NPBC. However, for patients who received chemotherapy more than a year after perioperative/radiation chemotherapy, OS was superior for PBC over NPBC (HR, 0.31; 95% CI, 0.10-0.92; P = .03)., Conclusions: There is no significant outcome difference between PBC and NPBC in patients with metastatic UC who previously received cisplatin-based chemotherapy for localized disease. However, if over a year has elapsed, return to PBC is associated with superior OS., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: Advanced pancreatic cancer remains a lethal, incurable malignancy. Chemotherapy is the mainstay of systemic therapy consideration in metastatic pancreas cancer. Homologous recombinant DNA repair mutations are reported in about 7% of pancreas cancer cases and have rapidly emerged as actionable mutations., Areas Covered: A review was conducted of publications of PARP inhibitors in pancreatic malignancies with a focus on clinical trials with olaparib. This included a review of the phase II and phase III clinical trials of olaparib in pancreatic cancer., Expert Opinion: Olaparib was compared to placebo in a randomized double blind trial in cases with advanced pancreatic cancer and germline BRCA1/2 mutations, with a clinical response or stable disease after at least 16 weeks of platinum based chemotherapy. Olaparib significantly improved progression free survival, [HR = -.53, p = 0.0035] but did not improve overall survival. No differences in quality of life were noted between the two arms. Adverse events from olaparib were noted in 40% of treated patients. Objective response rate was 20% in olaparib arm and 10% in placebo treated arm. A careful consideration of the risks and benefits of this personalized therapy is advisable, prior to clinical application in germline BRCA1/2 mutated advanced pancreatic cancer.

Neoantigens are critical targets of antitumor T-cell responses. The ATLAS bioassay was developed to identify neoantigens empirically by expressing each unique patient-specific tumor mutation individually in Escherichia coli , pulsing autologous dendritic cells in an ordered array, and testing the patient's T cells for recognition in an overnight assay. Profiling of T cells from patients with lung cancer revealed both stimulatory and inhibitory responses to individual neoantigens. In the murine B16F10 melanoma model, therapeutic immunization with ATLAS-identified stimulatory neoantigens protected animals, whereas immunization with peptides associated with inhibitory ATLAS responses resulted in accelerated tumor growth and abolished efficacy of an otherwise protective vaccine. A planned interim analysis of a clinical study testing a poly-ICLC adjuvanted personalized vaccine containing ATLAS-identified stimulatory neoantigens showed that it is well tolerated. In an adjuvant setting, immunized patients generated both CD4 + and CD8 + T-cell responses, with immune responses to 99% of the vaccinated peptide antigens. SIGNIFICANCE: Predicting neoantigens in silico has progressed, but empirical testing shows that T-cell responses are more nuanced than straightforward MHC antigen recognition. The ATLAS bioassay screens tumor mutations to uncover preexisting, patient-relevant neoantigen T-cell responses and reveals a new class of putatively deleterious responses that could affect cancer immunotherapy design. This article is highlighted in the In This Issue feature, p. 521 ., (©2021 American Association for Cancer Research.)

Neuroendocrine transdifferentiation of high-grade prostate cancer (PCA-NT) comprises a morphologic and immunophenotypic transition from conventional adenocarcinoma towards high-grade neuroendocrine/small cell carcinoma. This phenomenon is frequently observed post androgen deprivation and/or radiotherapy, but de novo instances are increasingly recognized. Herein, we report a series of de novo PCA-NT focusing on characteristic morphologic, immunophenotypic and clinical features. Treatment naïve PCA-NT were identified. IHC for PSA, NKX3.1, Chromogranin, Synaptophysin, Cyclin D1, RB and Ki67 were performed. Radiology, treatment and follow-up data were reviewed. Sixteen patients were included. Apart from focal areas of high-grade prostate cancer with acinar features (reminiscent of Grade Group 5 disease), extensive areas with sheets of cells with deep amphophilic/basophilic cytoplasm, enlarged, hyperchromatic nuclei with granular chromatin and inconspicuous to prominent nucleoli with high mitotic activity were identified. Immunohistochemistry showed patchy NKX3.1, patchy PSA, variable Synaptophysin and Chromogranin; RB and CyclinD1 showed loss of expression. Ki67 showed high proliferative index, in most cases. Adverse radiologic findings and metastases were documented in most cases. Two patients died of disease. De novo PCA-NT exhibits high-grade nuclei, high mitotic activity, reduced PSA expression with high Ki67 and functional inactivation of RB1 pathway, suggesting transition from androgen-driven to proliferation-driven phenotype. Most cases presented at advanced stage with adverse radiological findings, metastasis at time of diagnosis, and high mortality. In light of their prognostic and therapeutic implications, pathologists may need to maintain a sensitive threshold for performing immunostains-in particular, Ki67 and CyclinD1-when presented with such cases in their day to day clinical practice.

Background: Cabozantinib is approved for metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) based on the METEOR and CABOSUN trials. However, real-world effectiveness and dosing patterns of cabozantinib are not well characterized., Methods: Patients with mRCC treated with cabozantinib between 2011 and 2019 were identified and stratified using the International mRCC Database Consortium (IMDC) risk groups. First- (1L), second- (2L), third- (3L), and fourth-line (4L) overall response rate (ORR), time to treatment failure (TTF), and overall survival (OS) were analyzed. Dose reduction rates and their association with TTF and OS were determined., Results: A total of 413 patients were identified. The ORRs across 1L to 4L were 32%, 26%, 25%, and 29%, respectively, and the median TTF rates were 8.3, 7.3, 7.0, and 8.0 months, respectively. The median OS (mOS) rates in 1L to 4L were 30.7, 17.8, 12.6, and 14.9 months, respectively. For patients treated with 1L PD(L)1 combination agent (n = 31), 2L cabozantinib had ORR of 22%, median TTF of 5.4 months, and mOS of 17.4 months. About 50% (129/258) of patients required dose reductions. The TTF and mOS were significantly longer for patients who required dose reduction vs. patients who did not, with an adjusted hazard ratio of 0.37 (95% CI 0.202-0.672, p < 0.01) and 0.46 (95% CI 0.215-0.980, p = 0.04), respectively. Limitations include the retrospective study design and the lack of central radiology review., Conclusion: The ORR and TTF of cabozantinib were maintained from the 1L to 4L settings. Dose reductions due to toxicity were associated with improved TTF and OS. Cabozantinib has clinical activity after 1L Immuno-oncology combination agents., (© 2021 The Authors. Cancer Medicine published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Importance: Black patients have been underrepresented in prospective clinical trials of advanced prostate cancer. This study evaluated the efficacy of enzalutamide compared with bicalutamide, with planned subset analysis of Black patients with metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC), which is a disease state responsive to androgen deprivation therapy (ADT)., Objective: To compare the efficacy of enzalutamide vs bicalutamide in combination with ADT in men with mHSPC, with a subset analysis of Black patients., Design, Setting, and Participants: In this randomized clinical trial, a phase 2 screening design enabled a nondefinitive comparison of the primary outcome by treatment. Patients were stratified by race (Black or other) and bone pain (present or absent). Accrual of at least 30% Black patients was required. This multicenter trial was conducted at 4 centers in the US. Men with mHSPC with no history of seizures and adequate marrow, renal, and liver function were eligible. Data analysis was performed from February 2019 to March 2020., Interventions: Participants were randomized 1:1 to receive oral enzalutamide (160 mg daily) or bicalutamide (50 mg daily) in addition to ADT., Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point was the 7-month prostate-specific antigen (PSA) response (SMPR) rate, a previously accepted surrogate for overall survival (OS) outcome. Secondary end points included adverse reactions, time to PSA progression, and OS., Results: A total of 71 men (median [range] age, 65 [51-86] years) were enrolled; 29 (41%) were Black, 41 (58%) were White, and 1 (1%) was Asian. Thirty-six patients were randomized to receive enzalutamide, and 35 were randomized to receive bicalutamide. Twenty-six patients (37%) had bone pain and 37 patients (52%) had extensive disease. SMPR was achieved in 30 of 32 patients (94%; 95% CI, 80%-98%) taking enzalutamide and 17 of 26 patients (65%; 95% CI, 46%-81%) taking bicalutamide (P = .008) (difference, 29%; 95% CI, 5%-50%). Among Black patients, the SMPR was 93% (95% CI, 69%-99%) among those taking enzalutamide and 42% (95% CI, 19%-68%) among those taking bicalutamide (P = .009); among non-Black patients, the SMPR was 94% (95% CI, 74%-99%) among those taking enzalutamide and 86% (95% CI, 60%-96%) among those taking bicalutamide. The 12-month PSA response rates were 84% with enzalutamide and 34% with bicalutamide., Conclusions and Relevance: The findings of this randomized clinical trial comparing enzalutamide with bicalutamide suggest that enzalutamide is associated with improved outcomes compared with bicalutamide, in terms of the rate and duration of PSA response, in Black patients with mHSPC., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02058706.

Background: Trials of adjuvant chemotherapy following radical cystectomy generally require chemotherapy to start within 90 days postoperatively. However, it is unclear, whether the interval between surgery and start of adjuvant therapy (S-AC-interval) impacts the oncological outcome., Methods: Using the Retrospective International Study of Invasive/Advanced Cancer of the Urothelium (RISC) data base, we identified patients who underwent radical cystectomy for muscle invasive bladder cancer and subsequent adjuvant chemotherapy. Univariate analysis of patient characteristics, surgical factors and tumor characteristics regarding their impact on S-AC-interval was performed using Kruskal-Wallis testing and Fisher's exact test. Analysis of progression-free (PFS) and overall survival (OS) (follow-up time beginning with the start date of adjuvant chemotherapy) was analyzed in relation to S-AC-interval (continuous and dichotomous with a cut-off at 90 days) using Kaplan-Meier method and COX regression analysis., Results: We identified 238 eligible patients (83.5% male, mean age: 63.4 years, 76.1% T3/T4, 66.4% pN+, 14.7% R+, 70.6% urothelial carcinoma, 71% cisplatin-based adjuvant chemotherapy). The majority of patients (n = 207, 87%) started chemotherapy within 90 days after surgery. Median S-AC-interval was 57 days (interquartile range 32.8). S-AC-interval did not have consistent association with any patient/tumor characteristics or surgery related factors (type of surgery, urinary diversion). Survival analysis using continuous S-AC-interval revealed a trend toward an impact of S-AC-interval on OS (hazard ratio 1.004, 95% confidence ratio 0.9997-1.0084, P = 0.071). With regards to PFS, that impact was shown to be statistically significant (hazard ratio 1.004, 95% confidence ratio 1.0003-1.0075, P = 0.032). In multivariate analysis, however, S-AC-interval was negated by tumor and patient related factors (pathological T-stage, N-stage, ECOG performance status). Accounting for eligibility criteria defined in some clinical trials, we extended our analysis dividing S-AC-interval in ≤90 and >90 days. Although we could confirm the trend toward better outcome in patients with a shorter S-AC interval in dichotomous analysis, neither differences in OS nor in PFS reached statistical significance (P = 0.438 and P = 0.056)., Conclusions: In a large multi-institutional experience, 87% of patients who received adjuvant chemotherapy received it within the guideline recommended window of 90 days. While it was not possible to determine whether this is the optimal cut-off, early start of adjuvant chemotherapy seems to be reasonable. Regarding prognosis, tumor-related pathological factors abrogated the importance of the S-AC-interval in our analysis., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Recently, mutations in speckle-type pox virus and zinc finger protein (SPOP) gene (mutant SPOP [mtSPOP]) have been associated with improved outcomes to abiraterone in the castration-resistant setting. We hypothesized that mtSPOP would be associated with improved outcomes to systemic therapy in men with de novo metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer (d-mCSPC). Retrospective data of newly diagnosed d-mCSPC patients were collected from four institutions. Eligibility criteria included standard androgen deprivation therapy without intensification, and SPOP mutational status (mtSPOP or wild-type SPOP [wtSPOP]) determination by targeted next-generation sequencing from tumor biopsies. A total of 121 men (25 mtSPOP [21%] and 96 wtSPOP [79%]) were included. After adjusting for covariates, mtSPOP was significantly associated with better median progression-free survival (35 vs 13 mo; adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 0.47; p =  0.016) and overall survival (97 vs 69 mo; adjusted HR 0.32; p =  0.027), with similar HR and p value on the univariate analysis. These findings, upon external validation, may assist with counseling and prognostication in the clinic, and inform the design of future clinical trials in this setting. PATIENT SUMMARY: : Presence of tumor mutation in speckle-type pox virus and zinc finger protein (SPOP) gene was associated with improved survival outcomes in men with de novo metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer receiving standard androgen deprivation therapy., (Copyright © 2020 European Association of Urology. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Background: Patients with residual muscle-invasive urinary tract cancer after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) have a high risk of recurrence., Objective: To retrospectively evaluate whether additional adjuvant chemotherapy (AC) improves outcomes compared with surveillance in patients with significant residual disease despite NAC., Design, Setting, and Participants: We identified 474 patients who received NAC from the Retrospective International Study of Cancers of the Urothelium database, of whom 129 had adverse residual disease (≥ypT3 and/or ypN + )., Outcome Measurements and Statistical Analysis: Time to relapse (TTR) was the primary endpoint assessed starting from 2mo after surgery to minimize immortal time bias. Secondary endpoints included overall survival (OS), incidence of AC use, and chemotherapy patterns. Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression models estimated TTR, OS, and associations with AC, adjusting for the type of NAC, age, and pathological stage in multivariable analyses., Results and Limitations: A total of 106 patients underwent surveillance, while 23 received AC. Gemcitabine-cisplatin was the most frequent regimen employed in both settings (30.4%), and the majority (82.6%) of the patients switched to a different regimen. Median follow-up was 30mo. Over 50% of patients developed a recurrence. Median TTR was 16mo (range: <1-108mo). Longer median TTR was observed with AC compared with surveillance (18 vs 10mo, p=0.06). Risk of relapse significantly decreased with AC when adjusted in multivariable analyses (p=0.01). The subgroup analyses of ypT4b/ypN + patients (AC: 19; surveillance: 50) who received AC had significantly greater median TTR (20 vs 9mo; hazard ratio 0.43; 95% confidence interval: 0.21-0.89). No difference in OS was found. Limitations include the retrospective design., Conclusions: The utilization of AC after NAC in patients with high-risk residual disease is not frequent in clinical practice but might reduce the risk of recurrence. Further investigation is needed in this high-risk population to identify optimal therapy and to improve clinical outcomes such as the ongoing adjuvant immunotherapy trials., Patient Summary: We found that administering additional chemotherapy in patients who had significant residual disease despite preoperative chemotherapy is not frequent in clinical practice. While it might reduce the risk of recurrence, it did not clearly increase overall survival. We encourage participation in the ongoing immunotherapy trials to see whether we can improve outcomes using a different type of therapy that stimulates the immune system., (Copyright © 2019. Published by Elsevier B.V.)