Search

Background In the SPARTAN study, compared with placebo, apalutamide added to ongoing androgen deprivation therapy significantly prolonged metastasis-free survival (MFS) and time to symptomatic progression in patients with high-risk non-metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (nmCRPC). Overall survival (OS) results at the first interim analysis (IA1) were immature, with 104 of 427 (24%) events required for planned final OS analysis. Here, we report the results of a second pre-specified interim analysis (IA2). Methods One thousand two hundred and seven patients with nmCRPC were randomized 2 : 1 to apalutamide (240 mg daily) or placebo. The primary end point of the study was MFS. Subsequent therapy for metastatic CRPC was permitted. When the primary end point was met, the study was unblinded. Patients receiving placebo who had not yet developed metastases were offered open-label apalutamide. At IA2, pre-specified analysis of OS was undertaken, using a group-sequential testing procedure with O’Brien–Fleming-type alpha spending function. Safety and second progression-free survival (PFS2) were assessed. Results Median follow-up was 41 months. With 285 (67% of required) OS events, apalutamide was associated with an improved OS compared with placebo (HR 0.75; 95% CI 0.59–0.96; P = 0.0197), although the P-value did not cross the pre-specified O’Brien–Fleming boundary of 0.0121. Apalutamide improved PFS2 (HR 0.55; 95% CI 0.45–0.68). At IA2, 69% of placebo-treated and 40% of apalutamide-treated patients had received subsequent life-prolonging therapy for metastatic CRPC. No new safety signals were observed. Conclusion In patients with nmCRPC, apalutamide was associated with a 25% reduction in risk of death compared with placebo. This OS benefit was observed despite crossover of placebo-treated patients and higher rates of subsequent life-prolonging therapy for the placebo group.

Genetic variants could be useful as predictors of radiotherapy outcomes. Here we studied germline MRE11A variants in muscle invasive bladder cancer patients and found six rare variants and one SNP, rs1805363, to be associated with worse radiotherapy outcomes. If successfully validated in an independent radiotherapy cohort, this SNP could be used to select patients for bladder-conserving treatment., Background Muscle-invasive bladder cancer (MIBC) can be cured by radical radiotherapy (RT). We previously found tumour MRE11 expression to be predictive of survival following RT in MIBC, and this was independently validated in a separate institute. Here, we investigated germline MRE11A variants as possible predictors of RT outcomes in MIBC, using next-generation sequencing (NGS). Patients and methods The MRE11A gene was amplified in germline DNA from 186 prospectively recruited MIBC patients treated with RT and sequenced using bar-coded multiplexed NGS. Germline variants were analysed for associations with cancer-specific survival (CSS). For validation as a prognostic or predictive marker, rs1805363 was then genotyped in a cystectomy-treated MIBC cohort of 256 individuals. MRE11A mRNA isoform expression was measured in bladder cancer cell lines and primary tumour samples. Results Carriage of at least one of six (five novel) rare variants was associated with the worse RT outcome (hazard ratio [HR] 4.04, 95% confidence interval [95% CI] 1.42–11.51, P = 0.009). The single-nucleotide polymorphism (SNP), rs1805363 (minor allele frequency 11%), was also associated with worse CSS (per-allele HR 2.10, 95% CI 1.34–3.28, Ptrend = 0.001) following RT in MIBC, with a gene-dosage effect observed, but no effect seen on CSS in the cystectomy cohort (Ptrend = 0.89). Furthermore, rs1805363 influenced relative MRE11A isoform expression, with increased isoform 2 expression with carriage of the rs1805363 minor A allele. Conclusions Germline MRE11A SNP rs1805363 was predictive of RT, but not of cystectomy outcome in MIBC. If successfully validated in an independent RT-treated cohort, this SNP could be a useful clinical tool for selecting patients for bladder-conserving treatment.

Background Novel second-line treatments are needed for patients with advanced urothelial cancer (UC). Interim analysis of the phase III KEYNOTE-045 study showed a superior overall survival (OS) benefit of pembrolizumab, a programmed death 1 inhibitor, versus chemotherapy in patients with advanced UC that progressed on platinum-based chemotherapy. Here we report the long-term safety and efficacy outcomes of KEYNOTE-045. Patients and methods Adult patients with histologically/cytologically confirmed UC whose disease progressed after first-line, platinum-containing chemotherapy were enrolled. Patients were randomly assigned 1 : 1 to receive pembrolizumab [200 mg every 3 weeks (Q3W)] or investigator's choice of paclitaxel (175 mg/m2 Q3W), docetaxel (75 mg/m2 Q3W), or vinflunine (320 mg/m2 Q3W). Primary end points were OS and progression-free survival (PFS) per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors, version 1.1 (RECIST v1.1) by blinded independent central radiology review (BICR). A key secondary end point was objective response rate per RECIST v1.1 by BICR. Results A total of 542 patients were enrolled (pembrolizumab, n = 270; chemotherapy, n = 272). Median follow-up as of 26 October 2017 was 27.7 months. Median 1- and 2-year OS rates were higher with pembrolizumab (44.2% and 26.9%, respectively) than chemotherapy (29.8% and 14.3%, respectively). PFS rates did not differ between treatment arms; however, 1- and 2-year PFS rates were higher with pembrolizumab. The objective response rate was also higher with pembrolizumab (21.1% versus 11.0%). Median duration of response to pembrolizumab was not reached (range 1.6+ to 30.0+ months) versus chemotherapy (4.4 months; range 1.4+ to 29.9+ months). Pembrolizumab had lower rates of any grade (62.0% versus 90.6%) and grade ≥3 (16.5% versus 50.2%) treatment-related adverse events than chemotherapy. Conclusions Long-term results (>2 years' follow-up) were consistent with those of previously reported analyses, demonstrating continued clinical benefit of pembrolizumab over chemotherapy for efficacy and safety for treatment of locally advanced/metastatic, platinum-refractory UC. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02256436.

Background The ATLAS trial compared axitinib versus placebo in patients with locoregional renal cell carcinoma (RCC) at risk of recurrence after nephrectomy. Patients and methods In a phase III, randomized, double-blind trial, patients had >50% clear-cell RCC, had undergone nephrectomy, and had no evidence of macroscopic residual or metastatic disease [independent review committee (IRC) confirmed]. The intent-to-treat population included all randomized patients [≥pT2 and/or N+, any Fuhrman grade (FG), Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group status 0/1]. Patients (stratified by risk group/country) received (1 : 1) oral twice-daily axitinib 5 mg or placebo for ≤3 years, with a 1-year minimum unless recurrence, occurrence of second primary malignancy, significant toxicity, or consent withdrawal. The primary end point was disease-free survival (DFS) per IRC. A prespecified DFS analysis in the highest-risk subpopulation (pT3, FG ≥ 3 or pT4 and/or N+, any T, any FG) was conducted. Results A total of 724 patients (363 versus 361, axitinib versus placebo) were randomized from 8 May 2012, to 1 July 2016. The trial was stopped due to futility at a preplanned interim analysis at 203 DFS events. There was no significant difference in DFS per IRC [hazard ratio (HR) = 0.870; 95% confidence interval (CI) : 0.660–1.147; P = 0.3211). In the highest-risk subpopulation, a 36% and 27% reduction in risk of a DFS event (HR; 95% CI) was observed per investigator (0.641; 0.468–0.879; P = 0.0051), and by IRC (0.735; 0.525–1.028; P = 0.0704), respectively. Overall survival data were not mature. Similar adverse events (AEs; 99% versus 92%) and serious AEs (19% versus 14%), but more grade 3/4 AEs (61% versus 30%) were reported for axitinib versus placebo. Conclusions ATLAS did not meet its primary end point; however, improvement in DFS per investigator was seen in the highest-risk subpopulation. No new safety signals were reported. Trial registration number NCT01599754

Background\ud \ud STAMPEDE has previously reported that the use of upfront docetaxel improved overall survival (OS) for metastatic hormone naïve prostate cancer patients starting long-term androgen deprivation therapy. We report on long-term outcomes stratified by metastatic burden for M1 patients.\ud \ud \ud \ud Methods\ud \ud We randomly allocated patients in 2 : 1 ratio to standard-of-care (SOC; control group) or SOC + docetaxel. Metastatic disease burden was categorised using retrospectively-collected baseline staging scans where available. Analysis used Cox regression models, adjusted for stratification factors, with emphasis on restricted mean survival time where hazards were non-proportional.\ud \ud \ud \ud Results\ud \ud Between 05 October 2005 and 31 March 2013, 1086 M1 patients were randomised to receive SOC (n = 724) or SOC + docetaxel (n = 362). Metastatic burden was assessable for 830/1086 (76%) patients; 362 (44%) had low and 468 (56%) high metastatic burden. Median follow-up was 78.2 months. There were 494 deaths on SOC (41% more than the previous report). There was good evidence of benefit of docetaxel over SOC on OS (HR = 0.81, 95% CI 0.69–0.95, P = 0.009) with no evidence of heterogeneity of docetaxel effect between metastatic burden sub-groups (interaction P = 0.827). Analysis of other outcomes found evidence of benefit for docetaxel over SOC in failure-free survival (HR = 0.66, 95% CI 0.57–0.76, P 0.5 in each case). There was no evidence that docetaxel resulted in late toxicity compared with SOC: after 1 year, G3-5 toxicity was reported for 28% SOC and 27% docetaxel (in patients still on follow-up at 1 year without prior progression).\ud \ud \ud \ud Conclusions\ud \ud The clinically significant benefit in survival for upfront docetaxel persists at longer follow-up, with no evidence that benefit differed by metastatic burden. We advocate that upfront docetaxel is considered for metastatic hormone naïve prostate cancer patients regardless of metastatic burden.

In the phase III randomized ALSYMPCA trial of radium-223 in patients with castration-resistant prostate cancer and bone metastases, improved survival with radium-223 is accompanied by significant quality of life benefits, measured by EQ-5D and FACT-P, including a higher percentage of patients with meaningful improvement in quality of life and a slower decline in quality of life over time., Background Radium-223 dichloride (radium-223), a first-in-class α-emitting radiopharmaceutical, is recommended in both pre- and post-docetaxel settings in patients with castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC) and symptomatic bone metastases based on overall survival benefit demonstrated in the phase III ALSYMPCA study. ALSYMPCA included prospective measurements of health-related quality of life (QOL) using two validated instruments: the general EuroQoL 5D (EQ-5D) and the disease-specific Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Prostate (FACT-P). Patients and methods Analyses were conducted to determine treatment effects of radium-223 plus standard of care (SOC) versus placebo plus SOC on QOL using FACT-P and EQ-5D. Outcomes assessed were percentage of patients experiencing improvement, percentage of patients experiencing worsening, and mean QOL scores during the study. Results Analyses were carried out on the intent-to-treat population of patients randomized to receive radium-223 (n = 614) or placebo (n = 307). The mean baseline EQ-5D utility and FACT-P total scores were similar between treatment groups. A significantly higher percentage of patients receiving radium-223 experienced meaningful improvement in EQ-5D utility score on treatment versus placebo {29.2% versus 18.5%, respectively; P = 0.004; odds ratio (OR) = 1.82 [95% confidence interval (CI) 1.21–2.74]}. Findings were similar for FACT-P total score [24.6% versus 16.1%, respectively; P = 0.020; OR = 1.70 (95% CI 1.08–2.65)]. A lower percentage of patients receiving radium-223 experienced meaningful worsening versus placebo measured by EQ-5D utility score and FACT-P total score. Prior docetaxel use and current bisphosphonate use did not affect these findings. Treatment was a significant predictor of EQ-5D utility score, with radium-223 associated with higher scores versus placebo (0.56 versus 0.50, respectively; P = 0.002). Findings were similar for FACT-P total score (99.08 versus 95.22, respectively; P = 0.004). Conclusions QOL data from ALSYMPCA demonstrated that improved survival with radium-223 is accompanied by significant QOL benefits, including a higher percentage of patients with meaningful QOL improvement and a slower decline in QOL over time in patients with CRPC.

Background Radiotherapy is an effective treatment of intermediate/high-risk locally advanced prostate cancer, however,>30% of patients relapse within 5 years. Clinicopathological parameters currently fail to identify patients prone to systemic relapse and those whom treatment intensification may be beneficial. The purpose of this study was to independently validate the performance of a 70-gene Metastatic Assay in a cohort of diagnostic biopsies from patients treated with radical radiotherapy and androgen deprivation therapy. Patients and methods A bridging cohort of prostate cancer diagnostic biopsy specimens was profiled to enable optimization of the Metastatic Assay threshold before further independent clinical validation in a cohort of diagnostic biopsies from patients treated with radical radiotherapy and androgen deprivation therapy. Multivariable Cox proportional hazard regression analysis was used to assess assay performance in predicting biochemical failure-free survival (BFFS) and metastasis-free survival (MFS). Results Gene expression analysis was carried out in 248 patients from the independent validation cohort and the Metastatic Assay applied. Ten-year MFS was 72% for Metastatic Assay positive patients and 94% for Metastatic Assay negative patients [HR¼3.21 (1.35–7.67); P¼0.003]. On multivariable analysis the Metastatic Assay remained predictive for development of distant metastases [HR¼2.71 (1.11–6.63); P¼0.030]. The assay retained independent prognostic performance for MFS when assessed with the Cancer of the Prostate Assessment Score (CAPRA) [HR¼3.23 (1.22–8.59); P¼0.019] whilst CAPRA itself was not significant [HR¼1.88, (0.52–6.77); P¼0.332]. A high concordance [100% (61.5–100)] for the assay result was noted between two separate foci taken from 11 tumours, whilst Gleason score had low concordance. Conclusions The Metastatic Assay demonstrated significant prognostic performance in patients treated with radical radiotherapy both alone and independent of standard clinical and pathological variables. The Metastatic Assay could have clinical utility when deciding upon treatment intensification in high-risk patients. Genomic and clinical data are available as a public resource.

Background: Six radium-223 injections at 4-week intervals is indicated for patients with castration-resistant prostate cancer and symptomatic bone metastases. However, patients usually develop disease progression after initial treatment. This prospective phase I/II study assessed re-treatment safety and efficacy of up to six additional radium-223 injections. Patients and methods: Patients had castration-resistant prostate cancer and bone metastases and six initial radium-223 injections with no on-treatment bone progression; all had subsequent radiologic or clinical progression. Concomitant agents were allowed at investigator discretion, excluding chemotherapy and initiation of new abiraterone or enzalutamide. The primary endpoint was safety; additional exploratory endpoints included time to radiographic bone progression, time to total alkaline phosphatase and prostate-specific antigen progression, radiographic progression-free survival, overall survival, time to first symptomatic skeletal event (SSE), SSE-free survival, and time to pain progression. Results: Among 44 patients, 29 (66%) received all six re-treatment injections. Median time from end of initial radium-223 treatment was 6 months. Forty-one (93%) reported >= 1 treatment-emergent adverse event. No grade 4-5 hematologic treatment-emergent adverse events occurred. Only one (2%) patient had radiographic bone progression; eight (18%) had radiographic soft tissue tumor progression (three lymph node and five visceral metastases). Median times to total alkaline phosphatase and prostate-specific antigen progression were not reached and 2.2 months, respectively. Median radiographic progression-free survival was 9.9 months (12.8-month maximum follow-up). Five (11%) patients died and eight (18%) experienced first SSEs. Median overall survival, time to first SSE, and SSE-free survival were not reached. Five (14%) of 36 evaluable patients (baseline worst pain score

Contains fulltext : 175084.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Open Access) Background: Abiraterone and cabazitaxel improve survival in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). We conducted an open-label phase I/II trial of cabazitaxel plus abiraterone to assess the antitumor activity and tolerability in patients with progressive mCRPC after docetaxel (phase I), and after docetaxel and abiraterone (phase II) (NCT01511536). Patients and methods: The primary objectives were to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) and dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) of cabazitaxel plus abiraterone (phase I), and the prostate-specific antigen (PSA) response defined as a >/= 50% decrease confirmed >/=3 weeks later with this combination (phase II). Results: Ten patients were enrolled in the phase I component; nine were evaluable. No DLTs were identified. The MTD was established as the approved doses for both drugs (cabazitaxel 25 mg/m2 every 3 weeks and abiraterone 1000 mg once daily). Daily abiraterone treatment did not impact on cabazitaxel clearance. Twenty-seven patients received cabazitaxel plus abiraterone plus prednisone (5 mg twice daily) in phase II. The median number of cycles administered (cabazitaxel) was seven (range: 1-28). Grade 3-4 treatment-emergent adverse events included asthenia (in 5 patients; 14%), neutropenia (in 5 patients; 14%) and diarrhea (in 3 patients; 8%). Nine patients (24%) required dose reductions of cabazitaxel. Of 26 evaluable patients, 12 achieved a PSA response [46%; 95% confidence interval (CI): 26.6-66.6%]. Median PSA-progression-free survival was 6.9 months (95% CI: 4.1-10.3 months). Of 14 patients with measurable disease at baseline, 3 (21%) achieved a partial response per response evaluation criteria in solid tumors. Conclusions: The combination of cabazitaxel and abiraterone has a manageable safety profile and shows antitumor activity in patients previously treated with docetaxel and abiraterone.

Background This study describes a repeated measures prediction index to identify patients at high risk of ≥ grade 2 hand-foot skin reaction (HFSR) before each week of sorafenib therapy. Methods Data from 451 patients who received a sorafenib (400 mg bid) as part of a clinical trial were reviewed (Escudier B, Eisen T, Stadler WM et al. Sorafenib in advanced clear-cell renal-cell carcinoma. N Engl J Med 2007; 356: 125–134). Generalized estimating equations were used to develop the final risk model. A risk-scoring algorithm (range 0–58) was then derived from the final model coefficients. External validation was then carried out on a new sample of 1145 patients who received sorafenib under an expanded access program. Results Pretreatment white blood cell count, female gender, good performance status, presence of lung and liver metastases and number of affected organs were predictors for ≥ grade 2 HFSR. A nonlinear association between HFSR risk and treatment duration was also identified where risk was maximized at week 5 followed by a gradual decline. Before each week of therapy, patients with risk scores >40 would be considered at high risk for developing ≥ grade 2 HFSR. Conclusions The application and planned continued refinement of this prediction tool will be an important source of patient-specific risk information for the development of moderate to severe HFSR.

Background There is an urgent need to identify biomarkers to guide personalized therapy in castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC). We aimed to clinically qualify androgen receptor (AR) gene status measurement in plasma DNA using multiplex droplet digital PCR (ddPCR) in pre- and post-chemotherapy CRPC. Methods We optimized ddPCR assays for AR copy number and mutations and retrospectively analyzed plasma DNA from patients recruited to one of the three biomarker protocols with prospectively collected clinical data. We evaluated associations between plasma AR and overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) in 73 chemotherapy-naïve and 98 post-docetaxel CRPC patients treated with enzalutamide or abiraterone (Primary cohort) and 94 chemotherapy-naïve patients treated with enzalutamide (Secondary cohort; PREMIERE trial). Results In the primary cohort, AR gain was observed in 10 (14%) chemotherapy-naïve and 33 (34%) post-docetaxel patients and associated with worse OS [hazard ratio (HR), 3.98; 95% CI 1.74–9.10; P A (p.L702H) and 2632A>G (p.T878A)] were observed in eight (11%) post-docetaxel but no chemotherapy-naïve abiraterone-treated patients and were also associated with worse OS (HR 3.26; 95% CI 1.47–not reached; P = 0.004). There was no interaction between AR and docetaxel status (P = 0.83 for OS, P = 0.99 for PFS). In the PREMIERE trial, 11 patients (12%) with AR gain had worse PSA-PFS (sPFS) (HR 4.33; 95% CI 1.94–9.68; P

Background The safety and efficacy of upfront sunitinib, before nephrectomy in metastatic clear cell renal cancer (mCRC), has not been prospectively evaluated. Methods Two prospective single-arm phase II studies investigated either two cycles (study A: n = 19) or three cycles (study B: n = 33) of sunitinib before nephrectomy in mCRC. Results Overall, 38 of 52 (73%) of patients obtained clinical benefit (by RECIST) before surgery. The partial response rate of the primary tumour was 6% [median reduction in longest diameter of 12% (range 8%-35%)]. No patients became ineligible due to local progression of disease. A nephrectomy was carried out in 37 (71%) of patients. Necrosis (>50%) was a prominent feature at nephrectomy in 49%. Surgical complications (Clavien–Dindo classification) occurred in 10 (27%) patients, including one death (3%). The median blood loss and surgical time were 725 (90–4200) ml and 189 (70–420) min, respectively. The median progression-free survival was 8 months (95% confidence interval 6–15 months). A comparison of two versus three pre-surgery cycles showed no significant difference in terms of surgical complications or efficacy. Conclusions Nephrectomy after upfront sunitinib can be carried out safely. It obtains control of disease. Randomised studies are required to address if this approach is beneficial.

Background RECORD-3 compared everolimus and sunitinib as first-line therapy, and the sequence of everolimus followed by sunitinib at progression compared with the opposite (standard) sequence in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). This final overall survival (OS) analysis evaluated mature data for secondary end points. Patients and methods Patients received either first-line everolimus followed by second-line sunitinib at progression (n = 238) or first-line sunitinib followed by second-line everolimus (n = 233). Secondary end points were combined first- and second-line progression-free survival (PFS), OS, and safety. The impacts of neutrophil lymphocyte ratio (NLR) and baseline levels of soluble biomarkers on OS were explored. Results At final analysis, median duration of exposure was 5.6 months for everolimus and 8.3 months for sunitinib. Median combined PFS was 21.7 months [95% confidence interval (CI) 15.1–26.7] with everolimus-sunitinib and 22.2 months (95% CI 16.0–29.8) with sunitinib-everolimus [hazard ratio (HR)EVE-SUN/SUN-EVE, 1.2; 95% CI 0.9–1.6]. Median OS was 22.4 months (95% CI 18.6–33.3) for everolimus-sunitinib and 29.5 months (95% CI 22.8–33.1) for sunitinib-everolimus (HREVE-SUN/SUN-EVE, 1.1; 95% CI 0.9–1.4). The rates of grade 3 and 4 adverse events suspected to be related to second-line therapy were 47% with everolimus and 57% with sunitinib. Higher NLR and 12 soluble biomarker levels were identified as prognostic markers for poor OS with the association being largely independent of treatment sequences. Conclusions Results of this final OS analysis support the sequence of sunitinib followed by everolimus at progression in patients with mRCC. The safety profiles of everolimus and sunitinib were consistent with those previously reported, and there were no unexpected safety signals. Clinical Trials number ClinicalTrials.gov identifier, NCT00903175

Background This study assessed the human epidermal growth factor receptor-2 (HER2) protein expression and its relationship with gene amplification in invasive bladder carcinoma, using the same criteria than for breast cancer. Patients and methods In 1005 patients, paraffin-embedded tissues of transurethral resection or cystectomy were evaluated by immunohistochemistry (IHC), using antibodies against HER2. All samples with a 2+ or 3+ HER2 overexpression were evaluated by FISH. Results HER2 overexpression was observed in 93 (9.2%) tumors (2+: 42 tumors and 3+: 51 tumors). Using FISH, all HER2 3+ tumors had a gene amplification, whereas no amplification was found in 2+ tumors. Intratumoral heterogeneity was observed in 35% of cases. These tumors showed the same heterogeneous pattern, with adjacent 3+ positive and negative areas by both IHC and FISH. Conclusions This study showed that 5.1% of invasive bladder carcinomas had a HER2 gene amplification. These findings may have clinical implications for the management of patients with HER2-positive locally advanced or metastatic bladder cancer, as they could be potential candidates for targeted therapy.

Background: The purpose of this study is to evaluate the impact on the health-related quality of life (HRQoL) of sunitinib versus interferon-alpha (IFN-α) treatment in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). Patients and methods: In all, 304 mRCC patients (European cohort) were randomized 1 : 1 to receive sunitinib (50 mg/day for 4 weeks, followed by 2 weeks off) or IFN-α (9 million units s.c. injection three times/week). The following questionnaires were completed (days 1 and 28 per cycle): Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General (FACT-G), the FACT-Kidney Symptom Index and the EuroQol Group's EQ-5D self-report questionnaire (EQ-5D). Results correspond to an ongoing trial with progression-free survival time as primary end point, and patients were still being followed up. Data were analyzed using repeated measures mixed effects models (MEMs) that allow the inclusion of initial differences and uncompleted repeated measures, with the assumption of data missing at random. Six-cycle results were included. Results: Results consistently showed that patients in sunitinib group experienced statistically significantly milder kidney-related symptoms, better cancer-specific HRQoL and general health status (in social utility scores) during the study period as measured by these patient-reported outcome end points. No statistical differences between groups were found on the FACT-G physical well-being subscale or the EQ-5D VAS values. Conclusions: Results from MEM showed the sunitinib's benefit on HRQoL compared with IFN-α.

A prognostic index model was developed, composed of six readily available and assessable factors and categorizing patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer treated with abiraterone–prednisone into distinct prognostic risk groups. This model could be useful for determining patient prognosis for follow-up, monitoring and patient stratification for clinical trials., Background Few prognostic models for overall survival (OS) are available for patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) treated with recently approved agents. We developed a prognostic index model using readily available clinical and laboratory factors from a phase III trial of abiraterone acetate (hereafter abiraterone) in combination with prednisone in post-docetaxel mCRPC. Patients and methods Baseline data were available from 762 patients treated with abiraterone–prednisone. Factors were assessed for association with OS through a univariate Cox model and used in a multivariate Cox model with a stepwise procedure to identify those of significance. Data were validated using an independent, external, population-based cohort. Results Six risk factors individually associated with poor prognosis were included in the final model: lactate dehydrogenase > upper limit of normal (ULN) [hazard ratio (HR) = 2.31], Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 2 (HR = 2.19), presence of liver metastases (HR = 2.00), albumin ≤4 g/dl (HR = 1.54), alkaline phosphatase > ULN (HR = 1.38) and time from start of initial androgen-deprivation therapy to start of treatment ≤36 months (HR = 1.30). Patients were categorized into good (n = 369, 46%), intermediate (n = 321, 40%) and poor (n = 107, 13%) prognosis groups based on the number of risk factors and relative HRs. The C-index was 0.70 ± 0.014. The model was validated by the external dataset (n = 286). Conclusion This analysis identified six factors used to model survival in mCRPC and categorized patients into three distinct risk groups. Prognostic stratification with this model could assist clinical practice decisions for follow-up and monitoring, and may aid in clinical trial design. Trial registration numbers NCT00638690.

In this analysis of a phase III trial in patients with castration-resistant prostate cancer and bone metastases, treatment with denosumab reduced the risk of skeletal complications vs zoledronic acid regardless of whether the end point was defined as SSE or SRE. Both SSEs and SREs were associated with development of moderate/severe pain among patients with no/mild pain at baseline., Background In a phase III trial in patients with castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC) and bone metastases, denosumab was superior to zoledronic acid in reducing skeletal-related events (SREs; radiation to bone, pathologic fracture, surgery to bone, or spinal cord compression). This study reassessed the efficacy of denosumab using symptomatic skeletal events (SSEs) as a prespecified exploratory end point. Patients and methods Patients with CRPC, no previous bisphosphonate exposure, and radiographic evidence of bone metastasis were randomized to subcutaneous denosumab 120 mg plus i.v. placebo every 4 weeks (Q4W), or i.v. zoledronic acid 4 mg plus subcutaneous placebo Q4W during the blinded treatment phase. SSEs were defined as radiation to bone, symptomatic pathologic fracture, surgery to bone, or symptomatic spinal cord compression. The relationship between SSE or SRE and time to moderate/severe pain was assessed using the Brief Pain Inventory Short Form. Results Treatment with denosumab significantly reduced the risk of developing first SSE [HR, 0.78; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.66–0.93; P = 0.005] and first and subsequent SSEs (rate ratio, 0.78; 95% CI 0.65–0.92; P = 0.004) compared with zoledronic acid. The treatment differences in the number of patients with SSEs or SREs were similar (n = 48 and n = 45, respectively). Among patients with no/mild pain at baseline, both SSEs and SREs were associated with moderate/severe pain development (P < 0.0001). Fewer patients had skeletal complications, particularly fractures, when defined as SSE versus SRE. Conclusion In patients with CRPC and bone metastases, denosumab reduced the risk of skeletal complications versus zoledronic acid regardless of whether the end point was defined as SSE or SRE.

The RECCORD registry gathered real-world data on treatment and outcome for metastatic renal cell carcinoma patients in the UK. RECCORD revealed that the uptake of new agents varied across the UK. Survival and progression data were consistent with published trial reports. Longer overall survival was associated with a number of factors such as usage of second-line therapy and an initial dose reduction., Background The aim of the RECCORD registry was to gather real-world UK data on the use of targeted therapies in renal cell carcinoma (RCC) and assess clinical outcomes. Here, demographic and outcome data are presented with the treatment patterns and demographic profile of patients on the registry. Patients and methods Patients were retrospectively identified at seven UK hospitals with large cancer centres in England (5), Scotland (1) and Wales (1). Anonymised data were collected through an online registry covering demographics, treatments and outcomes. Five hundred and fourteen UK adult patients with metastatic RCC were included in the study for analysis. Patients were included if they were treated for metastatic RCC at one of the seven centres, and started systemic anti-cancer treatment from March 2009 to November 2012 inclusive. In addition to demographic factors, the principal outcome measures were overall survival (OS), time to disease progression and toxicity. Results The majority of first-line treatment was with sunitinib; first-line use of pazopanib increased as the study progressed. 15.8% of patients received second-line treatment, half of whom were prescribed everolimus. Median OS (from initiation of first-line treatment) was 23.9 months (95% confidence interval [CI] 18.6–29.1 months), similar to that reported for clinical trials of targeted RCC therapies [Ljungberg B, Campbell SC, Choi HY et al. The epidemiology of renal cell carcinoma. Eur Urol 2011; 60: 615–621; Abe H, Kamai T. Recent advances in the treatment of metastatic renal cell carcinoma. Int J Urol 2013; 20: 944–955; Motzer RJ, Hutson TE, Tomczak P et al. Overall survival and updated results for sunitinib compared with interferon alfa in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma. J Clin Oncol 2009; 27: 3584–3590]. OS was significantly longer for those who received second-line treatment after disease progression (33.0 months; 95% CI 30.8–35.2 months) than those who did not (20.9 months; 95% CI 16.4–25.3 months; P = 0.008). Conclusions RECCORD is a large ‘real-world’ database assessing metastatic RCC treatment patterns and outcomes. Treatment patterns changed over time as targeted therapies were approved and became widely available; survival data in RECCORD are consistent with those reported for systemic treatments in clinical trials. Kaplan–Meier analysis of results demonstrated that receiving second-line therapy was a major prognostic factor for longer OS.

This randomized phase II study examined the use of vinflunine in combination with gemcitabine or carboplatin as first-line chemotherapy in cisplatin-ineligible patients with advanced urothelial carcinoma. Both doublets were feasible and offered a similar 77% disease control rate. Response rate (44%), overall survival (14 months) and less haematological toxicity favoured vinflunine–gemcitabine., Background There is no standard first-line chemotherapy for advanced urothelial carcinoma (aUC) in cisplatin-ineligible (cisplatin-unfit) patients. The study assessed the efficacy and tolerability profile of two vinflunine-based cytotoxic regimens in this setting. Patients and methods Patients with aUC a creatinine clearance (CrCl) of

Background Cabazitaxel significantly improves overall survival (OS) versus mitoxantrone in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer after docetaxel failure. We examined patient survival at 2 years and tumour-related pain with cabazitaxel versus mitoxantrone. Methods Updated TROPIC data (cut-off 10 March 2010) were used to compare 2-year survival between treatment groups and assess patient demographics and disease characteristics. Factors prognostic for survival ≥2 years were assessed. Pain and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status were evaluated in the overall patient population. Results Median follow-up was 25.5 months. After 2 years, more patients remained alive following cabazitaxel than mitoxantrone [odds ratio 2.11; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.33–3.33]. Treatment with cabazitaxel was prognostic for survival ≥2 years. Demographics/baseline characteristics were balanced between treatment arms irrespective of survival. Pain at baseline and pain response were comparable between treatment groups. Average daily pain performance index was lower for cabazitaxel versus mitoxantrone (all cycles; 95% CI –0.27 to –0.01; P = 0.035) and analgesic scores were similar. Grade ≥3 peripheral neuropathies were uncommon and comparable between treatment groups. Conclusions Cabazitaxel prolongs OS at 2 years versus mitoxantrone and has low rates of peripheral neuropathy. Palliation benefits of cabazitaxel were comparable to those of mitoxantrone. The study was registered with www.ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT00417079).