Search

Background: The BONSAI phase II trial recently demonstrated the activity of cabozantinib in metastatic collecting duct patients. The outcomes of patients in this setting treated with immunotherapy as second-line is unknown. The aim of the present report was to describe outcomes of patients enrolled in the BONSAI trial that received nivolumab as second-line treatment., Material and Methods: We describe the oncological outcomes in terms of overall response rate, progression-free survival, overall survival and safety. We excluded patients that did not receive any second-line treatment or were treated with agents other than nivolumab., Results: We identified five patients of whom one was excluded due to lack of data. Three patients obtained clinical benefit (one partial response, two stable disease); the second-line progression-free survival (nivolumab) ranged from 2.8 to 19.9 months to and second-line overall survival ranged from 5.1 to 26.5 months. No new safety signals were observed., Conclusions: Nivolumab may be considered as second-line therapy option after cabozantinib failure in selected metastatic collecting duct carcinoma patients.

Background: Nivolumab and cabozantinib are currently approved agents in metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) but there are no data available for patients progressing to both treatments. The aim of this study was to compare active therapeutic options and best supportive care (BSC) after progression to nivolumab and cabozantinib in mRCC., Methods: In this retrospective study, we selected 50 patients from eight Italian centers. The primary endpoint of the study was the overall survival (OS) of patients on active treatment versus BSC. Secondary endpoints were the progression-free survival (PFS) and objective response rate (ORR). The efficacy of active therapy was also investigated., Results: After progression to both nivolumab and cabozantinib, 57.1% of patients were given active treatment (mainly everolimus and sorafenib) while 42.9% received BSC. The median OS was 13 months (95% CI: 4-NR) in actively treated patients and 3 months (95% CI: 2-4) in BSC patients (p = 0.001). Patients treated with sorafenib had better disease control than those treated with everolimus (stable disease: 71.4% vs. 16.7%, progression disease: 14.3% vs. 58.3%; p = 0.03), with no significant differences in PFS (5 and 3 months, 95% CI: 1-6 vs. 2-5; p = 0.6) and OS (12 and 4 months, 95% CI: 3-NR vs. 2-NR; p = 0.2)., Conclusion: After treatment with both nivolumab and cabozantinib, the choice of a safe active systemic therapy offered better outcomes than BSC., (© 2022 The Authors. Cancer Medicine published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background: Cabozantinib strongly inhibits osteoclast differentiation and bone resorption in vitro. We aimed to evaluate its effect on bone turnover markers (BTMs) in metastatic renal cell carcinoma., Methods: This is a monocentric prospective study on patients with mRCC treated with cabozantinib between October 2016 and July 2018. We collected blood samples at baseline and after 3 and 6 months of treatment. We compared sets of data obtained from plasma samples in the whole population with unpaired 2-tailed Student t tests and data for a subset of patients for which all timepoints were available with paired 2-tailed Student t tests. We used the Kaplan-Meier method for survival analyses and the log-rank test to compare the curves., Results: Our analysis included 39 patients. At month 3, the mean C-terminal cross-linked telopeptides of type I collagen (CTx) and the mean N-terminal propeptide of type 1 collagen (PINP) levels were significantly decreased in the whole population ( p = 0.013 and p < 0.0001, respectively), as well as at paired analysis ( p = 0.015 and p = 0.045, respectively). No differences were observed between baseline and 6 months ( p = 0.053 and p = 0.087, respectively). After 3 months, the mean parathyroid hormone (PTH) levels significantly increased in the whole population ( p = 0.004), as well as at paired analysis; the mean PTH levels increased significantly at 3 and 6 months, respectively ( p = 0.019 and p = 0.041, respectively). Changes in BTM levels were not associated with outcome., Conclusions: Cabozantinib significantly reduced bone resorption as demonstrated by the decrease of CTx and showed a transient secondary increase of PTH.

Objective: To assess the efficacy and tolerability of rechallenge with sunitinib and other targeted therapies (TTs) in patitents with relapsed recurrent renal cell carcinoma (RCC) in the advanced setting., Methods: In this multi-institutional retrospective study, patients with relapsed RCC were rechallenged with sunitinib or other systemic TTs as a first-line therapeutic approach after failed adjuvant sunitinib treatment. Patient characteristics, treatments and clinical outcomes were recorded. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS). Secondary endpoints were objective response rate (ORR) and overall survival (OS)., Results: A total of 34 patients with relapses were recorded, and 25 of these (73.5%) were men. Twenty-five patients were treated with systemic TT: 65% of patients received TT against the vascular endothelial growth factor pathway (including sunitinib), 21.7% received mammalian target of rapamycin inhibitors and 13% received immunotherapy. The median (interquartile range) time to relapse was 20.3 (5.2-20.4) months from diagnosis, and 7.5 months (1.0-8.5) from the end of adjuvant suntinib treatment. At a median follow-up of 23.5 months, 24 of the 25 patients had progressed on first-line systemic therapy. The median PFS was 12.0 months (95% confidence interval [CI] 5.78-18.2). There were no statistical differences in PFS between different treatments or sunitinib rechallenge. PFS was not statistically different in patients relapsing on or after adjuvant suntinib treatment (≤ 6 or >6 months after adjuvant suntinib ending). The ORR was 20.5%. The median OS was 29.1 months (95% CI 16.4-41.8)., Conclusions: Rechallenge with sunitinib or other systemic therapies is still a feasible therapeutic option that provides patients with advanced or metastastic RCC with additional clinical benefits with regard to PFS and OS after failed response to adjuvant sunitinib., (© 2021 The Authors BJU International © 2021 BJU International Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Objectives: Despite the initial clinical benefit, resistance to antiangiogenic therapies develops through the activation of alternative pathways. We measured plasma levels of circulating angiogenic factors to explore their predictive role in metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) patients treated with pazopanib., Materials and Methods: mRCC patients receiving first-line pazopanib were prospectively enrolled. The levels of circulating interleuchine (IL)-6, IL-8, stromal derived factor-1, vascular endothelial growth factor-A, hepatocyte growth factor (HGF), osteopontin, and E-selectin were quantified at baseline and every 4 weeks until disease progression (PD). Patients were dichotomized into "low" and "high" subgroups by a cutoff point defined by the respective median circulating angiogenic factor (CAF) value at baseline. Then, association with the objective response was determined. Changes in CAF levels between baseline and PD were also compared., Results: Among 25 patients included in the final data set, 6 patients were still on treatment. As best response, 12 patients presented a partial response (48%), 9 showed stable disease, and 4 showed PD. The median follow-up was 31.9 months. The median progression-free survival was 14.8 months. Low baseline levels of IL-6, IL-8, HGF, and osteopontin were found to be significantly associated with objective response. In addition, patients with low baseline levels of HGF showed longer progression-free survival and overall survival, whereas patients with low baseline levels of IL-8 showed longer overall survival. Among patients experiencing PD, the median plasma levels of stromal derived factor-1 and vascular endothelial growth factor-A were significantly higher compared with the baseline (P=0.01; P=0.011). Conversely, the median levels of E-selectin were significantly lower compared with the baseline (P=0.017)., Conclusion: Changes in levels of selected CAFs were associated with response/resistance to pazopanib in mRCC patients.

Introduction: In prostate cancer , there has recently been an emerging interest in mutations in genes belonging to the homologous recombination repair (HRR) pathway and in the inhibition of poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) proteins., Areas Covered: Mutations in the HRR genes, including BRCA1, BRCA2, and Ataxia-Telangiesctasia mutated (ATM), have been reported in prostate cancer, with different incidence in the localized and advanced settings. The PARP enzyme complex is involved in repair of DNA damage and its inhibition causes the accumulation of DNA mutations in HRR deficient cells. Several PARP inhibitors (PARPi) are under development, such as olaparib, talazoparib, niraparib, rucaparib, and veliparib. In metastatic castration resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC), olaparib has been the most studied and its clinical efficacy has been validated in a phase III clinical trial. Rucaparib and niraparib have also shown promising results in the preliminary analyzes of two phase II trials, while talazoparib is currently under development., Expert Opinion: PARPi have become part of the treatment of mCRPC. Early results of combination therapy with PARPi and new hormonal therapy are promising and are supported by a strong biological rationale. Current results need to be validated in randomized phase III-controlled trials in order to translate the use of PARPi into real world practice.

Background: In selected metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) patients, radical metastasectomy followed by observation is a potential strategy. It is still to be defined whether systemic therapy should be administered following metastasectomy., Objective: To assess the potential benefit of postoperative treatment with sorafenib compared with observation alone after radical metastasectomy in mRCC patients., Design, Setting, and Participants: The RESORT trial was a multicenter, randomized, open-label, phase 2 study conducted between November 2012 and November 2017 in Italy. Patients with clear-cell mRCC pretreated with nephrectomy and undergoing radical metastasectomy (three or fewer lesions) were eligible for the study. Patients were randomized (1:1) within 12 wk from metastasectomy to sorafenib (standard dose 400 mg twice daily) or observation for a maximum of 52 wk. Stratification factors were interval from nephrectomy, site, and number of lesions. Overall, 76 patients were screened and 69 were randomized: 33 were assigned to sorafenib and 36 to observation. The primary endpoint was recurrence-free survival (RFS). Secondary endpoints were overall survival and the safety profile., Outcome Measurements and Statistical Analysis: RFS curves were estimated with the Kaplan-Meier method, and the log-rank test was used to statistically compare the curves., Results and Limitations: At a median follow-up of 38 mo, median RFS was 37 mo (95% confidence interval [CI] 20-not available [NA]) in the observation arm versus 21 mo (95% CI 11-NA) in the sorafenib arm (log-rank test p = 0.404), with 12-, 24-, and 36-mo RFS probability of 74% versus 63%, 59% versus 49%, and 50% versus 41%, respectively, in the observation versus the sorafenib arm. Any-grade adverse event (AE) rates were 84% in the sorafenib arm and 31% in the observation arm; grade ≥3 AE rates were 22% and 3% in the sorafenib and the observation arm, respectively, with a rate of treatment discontinuation for AEs of 19% in the sorafenib arm., Conclusions: This prospective study showed that systemic treatment with sorafenib did not increase RFS as compared with observation in mRCC patients following radical metastasectomy., Patient Summary: This article reports the clinical outcome of patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma treated with sorafenib or managed with an observation-alone strategy after the radical surgery of metastases. We found that sorafenib did not improve the patient outcome in terms of relapse-free survival in this selected population., (Copyright © 2019 European Association of Urology. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Background: The purpose of the present retrospective analysis was to describe the trends in exposure to multiple lines of treatment and overall survival (OS) in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) who started therapy in 2 different periods (period 1, 2004-2010; and period 2, 2011-2017)., Patients and Methods: The proportion of patients who received subsequent lines of treatment after disease progression was compared between the 2 groups. OS was measured from the start of first-line treatment for metastatic disease to death or the last follow-up examination. Both univariate and multivariate analyses were performed., Results: A total of 500 patients were included in the study; 274 started treatment in period 1 and 226 in period 2. Of those patients who stopped first-line treatment because of disease progression, the patients in period 2 had a greater conditional probability to receive second- and third-line treatment compared with patients in period 1 (77.2% vs. 63.7%; odds ratio [OR], 1.93; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.20-3.11; P = .0065; and 69.6% vs. 48.1%; OR, 2.48; 95% CI, 1.40-4.40; P = .002, respectively). The median OS improved from 22.8 months for patients in period 1 to 38.2 months for patients in period 2 (univariate analysis: hazard ratio, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.50-0.83; P = .001)., Conclusion: Patients who started treatment during the past 5 years were exposed to a greater number of treatment lines compared with patients treated before 2011. Our data suggest that the increase of treatment options available and clinician expertise could be associated with better outcomes., (Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Aim: We report the outcomes observed with nivolumab in metastatic renal cell carcinoma patients with poor prognostic features enrolled in the Italian expanded access program., Patients & Methods: Nivolumab was available for patients who relapsed after at least one prior systemic treatment in the advanced or metastatic setting., Results: Of 389 patients, 32 (8%) had brain metastasis, 129 (33%) had liver and 193 (50%) had bone metastasis. These subpopulations achieved a disease control rate of 53, 45 and 47%, respectively. Fifty-one patients had G4 tumor, and they showed 23% objective response rate. The safety profile of the subgroups was in line with the expanded access program population. No new safety signals were reported., Conclusion: Patients with poor prognostic features may derive relevant benefits from nivolumab.

Context: Patients with adrenocortical carcinoma (ACC) frequently suffer from cortisol excess, which portends a negative prognosis. Rapid control of cortisol hypersecretion and tumor growth are the main goals of ACC therapy. Abiraterone acetate (AA) is a potent inhibitor of 17alpha-hydroxylase/17,20-lyase, a key enzyme of adrenal steroidogenesis., Objective: This study sought to investigate the therapeutic use of AA in preclinical models of ACC., Design: AA antisecretive and antiproliferative effects were investigated in vitro using NCI-H295R and SW13 ACC cell lines and human primary ACC cell cultures, as well as in vivo using immunodeficient mice., Methods: Steroid secretion, cell viability, and proliferation were analyzed in untreated and AA-treated ACC cells. The ability of AA to affect the Wnt/beta-catenin pathway in NCI-H295R cells was also analyzed. Progesterone receptor (PgR) gene was silenced by the RNA interference approach. The antitumor efficacy of AA was confirmed in vivo in NCI-H295R cells xenografted in immunodeficient mice., Results: AA reduced the secretion of both cortisol and androgens, increased production of progesterone, and induced a concentration-dependent decrease of cell viability in the NCI-H295R cells and primary secreting ACC cultures. AA also reduced beta-catenin nuclear accumulation in NCI-H295R cells. AA administration to NCI-H295R-bearing mice enhanced progesterone levels and inhibited tumor growth. The cytotoxic effect of AA was prevented by either blocking PgR or by gene silencing., Conclusion: AA is able to inhibit hormone secretion and growth of ACC both in vitro and in vivo. It also reduces beta-catenin nuclear accumulation. The cytotoxic effect of AA seems to require PgR.

The treatment of metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) has markedly improved over the last few years with the introduction of several targeted agents in clinical practice. Nevertheless, either primary or secondary resistance to inhibition of VEGF and mTOR pathways has limited the clinical benefit of these systemic treatments. Recently, a better understanding of the involvement of MET and its ligand HGF in many biological processes made this signaling pathway an attractive therapeutic target in oncology, particularly in mRCC. Herein, we review the development of cabozantinib, a recently approved inhibitor of multiple tyrosine kinase receptors, including MET, VEGFRs, and AXL, which has proven to increase progression-free survival and overall survival when compared to everolimus in mRCC patients who had progressed after VEGFR-targeted therapy. Finally, we discuss the potential role of cabozantinib within the current treatment landscape for mRCC.

We aimed to identify clinical predictors of long-term response to abiraterone (defined as >12 months drug exposure) in a retrospective cohort of metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer patients treated in post-docetaxel setting at 24 Italian centers. The Cox proportional hazards model was used to analyze the association between clinical features and the duration of drug exposure. Results were expressed as hazard ratios (HR) with associated 95% confidence intervals (CI). A total of 143 patients met the inclusion criteria. Their median age was 73 years, median Gleason score 8 and median abiraterone exposure 20 months. At the univariate analysis, a significant correlation with the duration of abiraterone exposure was found for Gleason score (HR 0.82, 95% CI 0.71-0.96; p=0.012), PSA (HR 1.10, 95% CI 1.03-1.18; p=0.08) and lactic dehydrogenase levels (HR 1.22, 95% CI 1.02-1.46; p=0.027), while the association between lower alkaline phosphatase levels and treatment duration was marginally significant (HR 1.07, 95% CI 0.99-1.16; p=0.074). Only PSA and Gleason score were predictive of long-term treatment duration in the multivariate analysis. No other clinical factors resulted to be predictive of sustained response to abiraterone, including metastatic disease at diagnosis and visceral disease, suggesting that all subgroups of patients may derive a substantial clinical benefit from abiraterone treatment. These findings need to be validated in prospective, larger studies., Competing Interests: The authors have no conflicts of interest to disclose.

Purpose: We retrospectively analyzed the risk of recurrence and conditional Disease-Free Survival (cDFS) in 63 patients with complete remission during treatment with tirosin kinase inhibitor (TKI), alone or with local treatment in metastatic renal cell carcinoma., Results: 37% patients achieve CR with TKI alone, while 63% with additional loco-regional treatments. 49% patients recurred after CR, with a median Disease free survival of 28.2 months. Patients treated with multimodal approaches present lower rate of recurrence (40% vs 61%) and longer Disease free survival compared to patient treated with TKI alone (16.5 vs 41.9 months, p=0.039).Furthermore the rate of recurrence was higher in patients with brain (88%), pancreatic (71%) and bone metastasis (50%). Patients who continued TKI therapy after complete response had a longer disease free survival than patients who stopped therapy, although the difference was not significant (42.1 vs 25.1 months, p=0.254). 2y-cDFS was better in patients treated with multimodal treatment and who continued TKIs than the other patient arms., Conclusions: The prognostic value of CR depends on the site where was obtained and how was obtained (with or without locoregional treatment). Cessation of TKI should be carefully considered in complete responder patients., Competing Interests: None of the authors declare conflicts of interest.

Aim: To assess clinical outcomes in octogenarians treated with docetaxel (DOC) for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer., Patients & Methods: The multicenter retrospective study was based on a review of the pre- and post-DOC clinical history, DOC treatment and outcomes., Results: We reviewed the records of 123 patients (median age: 82 years) who received DOC every 3 weeks or weekly, without significant grade 3-4 toxicities. Median progression-free survival was 7 months; median overall survival from the start of DOC was 20 months, but post-progression treatments significantly prolonged overall survival., Conclusion: The findings of this study suggest that toxicity is acceptable, survival is independent of patient's age and survival can be significantly prolonged by the use of new agents.

Unlabelled: Metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer mainly affects older men, opening issues about the efficacy and safety of therapies in this population. We have demonstrated that abiraterone, a selective androgen biosynthesis inhibitor, is a safe and active therapeutic option in a subgroup of 47 very elderly adults (aged > 80 years) enrolled in the Italian named patient program, with a tolerability profile and clinical outcomes comparable to those of younger population., Background: Prostate cancer mainly affects elderly men, who are often frail and whose reduced physiological reserves and multiple comorbidities increase the risk of side effects. The availability of new drugs has improved the overall survival (OS) of patients with castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC) but has increased the number of very elderly CRPC patients receiving anticancer drugs, raising questions about their efficacy and safety in this population., Patients and Methods: We assessed the tolerability of abiraterone (AA) in a cohort of very elderly adults with metastatic CRPC (mCRPC) enrolled in the Italian AA named patient program and analyzed their clinical outcomes. We retrospectively reviewed the clinical records of 47 mCRPC patients aged > 80 years who had received AA after docetaxel. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to calculate OS and progression-free survival (PFS). Safety and clinical outcomes were also analyzed by age group (< 80 and > 80 years). Cox regression analysis was used to calculate the differences in PFS and OS between the groups according to the stratification variables., Results: In very elderly men, the prostate-specific antigen response rate was 48.9%, and the median PFS and OS were 8 and 18 months, respectively. The differences in toxicities between the older and younger age groups were not major. The limitation of the present study was mainly its retrospective nature., Conclusion: Our data show that AA is active and safe in very elderly patients and leads to outcomes similar to those observed in younger patients, thus confirming that AA is a manageable therapeutic option for this patient population., (Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Nivolumab, a programmed death 1 (PD-1) checkpoint inhibitor, was associated with encouraging overall survival in uncontrolled studies involving previously treated patients with advanced renal-cell carcinoma. This randomized, open-label, phase 3 study compared nivolumab with everolimus in patients with renal-cell carcinoma who had received previous treatment., Methods: A total of 821 patients with advanced clear-cell renal-cell carcinoma for which they had received previous treatment with one or two regimens of antiangiogenic therapy were randomly assigned (in a 1:1 ratio) to receive 3 mg of nivolumab per kilogram of body weight intravenously every 2 weeks or a 10-mg everolimus tablet orally once daily. The primary end point was overall survival. The secondary end points included the objective response rate and safety., Results: The median overall survival was 25.0 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 21.8 to not estimable) with nivolumab and 19.6 months (95% CI, 17.6 to 23.1) with everolimus. The hazard ratio for death with nivolumab versus everolimus was 0.73 (98.5% CI, 0.57 to 0.93; P=0.002), which met the prespecified criterion for superiority (P≤0.0148). The objective response rate was greater with nivolumab than with everolimus (25% vs. 5%; odds ratio, 5.98 [95% CI, 3.68 to 9.72]; P<0.001). The median progression-free survival was 4.6 months (95% CI, 3.7 to 5.4) with nivolumab and 4.4 months (95% CI, 3.7 to 5.5) with everolimus (hazard ratio, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.75 to 1.03; P=0.11). Grade 3 or 4 treatment-related adverse events occurred in 19% of the patients receiving nivolumab and in 37% of the patients receiving everolimus; the most common event with nivolumab was fatigue (in 2% of the patients), and the most common event with everolimus was anemia (in 8%)., Conclusions: Among patients with previously treated advanced renal-cell carcinoma, overall survival was longer and fewer grade 3 or 4 adverse events occurred with nivolumab than with everolimus. (Funded by Bristol-Myers Squibb; CheckMate 025 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01668784.).

Aims and Background: The introduction of agents targeting vascular endothelial growth factor has radically changed the approach to metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC): sunitinib and pazopanib are now the standard first-line therapy in mRCC. At sunitinib failure, second-line axitinib or everolimus or sorafenib should be considered to improve the clinical outcome. No data are available for a third-line tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) after 2 previous lines of therapy with TKIs. At pazopanib failure, no prospective data are available., Study Design: The TOKIO study was designed to evaluate progression-free survival, safety, and efficacy of third-line therapy with TKI in 44 patients already treated with 2 previous lines of TKIs in 10 Italian centers, and relapsed from sunitinib-axitinib (group A) or pazopanib-sorafenib (group B). Standard treatment is sorafenib in group A and sunitinib in group B, administered until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Secondary endpoints include the evaluation of overall survival, safety, and quality of life.

Background: The availability of new agents (NAs) active in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) progressing after docetaxel treatment (abiraterone acetate, cabazitaxel, and enzalutamide) has led to the possibility of using them sequentially to obtain a cumulative survival benefit., Objective: To provide clinical outcome data relating to a large cohort of mCRPC patients who received a third-line NA after the failure of docetaxel and another NA., Design, Setting, and Participants: We retrospectively reviewed the clinical records of patients who had received at least two successive NAs after the failure of docetaxel., Outcome Measurements and Statistical Analysis: The independent prognostic value of a series of pretreatment covariates on the primary outcome measure of overall survival was assessed using Cox regression analysis., Results and Limitations: We assessed 260 patients who received one third-line NA between January 2012 and December 2013, including 38 who received a further NA as fourth-line therapy. The median progression-free and overall survival from the start of third-line therapy was, respectively, 4 mo and 11 mo, with no significant differences between the NAs. Performance status, and haemoglobin and alkaline phosphatase levels were the only independent prognostic factors. The limitations of the study are mainly due its retrospective nature and the small number of patients treated with some of the sequences., Conclusions: We were unable to demonstrate a difference in the clinical outcomes of third-line NAs regardless of previous NA therapy., Patient Summary: It is debated which sequence of treatments to adopt after docetaxel. Our data do not support the superiority of any of the three new agents in third-line treatment, regardless of the previously administered new agent., (Copyright © 2014 European Association of Urology. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Background: Everolimus is a mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) inhibitor approved for the treatment of metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). We aimed to assess the association between the baseline values and treatmentrelated modifications of total serum cholesterol (C), triglycerides (T), body mass index (BMI), fasting blood glucose level (FBG) and blood pressure (BP) levels and the outcome of patients treated with everolimus for mRCC., Methods: 177 patients were included in this retrospective analysis. Time to progression (TTP), clinical benefit (CB) and overall survival (OS) were evaluated., Results: Basal BMI was significantly higher in patients who experienced a CB (p=0,0145). C,T and C+T raises were significantly associated with baseline BMI (p=0.0412, 0.0283 and 0.0001). Median TTP was significantly longer in patients with T raise compared to patients without T (10 vs 6, p=0.030), C (8 vs 5, p=0.042) and C+T raise (10.9 vs 5.0, p=0.003). At the multivariate analysis, only C+T increase was associated with improved TTP (p=0.005). T raise (21.0 vs 14.0, p=0.002) and C+T increase (21.0 vs 14.0, p=0.006) were correlated with improved OS but were not significant at multivariate analysis., Conclusion: C+T raise is an early predictor for everolimus efficacy for patients with mRCC.

Objective: To investigate whether time from nephrectomy (Nx) to the diagnosis of metastatic disease may be an independent prognostic factor in metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) patients treated with targeted therapies (TTs)., Subjects and Methods: All patients who underwent Nx and at least 1 TT were considered. The patients were divided into two groups based on time from Nx [>1 year (Nx >1) and <1 year (Nx <1)] and a third group for cytoreductive Nx (cNx). Median overall survival (OS) represented the primary outcome., Results: A total of 297 patients met the inclusion criteria. The time from Nx was >1 year in 47%, <1 year in 26% and concomitant with the diagnosis of metastatic disease in 27% of the cases (i.e. cNx). The median OS was 40.6 months (95% CI 30.5-50.7) for the Nx >1 group, 24.3 months (95% CI 17.7-31) for the Nx <1 group and 16.2 months (95% CI 11.2-21.3) for the cNx group (p < 0.05 for all comparisons). On multivariate analysis, time from Nx resulted to be an independent prognostic factor (Nx <1 vs. cNx: HR = 0.62, 95% CI 0.42-0.90, p = 0.13; Nx >1 vs. cNx: HR = 0.43, 95% CI 0.31-0.61, p < 0.001)., Conclusion: We report that time from Nx is an independent prognostic factor for OS in patients affected by mRCC treated with TTs., (© 2014 S. Karger AG, Basel.)

Purpose: Late recurrence of renal cell carcinoma is not a rare event. In this retrospective study we investigate the clinicopathological features and the outcome of patients treated with sorafenib, sunitinib and pazopanib for late relapsing renal cell carcinoma., Materials and Methods: Data were collected from 21 Italian centers involved in the treatment of metastatic renal cell carcinoma. Late relapse was defined as more than 5 years after initial radical nephrectomy., Results: A total of 2,490 patients were screened and 269 (11%) were included in the study. First line therapy was sunitinib in 190 patients (71%), sorafenib in 58 (21%) and pazopanib in 21 (8%). Median progression-free survival was 20.0 months for sunitinib (95% CI 17.0-25.1), and 14.1 months for sorafenib (95% CI 11.0-29.0) and pazopanib (95% CI 11.2-not reported). On multivariate analysis MSKCC score and metastases to lymph nodes, liver and brain were associated with worst overall survival, while pancreatic metastases were associated with longer survival. Furthermore, age, MSKCC score and brain metastases were associated with worst progression-free survival., Conclusions: Patients with late relapsing renal cell carcinoma seem to present a characteristic pattern of metastatic spread without showing significant differences in terms of progression-free survival among sorafenib, sunitinib and pazopanib., (Copyright © 2015 American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

The introduction of agents targeting vascular endothelial grow factors has radically changed the approach to metastatic renal cell carcinoma; however, cure is not within definitive reach. In many cases, the tumor will progress several months after the start of first-line therapy and new lines of therapy are required. Pazopanib and sorafenib are two frequently used targeted agents, and no sound data are currently available for patients who relapsed after pazopanib. In this paper we illustrate the SOAP study, which was designed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of sorafenib in terms of progression free-survival in 44 patients treated in 10 Italian centers who had relapsed after first-line pazopanib. Standard treatment with sorafenib will be administered until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Secondary endpoints include the evaluation of overall survival, safety and quality of life. A subanalysis to evaluate toxicities as predictive factors has also been planned.

Aim: The Italian Retrospective Analysis of Sorafenib as First or Second Target Therapy study assessed the efficacy and safety of sorafenib in metastatic renal cell carcinoma patients treated in the community., Patients & Methods: Patients receiving first- or second-line single-agent sorafenib between January 2008 and December 2010 were eligible. Retrospective data collection started in 2012 and covers at least 1-year follow-up. The primary end point was overall survival (OS)., Results: Median OS was 17.2 months (95% CI: 15.5-19.6): 19.9 months (95% CI: 15.9-25.3) in patients treated with first-line sorafenib and 16.3 months (95% CI: 13.1-18.2) with second-line sorafenib. Overall median (95% CI) progression-free survival was 5.9 months (95% CI: 4.9-6.7): 6.6 (95% CI: 4.9-9.3) and 5.3 months (95% CI: 4.3-6.0) in first- and second-line patients, respectively., Conclusion: The efficacy and safety of sorafenib in routine community practice was generally good, especially in relation to OS in patients treated in the second line, where results were similar to those seen in recent prospective clinical trials.

Tyrosine kinase inhibitors are de facto the most commonly used targeted therapies for upfront treatment of metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). After the first era in which targeted agents were compared with placebo and interferon-α, a new phase has started in recent years characterized by head-to-head trials comparing targeted agents in superiority or non-inferiority trials. Recently, the results a head-to-head phase III trial comparing axitinib to sorafenib as upfront therapy in patients affected by mRCC have been reported. We discuss several critical aspects of this study and the results of our metaanalysis on the activity of axitinib over sorafenib in a larger population with the intent to confirm the superiority of axitinib. Despite this, the definition of primary endpoint remains a central factor in determining the final results of a trial.

Aim: Cabazitaxel is a novel taxane that is approved for use in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer based on the Phase III TROPIC study, which showed improved overall survival with cabazitaxel/prednisone versus mitoxantrone/prednisone. A global early-access program was initiated in order to provide early access to cabazitaxel in docetaxel-pretreated patients and to obtain real-world data., Patients & Methods: We report interim safety results from an Italian prospective, single-arm, multicenter, open-label trial of 218 patients receiving cabazitaxel 25 mg/m2 every 3 weeks plus prednisolone 10 mg/day, until disease progression, unacceptable toxicity, investigator's decision or death., Results: Patients completing treatment received a median of six cabazitaxel cycles. The most common grade 3/4 adverse events were neutropenia (33.9%), leukopenia (15.6%), anemia (6%) and asthenia (6%). No peripheral neuropathy or nail disorders were observed., Conclusion: These results confirm that cabazitaxel has a manageable safety profile in daily clinical practice and support its use in patients with prostate cancer who progress during or after a docetaxel-based therapy.

Background: Chemotherapy for collecting duct carcinoma (CDC) has demonstrated only limited efficacy in the advanced setting. The present study evaluated the activity of targeted therapies in metastatic CDC., Patients and Methods: We evaluated a cohort of 384 consecutive patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). The characteristics of patients with CDC were compared against those of the remaining cohort. All patients with CDC were treated with targeted therapies., Results: Thirteen patients with advanced CDC were referred to our Center (incidence: 3.4% of all mRCC). Median age was 57 and 62 years in the CDC and non-CDC groups, respectively. The overall disease control in the CDC population was 23%, and median overall survival was 4 (95% confidence interval(CI)=2.4-5.6) months. Three patients obtained a satisfying response (disease control lasting 6-33 months)., Conclusion: CDC has a poor prognosis compared to non-CDC renal cell carcinoma. Treatment for CDC represents a future challenge and targeted therapies may play a role in selected cases.

The introduction of targeted agents did not totally resolve the approach to the treatment of metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) because complete response is rarely achieved. Recent findings seem to indicate that metastasectomy may improve survival. The RESORT study was designed to evaluate the additional clinical benefit of metastasectomy followed by sorafenib in a population of mRCC patients. With the aim of evaluating time to recurrence, 132 patients with mRCC who underwent radical resection of metastases at the time of recurrence after nephrectomy will be randomized to receive either sorafenib or best supportive care. Targeted treatment will be administered for up to 52 weeks or discontinued in the case of disease recurrence or unacceptable toxicity. Patients will be followed for a period of 36 months.

Aim: Only few efforts have been taken to investigate the potential existence of disease-specific differences in the safety profile of everolimus. We analyze here the correlation between different patient and tumor characteristics on the safety profile of this molecule. Information on treatment response is also provided., Methods: Consecutive patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC), pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (pNET) or biliary tract cancer were included in this retrospective study. All patients received everolimus 10 mg/day or 5 mg/day. Clinical assessments were performed every 3 weeks., Results: In total, 98 patients were enrolled: 51 with mRCC, 25 with pNET and 22 with biliary tract cancer. The incidence of toxicities (any grade) was 76% with mRCC, 64% with pNET and 95% with biliary tract cancer. Patients with biliary tract cancer also presented a higher frequency of severe toxicities: 64 versus 18% with mRCC and 32% with pNET. Multivariate analysis disclosed that biliary tract cancer (odds ratio [OR]: 23.8; 95% CI: 6.0-117.8; p < 0.0001) is a predictive factor for the development of toxicities during everolimus treatment. No correlations between liver metastasis and toxicities were identified. Disease control rate (DCR) was 45% in mRCC patients, 96% in pNET and 50% for biliary tract cancer patients. pNET tumors were associated with a higher DCR than the mRCC and biliary tract cancer (OR vs mRCC: 66.7; 95% CI: 6.2-276.5; p = 0.004; OR vs biliary tract cancer: 2.6; 95% CI: 0.5-14.2; p = 0.025)., Conclusion: This study suggests that the safety profile of everolimus is acceptable in patients with either mRCC or pNET. In addition, the onset of toxicities is associated with an improved DCR. In patients with biliary tract cancer, everolimus is safe but associated with a higher incidence of adverse events.

Everolimus is an oral derivative of rapamycin which acts as a signal transduction inhibitor. It targets the mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR), a key serine/threonine kinase regulating cell growth and angiogenesis. Everolimus has been approved for the treatment of pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (pNETs), metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC), and breast carcinoma. The activity of everolimus was demonstrated in three phase III randomized placebo-controlled trials, RADIANT-3, RECORD 1 and BOLERO 2, in patients with pNETs, mRCC and breast carcinoma, respectively. All three trials reported a statistically significant increase in median progression-free survival, the primary endpoint of the studies, in favor of everolimus. The absence of an overall survival benefit could be related to the cross-over design and subsequent therapies. The focus of our paper is on the best timing to start treatment with everolimus, while additional questions concern the opportuneness of intermittent use of everolimus specifically in long-responding patients. Lastly, we suggest this treatment could be optimized on the basis of patient and disease characteristics.

Recent therapeutic advances have changed the treatment landscape of metastatic renal cell carcinoma. Unfortunately, the seven agents now available are not based on biomarkers that would indicate which one could provide the best benefit for every patient. We have reviewed the avaliable information concerning the impact of each treatment on comorbidities or status that are frequently seen before commencing treatment for the advanced disease: elderly and patients with cardiovascular complications, metabolic and endocrinology disorders, and infections, as well as impaired organ function (kidney, liver and heart). Additional new drugs will be launched, but no predictive biomarkers are available. Head-to-head studies to evaluate the safety of the different drugs are rare. In this quite complex scenario, we believe that a decision-making approach focused on the patient may represent a suitable strategy.

Although over 70% of patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (RCC) respond to initial therapy with tyrosine kinase inhibitors (disease control rate 70-80%), approximately 20-30% of patients do not respond to first-line therapy and progress within ≤3 months. Understanding the mechanisms of resistance to targeted therapies is vital in the development of prospectively defined sequences and because the choice of first-line therapy determines that of second and subsequent line therapy, identification of the optimal first-line therapy is a priority for clinicians treating patients with metastatic RCC. By preselecting those patients most likely to respond to antivascular endothelial growth factor therapy, clinicians can begin to optimize therapeutic strategies. This review focuses on primary antivascular endothelial growth factor-refractory patients and the move towards individualizing treatment for RCC. The authors include a review of the growing number of studies, as yet retrospective, which provide important information on the group of primary refractory patients with advanced RCC for whom the prognosis is not good. First, the percentage of primary refractory patients (26%) is in agreement with disease control rate - the sum of objective responses and disease stabilization, observed in registration studies for a range of tyrosine kinase inhibitors. Second, the prognosis for these patients is poor as they do not respond to first-line nor to second-line therapy, and changing the mechanism of action (with inhibition of mTOR pathway) does not appear to produce additional benefits. Third and most importantly, the results of these studies demonstrate the need to better characterize the mechanism of primary resistance to current therapeutic agents with the ultimate aim of developing a therapeutic strategy for this important subgroup of patients.

Unlabelled: What's known on the subject? and What does the study add? Sunitinib and sorafenib are orally administered multikinase inhibitors approved for the treatment of advanced RCC. The limited pharmacokinetics data on sunitinib and sorafenib suggest that haemodialysis does not significantly alter plasma concentrations. In this retrospective study we define the safety and efficacy of tyrosine kinase inhibitors in patients with metastatic RCC (mRCC) and end-stage renal disease requiring haemodialysis. Even though the retrospective nature of this survey and the relatively small sample size represent major limitations, these data indicate that treatment with sunitinib and sorafenib in this cohort of patients is feasible with no unexpected toxicity and good efficacy, results similar to those in the general population of patients with mRCC., Objective: To investigate the safety and efficacy of tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) and end-stage renal disease requiring haemodialysis (HD)., Patients and Methods: Between July 2006 and December 2010, 24 patients undergoing HD were treated with sunitinib and/or sorafenib for mRCC in 14 Italian institutions. We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of these patients to evaluate the administered doses of TKIs, treatment-related toxicities and the clinical response to therapy., Results: Sunitinib was administered at 50 mg daily for 4-6 weeks in six patients, 37.5 mg daily for 4-6 weeks in seven patients (one patient subsequently increased the dose to 50 mg daily), 25 mg daily for 4-6 weeks in two patients and 12.5 mg daily for 4-6 weeks in one patient. Among the eight patients treated with sorafenib, four patients received 800 mg daily (400 mg every 12 h), three patients 400 mg daily and one patient 200 mg daily with a continuous schedule. The estimated median progression-free and overall survival periods of this cohort of patients were 10.3 months and 22.6 months, respectively. With regard to tolerability and safety, no unexpected adverse events were registered and no grade 4 haematological or non-haematological toxicities were reported., Conclusions: Sunitinib and sorafenib treatment is not contraindicated in patients with mRCC undergoing HD. The outcome of this patient population is similar to that observed in patients with normal renal function treated with TKIs. These results merit further confirmation by a larger prospective trial., (© 2012 BJU INTERNATIONAL.)

The management of advanced genitourinary malignancies has undergone a major transformation with the advent of novel drugs and targeted therapies in recent years. Assessment of the treatment risks and benefits is required for each patient and therefore better knowledge of the different clinical and molecular aspects of these diseases is warranted. The results of further studies and biomarker validations are expected to provide more treatment options and improve outcomes in the future management of genitourinary malignancies.

The management of advanced genitourinary tumors is rapidly evolving thanks to the clinical availability of several targeted drugs with different mechanisms of action. Among clinicians, in-depth knowledge of all the aspects of the disease, together with the capacity to interpret and accurately correlate clinical data and imaging findings, are strongly needed. Moreover, the optimization of treatment sequences might lead to better disease control with respect to prognostic categories, radiological monitoring and newer biomarkers. Among the genitourinary tumors, only few data are available on bladder, testicular and penile cancers. Our report is supported by scientific and clinical experience in renal cell carcinoma and prostate cancer.

Targeted therapies have improved survival in patients with metastatic renal cell cancer (RCC); however, expert opinion on the optimal therapeutic strategy is divided. This retrospective study evaluates different sequential schemes of targeted therapies in 310 patients with advanced/metastatic RCC who received different systemic agents - sorafenib, sunitinib, bevacizumab, everolimus, temsirolimus and axitinib - alone or in different sequences, until disease progression or intolerable toxicity (median follow-up: 37 months). The median overall survival (OS) was 22 months and the 5-year OS was 23.4%; differential therapeutic schemes were not associated with differences in OS. A worse performance status, no nephrectomy and a poor-risk classification according to the Motzer criteria was associated with a shorter OS. These findings support the use of targeted therapies in the treatment of RCC, even in a large unselected population from a single institution, and suggest that treatment should be tailored to meet individual circumstances and needs.

Mounting evidence suggests that, in order to optimize therapeutic benefits, it is important to consider the range of parameters and characteristics relevant to each individual patient. Of note, the six targeted therapies currently approved for the treatment of advanced/metastatic renal cell carcinoma have not been evaluated in all relevant settings and in all prognostic groups. Among different agents currently licensed for the treatment of renal cell carcinoma, sorafenib was the first therapy to show improvements in progression-free survival and overal survival in Phase III trials. This article will discuss the current role of sorafenib in the treatment of elderly patients with renal cell carcinoma.

Background: The aim of our study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety in unresectable or advanced renal carcinoma treated with sorafenib, in a situation closely similar to the everyday medical practice., Patients and Methods: One hundred and thirty-six patients have been treated with 400 mg b.i.d. of sorafenib administered orally until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. They were either previously untreated or relapsed after one or more previous treatments with systemic therapy. Most of them had clear cell renal carcinoma (RCC), but other histological types such as papillary, chromophobe, Bellini ducts, sarcomatoid and mixed forms were also represented., Results: Overall disease control of 70.6% was achieved with 7.9% of partial remissions. Response was observed in the majority of patients with RCC, but also in some patients with non-clear cell RCC. Safety was acceptable, with the most common adverse events consisting of hand-foot skin reaction, cutaneous rash, diarrhoea, fatigue and hypertension., Conclusions: The results confirm previous ones reported in the literature concerning the efficacy and the safety of sorafenib as second-line treatment in patients with RCC. In addition, they disclose the hypothesis that sorafenib could be effective also in patients who underwent multiple previous treatments and in those with histology different from clear cells., ((c) 2008 S. Karger AG, Basel)

Neuroendocrine tumors are rare neoplasms originating from cells belonging to a diffuse or confined neuroendocrine system and characterized by a significant histopatologic and biologic heterogeneity. Timely diagnosis is delayed because they are often clinically silent for their low differentiation grade and the absence of any symptom due to abnormal hormone release. For these reasons, many neuroendocrine tumor patients are not treated medically for metastatic or inoperable disease. Medical treatments include biotherapy, with interferon-alpha and somatostatin analogues, and chemotherapy. Somastostatin analogues are widely used in patients with symptoms and with carcinoids of low differentiation grade. Interferon-alpha is used alone or in combination with somatostatin analogues. Chemotherapy is active in patients with poorly differentiated neuroendocrine tumors. The therapeutic regimen commonly used is the combination of cisplatinum and etoposide. In conclusion, no standard treatment for NET has yet been identified, and the response criteria suggested by ITMO remain a reference point. The clinical aspect of the disease and biologic features suggest the identification of neuroendocrine tumors patients suitable for the appropriate therapies. On these bases, it is recommended that diagnosis and treatment of neuroendocrine tumors be carried out at specialized oncological centers involved in clinical trials.

Prognostic estimates for older mRCC patients might be key for clinical decision-making. The outcome of realworld older mRCC patients treated with any line cabozantinib study was analyzed according to the baseline Meet-URO score. Meet-URO score is a valid prognostic tool in older mRCC patients treated with cabozantinib for informing the patient and clinical decisions. Background: The addition of neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio (NLR) and bone metastases to the IMDC classification provided by the Meet-URO score, resulted in higher prognostic accuracy in metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) patients receiving ≥2nd line nivolumab or cabozantinib in 2 retrospective analyses and 1st line nivolumab-ipilimumab in an expanded access programme. Prognostic estimates for older mRCC patients might be key for clinical decisionmaking. Methods: The outcome of real-world older (≥70 years) mRCC patients treated with any line cabozantinib within the multicenter observational prospective ZEBRA (Meet-URO 9) study was analyzed according to the baseline Meet-URO score. The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS). The discriminative ability by Harrell's c-index and calibration were assessed to compare the Meet-URO and IMDC scores. Results: A total of 104 mRCC patients received cabozantinib as 1st (38%), 2nd (20%), or ≥3rd (41%) line. With a median follow-up of 11.2 months, the median OS (mOS) was of 18.4 months. According to the IMDC score, favorable (15%), intermediate (65%) and poor-risk (19%) patients had a mOS not reached, of 15.6 and 5.7 months respectively (p = .011). According to the Meet-URO score groups, mOS was not reached in both group 1 (10%) and group 2 (25%), while in group 3 (33%), group 4 (25%) and group 5 (8%) mOS was of 13.6, 12.5, and 3.7 months, respectively (p < .001). The discriminative ability of the Meet-URO score was maintained by merging groups 1 to 2 vs. 3 to 4 vs. 5 (p < .001). The Meet-URO score (with either the original 5-group stratification or the modified 3-group one) showed higher accuracy than the IMDC score (c-index of 0.686 and 0.676 vs. 0.622). Conclusion: This analysis confirmed the prognostic accuracy of the Meet-URO score in older mRCC patients treated with cabozantinib and its role as a convenient tool for informing the patient and clinical decisions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]