Search

Contains fulltext : 248305.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Closed access) CONTEXT: Treatment of metastatic urothelial carcinoma is currently undergoing a rapid evolution. OBJECTIVE: This overview presents the updated European Association of Urology (EAU) guidelines for metastatic urothelial carcinoma. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: A comprehensive scoping exercise covering the topic of metastatic urothelial carcinoma is performed annually by the Guidelines Panel. Databases covered by the search included Medline, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Libraries, resulting in yearly guideline updates. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: Platinum-based chemotherapy is the recommended first-line standard therapy for all patients fit to receive either cisplatin or carboplatin. Patients positive for programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) and ineligible for cisplatin may receive immunotherapy (atezolizumab or pembrolizumab). In case of nonprogressive disease on platinum-based chemotherapy, subsequent maintenance immunotherapy (avelumab) is recommended. For patients without maintenance therapy, the recommended second-line regimen is immunotherapy (pembrolizumab). Later-line treatment has undergone recent advances: the antibody-drug conjugate enfortumab vedotin demonstrated improved overall survival and the fibroblast growth factor receptor (FGFR) inhibitor erdafitinib appears active in case of FGFR3 alterations. CONCLUSIONS: This 2021 update of the EAU guideline provides detailed and contemporary information on the treatment of metastatic urothelial carcinoma for incorporation into clinical practice. PATIENT SUMMARY: In recent years, several new treatment options have been introduced for patients with metastatic urothelial cancer (including bladder cancer and cancer of the upper urinary tract and urethra). These include immunotherapy and targeted treatments. This updated guideline informs clinicians and patients about optimal tailoring of treatment of affected patients.

Purpose The prognostic significance of lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) in patients with metastatic seminoma is not defined. We investigated the prognostic impact of LDH levels prior to first-line systemic treatment and other clinical characteristics in this subset of patients. Methods Files from two registry studies and one single-institution database were analyzed retrospectively. Uni- and multivariate analyses were conducted to identify patient characteristics associated with recurrence free survival (RFS), overall survival (OS), and complete response rate (CRR). Results The dataset included 351 metastatic seminoma patients with a median follow-up of 5.36 years. Five-year RFS, OS and CRR were 82%, 89% and 52%, respectively. Explorative analysis revealed a cut-off LDH level of n = 228) vs. ≥ 2.5 ULN (n = 123) to be associated with a significant difference concerning OS associated with 5-years OS rates of 93% vs. 83% (p = 0.001) which was confirmed in multivariate analysis (HR 2.87; p = 0.004). Furthermore, the cut-off LDH p = 0.012) and 32% vs. 59% (p ≤ 0.001), respectively. Conclusions LDH levels correlate with treatment response and survival in metastatic seminoma patients and should be considered for their prognostic stratification.

Background: With the expanding indications and thus broader use of immune checkpoint inhibitors, clinicians are faced with a new kind of immune-related adverse events. Because of their immune modulating effects, immune checkpoint inhibitors have the potential to worsen autoimmunity in general. Paraneoplastic syndromes can be caused by tumor-induced autoimmune mechanisms. The use of immune-activating substances such as checkpoint inhibitors might lead to exacerbation of paraneoplastic syndromes causing premature discontinuation of the immunotherapy. Case presentation: We report on a 64-year-old patient with metastasized renal cell carcinoma who developed acute kidney failure after cytoreductive nephrectomy. Work-up revealed a paraneoplastic syndrome that caused tubulointerstitial nephritis (TIN). Glucocorticoid therapy successfully reversed the acute kidney injury. However, adjuvant therapy with Nivolumab provoked a flare-up of the paraneoplastic syndrome on two occasions, eventually leading to a treatment discontinuation. Conclusions: Many cases of Nivolumab-induced TIN have been described lately. However, our case demonstrates therapy failure due to a flare-up of a pre-existing paraneoplastic syndrome of the renal cancer. Against this background, it can only be speculated that some of the TIN cases discussed in prior literature might also have been flare-ups of subclinical autoimmunity.

Approximately 420 men are diagnosed with germ-cell cancer (GCC) in Switzerland each year. Recent international guidelines outline management issues, but many aspects remain controversial in an area of highly individualised treatments. Even more than in other tumour types, in GCC the challenge is to choose exactly the correct treatment for an individual patient. Overtreatment in patients likely to be cured must be avoided to reduce long-term toxicities. On the other hand, treatment intensification is required in patients presenting with adverse prognostic factors. Therefore, referral to expert centres or consultations with an expert for a second opinion is strongly recommended. In 2020, Swiss experts discussed their strategies in a consensus meeting during the virtual Swiss Oncology and Haematology Congress (SOHC) in order to harmonise their concepts and to suggest optimal strategies for the management of GCC patients in Switzerland. Votes on controversial issues were obtained and are presented in this review wherever applicable.

Although guidelines exist for advanced and variant bladder cancer management, evidence is limited/conflicting in some areas and the optimal approach remains controversial. Background: Although guidelines exist for advanced and variant bladder cancer management, evidence is limited/conflicting in some areas and the optimal approach remains controversial. Objective: To bring together a large multidisciplinary group of experts to develop consensus statements on controversial topics in bladder cancer management. Design: A steering committee compiled proposed statements regarding advanced and variant bladder cancer management which were assessed by 113 experts in a Delphi survey. Statements not reaching consensus were reviewed; those prioritised were revised by a panel of 45 experts before voting during a consensus conference. Setting: Online Delphi survey and consensus conference. Participants: The European Association of Urology (EAU), the European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO), experts in bladder cancer management. Outcome measurements and statistical analysis: Statements were ranked by experts according to their level of agreement: 1–3 (disagree), 4–6 (equivocal), 7–9 (agree). A priori (level 1) consensus was defined as 70% agreement and 15% disagreement, or vice versa. In the Delphi survey, a second analysis was restricted to stakeholder group(s) considered to have adequate expertise relating to each statement (to achieve level 2 consensus). Results and limitations: Overall, 116 statements were included in the Delphi survey. Of these, 33 (28%) statements achieved level 1 consensus and 49 (42%) statements achieved level 1 or 2 consensus. At the consensus conference, 22 of 27 (81%) statements achieved consensus. These consensus statements provide further guidance across a broad range of topics, including the management of variant histologies, the role/limitations of prognostic biomarkers in clinical decision making, bladder preservation strategies, modern radiotherapy techniques, the management of oligometastatic disease and the evolving role of checkpoint inhibitor therapy in metastatic disease. Conclusions: These consensus statements provide further guidance on controversial topics in advanced and variant bladder cancer management until a time where further evidence is available to guide our approach, The authors would like to thank Peter E. Clark from Atrium Health, Levine Cancer Institute, Charlotte, NC, USA, for his contribution to the Delphi survey. Angela Corstorphine of Kstorfin Medical Communications Ltd provided medical writing support with the preparation of this manuscript; this support was funded jointly by EAU and ESMO.

Background Results from large randomised controlled trials have shown that adding docetaxel to the standard of care (SOC) for men initiating hormone therapy for prostate cancer (PC) prolongs survival for those with metastatic disease and prolongs failure-free survival for those without. To date there has been no formal assessment of whether funding docetaxel in this setting represents an appropriate use of UK National Health Service (NHS) resources. Objective To assess whether administering docetaxel to men with PC starting long-term hormone therapy is cost-effective in a UK setting. Design, setting, and participants We modelled health outcomes and costs in the UK NHS using data collected within the STAMPEDE trial, which enrolled men with high-risk, locally advanced metastatic or recurrent PC starting first-line hormone therapy. Intervention SOC was hormone therapy for ≥2 yr and radiotherapy in some patients. Docetaxel (75 mg/m2) was administered alongside SOC for six three-weekly cycles. Outcome measurements and statistical analysis The model generated lifetime predictions of costs, changes in survival duration, quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs). Results and limitations The model predicted that docetaxel would extend survival (discounted quality-adjusted survival) by 0.89 yr (0.51) for metastatic PC and 0.78 yr (0.39) for nonmetastatic PC, and would be cost-effective in metastatic PC (ICER £5514/QALY vs SOC) and nonmetastatic PC (higher QALYs, lower costs vs SOC). Docetaxel remained cost-effective in nonmetastatic PC when the assumption of no survival advantage was modelled. Conclusions Docetaxel is cost-effective among patients with nonmetastatic and metastatic PC in a UK setting. Clinicians should consider whether the evidence is now sufficiently compelling to support docetaxel use in patients with nonmetastatic PC, as the opportunity to offer docetaxel at hormone therapy initiation will be missed for some patients by the time more mature survival data are available. Patient summary Starting docetaxel chemotherapy alongside hormone therapy represents a good use of UK National Health Service resources for patients with prostate cancer that is high risk or has spread to other parts of the body., Take Home Message Docetaxel is a cost-effective intervention in patients with metastatic and nonmetastatic prostate cancer starting hormone therapy. Clinicians and National Health Service funding bodies should consider whether the evidence is now sufficiently compelling to support initiating docetaxel in patients with nonmetastatic disease.

PURPOSE The classification of the International Germ-Cell Cancer Collaborative Group (IGCCCG) has been a major advance in the management of germ-cell tumors, but relies on data of only 660 patients with seminoma treated between 1975 and 1990. We re-evaluated this classification in a database from a large international consortium. MATERIALS AND METHODS Data on 2,451 men with metastatic seminoma treated with cisplatin- and etoposide-based first-line chemotherapy between 1990 and 2013 were collected from 30 institutions or collaborative groups in Australia, Europe, and North America. Clinical trial and registry data were included. Primary end points were progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) calculated from day 1 of treatment. Variables at initial presentation were evaluated for their prognostic impact. Results were validated in an independent validation set of 764 additional patients. RESULTS Compared with the initial IGCCCG classification, in our modern series, 5-year PFS improved from 82% to 89% (95% CI, 87 to 90) and 5-year OS from 86% to 95% (95% CI, 94 to 96) in good prognosis, and from 67% to 79% (95% CI, 70 to 85) and 72% to 88% (95% CI, 80 to 93) in intermediate prognosis patients. Lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) proved to be an additional adverse prognostic factor. Good prognosis patients with LDH above 2.5× upper limit of normal had a 3-year PFS of 80% (95% CI, 75 to 84) and a 3-year OS of 92% (95% CI, 88 to 95) versus 92% (95% CI, 90 to 94) and 97% (95% CI, 96 to 98) in the group with lower LDH. CONCLUSION PFS and OS in metastatic seminoma significantly improved in our modern series compared with the original data. The original IGCCCG classification retains its relevance, but can be further refined by adding LDH at a cutoff of 2.5× upper limit of normal as an additional adverse prognostic factor.

BACKGROUND International guidelines state that bone-targeted agents such as denosumab or zoledronic acid at doses used for bone metastasis are not indicated for patients with metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer (mCSPC) with bone metastases. Whereas denosumab has never been studied in this patient population, zoledronic acid has been shown to be ineffective in decreasing the risk for skeletal-related events. This study estimates the prevalence and economic consequences of real-world use of bone-targeted agents for mCSPC patients in Switzerland. METHODS To estimate the frequency of bone-targeted agent administration and skeletal-related events, data from a non-interventional, cross-sectional survey involving oncologists across Switzerland (SAKK 95/16) was combined with data from the Swiss National Institute for Cancer Epidemiology and Registration (NICER). Economic parameters were calculated from the perspective of the healthcare system over the median time to prostate-specific antigen (PSA) progression for the extrapolated patient group, using data from NICER. The cost calculation covered costs for bone-targeted agents, their administration and skeletal-related events. The time to PSA progression (33.2 months), as well as the probability and cost of skeletal-related events were derived from the literature. RESULTS The survey was answered by 86 physicians treating 417 patients, of whom 106 (25.4%) had prostate cancer, with 36 (34.0%) of these mCSPC. The majority of mCSPC patients (52.8%, n = 19) received bone-targeted agents monthly. Denosumab was the treatment of choice in 84.2% of patients (n = 16). Extrapolation using data from NICER indicated that 568 mCSPC patients may be treated with bone-targeted agents at doses used for bone metastasis every year in Switzerland, leading to estimated total costs of more than CHF 8.3 million over 33.2 months. Because of its more frequent prescription and higher price, it appears that almost 93% of the total costs can be attributed to denosumab. For both denosumab and zoledronic acid, the most expensive components were the cost of administration and the drug cost, making up more than 90% of the total costs, with the rest being costs of skeletal-related events. CONCLUSIONS This study found that the administration of bone-targeted agents in doses used for bone-metastatic diseases to prevent skeletal-related events is frequent in the setting of mCSPC and results in significant costs for the healthcare system.

Bone-modifying agent (BMA) therapy is recommended for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer but not metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer (mCSPC). BMA treatment in mCSPC may therefore constitute overuse.In this retrospective cohort study using linked Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results-Medicare data, we included patients diagnosed with stage IV prostate adenocarcinoma from 2007 to 2015 who were 66 years of age or older at diagnosis and had received androgen-deprivation or antiandrogen therapy. We excluded patients who had previously received BMAs or had existing osteoporosis, osteopenia, hypercalcemia, or prior bone fracture. The primary outcome was receipt of BMA (zoledronic acid or denosumab) within 180 days of diagnosis (emergence of CRPC within this time frame is unlikely). The secondary outcome was receipt of a BMA within 90 days. Exposures of interest included practice location (physician office vs hospital outpatient) and the specialty (medical oncologist vs urologist) of the treating physician.Our sample included 2627 patients, of whom 52.9% were treated by medical oncologists and 47.1% by urologists; 77.7% and 22.3% received care in physician office and hospital outpatient locations, respectively. Overall, 23.6% received a BMA within 180 days; 18.4% did within 90 days. BMA therapy was more common among patients treated by oncologists (odds ratio = 8.23, 95% confidence interval = 6.41 to 10.57) and in physician office locations (odds ratio = 1.33, 95% confidence interval = 1.06 to 1.69). Utilization has increased: 17.3% of patients received BMAs from 2007 to 2009 (17.3% zoledronic acid, 0% denosumab) and 28.1% from 2012 to 2015 (8.4% zoledronic acid, 20.3% denosumab).Among patients with mCSPC who had no evidence of high osteoporotic fracture risk, more than one-quarter have received BMAs in recent years. This overuse may lead to excess costs and toxicity.

Background Bone-targeted agents (BTAs) are widely used in the management of patients with bone metastases from solid tumors. Knowledge of the impact of their routine care use on patient-reported pain and bone pain-related quality of life (QoL) is limited. Methods This real world, cross-sectional study enrolled patients over a 3-month period through oncologists across Switzerland. Patients were ≥ 18 years, had solid tumors and at least one bone metastasis, and received routine care for bone metastases. Physicians provided data on BTA-related practices, risk of bone complications and BTA regimen. Patients completed questionnaires about pain (BPI-SF), general and bone pain-related QoL (FACT-G, FACT-BP) and treatment satisfaction (FACIT-TS-G). Results Eighteen sites recruited 417 patients. Based on the FACT-BP, 42% of the patients indicated not having bone pain. According to the BPI-SF, 28% reported no, 43% mild, 14% moderate, and 15% severe pain, respectively. Patients not treated with a BTA had better overall QoL (FACT-G: p = 0.031) and bone pain-related QoL (FACT-BP, p = 0.007) than those treated with a BTA. All pain and other QoL scales did not differ between groups. Patients perceived at ‘low risk of bone complications’ by their physician not receiving a BTA reported less pain and better QoL than those considered at ‘low risk’ but receiving BTA treatment or those considered at ‘high risk’ regardless of BTA treatment. Overall satisfaction with the treatment was good; almost 50% of patients reporting that they were completely satisfied. Conclusions Overall, pain and QoL did not differ according to BTA treatment or physicians’ risk perception. Patient with low risks not receiving BTA treatment reported least pain and highest QoL scores. These results may suggest that treating physicians assess bone complication risk appropriately and treat patients accordingly, but they need to be confirmed by objective determination of longitudinal skeletal complication risk.

Background: For patients with resectable stage IIIA(N2) non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) neoadjuvant chemotherapy with three cycles of cisplatin and docetaxel followed by surgery has been shown to yield a 1-year event-free survival (EFS) rate of 48% and is an accepted standard of care. Neoadjuvant PD-(L)1 inhibitors can result in high response rates in resectable NSCLC. Methods: Neoadjuvant treatment consisted of three cycles of cisplatin 100 mg/m 2 and docetaxel 85 mg/m 2 q3w followed by two cycles of durvalumab 750 mg q2w. Adjuvant durvalumab was continued for 1 year after surgery. The primary endpoint was 1-year EFS. The hypothesis for statistical considerations was an improvement of 1-year EFS from 48% to 65%. This trial is registered with ClinicialTrials.gov, NCT02572843. Findings: Sixty-eight patients were enrolled, 67 were included in the full analysis set. Radiographic response rate was 43·3% (95%CI: 31·2-56·0) after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (complete remission (CR): 2·9%, partial remission (PR): 40·3%, stable disease (SD): 44·8%) and 58·1% (95%CI: 44·8-70·5) after additional neoadjuvant immunotherapy (CR: 6·5%, PR: 51·6%, SD: 25·8%). Fifty-five patients were resected, of which 34 (61·8%) achieved a major pathological response (MPR; ≤10% viable tumour cells), and 10 (18·2%) amongst them a complete pathological response. Postoperative nodal down-staging (ypN0-1) was observed in 37 patients (67·3%). Fifty-one (92·7%) patients had an R0 resection. There was no significant effect of pre-treatment PD-L1 expression on MPR or nodal down-staging. In the entire study population, the 1-year EFS rate was 73·4% (90%CI: 62·7-81·5). Median EFS and overall survival were not reached after 28 months of median follow-up. Fifty-nine (88·1%) patients had an adverse event (AE) grade ≥3 including two fatal AEs that were not assessed to be treatment-related. Interpretation: This is thus far the largest report on perioperative PD-(L)1 inhibition in patients with resectable stage IIIA(N2) NSCLC. The addition of perioperative durvalumab to neoadjuvant chemotherapy is safe and exceeds historical data of chemotherapy alone with a high MPR and an encouraging 1-year EFS rate of 73·4%. Trial Registration: This trial is registered with ClinicialTrials.gov, NCT02572843. Funding Statement: The study was supported by research agreements with the following institutions: Swiss State Secretary for Education, Research and Innovation (SERI), Swiss Cancer Research Foundation (SCS) and Swiss Cancer League (SCL). Research funding for translational research projects was granted by Gateway for Cancer Research and Rising Tide Foundation. AstraZeneca provided drug and financial support. Declaration of Interests: SIR: Honoraria for advisory boards and consulting (all paid to the institution) from Astra-Zeneca, BMS, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Eisai, Eli Lilly, Merck Serono, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Takeda. Research funding from AbbVie, Astra-Zeneca, BMS, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Merck. Support for travel and accommodations from Amgen, AstraZeneca, BMS, Boehringer-Ingelheim, MSD, Roche, Takeda. Member of the Federal Drug Commission of the Federal Office of Public Health. AZ: Honoraria for advisory boards and consulting (all paid to the institution) from Bristol-Myers Squibb, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Hoffmann–La Roche, NBE Therapeutics, Secarna, ACM Pharma and Hookipa. Non-commercial research agreements with Hoffmann–La Roche, NBE Therapeutics, Secarna, ACM Pharma, Hookipa, and BeyondSpring. EIE: None SSP: Honoraria for advisory boards and consulting from Astra-Zeneca, BMS, Boehringer-Ingelheim, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer and Roche. DB: None AB: None MF: Research grants from Bristol-Myers-Squibb and Astra Zeneca (paid to the institution). Honoraria for advisory boards from Bristol-Myers Squibb, AstraZeneca, Takeda, Roche, Boehringer-Ingelheim and MSD. MJ: Research grants from Bristol-Myers Squibb, Roche and Merck. DL: None HG: None LAM: Honoraria for advisory boards from AstraZeneca, Bristol-Myers-Squibb, Takeda, Roche and MSD. Support for travel and accommodations from AstraZeneca and Roche. CB: Honoraria for advisory boards from AstraZeneca, Pfizer, Roche, Takeda, Janssen-Cilag and Boehringer-Ingelheim. Support for travel and accommodations from AstraZeneca and Takeda. WW: Honoraria for advisory boards and consulting from Astra Zeneca SP: Personal fees from Abbvie, grants and personal fees from Amgen, grants and personal fees from AstraZeneca, personal fees from Bayer, personal fees from Biocartis, grants and personal fees from Boehringer-Ingelheim, grants and personal fees from Bristol-Myers Squibb, grants and personal fees from Clovis, personal fees from Daiichi Sankyo, personal fees from Debiopharm, personal fees from Eli Lilly, grants and personal fees from F. Hoffman - La Roche, personal fees from Foundations Medicine, grants and personal fees from Illumina, personal fees from Janssen, grants and personal fees from Novartis, personal fees from Pharma Mar, grants and personal fees from Pfizer, personal fees from Regeneron, personal fees from Sanofi, personal fees from Seattle Genetics, personal fees from Takeda, grants and personal fees from Merck Sharp and Dohme, personal fees from Merck Serono, personal fees from Merrimack. MM: Honoraria for advisory boards from AstraZeneca, Bristol-Myers-Squibb, MSD, Roche and Takeda. Research grant (to the institution) from AstraZeneca. RC: Honoraria for advisory boards (all paid to the institution) from AstraZeneca, Astellas, MSD, Bristol-Myers-Squibb, Janssen-Cilag, Roche, Pfizer, Merck Serono, Ipsen and Bayer. AFO: None WDJ: None CW: None NM: None PF: Honoraria for advisory from Pfizer, Roche, Takeda, Boehringer-Ingelheim and BristolMyers Squibb. MB: None PB: None GG: None CR: None MG: Honoraria for advisory boards and consulting (all paid to the institution) from Astra-Zeneca. MP: Honoraria for advisory boards from AbbVie, AstraZeneca, Boehringer-Ingelheim, BristolMyers-Squibb, Eisai, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Takeda and Merck. Speakers fee from Janssen-Cilag. Support for travel and accommodations from AstraZeneca, BoehringerIngelheim, Bristol-Myers-Squibb and Vifor. Ethics Approval Statement: The trial was done in accordance with the principles of the Declaration of Helsinki. The protocol was approved by the ethics committee of each participating site. Written informed consent was obtained from all patients.

International audience; Context: This overview presents the updated European Association of Urology (EAU) guidelines for muscle-invasive and metastatic bladder cancer (MMIBC). Objective: To provide practical evidence-based recommendations and consensus statements on the clinical management of MMIBC with a focus on diagnosis and treatment. Evidence acquisition: A broad and comprehensive scoping exercise covering all areas of the MMIBC guideline has been performed annually since its 2017 publication (based on the 2016 guideline). Databases covered by the search included Medline, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Libraries, resulting in yearly guideline updates. A level of evidence and a grade of recommendation were assigned. Additionally, the results of a collaborative multistakeholder consensus project on advanced bladder cancer (BC) have been incorporated in the 2020 guidelines, addressing those areas where it is unlikely that prospective comparative studies will be conducted. Evidence synthesis: Variant histologies are increasingly reported in invasive BC and are relevant for treatment and prognosis. Staging is preferably done with (enhanced) computerised tomography scanning. Treatment decisions are still largely based on clinical factors. Radical cystectomy (RC) with lymph node dissection remains the recommended treatment in highest-risk non–muscle-invasive and muscle-invasive nonmetastatic BC, preceded by cisplatin-based neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) for invasive tumours in “fit” patients. Selected men and women benefit from sexuality sparing RC, although this is not recommended as standard therapy. Open and robotic RC show comparable outcomes, provided the procedure is performed in experienced centres. For open RC 10, the minimum selected case load is 10 procedures per year. If bladder preservation is considered, chemoradiation is an alternative in well-selected patients without carcinoma in situ and after maximal resection. Adjuvant chemotherapy should be considered if no NAC was given. Perioperative immunotherapy can be offered in clinical trial setting. For fit metastatic patients, cisplatin-based chemotherapy remains the first choice. In cisplatin-ineligible patients, immunotherapy in Programmed Death Ligand 1 (PD-L1)-positive patients or carboplatin in PD-L1–negative patients is recommended. For second-line treatment in metastatic disease, pembrolizumab is recommended. Postchemotherapy surgery may prolong survival in responders. Quality of life should be monitored in all phases of treatment and follow-up. The extended version of the guidelines is available at the EAU website: https://uroweb.org/guideline/bladder-cancer-muscle-invasive-and-metastatic/. Conclusions: This summary of the 2020 EAU MMIBC guideline provides updated information on the diagnosis and treatment of MMIBC for incorporation into clinical practice. Patient summary: The European Association of Urology Muscle-invasive and Metastatic Bladder Cancer (MMIBC) Panel has released an updated version of their guideline, which contains information on histology, staging, prognostic factors, and treatment of MMIBC. The recommendations are based on the current literature (until the end of 2019), with emphasis on high-level data from randomised clinical trials and meta-analyses and on the findings of an international consensus meeting. Surgical removal of the bladder and bladder preservation are discussed, as well as the use of chemotherapy and immunotherapy in localised and metastatic disease. Radical cystectomy with urinary diversion remains the mainstay of managing muscle-invasive bladder cancer (MIBC). The use of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) has improved overall survival rates, but selection of patients who will benefit most from NAC remains challenging. In case bladder-preserving strategies are considered, patient stratification according to their risk profile is imperative and management should be discussed in a multidisciplinary team. As yet, there are no validated prognostic molecular markers to guide the clinical management of MIBC. In a metastatic setting, cisplatin-based chemotherapy remains the first choice in fit patients. In unfit patients, based on interim results from two on-going clinical trials, first-line treatment with pembrolizumab or atezolizumab for urothelial cancer is restricted to Programmed Death Ligand 1-positive patients only.

Introduction: Primary breast malignancy in adolescent women is very rare and differs in several aspects from findings in adult women. Case Presentation: A young woman aged 16 years presented with a locally aggressive breast tumor. The patient received cisplatin-based chemotherapy followed by tumor resection assuming a diagnosis of germ cell tumor. Four months later, she developed locally recurrent disease and underwent a mastectomy. No definite diagnosis was agreed upon despite intensive pathological workup. Subsequent management consisted of follow-up only and the patient remains in complete remission 9 years later. Conclusion: This case demonstrates the difficulty of diagnosis and management of rare malignancies in adolescents, and highlights the importance of international and interdisciplinary collaboration in diagnosis and clinical decision-making.

Purpose: MEDI3726 is an antibody–drug conjugate targeting the prostate-specific membrane antigen and carrying a pyrrolobenzodiazepine warhead. This phase I study evaluated MEDI3726 monotherapy in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer after disease progression on abiraterone and/or enzalutamide and taxane-based chemotherapy. Patients and Methods: MEDI3726 was administered at 0.015–0.3 mg/kg intravenously every 3 weeks until disease progression/unacceptable toxicity. The primary objective was to assess safety, dose-limiting toxicities (DLT), and MTD/maximum administered dose (MAD). Secondary objectives included assessment of antitumor activity, pharmacokinetics, and immunogenicity. The main efficacy endpoint was composite response, defined as confirmed response by RECIST v1.1, and/or PSA decrease of ≥50% after ≥12 weeks, and/or decrease from ≥5 to Results: Between February 1, 2017 and November 13, 2019, 33 patients received MEDI3726. By the data cutoff (January 17, 2020), treatment-related adverse events (TRAE) occurred in 30 patients (90.9%), primarily skin toxicities and effusions. Grade 3/4 TRAEs occurred in 15 patients (45.5%). Eleven patients (33.3%) discontinued because of TRAEs. There were no treatment-related deaths. One patient receiving 0.3 mg/kg had a DLT of grade 3 thrombocytopenia. The MTD was not identified; the MAD was 0.3 mg/kg. The composite response rate was 4/33 (12.1%). MEDI3726 had nonlinear pharmacokinetics with a short half-life (0.3–1.8 days). The prevalence of antidrug antibodies was 3/32 (9.4%), and the incidence was 13/32 (40.6%). Conclusions: Following dose escalation, no MTD was identified. Clinical responses occurred at higher doses, but were not durable as patients had to discontinue treatment due to TRAEs.

The authors regret that a co-author was mistakenly missed from the authorship. The following co-author should have been included in the authorship: Peter-Paul M. Willemse Department of Oncological Urology, University Medical Center, Utrecht Cancer Center, Utrecht, The Netherlands

Several ongoing clinical trials are investigating novel therapies and combinations of existing therapies for the treatment of patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer. One such trial, ERA 223, has shown that the combination of abiraterone plus radium-223 did not improve symptomatic skeletal event-free survival compared with abiraterone plus placebo. Furthermore, an increase in bone fractures was observed with the combination of abiraterone and radium-223 in the study, particularly in patients not receiving bone health agents (denosumab or zoledronic acid). The results led to a change in the indication of radium-223 in Europe and also highlighted a need for greater awareness of bone health in patients with prostate cancer. Following a meeting to discuss these issues, we report in this article our views on the role of radium-223 within the emerging treatment options for patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer. We discuss best practices, and provide expert recommendations for preserving bone health and sequencing of life-prolonging therapies in patients with prostate cancer in order to achieve optimal outcomes. PATIENT SUMMARY: We provide recommendations on maintaining bone health, sequencing of treatments, and the role of radium-223 therapy in prostate cancer. Radium-223 is a valuable treatment option for patients with castration-resistant prostate cancer and bone metastases. Monitoring and maintaining bone health are essential for patients with prostate cancer, and should be considered at the initiation of androgen deprivation therapy.

International audience; CONTEXT: In bladder cancer patients treated with radical cystectomy (RC), controversy exists regarding the impact of the annual hospital volume (HV) and/or surgeon volume (SV) on oncological outcomes and quality of care. OBJECTIVE: A systematic review was performed to evaluate the impact of HV and SV on clinical outcomes. Primary outcomes included in-hospital, 30-d, and 90-d mortality. Secondary outcomes included complications, long-term survival, positive surgical margin rate, lymphadenectomy performance, length of hospital stay, neobladder performance, and blood loss/transfusion rate. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched. Comparative studies published after the year of 2000 including patients who underwent RC for bladder cancer were eligible for inclusion. Partial cystectomy was an exclusion criterion. Risk of bias (RoB) assessment was performed according to the ROBINS-1 tool. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: After screening of 1190 abstracts, 39 studies recruiting 549 542 patients were included. All studies were retrospective observation cohort studies (level of evidence 3). Twenty-two studies reported on HV only, six studies on SV only, and 12 on both. Higher HV, specifically an HV of >10, was associated with improved primary and secondary outcomes in most studies. In addition, there is some evidence that an HV of >20 improves outcomes. For SV, limited and conflicting data are reported. Most studies had moderate to high RoB. The results were synthesized narratively. CONCLUSIONS: Acknowledging the lower level of evidence, HV is likely associated with in-hospital, 30- and 90-d mortality, as well as the secondary outcomes assessed. Based on this study, the European Association of Urology Muscle-invasive and Metastatic Bladder Cancer Guideline Panel recommends hospitals to perform at least 10, and preferably >20, RCs annually or refer the patient to a center that reaches this number. For SV, limited and conflicting data are available. The available evidence suggests HV rather than SV to be the main driver of perioperative outcomes. PATIENT SUMMARY: Current literature suggests that the number of bladder removal operations per hospital per year is associated with postoperative survival as well as the quality of care provided. Copyright

CONTEXT Primary urethral carcinoma (PUC) is a rare cancer accounting for

ZusammenfassungGonadale Keimzelltumoren stellen zusammen mit den seltenen extragonadalen Keimzelltumoren die häufigste Krebserkrankung von Männern zwischen der Pubertät und einem Alter von etwa 40 Jahren dar. Diagnostik, Therapie und Nachsorge wurden in klinischen Studien intensiv untersucht sowie in nationalen und internationalen Leitlinien zusammengefasst 1 2 3. Die überwiegende Mehrheit Betroffener wird heutzutage geheilt. Das junge Alter sowie die hohe Heilungsaussicht zwingen mehr noch als bei anderen Erkrankungen, unnötige Strahlenbelastung zu vermeiden. Daher bleibt der Einsatz der PET/CT bei Keimzelltumoren einigen wenigen Indikationen vorbehalten.

Background: The prognostic role of human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG) and lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) serum levels in seminoma patients remains uncertain. This observational study evaluates the prognostic impact of tumour marker levels, and other clinicopathological findings, in hCG-positive seminoma patients. Methods: Seminoma patients with serum hCG levels above normal at first diagnosis were eligible for recruitment. Statistical analysis, including multivariate regression, was performed to identify risk factors. Primary end-points were overall survival (OS) and recurrence-free survival (RFS). Results: We recruited 1031 hCG-positive patients (stage I: n = 586; stage II + III: n = 427) diagnosed between 1981 and 2018. In metastatic disease, LDH levels >= 3 above upper normal limit (UNL) pre- (n = 109) or post-orchiectomy (n = 73) and patients aged >= 40 years (n = 187) were associated with poor prognosis: 5-year OS rates of 84% (LDH >= 3 UNL pre-orchiectomy) versus 92% (= 3 UNL post-orchiectomy) versus 92% (= 40 years) versus 91% (= 2000 IU/l pre-orchiectomy (n = 17) exhibited a poor prognosis, with 5-year OS rates of 73% (>= 2000 IU/ l) versus 94% (= 2000 IU/l, may represent a separate prognostic subgroup associated with impaired survival rates. (C) 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Background: VPM1002BC is a modified mycobacterium Bacillus Calmette Guérin (BCG) for the treatment of non-muscle invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC). The genetic modifications are expected to result in better immunogenicity and less side effects. We report on patient safety and immunology of the first intravesical application of VPM1002BC in human. Methods: Six patients with BCG failure received a treatment of 6 weekly instillations with VPM1002BC. Patients were monitored for adverse events (AE), excretion of VPM1002BC and cytokines, respectively. Results: No DLT (dose limiting toxicity) occurred during the DLT-period. No grade ≥3 AEs occurred. Excretion of VPM1002BC in the urine was limited to less than 24 hours. Plasma levels of TNFα significantly increased after treatment and blood-derived CD4+ T cells stimulated with PPD demonstrated significantly increased intracellular GM-CSF and IFN expression. Conclusion: The intravesical application of VPM1002BC is safe and well tolerated by patients and results in a potential Th1 weighted immune response.

javax.xml.bind.JAXBElement@5a6991ed Differentiated thyroid cancer (DTC) accounts for approximately 95% of thyroid carcinomas. In the metastatic RAI-refractory disease, chemotherapy has very limited efficacy and is associated with substantial toxicity. With increasing knowledge of the molecular pathogenesis of DTC, novel targeted therapies have been developed. Lenvatinib is a tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) with promising clinical activity based on the randomized phase III SELECT trial. In Switzerland, a Named Patient Program (NPP) was installed to bridge the time gap to Swissmedic approval. Here, we report the results from the Swiss Lenvatinib NPP including patients with metastatic RAI-refractory DTC. javax.xml.bind.JAXBElement@7407c55a Main inclusion criteria for the Swiss NPP were RAI-refractory DTC, documented disease progression, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status 0-3. The number of previous therapies was not limited. The Swiss Lenvatinib NPP was initiated in June 2014 and was closed in October 2015 with the approval of the drug. javax.xml.bind.JAXBElement@1c5cb2cc Between June 2014 and October 2015, 13 patients with a median age of 72 years have been enrolled. Most patients (69%) had at least one prior systemic therapy, mainly sorafenib. 31% of patients showed a PR and 31% SD. Median progression free survival was 7.2 months and the median overall survival was 22.7 months. Dose reduction due to adverse events was necessary in 7 patients (53%). At the time of analysis 6 patients (47%) were still on treatment with a median time on treatment of 9.98 months. javax.xml.bind.JAXBElement@713fc2d4 Our results show that lenvatinib has reasonable clinical activity in unselected patients with RAI-refractory thyroid cancer with nearly two-third of patients showing clinical benefit. The toxicity profile of lenvatinib is manageable.

Simple Summary Despite immune checkpoint inhibitors’ (ICIs) improved overall survival in urothelial carcinoma patients, only a minority of them benefit from immunotherapy. Therefore, there is an unmet clinical need to identify biomarkers which are useful to select the patients who are most likely to respond to ICIs. This review describes the prognostic and predictive role, and potential clinical applicability, of patient- and tumour-related factors. These factors include new molecular classes, tumour mutational burden, mutational signatures, circulating tumour DNA, programmed death-ligand 1, inflammatory indices and clinical characteristics. This summary may help clinicians to assess patients who are considered for ICI treatment, and may drive further prospective research on these biomarkers. Abstract In recent years, the treatment landscape of urothelial carcinoma has significantly changed due to the introduction of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs), which are the standard of care for second-line treatment and first-line platinum-ineligible patients with advanced disease. Despite the overall survival improvement, only a minority of patients benefit from this immunotherapy. Therefore, there is an unmet need to identify prognostic and predictive biomarkers or models to select patients who will benefit from ICIs, especially in view of novel therapeutic agents. This review describes the prognostic and predictive role, and clinical readiness, of clinical and tumour factors, including new molecular classes, tumour mutational burden, mutational signatures, circulating tumour DNA, programmed death-ligand 1, inflammatory indices and clinical characteristics for patients with urothelial cancer treated with ICIs. A classification of these factors according to the levels of evidence and grades of recommendation currently indicates both a prognostic and predictive value for ctDNA and a prognostic relevance only for concomitant medications and patients’ characteristics.

Radiolabeled somatostatin (sst) receptor agonists are integral to the diagnosis of gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (NETs), but detection rates, especially of liver metastases, remain limited even with PET/CT. 68Ga-OPS202 (68Ga-NODAGA-JR11; NODAGA = 1,4,7-triazacyclononane,1-glutaric acid-4,7-acetic acid and JR11 = Cpa-c(dCys-Aph(Hor)-dAph(Cbm)-Lys-Thr-Cys)-dTyr-NH2)), a novel radiolabeled sst receptor antagonist with a high affinity for the sst2 receptor, has the potential to perform better than sst receptor agonists. Here, we present the results of the phase II component of a phase I/II study that evaluated the sensitivity of 68Ga-OPS202, compared with the reference compound, 68Ga-DOTATOC (an sst receptor agonist), in PET imaging. Methods: Patients received a single 150-MBq intravenous injection of 68Ga-DOTATOC (15 μg of peptide) and 2 single 150-MBq intravenous injections of 68Ga-OPS202 (15 μg of peptide at visit 1 and 50 μg at visit 2). Whole-body PET/CT acquisitions were performed 1 h after injection on the same calibrated PET/CT scanner. Diagnostic efficacy measures were compared against contrast medium-enhanced CT or MRI as the gold standard. Two independent masked experts read the scans, and both outcomes were combined for analysis. Results: Twelve consecutive patients with low- or intermediate-grade gastroenteropancreatic NETs took part in this prospective study. Image contrast for matched malignant liver lesions was significantly higher for the 68Ga-OPS202 scans than for the 68Ga-DOTATOC scan: the median of the mean tumor-to-background SUVmax ratios were significantly higher for 15 and 50 μg of 68Ga-OPS202 (5.3 and 4.3, with interquartile ranges of 2.9-5.7 and 3.4-6.3 and P values of 0.004 and 0.008) than for 68Ga-DOTATOC (1.9, with an interquartile range of 1.4-2.9). The higher tumor-to-background ratio of 68Ga-OPS202 resulted not only in a higher detection rate of liver metastases but also in a significantly higher lesion-based overall sensitivity with the antagonist than with 68Ga-DOTATOC: 94% and 88% for 50 and 15 μg of 68Ga-OPS202, respectively, and 59% for 15 μg of 68Ga-DOTATOC (P < 0.001). Positive predictive values for 68Ga-OPS202 PET/CT and 68Ga-DOTATOC PET/CT were similar (∼98%). There were no significant differences in image contrast, sensitivity, or positive predictive values between the 2 68Ga-OPS202 peptide doses, indicating a high reproducibility. Conclusion: Preliminary diagnostic efficacy data from this phase II study indicate that 68Ga-OPS202 has high sensitivity for the detection of gastroenteropancreatic NETs. Further studies in larger patient populations are warranted.

The imaging response to radium-223 therapy is at present poorly described. We aimed to describe the imaging response to radium-223 treatment. We retrospectively evaluated the computed tomography (CT) and bone scintigraphy response of metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC) patients treated with radium-223, in eight centers in three countries. A total of 130 patients were included, the majority (n=84, 65%) received radium-223 post docetaxel. Thirty-four of 99 patients with available data (34%) received concomitant abiraterone or enzalutamide. A total of 54% (n=70) patients completed the planned six injections of radium-223. In patients with available data, a transient increase in bone metastases-related pain was observed in 27% (n=33/124) and an improvement of bone metastases-related pain on treatment with radium-223 was noted in 49% of patients (n=61/124). At 3 and 6 months of treatment with radium-223, bone imaging showed stable disease in 74% (n=84/113) and 94% of patients (n=93/99) with available data, respectively. An increase in the number of bone lesions was documented at 3 months compared with baseline in 26% (n=29/113) and at 6 months compared with 3 months in 6% of patients (n=6/99), respectively. Radiological extraskeletal disease progression occurred in 46% of patients (n=57/124) with available CT data at 3 and/or 6 months. Progression of bone metastases during radium-223 therapy is uncommon. A bone flare (pain and/or radiological) may be noted during the first 3 months, and should not be confused with progression. Imaging by CT scan should be considered after three and six doses of radium-223 to rule out extraskeletal disease progression.

Summary The combination of lenalidomide (Revlimid®, R) and dexamethasone (d) is a standard regimen for patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (rrMM). With this regimen, only a small fraction of patients will achieve high quality responses [≥ very good partial response (VGPR)]. The combination of bendamustine (B), lenalidomide and dexamethasone (BRd) has shown high efficacy in patients with advanced rrMM. However, dose-limiting haematotoxicity restricted its use in extensively pre-treated patient populations. This prospective, multicentre Phase II study evaluated the efficacy and safety of BRd in rrMM patients with one prior line of therapy. Fifty patients were enrolled (median age 68·5 years [range 46–83]) and were treated with B 75 mg/m2 days 1, 2; R 25 mg days 1–21 and d (40/20 mg) days 1, 8, 15 and 22, for 6 28-day induction cycles, followed by 12 cycles with Rd alone. Pegfilgrastim was administered according to protocol-defined criteria. The study aimed to demonstrate a complete response (CR)/VGPR rate of >40% after induction therapy. Of 45 evaluable patients, 23 (51%) achieved a CR/VGPR. Grade 4 neutropenia or thrombocytopenia occurred in 17 (34%) and 8 (16%) of patients, respectively. BRd is a safe and efficacious regimen as a second line treatment for rrMM, leading to high quality responses in a considerable proportion of patients.

Highlights • Implementation of guideline-recommended BTA practice is high among Swiss physicians. • Denosumab is the BTA of choice in Switzerland. • BTAs were widely administered (94.2%) according to a 3–4-weekly dosing regimen. • Bone pain and SRE incidence were low in patients with solid tumor bone metastases. • Low SRE incidence may indicate BTA efficacy and judicious BTA prescribing., Background Bone-targeted agents (BTAs) are widely used in the management of patients with bone metastases from solid tumors, but knowledge of their routine care use and the therapeutic implications remains limited. This non-interventional study aimed to characterize real-world BTA patterns of care in Switzerland. Materials and methods Non-interventional, cross-sectional study involving oncologists from across Switzerland who completed a Treating Physician questionnaire, providing data on their clinical setting and BTA-related practices, and a Patient Characteristics and Treatment questionnaire, providing data on their patients’ disease status, risk of bone complications, BTA regimen and related outcomes. Eligible patients were aged ≥ 18 years, with solid tumors and at least one bone metastasis and were receiving routine management at the participating physician's center over the 3-month study period. Results A total of 86 oncologists recruited 417 patients from across 18 centers in Switzerland (80% public hospitals; 20% private clinics). The majority of physicians (70.9%) reported prescribing BTAs in line with international guidelines; denosumab was the treatment of choice in 78.5% of patients. BTAs were widely administered (94.2%) according to a 3–4-weekly dosing regimen; 33.7% of physicians reported extending intervals to 12 weeks after an initial 2 years of treatment. Physicians appeared to use clinical judgement, as well as formal risk assessment, to guide treatment for symptomatic skeletal events. No association was seen between either BTA use, or risk of complications, and incidence of skeletal complications. Only 4.3% of patients were reported to be experiencing severe bone pain at the time of the study. Conclusions This cross-sectional, non-interventional study found high implementation of guideline-recommended BTA prescribing, good pain control and low incidence of skeletal-related events. Long-term BTA randomized controlled trials have the potential to further optimize routine care outcomes for patients.

This work was supported by Cancer Research UK (EHW, TJ: C42738/A24868); National Institute of Health Research Cambridge Biomedical Research Centre (HE); National Institute of Health Research UK Academic Clinical Fellowship (CMC); and National Institutes of Health USA Cancer Center support grant (TJ: 5P30CA045508-31). Important oncological management decisions rely on kidney function assessed by serum creatinine-based estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR). However, no large-scale multicentre comparison of methods to determine eGFR in patients with cancer are available. To compare the performance of formulas for eGFR based on routine clinical parameters and serum creatinine not calibrated with isotope dilution mass spectrometry (non-IDMS), we studied 3,620 patients with cancer and 166 without cancer who had their GFR measured with an exogenous nuclear tracer at one of seven clinical centres. The mean measured GFR was 86 ml/min. Accuracy of all models was centre-dependent, reflecting inter-centre variability of non-IDMS creatinine measurements. CamGFR was the most accurate model for eGFR (root-mean-squared-error (RMSE) 17.3 ml/min) followed by the Chronic Kidney Disease Epidemiology Collaboration (CKD-EPI) model (RMSE 18.2 ml/min).Important oncological management decisions rely on kidney function assessed by serum creatinine-based estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR). However, no large-scale multicentre comparison of methods to determine eGFR in patients with cancer are available. To compare the performance of formulas for eGFR based on routine clinical parameters and serum creatinine not calibrated with isotope dilution mass spectrometry (non-IDMS), we studied 3,620 patients with cancer and 166 without cancer who had their GFR measured with an exogenous nuclear tracer at one of seven clinical centres. The mean measured GFR was 86 ml/min. Accuracy of all models was centre-dependent, reflecting inter-centre variability of non-IDMS creatinine measurements. CamGFR was the most accurate model for eGFR (root-mean-squared-error (RMSE) 17.3 ml/min) followed by the Chronic Kidney Disease Epidemiology Collaboration (CKD-EPI) model (RMSE 18.2 ml/min).Important oncological management decisions rely on kidney function assessed by serum creatinine–based estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR). However, no large-scale multicenter comparisons of methods to determine eGFR in patients with cancer are available. To compare the performance of formulas for eGFR based on routine clinical parameters and serum creatinine not calibrated with isotope dilution mass spectrometry, we studied 3620 patients with cancer and 166 without cancer who had their glomerular filtration rate (GFR) measured with an exogenous nuclear tracer at one of seven clinical centers. The mean measured GFR was 86 mL/min. Accuracy of all models was center dependent, reflecting intercenter variability of isotope dilution mass spectrometry–creatinine measurements. CamGFR was the most accurate model for eGFR (root-mean-squared error 17.3 mL/min) followed by the Chronic Kidney Disease Epidemiology Collaboration model (root-mean-squared error 18.2 mL/min). Publisher PDF

Despite several treatment options and an initial high response rate to androgen deprivation therapy, the majority of prostate cancers will eventually become castration-resistant in the metastatic stage (mCRPC). Androgen receptor splice variant 7 (ARV7) is one of the best-characterized androgen receptor (AR) variants whose expression in circulating tumor cells (CTCs) has been associated with enzalutamide resistance. ARV7 expression analysis before and during enzalutamide treatment could identify patients requiring alternative systemic therapies. However, a robust test for the assessment of the ARV7 status in patient samples is still missing. Here, we implemented an RT-qPCR-based assay for detection of AR full length (ARFL)/ARV7 expression in CTCs for clinical use. Additionally, as a proof-of-principle, we validated a cohort of 95 mCRPC patients initiating first line treatment with enzalutamide or enzalutamide/metformin within a clinical trial. A total of 95 mCRPC patients were analyzed at baseline of whom 27.3% (26/95) had ARFL+ARV7+, 23.1% (22/95) had ARFL+ARV7&minus, 23.1% (22/95) had ARFL&minus, ARV7&minus, and 1.1% (1/95) had ARFL&minus, ARV7+ CTCs. In 11.6% (11/95), no CTCs could be isolated. A total of 25/95 patients had another CTC analysis at progressive disease, of whom 48% (12/25) were ARV7+. Of those, 50% (6/12) were ARV7&minus, and 50% (6/12) were ARV7+ at baseline. Our results show that mRNA analysis of isolated CTCs in mCRPC is feasible and allows for longitudinal endocrine agent response monitoring and hence could contribute to treatment optimization in mCRPC.

BackgroundAlthough guidelines exist for advanced and variant bladder cancer management, evidence is limited/conflicting in some areas and the optimal approach remains controversial.ObjectiveTo bring together a large multidisciplinary group of experts to develop consensus statements on controversial topics in bladder cancer management.DesignA steering committee compiled proposed statements regarding advanced and variant bladder cancer management which were assessed by 113 experts in a Delphi survey. Statements not reaching consensus were reviewed; those prioritised were revised by a panel of 45 experts prior to voting during a consensus conference.SettingOnline Delphi survey and consensus conference.ParticipantsThe European Association of Urology (EAU), the European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO), experts in bladder cancer management.Outcome measurements and statistical analysisStatements were ranked by experts according to their level of agreement: 1–3 (disagree), 4–6 (equivocal), and 7–9 (agree). A priori (level 1) consensus was defined as ≥70% agreement and ≤15% disagreement, or vice versa. In the Delphi survey, a second analysis was restricted to stakeholder group(s) considered to have adequate expertise relating to each statement (to achieve level 2 consensus).Results and limitationsOverall, 116 statements were included in the Delphi survey. Of these statements, 33 (28%) achieved level 1 consensus and 49 (42%) achieved level 1 or 2 consensus. At the consensus conference, 22 of 27 (81%) statements achieved consensus. These consensus statements provide further guidance across a broad range of topics, including the management of variant histologies, the role/limitations of prognostic biomarkers in clinical decision making, bladder preservation strategies, modern radiotherapy techniques, the management of oligometastatic disease, and the evolving role of checkpoint inhibitor therapy in metastatic disease.ConclusionsThese consensus statements provide further guidance on controversial topics in advanced and variant bladder cancer management until a time when further evidence is available to guide our approach.Patient summaryThis report summarises findings from an international, multistakeholder project organised by the EAU and ESMO. In this project, a steering committee identified areas of bladder cancer management where there is currently no good-quality evidence to guide treatment decisions. From this, they developed a series of proposed statements, 71 of which achieved consensus by a large group of experts in the field of bladder cancer. It is anticipated that these statements will provide further guidance to health care professionals and could help improve patient outcomes until a time when good-quality evidence is available.

Summary Background The clinical activity of fibroblast growth factor receptor (FGFR) inhibitors seems restricted to cancers harbouring rare FGFR genetic aberrations. In preclinical studies, high tumour FGFR mRNA expression predicted response to rogaratinib, an oral pan-FGFR inhibitor. We aimed to assess the safety, maximum tolerated dose, recommended phase 2 dose, pharmacokinetics, and preliminary clinical activity of rogaratinib. Methods We did a phase 1 dose-escalation and dose-expansion study of rogaratinib in adults with advanced cancers at 22 sites in Germany, Switzerland, South Korea, Singapore, Spain, and France. Eligible patients were aged 18 years or older, and were ineligible for standard therapy, with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0–2, a life expectancy of at least 3 months, and at least one measurable or evaluable lesion according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) version 1.1. During dose escalation, rogaratinib was administered orally twice daily at 50–800 mg in continuous 21-day cycles using a model-based dose-response analysis (continuous reassessment method). In the dose-expansion phase, all patients provided an archival formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded (FFPE) tumour biopsy or consented to a new biopsy at screening for the analysis of FGFR1–3 mRNA expression. In the dose-expansion phase, rogaratinib was given at the recommended dose for expansion to patients in four cohorts: urothelial carcinoma, head and neck squamous-cell cancer (HNSCC), non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), and other solid tumour types. Primary endpoints were safety and tolerability, determination of maximum tolerated dose including dose-limiting toxicities and determination of recommended phase 2 dose, and pharmacokinetics of rogaratinib. Safety analyses were reported in all patients who received at least one dose of rogaratinib. Patients who completed cycle 1 or discontinued during cycle 1 due to an adverse event or dose-limiting toxicity were included in the evaluation of recommended phase 2 dose. Efficacy analyses were reported for all patients who received at least one dose of study drug and who had available post-baseline efficacy data. This ongoing study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01976741, and is fully recruited. Findings Between Dec 30, 2013, and July 5, 2017, 866 patients were screened for FGFR mRNA expression, of whom 126 patients were treated (23 FGFR mRNA-unselected patients in the dose-escalation phase and 103 patients with FGFR mRNA-overexpressing tumours [52 patients with urothelial carcinoma, eight patients with HNSCC, 20 patients with NSCLC, and 23 patients with other tumour types] in the dose-expansion phase). No dose-limiting toxicities were reported and the maximum tolerated dose was not reached; 800 mg twice daily was established as the recommended phase 2 dose and was selected for the dose-expansion phase. The most common adverse events of any grade were hyperphosphataemia (in 77 [61%] of 126 patients), diarrhoea (in 65 [52%]), and decreased appetite (in 48 [38%]); and the most common grade 3–4 adverse events were fatigue (in 11 [9%] of 126 patients) and asymptomatic increased lipase (in 10 [8%]). Serious treatment-related adverse events were reported in five patients (decreased appetite and diarrhoea in one patient with urothelial carcinoma, and acute kidney injury [NSCLC], hypoglycaemia [other solid tumours], retinopathy [urothelial carcinoma], and vomiting [urothelial carcinoma] in one patient each); no treatment-related deaths occurred. Median follow-up after cessation of treatment was 32 days (IQR 25–36 days). In the expansion cohorts, 15 (15%; 95% CI 8·6–23·5) out of 100 evaluable patients achieved an objective response, with responses recorded in all four expansion cohorts (12 in the urothelial carcinoma cohort and one in each of the other three cohorts), and in ten (67%) of 15 FGFR mRNA-overexpressing tumours without apparent FGFR genetic aberration. Interpretation Rogaratinib was well tolerated and clinically active against several types of cancer. Selection by FGFR mRNA expression could be a useful additional biomarker to identify a broader patient population who could be eligible for FGFR inhibitor treatment. Funding Bayer AG.

Background Preclinical studies demonstrate synergism between cancer immunotherapy and local radiation, enhancing anti-tumor effects and promoting immune responses. BI1361849 (CV9202) is an active cancer immunotherapeutic comprising protamine-formulated, sequence-optimized mRNA encoding six non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC)-associated antigens (NY-ESO-1, MAGE-C1, MAGE-C2, survivin, 5T4, and MUC-1), intended to induce targeted immune responses. Methods We describe a phase Ib clinical trial evaluating treatment with BI1361849 combined with local radiation in 26 stage IV NSCLC patients with partial response (PR)/stable disease (SD) after standard first-line therapy. Patients were stratified into three strata (1: non-squamous NSCLC, no epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutation, PR/SD after ≥4 cycles of platinum- and pemetrexed-based treatment [n = 16]; 2: squamous NSCLC, PR/SD after ≥4 cycles of platinum-based and non-platinum compound treatment [n = 8]; 3: non-squamous NSCLC, EGFR mutation, PR/SD after ≥3 and ≤ 6 months EGFR-tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) treatment [n = 2]). Patients received intradermal BI1361849, local radiation (4 × 5 Gy), then BI1361849 until disease progression. Strata 1 and 3 also had maintenance pemetrexed or continued EGFR-TKI therapy, respectively. The primary endpoint was evaluation of safety; secondary objectives included assessment of clinical efficacy (every 6 weeks during treatment) and of immune response (on Days 1 [baseline], 19 and 61). Results Study treatment was well tolerated; injection site reactions and flu-like symptoms were the most common BI1361849-related adverse events. Three patients had grade 3 BI1361849-related adverse events (fatigue, pyrexia); there was one grade 3 radiation-related event (dysphagia). In comparison to baseline, immunomonitoring revealed increased BI1361849 antigen-specific immune responses in the majority of patients (84%), whereby antigen-specific antibody levels were increased in 80% and functional T cells in 40% of patients, and involvement of multiple antigen specificities was evident in 52% of patients. One patient had a partial response in combination with pemetrexed maintenance, and 46.2% achieved stable disease as best overall response. Best overall response was SD in 57.7% for target lesions. Conclusion The results support further investigation of mRNA-based immunotherapy in NSCLC including combinations with immune checkpoint inhibitors. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01915524. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1186/s40425-019-0520-5) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

PURPOSE Previous studies suggested that serum levels of microRNA (miR)-371a-3p (so-called M371 test) have a much higher sensitivity and specificity than the classic markers of testicular germ cell tumors (GCTs) and are applicable toward both seminoma and nonseminoma. We sought to confirm the usefulness of this test as a novel biomarker for GCT. PATIENTS AND METHODS In a prospective, multicentric study, serum samples of 616 patients with testicular GCTs and 258 male controls were examined for serum levels of miRNA-371a-3p (miR levels) by quantitative polymerase chain reaction. The GCT population encompassed 359 patients with seminoma and 257 with nonseminoma; 371 had clinical stage I disease, 201 had systemic disease, and 46 had relapses. Paired measurements before and after orchiectomy were performed in 424 patients; 118 with systemic disease had serial measurements during treatment. miR levels were compared with those of β-human chorionic gonadotropin, α-fetoprotein, and lactate dehydrogenase. RESULTS For the primary diagnosis of GCT, the M371 test showed a sensitivity of 90.1%, a specificity of 94.0%, an area under the curve of 0.966 upon receiver operating characteristic analysis, and a positive predictive value of 97.2%. α-Fetoprotein, β-human chorionic gonadotropin, and lactate dehydrogenase had sensitivities of less than 50% in seminoma and slightly higher sensitivities in nonseminomas. miR levels were significantly associated with clinical stage, primary tumor size, and response to treatment. Relapses had elevated miR levels that subsequently dropped to normal upon remission. Teratoma did not express miR-371a-3p. CONCLUSION The M371 test outperforms the classic markers of GCT with both a sensitivity and a specificity greater than 90%. All histologic subgroups, except teratoma, express this marker. The test could be considered for clinical implementation after further validation.

430 Background: The combination of cisplatin-based chemotherapy with immune checkpoint inhibitors is extensively investigated in urothelial carcinoma. Using this combination in the neoadjuvant setting for patients (pts) with MIUC might improve pathological response rate (PaR: 1 EFS at 2 years ≥ 65% compared to H0 EFS at 2 years ≤ 50%. We report the secondary endoints PaR, pathological complete remission (pCR: ypT0 N0), and safety on the full analysis set (FAS, received at least one dose of durva). Results: 61 pts were included between 7/18 and 9/19 at 12 sites. The FAS consists of 58 pts (79% male, median age 67.5 yrs) with bladder cancer (95%) or upper urinary tract/urethral cancer (5%). Clinical T2, T3, T4 stage were present at diagnosis in 69%, 21%, 10%, respectively, and 17% had cN1. 95% of pts received all 4 doses of neoadjuvant durva, 81% all 4 cycles of cis/gem and 17% switched to carboplatin. In total grade 3 and 4 adverse events (AE) during neoadjuvant treatment occurred in 48% and 27%, respectively. AEs related to durva were G3 in 7 pts (12%) and G4 in one patient (2%). Resection was performed in 53 pts (91%; 51 radical cystectomy, 2 nephroureterectomy), 4 pts refused surgery and one patient was irresectable due to a frozen pelvis. R0 resection was achieved in 52 pts (98%), one had R1. Postoperative complications included Clavien-Dindo III in 13 pts (24%) and IV in 5 pts (9%). PaR was found in 60% (95% CI 46.0%-73.5%) with 18 pts achieving pCR (34%; 95% CI 21.5%-48.3%) and 14 patients (26%) ypT1/ypTis. Conclusions: The first FAS results for neoadjuvant durvalumab in combination with cis/gem for operable MIUC confirm elevated pathological response rates and demonstrate acceptable safety. Postoperative morbidity is relevant but not exceeding the expected frequency or severity. Clinical trial information: NCT03406650.

BACKGROUND We tested whether a switch maintenance treatment with orteronel, an oral inhibitor of androgen biosynthesis, prolongs disease control in men with metastatic castration resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) after documented disease stabilization with docetaxel. METHODS Men with mCRPC and non-progressive disease after a cumulative dose of ?300mg/m2 docetaxel for first line treatment were randomized 1:1 to receive orteronel 300mg twice daily or placebo. The primary endpoint was event-free survival (EFS) defined as the time from randomization to death or the combination of at least two of radiographic, clinical, or PSA progression. Ninety-six patients per arm were planned to demonstrate an improvement of median EFS from 4 months on placebo to 6.7 months on orteronel (hazard ratio (HR) 0.6; type I error 5% and power 90%). RESULTS Forty-seven patients (23 orteronel, 24 placebo) were randomized before premature closure of the trial because of discontinuation of clinical development of orteronel. Median EFS was 8.5 months with orteronel and 2.9 months with placebo (P¼0.001; HR 0.32; 95%CI 0.15–0.65). Median radiographic progression-free survival (rPFS) was 8.5 and 2.8 months (P¼0.02; HR 0.42; 95%CI 0.20–0.91) in the orteronel and placebo arm, respectively. PSA decline ?50% was seen in 57% on orteronel and 4% on placebo. Toxicity was mainly mild, one patient on orteronel developed transient grade 3 adrenal insufficiency and one grade 4 pneumonitis. CONCLUSIONS Orteronel significantly prolongs EFS in men with mCRPC who achieve disease stabilization with docetaxel. The concept of switch maintenance therapy in mCRPC warrants further research.

Background: Metastatic differentiated thyroid cancer (DTC) is a rare disease that is in the first line treated with iodine-131 radioisotope therapy. Until recently, options were very limited in the case of progressive radioactive-iodine (RAI)-refractory disease. Based on new study results, tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) have attracted attention. The TKI sorafenib demonstrated significantly improved progression-free survival (PFS) in a phase III trial. Recent data from another phase III trial showed that the TKI lenvatinib achieved high response rates and a large improvement in PFS in metastatic RAI-refractory DTC patients in the first-line setting and after 1 prior line of TKI. However, little is known about the response to lenvatinib in patients pretreated with multiple lines of TKIs. Case Report: We present the case of a 45-year-old man with metastatic RAI-refractory DTC progressing after multiple prior treatments with TKIs and chemotherapy. A very good and long-lasting response to lenvatinib was observed. Careful and prospective monitoring as well as management of side effects including dose adaptation were necessary to ensure success of treatment. Conclusion: Here, we review different novel treatment options for patients with metastatic RAI-refractory DTC.

Summary Background Postoperative hemithoracic radiotherapy has been used to treat malignant pleural mesothelioma, but it has not been assessed in a randomised trial. We assessed high-dose hemithoracic radiotherapy after neoadjuvant chemotherapy and extrapleural pneumonectomy in patients with malignant pleural mesothelioma. Methods We did this phase 2 trial in two parts at 14 hospitals in Switzerland, Belgium, and Germany. We enrolled patients with pathologically confirmed malignant pleural mesothelioma; resectable TNM stages T1–3 N0–2, M0; WHO performance status 0–1; age 18–70 years. In part 1, patients were given three cycles of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (cisplatin 75 mg/m 2 and pemetrexed 500 mg/m 2 on day 1 given every 3 weeks) and extrapleural pneumonectomy; the primary endpoint was complete macroscopic resection (R0–1). In part 2, participants with complete macroscopic resection were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive high-dose radiotherapy or not. The target volume for radiotherapy encompassed the entire hemithorax, the thoracotomy channel, and mediastinal nodal stations if affected by the disease or violated surgically. A boost was given to areas at high risk for locoregional relapse. The allocation was stratified by centre, histology (sarcomatoid vs epithelioid or mixed), mediastinal lymph node involvement (N0–1 vs N2), and T stage (T1–2 vs T3). The primary endpoint of part 1 was the proportion of patients achieving complete macroscopic resection (R0 and R1). The primary endpoint in part 2 was locoregional relapse-free survival, analysed by intention to treat. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00334594. Findings We enrolled patients between Dec 7, 2005, and Oct 17, 2012. Overall, we analysed 151 patients receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy, of whom 113 (75%) had extrapleural pneumonectomy. Median follow-up was 54·2 months (IQR 32–66). 52 (34%) of 151 patients achieved an objective response. The most common grade 3 or 4 toxic effects were neutropenia (21 [14%] of 151 patients), anaemia (11 [7%]), and nausea or vomiting (eight [5%]). 113 patients had extrapleural pneumonectomy, with complete macroscopic resection achieved in 96 (64%) of 151 patients. We enrolled 54 patients in part 2; 27 in each group. The main reasons for exclusion were patient refusal (n=20) and ineligibility (n=10). 25 of 27 patients completed radiotherapy. Median total radiotherapy dose was 55·9 Gy (IQR 46·8–56·0). Median locoregional relapse-free survival from surgery, was 7·6 months (95% CI 4·5–10·7) in the no radiotherapy group and 9·4 months (6·5–11·9) in the radiotherapy group. The most common grade 3 or higher toxic effects related to radiotherapy were nausea or vomiting (three [11%] of 27 patients), oesophagitis (two [7%]), and pneumonitis (two [7%]). One patient died of pneumonitis. We recorded no toxic effects data for the control group. Interpretation Our findings do not support the routine use of hemithoracic radiotherapy for malignant pleural mesothelioma after neoadjuvant chemotherapy and extrapleural pneumonectomy. Funding Swiss Group for Clinical Cancer Research, Swiss State Secretariat for Education, Research and Innovation, Eli Lilly.

499 Background: Cisplatin-based neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by surgery is the standard of care for patients (pts) with MIUC but relapse rates remain high. Immune checkpoint inhibitors have demonstrated efficacy in advanced urothelial carcinoma (UC). We hypothesize that the integration of the PD-L1 inhibitor durvalumab into perioperative management of MIUC improves outcome. Methods: SAKK 06/17 is an open label single arm phase II study including 61 pts. Operable MIUC cT2-T4a cN0-1 pts without contraindication for Cis were eligible. Four cycles of preoperative Cis/Gem q3w are administered in combination with 4 cycles Durva 1500mg q3w starting at cycle 2. Durva is continued after surgery q4w for 10 cycles. Primary endpoint is event free survival at 2 years. We report a preplanned interim analysis of the secondary endpoints safety, pathological complete remission ypT0 N0 (pCR,) and pathological response rate (PaR, defined as ≤ypT1N0) on the first 30 resected pts. Results: Among 34 eligible pts (27M, 7F; median age 70, range 41-81 years) included from 07/18 – 02/19, 33 pts (97%) had primary bladder cancer and 1 pt had upper tract UC. Clinical T2, T3, T4 and TxN1 stage were present at diagnosis in 68%, 18%, 15% and 15%, respectively. Four cycles of chemo-immunotherapy were completed per protocol in 34 pts (100%). No tumor progression was noted at preoperative restaging. AE related to Durvalumab were G3 in 5 pts (15%) and G4 in 3 pts (9%). Surgery was performed as planned in 30 pts (88%), 3 pts refused surgery and 1 pt had a frozen pelvis. Operation technique was open in 20 pts (67%) and laparoscopic/robot-assisted in 10 pts (33%). Postoperative complications included Clavien-Dindo III in 6 pts (20%) and IV in 2 pts (7%) with infections being most common (5 pts, 17%). pCR was found in 9 pts (30%) and additional 6 pts (20%) had ypT1/ypTis for a PaR of 50%. Conclusions: The combination of Cis/Gem and Durva as neoadjuvant treatment for MIUC is feasible with manageable toxicities and pCR and PaR rates in the expected range. The rate of postoperative complications warrants further close follow up. Clinical trial information: 2017-003565-10.

527 Background: Aberrant activation of the fibroblast growth factor receptor (FGFR) pathway is implicated in many cancers, including UC. In a recent Phase I dose-escalation study, rogaratinib, an oral pan-FGFR1-4 inhibitor, demonstrated favorable efficacy and safety in pts with solid cancers selected based on FGFR1-3 mRNA overexpression. We report results from the Phase I expansion cohort with rogaratinib in pts with UC selected by FGFR1-3 mRNA overexpression and/or FGFR3-activating mutations (NCT01976741). Methods: Pts with advanced/metastatic UC were screened for FGFR1-3 mRNA overexpression using RNA in situ hybridization (RNAscope) and NanoString assay in fresh or archival tumor samples. Pts received rogaratinib 800 mg po BID continuously. Tumor response and safety were assessed. Results: 74 pts with UC were treated with rogaratinib; 73.0% were male, median age was 66 years (range 45-85), and 93.2% had stage IV disease. Rogaratinib was well tolerated, with adverse events being mostly mild or moderate. The most common treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) are shown in the Table. The most common drug-related TEAEs (any grade) were diarrhea (52.7%), increased blood phosphorus (41.9%), and decreased appetite and dry mouth (31.1% each). No ocular toxicities were reported. Increased blood creatinine and acute kidney injury (AKI), regardless of relatedness, were reported in 16.2% and 2.7% of pts, respectively; 1 case of AKI was confirmed as acute tubular necrosis. Of 72 evaluable pts, 15 (20.8%) achieved an objective response; complete and partial responses were observed in 1 (1.4%) and 14 (19.4%) pts, respectively. Stable disease was achieved by 34 pts (47.2%), with a disease control rate of 68.1%. Conclusions: Rogaratinib demonstrated a favorable safety and efficacy profile in pts with tumor FGFR1-3 mRNA-positive UC. TEAEs observed in >25% of pts. Clinical trial information: NCT01976741. [Table: see text]

405 Background: Standard treatment options for stage IIA/B seminoma include either extensive paraaortal/pelvic radiotherapy or intensive chemotherapy with 3x BEP or 4x EP. Both treatment modalities are associated with excellent efficacy but also a high rate of acute and late toxicities. Therefore, de-escalation strategies appear warranted for this patient group aiming to minimize acute and long-term toxicities while maintaining efficacy. SAKK 01/10 is a joint project of the Swiss Group for Clinical Cancer Research and the German Testicular Cancer Study Group. Methods: Patients with stage IIA/B seminoma (de novo or relapse on active surveillance) were eligible for participation in this single arm phase II trial. A repeat scan was advised in patients with equivocal lymph node enlargement. Treatment consisted of one cycle carboplatin AUC7 followed by involved-node radiotherapy with 30 Gy in stage IIA and 36 Gy in stage IIB disease. The primary endpoint of the trial is 3-year progression free survival. We report on treatment compliance and early toxicity during treatment and within 30 days. Results: 120 patients with stage IIA/B seminoma were recruited from 10/12 until 06/18 in 20 study centers in Switzerland and Germany. 116 patients were eligible and initiated treatment per protocol (40% stage IIA, 60% stage IIB). All patients received chemotherapy (CT) with a median applied dose of 984 mg (range: 560-1920 mg). The median planning target volume (PTV) for radiotherapy (RT) was 297 cm3 (range: 24-1047 cm3). RT was delayed/interrupted in two patients due to adverse events. During CT, grade 2 and grade 3 adverse events were seen in 21% and 2% of all patients respectively (most common grade 2 events: neutropenia 6%, nausea 5%). During RT, grade 2 and grade 3 adverse events were seen in 26% and 6% of all patients respectively (most common grade 2 events: neutropenia 15%, nausea 6%). One case of transient creatinine increase was reported as a severe adverse event, resolving without sequelae. Conclusions: Treatment with one cycle carboplatin AUC7 and 30-36 Gy involved-node radiotherapy for stage IIA/B seminoma is feasible and demonstrates a very favorable early toxicity profile. Clinical trial information: NCT01593241.

99 Background: MEDI3726 is an ADC targeting PSMA. Once bound to PSMA and internalized, the released pyrrolobenzodiazepine dimer toxin crosslinks DNA and triggers cell death. This phase 1 study evaluated the safety and efficacy of MEDI3726 in mCRPC after failure of abiraterone and/or enzalutamide and a taxane-based therapy. Methods: The starting dose was 0.015 mg/kg MEDI3726 IV Q3W until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Dose escalation used a modified toxicity probability interval algorithm (mTPI). The primary objectives were safety, adverse events (AEs) and dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) and to determine the maximum tolerated (MTD) or administered (MAD) dose. Secondary objectives included antitumor activity, pharmacokinetics and immunogenicity. The endpoint for activity was composite response: confirmed response by RECIST v1.1, and/or PSA decrease of ≥ 50% after ≥ 12 wks, and/or confirmed conversion in circulating tumor cell count, defined as a decrease from ≥ 5 to < 5 cells/7.5 mL. Efficacy analyses were based on Prostate Working Group Criteria. Mutational profiles were evaluated in ctDNA. Results: As of Sept 27 2019, 33 pts received MEDI3726. Median age was 71.0 yr. Median number of prior regimens was 4. Median follow-up was 5.4 mo. Drug-related AEs occurred in 30 (90.9%), being grade 3/4 in 15 (45.5%), serious in 11 (33.3%) and causing discontinuation in 13 (39.4%). There were no drug-related deaths. One pt at 0.3 mg/kg had a DLT of Grade 3 thrombocytopenia. No MTD was identified per mTPI; the MAD was 0.3 mg/kg. MEDI3726 had nonlinear PK with a short t1/2 (0.3–2 d). Three pts (15.8%) at baseline and 6 (33.3%) post-baseline had antidrug antibodies, with no correlation to PK exposure. Composite response rate across all doses was 2/33 (6.1%). Time to response was 0.3 mo; duration of response was 1.8–3.8 mo. Median progression-free survival was 3.9 mo and median overall survival was 10.6 mo. Conclusions: An MTD was not identified, but drug-related AEs (skin toxicities and effusions) prevented raising the dose over 0.3 mg/kg and limited the number of cycles. Responses were seen at higher doses, but were not durable as pts discontinued due to drug-related AEs. Clinical trial information: NCT02991911.