Search

Summary: Background: Regorafenib inhibits VEGF receptors 1, 2, and 3 and PDGF receptors like other anti-angiogenic tyrosine-kinase inhibitors approved for treatment of advanced renal-cell cancer. Regorafenib also inhibits other potentially important angiogenic kinases like TIE2, activation of which is thought to be important in tumour escape mechanisms. This phase 2, open-label, non-randomised study assessed the safety and efficacy of the multikinase inhibitor regorafenib for treatment of renal-cell carcinoma. Methods: Patients were recruited from 18 academic oncology centres across Europe and USA. Patients with previously untreated metastatic or unresectable clear-cell renal-cell carcinoma received oral regorafenib (160 mg per day) in repeating cycles of 3 weeks on, 1 week off until disease progression or until patients met the criteria for removal from study. The primary efficacy endpoint was the proportion of patients who achieved an objective overall response, assessed in all patients who were evaluable for response. The trial has finished. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00664326. Findings: The study was done between April 30, 2008, and June 1, 2011. We screened 64 patients, of whom 49 received regorafenib. Median duration of treatment was 7·1 months (range 0·7–34·4, IQR 2·5–18·0) and at the time of data cutoff, six patients (12%) were still receiving treatment. 48 patients were assessable for tumour response. 19 patients (39·6%, 90% CI 27·7–52·5) had an objective response, all of which were partial responses. Drug-related adverse events occurred in 48 patients (98%) and drug-related serious adverse events in 17 (35%). Grade 3 drug-related adverse events were common, most frequently hand and foot skin reaction (16 patients, 33%), diarrhoea (five patients, 10%), renal failure (five patients, 10%), fatigue (four patients, 8%), and hypertension (three patients, 6%). Two patients had grade 4 treatment-related adverse events: two cardiac ischaemia or infarction, one hypomagnesaemia, and one pain in the chest or thorax. Four patients died during study treatment or within 30 days of last dose, of which two were deemed likely to be related to the study drug. Interpretation: Regorafenib has antitumour activity as first-line treatment for metastatic or unresectable renal-cell carcinoma. The drug''s safety profile requires close monitoring. Funding: Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Summary: Five targeted agents have shown efficacy in advanced renal cell carcinoma. These agents were evaluated in pivotal phase III clinical trials using different treatment settings and different patient populations. As patients encountered in ‘real life’ clinical practice are frequently under-represented in phase III trials, making treatment decisions based on phase III data alone may have limitations. In order to support treatment decisions for patients who do not fit within the inclusion criteria of many phase III trials, physicians must consider additional data sources such as expanded access programmes, sub- and retrospective analyses, and also clinical experience. The suitability of a specific targeted agent for a given patient group, e.g. elderly, will depend on a number of factors, including disease-, patient- and treatment-related characteristics. Here, we identify the need for an individualised patient-focused approach to the management of advanced renal cell carcinoma in clinical practice. In order to optimise therapy for individual patients, we present a schema providing guidance on the wide range of parameters that should be considered when making treatment decisions. We recommend the integration of this approach into everyday clinical practice. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Abstract: Objective: To evaluate the antitumor activity and safety profile of plitidepsin administered as a 1h weekly intravenous (i.v.) infusion of 3.2mg/m2 to patients with small cell lung cancer (SCLC) who relapsed or progressed after one line of chemotherapy. Patients and methods: This was a multicenter, open-label, single-arm, exploratory, phase II clinical trial. Treatment lasted until disease progression, unacceptable toxicity, patient refusal or treatment delay for >2 weeks. Objective response rate (primary efficacy endpoint) was evaluated according to response evaluation criteria in solid tumors (RECIST). The rate of stable disease (SD) lasting for at least 6 months and time-to-event variables were secondary endpoints of efficacy. Toxicity was assessed using National Cancer Institute Common Toxicity Criteria (NCI-CTC) version 2.0. Results: Twenty pretreated SCLC patients (median age, 60 years) with extensive (n =13) or limited-stage disease (n =7) received a total of 24 treatment cycles (median, one cycle per patient; range, 1–2). Objective tumor responses were not observed and only one of the 17 evaluable patients had SD. With a median follow-up of 11.8 months, the progression-free survival and the median overall survival were 1.3 months and 4.8 months, respectively. The most troubling or common toxicities were fatigue, muscle weakness, lymphopenia, anemia (no patients showed neutropenia), and asymptomatic, non-cumulative increase of transaminases levels and alkaline phosphatase. Conclusion: This clinical trial shows that a cycle of 1h weekly i.v. infusion of plitidepsin (3.2mg/m2) was generally well tolerated other than fatigue and muscle weakness in patients with pretreated SCLC. One patient died due to multi-organ failure. The absence of antitumor activity found here precludes further studies of this plitidepsin schedule as second-line single-agent treatment of SCLC. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Abstract: Immunotherapy confers a small but significant overall survival advantage in metastatic renal cell carcinoma (RCC) but a need exists to develop more effective systemic therapies. Angiogenesis has a key role in the pathophysiology of renal cell carcinoma and vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) is an important mediator of this process. Sunitinib, sorafenib and axitinib are new agents which belong to a class of drugs called kinase inhibitors and inhibit the VEGF, platelet-derived growth factor (PDGF) and c-KIT receptor tyrosine kinases. Temsirolimus inhibits the mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR). All these agents have shown significant activity with manageable toxicity in metastatic RCC in phase 2 studies in patients generally pretreated with immunotherapy, whilst prolonged progression-free survival in a phase 3 study has been reported with sorafenib in comparison with placebo. Further phase 3 trials are recruiting and the combination of kinase inhibitors with other therapies is under investigation. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Biological therapies are claiming a place in the routine management of some solid tumours. In this review we focus on the biological treatment of melanoma and renal-cell carcinoma, identifying the background to current practice and areas of promise that may be in routine clinical use in the near future. Melanomas and renal-cell carcinomas are particularly resistant to chemotherapy and radiotherapy and are characterised by the host immune response to the tumours. For this reason there has been particular interest in the biological therapy of these diseases. Biological therapies differ from chemotherapeutic approaches in their mechanism of action, time to response, and side-effect profiles. Although biological treatment has a long history, it is only with recent advances in immunology and molecular biology that progress has been made. In the next few years investigators expect to build on their research experience with biotherapeutic agents to provide tangible benefits for patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Treatment of non–clear cell renal cell carcinoma (RCC) remains controversial despite several recent prospective studies of targeted therapies (TT). Often Vascular Endothelial growth Factor (VEGF) and Mammalian Target of Rapamycin (mTOR) inhibitors are used, extrapolating the data from use of these agents in clear cell RCC. Methods We performed a retrospective data analysis within the Renal Cross Channel Group to determine metastatic chromophobe RCC (mChRCC) outcomes in the TT era. The end-points were overall response, overall survival (OS) and time to treatment failure (TTF). The two latter were estimated using the Kaplan–Meier method. Results 91 mChRCC patients from 26 centres were included. Median follow-up from the date of first metastasis was 6.1 years (range: 0–13.9). Median OS was 37.9 months (95% confidence interval [CI]: 21.4–46.8) from the diagnosis of metastatic disease. Among the 61 patients who received TT, 50 (82%) were treated with anti-angiogenic (AA) and 11 with mTOR inhibitors. Median TTF and OS in patients receiving a first line of AA was 8.7 months (95% CI: 5.2–10.9) and 22.9 months (95% CI: 17.8–49.2) versus 1.9 months (95% CI: 1.0–6.0) and 3.2 months (95% CI: 2.3–not evaluable) with mTOR inhibitors, respectively. A stratified log-rank test was used to compare AA and mTOR inhibitors TT, while controlling the effect of the International Metastatic RCC Database Consortium risk group and no significant difference between AA and mTOR inhibitors was observed for TTF (p = 0.26) or for OS (p = 0.55). Conclusion We report the largest retrospective cohort of patients with mChRCC treated with TT and no significant difference between AA and mTOR inhibitors was observed for TTF and OS. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Non-clear cell renal cell carcinomas are histologically and genetically diverse kidney cancers with variable prognoses, and their optimum initial treatment is unknown. We aimed to compare the mTOR inhibitor everolimus and the VEGF receptor inhibitor sunitinib in patients with non-clear cell renal cell carcinoma.Methods: We enrolled patients with metastatic papillary, chromophobe, or unclassified non-clear cell renal cell carcinoma with no history of previous systemic treatment. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive everolimus (10 mg/day) or sunitinib (50 mg/day; 6-week cycles of 4 weeks with treatment followed by 2 weeks without treatment) administered orally until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Randomisation was stratified by Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center risk group and papillary histology. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival in the intention-to-treat population using the RECIST 1.1 criteria. Safety was assessed in all patients who were randomly assigned to treatment. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01108445.Findings: Between Sept 23, 2010, and Oct 28, 2013, 108 patients were randomly assigned to receive either sunitinib (n=51) or everolimus (n=57). As of December, 2014, 87 progression-free survival events had occurred with two remaining active patients, and the trial was closed for the primary analysis. Sunitinib significantly increased progression-free survival compared with everolimus (8·3 months [80% CI 5·8-11·4] vs 5·6 months [5·5-6·0]; hazard ratio 1·41 [80% CI 1·03-1·92]; p=0·16), although heterogeneity of the treatment effect was noted on the basis of histological subtypes and prognostic risk groups. No unexpected toxic effects were reported, and the most common grade 3-4 adverse events were hypertension (12 [24%] of 51 patients in the sunitinib group vs one [2%] of 57 patients in the everolimus group), infection (six [12%] vs four [7%]), diarrhoea (five [10%] vs one [2%]), pneumonitis (none vs five [9%]), stomatitis (none vs five [9%]), and hand-foot syndrome (four [8%] vs none).Interpretation: In patients with metastatic non-clear cell renal cell carcinoma, sunitinib improved progression-free survival compared with everolimus. Future trials of novel agents should account for heterogeneity in disease outcomes based on genetic, histological, and prognostic factors.Funding: Novartis and Pfizer. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Reducing the number of patients required for a clinical trial is important for shortening development time. Phase II cancer trials assess the tumour-shrinking effect of a novel compound through a binary end-point formed from the percentage change in total lesion diameter. We compare single-arm two-stage designs which use the binary end-point to those which directly use the continuous end-point. Using the continuous end-point results in lower expected and maximum sample sizes. For larger trials the reduction is around 37%. This assumes that the dichotomisation point of the continuous end-point is chosen to give the best sample size, with the trial design using the binary end-point performing even worse otherwise. We consider a previous trial designed using a Simon two-stage design and show that if the continuous end-point had been used, the expected and maximum sample sizes of the trial would be reduced by around 50%. Using the continuous end-point in a two-stage cancer trial results in large sample size reductions. The methods discussed in this paper work best when the number of complete responses is low, as is true in several types of cancer. We discuss what could be done if this is not the case. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Abstract: The plasminogen pathway plays an important role in the behavior of many tumors including lung cancer. Hence genetic variants encoding plasminogen activator (PLAU), plasminogen receptor (PLAUR), plasminogen activator inhibitor 1 (PAI-1) and plasminogen activator inhibitor 2 (PAI-2) may contribute to lung cancer prognosis. To investigate this proposition we genotyped PAI-1 A15T, PLAU L141P, PLAUR L317P and PAI-2 S413C variants in 698 patients with lung cancer, 522 with non-small cell (NSCLC) and 176 with small cell lung cancer (SCLC). PAI-1 A15T was significantly associated with overall survival (OS), with carriers of variant alleles having a worse prognosis (hazard ratio (HR)=1.14; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.03–1.26). An association was also detected between OS in NSCLC and carrier status for PAI-2 413C (HR=1.13; 95% CI: 1.01–1.24). These common genetic variants identified warrant further evaluation as promising prognostic markers of patient outcome. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Background Tivozanib is a selective inhibitor of vascular endothelial growth factor receptors 1, 2 and 3 tyrosine kinases. This open-label, crossover clinical study (AV-951-09-902) provided access to tivozanib for patients who progressed on sorafenib in TIVO-1, comparing tivozanib with sorafenib in patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC). Methods Patients enrolled in this single-arm, phase 2 crossover study were previously randomised to sorafenib on TIVO-1, progressed and then crossed over to tivozanib. Patients received tivozanib (1.5 mg/day orally; 3 weeks on/1 week off) within 4 weeks after their last sorafenib dose. Findings Crossover patients were exposed to tivozanib for a median of eight cycles. From the start of tivozanib treatment, median progression-free survival was 11.0 months (95% confidence interval [CI]: 7.3–12.7) and median overall survival was 21.6 months (95% CI: 17.0–27.6). Best overall response was partial response in 29 (18%) patients and stable disease in 83 (52%) patients, with a median duration of response of 15.2 and 12.7 months, respectively. About 77% of patients experienced adverse events, most frequently hypertension (26%), followed by diarrhoea (14%) and fatigue (13%); 53% of patients had treatment-related adverse events, including 24% grade ≥3. About 9% and 16% of patients had dose reductions and dose interruptions due to adverse events, respectively. A total of 30% of patients had serious adverse events, and 4% had treatment-related serious adverse events. Interpretation This crossover study of patients with advanced RCC demonstrated potent tivozanib anti-tumour activity. Safety and tolerability profiles were acceptable and consistent with the established adverse event profile of tivozanib. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Genome-wide association studies (GWASs) have identified associations between the CHRNA5–CHRNA3–CHRNB4 gene cluster and smoking heaviness and nicotine dependence. Studies in rodents have described the anatomical localisation and function of the nicotinic acetylcholine receptors (nAChRs) formed by the subunits encoded by this gene cluster. Further investigations that complemented these studies highlighted the variability of individuals’ smoking behaviours and their ability to adjust nicotine intake. GWASs of smoking-related health outcomes have also identified this signal in the CHRNA5–CHRNA3–CHRNB4 gene cluster. This insight underpins approaches to strengthen causal inference in observational data. Combining genetic and mechanistic studies of nicotine dependence and smoking heaviness may reveal novel targets for medication development. Validated targets can inform genetic therapeutic interventions for smoking cessation and tobacco-related diseases. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study introduces the use of ‘error-category mapping’ in the interpretation of pharmacokinetic (PK) model parameter results derived from dynamic contrast-enhanced (DCE-) MRI data. Eleven patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma were enrolled in a multiparametric study of the treatment effects of bevacizumab. For the purposes of the present analysis, DCE-MRI data from two identical pre-treatment examinations were analysed by application of the extended Tofts model (eTM), using in turn a model arterial input function (AIF), an individually-measured AIF and a sample-average AIF. PK model parameter maps were calculated. Errors in the signal-to-gadolinium concentration ([Gd]) conversion process and the model-fitting process itself were assigned to category codes on a voxel-by-voxel basis, thereby forming a colour-coded ‘error-category map’ for each imaged slice. These maps were found to be repeatable between patient visits and showed that the eTM converged adequately in the majority of voxels in all the tumours studied. However, the maps also clearly indicated sub-regions of low Gd uptake and of non-convergence of the model in nearly all tumours. The non-physical condition v e ≥ 1 was the most frequently indicated error category and appeared sensitive to the form of AIF used. This simple method for visualisation of errors in DCE-MRI could be used as a routine quality-control technique and also has the potential to reveal otherwise hidden patterns of failure in PK model applications. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Summary: Background: The gold standard endpoint in clinical trials of chemotherapy and radiotherapy for lung cancer is overall survival. Although reliable and simple to measure, this endpoint takes years to observe. Surrogate endpoints that would enable earlier assessments of treatment effects would be useful. We assessed the correlations between potential surrogate endpoints and overall survival at individual and trial levels. Methods: We analysed individual patients' data from 15 071 patients involved in 60 randomised clinical trials that were assessed in six meta-analyses. Two meta-analyses were of adjuvant chemotherapy in non-small-cell lung cancer, three were of sequential or concurrent chemotherapy, and one was of modified radiotherapy in locally advanced lung cancer. We investigated disease-free survival (DFS) or progression-free survival (PFS), defined as the time from randomisation to local or distant relapse or death, and locoregional control, defined as the time to the first local event, as potential surrogate endpoints. At the individual level we calculated the squared correlations between distributions of these three endpoints and overall survival, and at the trial level we calculated the squared correlation between treatment effects for endpoints. Findings: In trials of adjuvant chemotherapy, correlations between DFS and overall survival were very good at the individual level (ρ2=0·83, 95% CI 0·83–0·83 in trials without radiotherapy, and 0·87, 0·87–0·87 in trials with radiotherapy) and excellent at trial level (R 2=0·92, 95% CI 0·88–0·95 in trials without radiotherapy and 0·99, 0·98–1·00 in trials with radiotherapy). In studies of locally advanced disease, correlations between PFS and overall survival were very good at the individual level (ρ2 range 0·77–0·85, dependent on the regimen being assessed) and trial level (R 2 range 0·89–0·97). In studies with data on locoregional control, individual-level correlations were good (ρ2=0·71, 95% CI 0·71–0·71 for concurrent chemotherapy and ρ2=0·61, 0·61–0·61 for modified vs standard radiotherapy) and trial-level correlations very good (R 2=0·85, 95% CI 0·77–0·92 for concurrent chemotherapy and R 2=0·95, 0·91–0·98 for modified vs standard radiotherapy). Interpretation: We found a high level of evidence that DFS is a valid surrogate endpoint for overall survival in studies of adjuvant chemotherapy involving patients with non-small-cell lung cancers, and PFS in those of chemotherapy and radiotherapy for patients with locally advanced lung cancers. Extrapolation to targeted agents, however, is not automatically warranted. Funding: Programme Hospitalier de Recherche Clinique, Ligue Nationale Contre le Cancer, British Medical Research Council, Sanofi-Aventis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Context: Until the development of novel targeted agents directed against angiogenesis and tumour growth, few treatment options have been available for the treatment of metastatic renal-cell carcinoma (mRCC). Objective: This review discusses current targeted therapies for mRCC and provides consensus statements regarding treatment algorithms. Evidence acquisition: Medical literature was retrieved from PubMed up to April 2011. Additional relevant articles and abstract reviews were included from the bibliographies of the retrieved literature. Evidence synthesis: Targeted treatment for mRCC can be categorized for the following patient groups: previously untreated patients, those refractory to immunotherapy, and those refractory to vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF)–targeted therapy. Sunitinib and bevacizumab combined with interferon alpha are generally considered first-line treatment options in patients with favourable or intermediate prognoses. Temsirolimus is considered a first-line treatment option for poor-risk patients. Either sorafenib or sunitinib may be valid second-line treatments for patients who have failed prior cytokine-based therapies. For patients refractory to treatment with VEGF-targeted therapy, everolimus is now recommended. Pazopanib is a new treatment option in the first- and second-line setting (after cytokine failure). Sequential and combination approaches, and the roles of nephrectomy and tumour metastasectomy will also be discussed. Conclusions: Increasing clinical evidence is clarifying appropriate first- and second-line treatments with targeted agents for patients with mRCC. Based on phase 2 and 3 trials, a sequential approach is most promising, while combination therapy is still investigational. The role of nephrectomy in mRCC is being evaluated in ongoing phase 3 clinical trials. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Background: The phase III Treatment Approaches in Renal cancer Global Evaluation Trial (TARGET) indicated that sorafenib is effective and well tolerated in advanced renal cell carcinoma patients. However, few data have been published on the safety of long-term sorafenib treatment. A retrospective subgroup analysis was performed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of sorafenib in patients in TARGET who received treatment for >1year. Methods: The present subgroup analysis (based on the September 2006 database with updated safety analysis) evaluated the efficacy and safety of sorafenib in all patients in the sorafenib arm of TARGET who were treated for >1 year. The assessments included the overall survival, progression-free survival (PFS), disease control rate (DCR), and safety. The patients remained on therapy post-progression at the discretion of the investigator. Results: In TARGET, 169 patients received treatment with sorafenib for >1year. The median PFS of patients in this subpopulation was 10.9months from the date of randomisation, with a DCR of 92%. The most commonly reported treatment-related adverse events of any grade were diarrhoea (74%), rash/desquamation (51%), hand–foot skin reaction (49%), alopecia (39%), and fatigue (38%). Adverse events were mild to moderate, and presented early in the course of the treatment; there were no unexpected toxicities associated with the long-term administration of sorafenib. Conclusions: Results of this subgroup analysis of patients enrolled in TARGET who received treatment for >1year indicate that long-term treatment with sorafenib is associated with continued efficacy and a well-tolerated safety profile. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Summary: Guidelines issued by the National Institute for Clinical Excellence (NICE) in the England and Wales recommend that rapid access to 18F-deoxyglucose positron emission tomography (FDG-PET) is made available to all appropriate patients with non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). The clinical evidence for the benefits of PET scanning in NSCLC is substantial, showing that PET has high accuracy, sensitivity and specificity for disease staging, as well as pre-therapeutic assessment in candidates for surgery and radical radiotherapy. Moreover, PET scanning can provide important information to assist in radiotherapy treatment planning, and has also been shown to correlate with responses to treatment and overall outcomes. If the government cancer waiting time targets are to be met, rapid referral from primary to secondary healthcare is essential, as is early diagnostic referral within secondary and tertiary care for techniques such as PET. Studies are also required to explore new areas in which PET may be of benefit, such as surveillance studies in high-risk patients to allow early diagnosis and optimal treatment, while PET scanning to identify treatment non-responders may help optimise therapy, with benefits both for patients and healthcare resource use. Further studies are needed into other forms of lung cancer, including small-cell lung cancer and mesothelioma. In conclusion, PET scanning has the potential to improve the diagnosis and management of lung cancer for many patients. Further studies and refinement of guidelines and procedures will maximise the benefit of this important technique. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Summary: The prognostic significance of the Arg72Pro polymorphism of the p53 tumour suppressor gene in cancer is controversial. To determine whether Arg72Pro is a marker for lung cancer prognosis we genotyped 619 female lung cancer patients with incident disease and examined the relationship between genotype and overall survival (OS). Nonparametric tests provided no evidence for a relationship between SNP genotype and OS (P-values 0.131, 0.161, and 0.156 for log rank, Wilcoxon and Fleming–Harrington test statistics, respectively). Under the Cox proportional hazards model the HRs associated with Arg/Pro, Pro/Pro and Pro-carrier status were: 0.98 (95%CI: 0.79–1.22), 0.76 (95%CI: 0.51–1.15) and 0.93 (95%CI: 0.76–1.15), respectively. Despite employing a comprehensive set of statistical tests including those sensitive to the detection of differences in early survival our data provide little evidence to support the tenet that the p53 Arg72Pro polymorphism is a clinically useful prognostic marker for lung cancer. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Summary: Background: Chemotherapy induced neutropenia has been shown to be associated with improved treatment outcomes in selected solid tumours. We studied the association of chemotherapy induced neutropenia with treatment related outcomes in small cell lung cancer (SCLC). Methods: This is a retrospective analysis of patients receiving chemotherapy for SCLC at the Royal Marsden Hospital, UK over an 8 year period. The chemotherapy included Carboplatin AUC 5, IV and Etoposide 100mg/m2 IV on day 1 and 100mg/m2 PO, B.I.D. on day 2 and 3 every 21 days. Patients were stratified into two groups (A) those experiencing grades 0–2 neutropenia and group (B) those experiencing grades 3–4 neutropenia. The outcomes studied were response rate, time to progression (TTP) and overall survival (OS). Results: 173 patients were studied. The median age 64 (range 39–83) and M/F ratio was 112:61. The response rates in groups A and B was 90% versus 90%, p =1.0. The median TTP in groups A and B was 30 and 38 weeks, p =0.05. The median OS in groups A and B was 47 weeks versus 60 weeks, p =0.008. The differences in TTP and OS were not significant in patients with extensive stage disease. Conclusions: Occurrence of chemotherapy induced grade 3 or 4 neutropenia correlated with OS in patients with SCLC receiving carboplatin and etoposide chemotherapy. Trials exploring controlled, safe intra-patient dose escalation with the intent of achieving grade 3 or 4 neutropenia in patients with SCLC are warranted. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

The development of therapeutics in oncology is a highly active research area for the pharmaceutical and biotechnology industries, but also has a strong academic base. Many new agents have been developed in recent years, most with specific biological targets. This has mandated the need to look at different ways to streamline the evaluation of new agents. One solution has been the development of adaptive trial designs that allow the evaluation of multiple agents, concentrating on the most promising agents while screening out those which are unlikely to benefit patients. Another way forward has been the growth of partnerships between academia and industry with the shared goal of designing and conducting high quality clinical trials which answer important clinical questions as efficiently as possible. The RAMPART trial (NCT03288532) brings together both of these processes in an attempt to improve outcomes for patients with locally advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC), where no globally acceptable adjuvant strategy after nephrectomy currently exist. RAMPART is led by the MRC CTU at University College London (UCL), in collaboration with other international academic groups and industry. We aim to facilitate the use of data from RAMPART, (dependent on outcomes), for a future regulatory submission that will extend the license of the agents being investigated. We share our experience in order to lay the foundations for an effective trial design and conduct framework and to guide others who may be considering similar collaborations. Trial Registration: ISRCTN #: ISRCTN53348826, NCT #: NCT03288532 , EUDRACT #: 2017–002329-39. CTA #: 20363/0380/001–0001. MREC #: 17/LO/1875. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03288532 RAMPART grant number: MC_UU_12023/25.. RAMPART Protocol version 5.0. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

20–60% of patients with initially locally advanced Renal Cell Carcinoma (RCC) develop metastatic disease despite optimal surgical excision. Adjuvant strategies have been tested in RCC including cytokines, radiotherapy, hormones and oral tyrosine-kinase inhibitors (TKIs), with limited success. The predominant global standard-of-care after nephrectomy remains active monitoring. Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) are effective in the treatment of metastatic RCC; RAMPART will investigate these agents in the adjuvant setting. RAMPART is an international, UK-led trial investigating the addition of ICIs after nephrectomy in patients with resected locally advanced RCC. RAMPART is a multi-arm multi-stage (MAMS) platform trial, upon which additional research questions may be addressed over time. The target population is patients with histologically proven resected locally advanced RCC (clear cell and non-clear cell histological subtypes), with no residual macroscopic disease, who are at high or intermediate risk of relapse (Leibovich score 3–11). Patients with fully resected synchronous ipsilateral adrenal metastases are included. Participants are randomly assigned (3,2:2) to Arm A - active monitoring (no placebo) for one year, Arm B - durvalumab (PD-L1 inhibitor) 4-weekly for one year; or Arm C - combination therapy with durvalumab 4-weekly for one year plus two doses of tremelimumab (CTLA-4 inhibitor) at day 1 of the first two 4-weekly cycles. The co-primary outcomes are disease-free-survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS). Secondary outcomes include safety, metastasis-free survival, RCC specific survival, quality of life, and patient and clinician preferences. Tumour tissue, plasma and urine are collected for molecular analysis (TransRAMPART). ISRCTN #: ISRCTN53348826, NCT #: NCT03288532 , EUDRACT #: 2017–002329-39, CTA #: 20363/0380/001–0001, MREC #: 17/LO/1875, ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03288532 , RAMPART grant number: MC_UU_12023/25, TransRAMPART grant number: A28690 Cancer Research UK, RAMPART Protocol version 5.0. • RAMPART is the first international, academically led adjuvant trial to assess both single and combination immune checkpoint inhibitors in patients with RCC at intermediate and high risk of recurrence after nephrectomy. • RAMPART is a three arm adaptive MAMS platform trial upon which at least one new research arm can be added over the coming years. • The target population is participants with histologically proven RCC (clear cell and non-clear cell), with no residual macroscopic disease, who are at high or intermediate risk of relapse (Leibovich score 3–11). • Patients with synchronous ipsilateral adrenal metastases, resected at the time of nephrectomy are included in RAMPART. • Significant changes have been made to the RAMPART protocol during the COVID-19 pandemic to optimise safety for participants including the option for remote patient consent and clinical assessment. • TransRAMPART is a unique scientific collaboration linked to RAMPART that will provide an opportunity to address pertinent unanswered issues for patients with RCC. • The RAMPART protocol can be found at https://www.rampart-trial.org/. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]