Search

Urothelial carcinoma (UC) is the 10th most common cancer globally with an almost 4 times higher prevalence in men. The main risk factors for development of urothelial carcinoma are advanced age, smoking, arsenic contamination, exposure to carcinogens. Metastatic urothelial carcinoma (mUC) has overall poor prognosis with a 5-year overall survival rate of only < 5%. The standard of care comprises of platinum-based chemotherapy, but the responses are often not sustained. A working group was established with an objective to discuss the most recent clinical data on the genitourinary tumors of interest and comprised of experts across Latin America, Emerging Asia (except China, Japan, and South Korea), Africa, and the Middle East (known as Emerging Markets or EM). There is an evident disparity in terms of uneven mortality and incidence rate distribution among various regions. There is a lack and/or insufficient data on epidemiology, treatment, and outcomes in the EM. The lack of registries impacts the healthcare decisions and the lower incidence from the region might not be reflective of the true disease burden. The treatment outcomes of mUC can be improved by understanding the current disease burden and treatment approach of mUC and identifying the gaps and challenges associated with management. Hence, a literature review was developed to summarize the current disease burden and treatment approach of mUC across EM. The review also highlights the unmet needs for mUC management in EM and suggests a way forward to improve the current situation in order to better serve the patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background There is a lack of consensus regarding the optimal method of assessing health-related quality of life (HR-QOL) among patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). This study explored the perceived relevance of items that make up the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy Kidney Symptom Index-19 (FKSI-19), as judged by patients with mRCC. Methods This was a multinational cross-sectional survey. Eligible patients responded to a questionnaire composed of 18 items that assessed the perceived relevance of each item in the FKSI-19 questionnaire. Open-ended questions assessed additional issues deemed relevant by patients. Responses were grouped as relevant (scores 2-5) or nonrelevant (score 1). Descriptive statistics were collated, and open-ended questions were analyzed and categorized into descriptive categories. Spearman correlation statistics were used to test the association between relevance and clinical characteristics. Results A total of 151 patients were included (gender: 78.1 M, 21.9F; median age: 64; treatment: 38.4 immunotherapy, 29.8 targeted therapy, 13.9 immuno-TKI combination therapy) in the study. The most relevant questions evaluated fatigue (77.5), lack of energy (72.2), and worry that their condition will get worse (71.5). Most patients rated blood in urine (15.2), fevers (16.6), and lack of appetite (23.2) as least relevant. Qualitative analysis of open-ended questions revealed several themes, including emotional and physical symptoms, ability to live independently, effectiveness of treatment, family, spirituality, and financial toxicity. Conclusion There is a need to refine widely used HR-QOL measures that are employed among patients diagnosed with mRCC treated with contemporary therapies. Guidance was provided for the inclusion of more relevant items to patients' cancer journey. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Enfortumab vedotin (EV), an antibody–drug conjugate directed against Nectin-4, significantly prolonged survival compared to standard chemotherapy in patients with locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma who previously received platinum-based chemotherapy and a PD-1 or PD-L1 inhibitor. The overall response rate in the phase 3 EV301 trial leading to approval was 40.6%. However, no data have been published yet regarding the effect of EV on brain metastases. Here, we present three patients from different centers with brain metastases receiving EV. A 58-year-old white male patient, who had been heavily pretreated for urothelial carcinoma with visceral metastases and a solitary clinically active brain metastasis, started on EV 1.25 mg/kg on days 1, 8, and 15 of a 28-day cycle. After three cycles, the first evaluation showed a partial remission by RECIST v1.1, with a near complete response on the brain metastasis and disappearance of neurological symptoms. The patient is currently still receiving EV. A second, 74-year-old male patient started on the same regimen, after previous progression on platinum-based chemotherapy and avelumab in maintenance. The patient achieved a complete response and received therapy for five months. Nevertheless, therapy was discontinued at the patient's request. Shortly after, he developed new leptomeningeal metastases. Upon rechallenge with EV, there was a significant reduction in the diffuse meningeal infiltration. A third, 50-year-old white male patient also received EV after previous progression on cisplatin–gemcitabine and atezolizumab maintenance, followed by palliative whole-brain radiotherapy and two cycles of vinflunine. After three cycles of EV, there was a significant reduction in the brain metastases. The patient is currently still receiving EV. These are the first reports on the efficacy of EV in patients with urothelial carcinoma and active brain metastases. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Docetaxel improves overall survival (OS) in castration-resistant prostate cancer (PCa) (CRPC) and metastatic hormone-sensitive PCa (mHSPC). However, not all patients respond due to inherent and/or acquired resistance. There remains an unmet clinical need for a robust predictive test to stratify patients for treatment. Liquid biopsy of circulating tumour cell (CTCs) is minimally invasive, can provide real-time information of the heterogeneous tumour and therefore may be a potentially ideal docetaxel response prediction biomarker. Objective: In this study we investigate the potential of using CTCs and their gene expression to predict post-docetaxel tumour response, OS and progression free survival (PFS). Methods: Peripheral blood was sampled from 18 mCRPC and 43 mHSPC patients, pre-docetaxel treatment, for CTC investigation. CTCs were isolated ® using the epitope independent Parsortix system and gene expression was determined by multiplex RT-qPCR. We evaluated CTC measurements for post-docetaxel outcome prediction using receiver operating characteristics and Kaplan Meier analysis. Results: Detection of CTCs pre-docetaxel was associated with poor patient outcome post-docetaxel treatment. Combining total-CTC number with PSA and ALP predicted lack of partial response (PR) with an AUC of 0.90, p= 0.037 in mCRPC. A significantly shorter median OS was seen in mCRPC patients with positive CTC-score (12.80 vs. 37.33 months, HR= 5.08, p= 0.0005), ≥3 total-CTCs/7.5mL (12.80 vs. 37.33 months, HR= 3.84, p= 0.0053), ≥1 epithelial-CTCs/7.5mL (14.30 vs. 37.33 months, HR= 3.89, p= 0.0041) or epithelial to mesenchymal transitioning (EMTing)-CTCs/7.5mL (11.32 vs. 32.37 months, HR= 6.73, p= 0.0001). Significantly shorter PFS was observed in patients with ≥2 epithelial-CTCs/7.5mL (7.52 vs. 18.83 months, HR= 3.93, p= 0.0058). mHSPC patients with ≥5 CTCs/7.5mL had significantly shorter median OS (24.57 vs undefined months, HR= 4.14, p= 0.0097). In mHSPC patients, expression of KLK2, KLK4, ADAMTS1, ZEB1 and SNAI1 was significantly associated with shorter OS and/or PFS. Importantly, combining CTC measurements with clinical biomarkers increased sensitivity and specificity for prediction of patient outcome. Conclusion: While it is clear that CTC numbers and gene expression were prognostic for PCa post-docetaxel treatment, and CTC subtype analysis may have additional value, their potential predictive value for docetaxel chemotherapy response needs to be further investigated in large patient cohorts. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Outcomes for patients with advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma (UC) remain poor. Targeting the programmed death ligand-1 (PD-(L)1) immune checkpoint pathway has emerged as a useful target in patients with UC. Avelumab is a PD-L1 inhibitor, resulting in restoration of a cytotoxic, antitumor T cell response. Results from the JAVELIN bladder 100 trial has resulted in a new standard of care of platinum-based chemotherapy sequenced by maintenance avelumab in advanced or metastatic UC. This review covers the clinical evidence for avelumab in UC. This includes the maintenance approach with avelumab, which has become the standard of care, following platinum-based chemotherapy. Immune checkpoint inhibitor treatment in metastatic UC holds much promise, but has not been optimized. First-line maintenance avelumab is an attractive option for these patients. Future research will significantly change the landscape of treatment in the near future. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Immuno-oncology (IO) therapies are now the first-line (1L) standard of care for metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). In real-world adult patients with mRCC, the current study found second-line sunitinib continued to show clinical activity after failure of 1L IO. This study highlights the need to understand optimal treatment sequencing after 1L IO progression. Background: Limited data exist on the clinical effectiveness of second-line (2L) vascular endothelial growth factor (receptor) targeted inhibitor (VEGF(R)i) sunitinib after first-line (1L) immuno-oncology (IO) therapy for patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) in real-world settings. Methods: A retrospective cohort study among adult patients with mRCC treated with 2L sunitinib following 1L IO was conducted from select International mRCC Database Consortium (IMDC) centers. All analyses were performed overall and by 1L ipilimumab + nivolumab (IPI + NIVO) or 1L IO + VEGF(R)i. Median overall survival (mOS) and time-to-treatment discontinuation (mTTD) in 2L were estimated using Kaplan-Meier analysis. The 2L objective response rate (ORR) (complete/partial response) was reported. Results: Among 102 patients on 2L sunitinib, mean age was 61.3 years. IMDC risk scores at 2L initiation was available for 83 patients: 8 (9.6%) were favorable, 45 (54.2%) were intermediate, and 30 (36.1%) were poor risk. The 1L consisted of IPI + NIVO in 62 (60.8%), IO + VEGF(R)i therapy in 27 (26.5%), and IO monotherapy in 13 (12.7%) patients. Among all patients, mOS was 15.6 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 9.8-21.7), with a 1-year OS rate of 57.5% (95% CI, 45.2-68.0). mTTD was 5.4 months (95% CI, 4.2-7.2) and ORR was 22.5%. Conclusion: Despite availability of effective 1L therapies in recent years, 2L sunitinib continues to have clinical activity after failure of 1L IO. Further studies on optimal treatment sequencing after 1L IO progression are needed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Metastatic urothelial cancer (UC) is the eighth most common cause of cancer death in the UK. Standard first-line treatment, for most patients, is cytotoxic chemotherapy. Although UC is initially sensitive to chemotherapy, relapse is almost inevitable and outcomes are poor; median overall survival is 8 months. Therefore, there is an urgent need for novel therapies to improve outcomes for this patient group.Methods: ATLANTIS is a randomised phase II umbrella-design screening trial of maintenance therapy in biomarker-defined subgroups of patients with advanced UC. The primary end point is progression-free survival, and the study involves over 30 UK cancer centres.Discussion: ATLANTIS is the first study in the UK to employ a precision-medicine approach to patients with UC for maintenance treatment. Agents with a positive efficacy signal will proceed to randomised phase III trials to confirm the activity of novel, biologically stratified therapies in UC.Registration: ATLANTIS trial EudraCT number 2015-003249-25. ISRCTN25859465. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: A phase 2 trial showed improved progression-free survival for atezolizumab plus bevacizumab versus sunitinib in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma who express programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1). Here, we report results of IMmotion151, a phase 3 trial comparing atezolizumab plus bevacizumab versus sunitinib in first-line metastatic renal cell carcinoma.Methods: In this multicentre, open-label, phase 3, randomised controlled trial, patients with a component of clear cell or sarcomatoid histology and who were previously untreated, were recruited from 152 academic medical centres and community oncology practices in 21 countries, mainly in Europe, North America, and the Asia-Pacific region, and were randomly assigned 1:1 to either atezolizumab 1200 mg plus bevacizumab 15 mg/kg intravenously once every 3 weeks or sunitinib 50 mg orally once daily for 4 weeks on, 2 weeks off. A permuted-block randomisation (block size of 4) was applied to obtain a balanced assignment to each treatment group with respect to the stratification factors. Study investigators and participants were not masked to treatment allocation. Patients, investigators, independent radiology committee members, and the sponsor were masked to PD-L1 expression status. Co-primary endpoints were investigator-assessed progression-free survival in the PD-L1 positive population and overall survival in the intention-to-treat (ITT) population. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02420821.Findings: Of 915 patients enrolled between May 20, 2015, and Oct 12, 2016, 454 were randomly assigned to the atezolizumab plus bevacizumab group and 461 to the sunitinib group. 362 (40%) of 915 patients had PD-L1 positive disease. Median follow-up was 15 months at the primary progression-free survival analysis and 24 months at the overall survival interim analysis. In the PD-L1 positive population, the median progression-free survival was 11·2 months in the atezolizumab plus bevacizumab group versus 7·7 months in the sunitinib group (hazard ratio [HR] 0·74 [95% CI 0·57-0·96]; p=0·0217). In the ITT population, median overall survival had an HR of 0·93 (0·76-1·14) and the results did not cross the significance boundary at the interim analysis. 182 (40%) of 451 patients in the atezolizumab plus bevacizumab group and 240 (54%) of 446 patients in the sunitinib group had treatment-related grade 3-4 adverse events: 24 (5%) in the atezolizumab plus bevacizumab group and 37 (8%) in the sunitinib group had treatment-related all-grade adverse events, which led to treatment-regimen discontinuation.Interpretation: Atezolizumab plus bevacizumab prolonged progression-free survival versus sunitinib in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma and showed a favourable safety profile. Longer-term follow-up is necessary to establish whether a survival benefit will emerge. These study results support atezolizumab plus bevacizumab as a first-line treatment option for selected patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma.Funding: F Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd and Genentech Inc. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose We evaluated the impact of the number of cycles of platinum based, first line chemotherapy (fewer than 6 cycles vs the conventional 6 cycles or more) on the survival of patients with metastatic urothelial carcinoma. Materials and Methods We used the RISC (Retrospective International Study of Invasive/Advanced Cancer of the Urothelium) database. The association of the number of cycles of chemotherapy with overall survival was investigated by Cox multiple regression analysis after controlling for recognized prognostic factors. We excluded patients who received fewer than 3 or more than 9 platinum chemotherapy cycles to reduce confounding factors. The primary analysis was a comparison of overall survival for 3 to 5 vs 6 to 9 cycles using 6-month landmark analysis when 281 death events were observed. Results Of the 1,020 patients in the RISC 472 received cisplatin or carboplatin, of whom 338 and 134, respectively, were evaluable. A total of 157 patients received 3 to 5 cycles (median 4) and 315 received 6 to 9 cycles (median 6). There was no significant difference in overall survival between 3 to 5 and 6 to 9 cycles (HR 1.02, 95% CI 0.78–1.33, p = 0.91). No significant interactions were observed for the type of platinum (p = 0.09) and completed planned chemotherapy (p = 0.56). The limitations of a hypothesis generating, retrospective analysis applied. Conclusions Four cycles of platinum based, first line chemotherapy appeared adequate and did not significantly compromise the survival of patients with advanced urothelial carcinoma. The omission of excessive cycles may avoid unnecessary cumulative toxicity and facilitate a better transition to second line therapy and investigational switch maintenance therapy strategies. These results require prospective validation but they may impact practice in select patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Metastatic clear cell renal cell cancer (mccRCC) portends a poor prognosis and urgently requires better clinical tools for prognostication as well as for prediction of response to treatment. Considerable investment in molecular risk stratification has sought to overcome the performance ceiling encountered by methods restricted to traditional clinical parameters. However, replication of results has proven challenging, and intratumoural heterogeneity (ITH) may confound attempts at tissue-based stratification.Methods: We investigated the influence of confounding ITH on the performance of a novel molecular prognostic model, enabled by pathologist-guided multiregion sampling (n = 183) of geographically separated mccRCC cohorts from the SuMR trial (development, n = 22) and the SCOTRRCC study (validation, n = 22). Tumour protein levels quantified by reverse phase protein array (RPPA) were investigated alongside clinical variables. Regularised wrapper selection identified features for Cox multivariate analysis with overall survival as the primary endpoint.Results: The optimal subset of variables in the final stratification model consisted of N-cadherin, EPCAM, Age, mTOR (NEAT). Risk groups from NEAT had a markedly different prognosis in the validation cohort (log-rank p = 7.62 × 10-7; hazard ratio (HR) 37.9, 95% confidence interval 4.1-353.8) and 2-year survival rates (accuracy = 82%, Matthews correlation coefficient = 0.62). Comparisons with established clinico-pathological scores suggest favourable performance for NEAT (Net reclassification improvement 7.1% vs International Metastatic Database Consortium score, 25.4% vs Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center score). Limitations include the relatively small cohorts and associated wide confidence intervals on predictive performance. Our multiregion sampling approach enabled investigation of NEAT validation when limiting the number of samples analysed per tumour, which significantly degraded performance. Indeed, sample selection could change risk group assignment for 64% of patients, and prognostication with one sample per patient performed only slightly better than random expectation (median logHR = 0.109). Low grade tissue was associated with 3.5-fold greater variation in predicted risk than high grade (p = 0.044).Conclusions: This case study in mccRCC quantitatively demonstrates the critical importance of tumour sampling for the success of molecular biomarker studies research where ITH is a factor. The NEAT model shows promise for mccRCC prognostication and warrants follow-up in larger cohorts. Our work evidences actionable parameters to guide sample collection (tumour coverage, size, grade) to inform the development of reproducible molecular risk stratification methods. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: In a phase 3, randomized, open-label trial (Pazopanib versus Sunitinib in the Treatment of Locally Advanced and/or Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma, COMPARZ; NCT00720941), pazopanib was found to be noninferior to sunitinib in terms of progression-free survival in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma with no prior therapy. Overall treatment differences were evaluated in a post hoc analysis with a quality-adjusted time without symptoms or toxicity (Q-TWiST) methodology.Methods: Each patient's overall survival was partitioned into 3 mutually exclusive health states: time with grade 3 or 4 toxicity (TOX), time without symptoms of disease or grade 3/4 toxicity of treatment, and time after tumor progression or relapse (REL). The time spent in each state was weighted by a health-state utility associated with that state and summed to calculate the Q-TWiST. A threshold utility analysis was used, and utilities were applied across the range of 0 (similar to death) to 1 (perfect health).Results: A total of 1110 patients were enrolled (557 on pazopanib and 553 on sunitinib). The mean TOX was 31 days (95% confidence interval, 13-48 days) longer for sunitinib versus pazopanib. In the threshold utility analysis, the difference in the Q-TWiST ranged from -11 days (utility for TOX, 1; utility for REL, 0) to 43 days (utility for TOX, 0; utility for REL, 1) in favor of pazopanib across most utility combinations. Differences were significant in less than half of the utility combinations examined, and this typically occurred when the utility for TOX was lower than the utility for REL.Conclusions: Patients randomized to pazopanib had a slightly longer Q-TWiST in comparison with sunitinib patients, and this was primarily due to the reduced length of TOX. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Surgical complete resection is the only curative treatment of renal cell carcinoma including patients with locally advanced disease and those with limited metastatic disease. Patients at high risk of recurrence after complete resection might theoretically benefit from adjuvant and neoadjuvant systemic treatment strategies to prolong disease-free survival and ultimately overall survival. Another rationale for using targeted therapy includes downsizing/downstaging of surgically complex locally advanced renal cell carcinoma to facilitate complete resection or primary tumors to allow for nephron-sparing strategies. Unfortunately, a considerable percentage of patients are diagnosed with metastatic disease at first presentation. Although large population-based studies consistently show a survival benefit after cytoreductive nephrectomy in the targeted therapy era, confounding factors preclude definite conclusions for this heterogeneous patient group until ongoing phase III trials are published. Presurgical targeted therapy has been proposed to identify patients with clinical benefit and potentially long-term survival after cytoreductive nephrectomy. Recently, the use of targeted therapy before or after local treatment of metastases has been reported in small retrospective series. The present review revisits the current evidence base of targeted therapy in combination with surgery for the various disease stages in renal cell carcinoma. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

There have been no major advances for the treatment of metastatic urothelial bladder cancer (UBC) in the last 30 years. Chemotherapy is still the standard of care. Patient outcomes, especially for those in whom chemotherapy is not effective or is poorly tolerated, remain poor. One hallmark of UBC is the presence of high rates of somatic mutations. These alterations may enhance the ability of the host immune system to recognize tumour cells as foreign owing to an increased number of antigens. However, these cancers may also elude immune surveillance and eradication through the expression of programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1; also called CD274 or B7-H1) in the tumour microenvironment. Therefore, we examined the anti-PD-L1 antibody MPDL3280A, a systemic cancer immunotherapy, for the treatment of metastatic UBC. MPDL3280A is a high-affinity engineered human anti-PD-L1 monoclonal immunoglobulin-G1 antibody that inhibits the interaction of PD-L1 with PD-1 (PDCD1) and B7.1 (CD80). Because PD-L1 is expressed on activated T cells, MPDL3280A was engineered with a modification in the Fc domain that eliminates antibody-dependent cellular cytotoxicity at clinically relevant doses to prevent the depletion of T cells expressing PD-L1. Here we show that MPDL3280A has noteworthy activity in metastatic UBC. Responses were often rapid, with many occurring at the time of the first response assessment (6 weeks) and nearly all were ongoing at the data cutoff. This phase I expansion study, with an adaptive design that allowed for biomarker-positive enriched cohorts, demonstrated that tumours expressing PD-L1-positive tumour-infiltrating immune cells had particularly high response rates. Moreover, owing to the favourable toxicity profile, including a lack of renal toxicity, patients with UBC, who are often older and have a higher incidence of renal impairment, may be better able to tolerate MPDL3280A versus chemotherapy. These results suggest that MPDL3280A may have an important role in treating UBC-the drug received breakthrough designation status by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in June 2014. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Everolimus (mammalian target of rapmaycin (mTOR) inhibitor) and dovitinib (vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) and fibroblast growth factor 2 (FGF-2) inhibitor) demonstrate activity in metastatic clear cell renal cancer. The combination of these agents has a broad spectrum of relevant activity. The combination is explored in this phase Ib study. Methods Patients with metastatic clear cell renal cancer who have failed VEGF targeted therapy were eligible. Up to four cohorts of three to six patients (3+3 design) were treated with escalating doses of everolimus and dovitinib. Dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) were assessed to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD). An expansion cohort (n=15) was investigated to obtain additional efficacy information. Sequential fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography (FDG-PET) was used as a surrogate marker of response. Results Overall 18 patients were recruited into the study. Fifteen patients received the MTD, which was everolimus 5mg orally (PO) once daily (OD) and dovitinib 200mg PO day 1-5/7. The MTD was associated with toxicity, which included fatigue, mucositis and diarrhoea in 73%, 53% and 53% (Common Toxicity Criteria (CTC) grade 1-4) of patients, respectively. Frequent biochemical abnormalities occurred (such as hypertriglyceridaemia in 67%). Higher doses of the combination were not tolerable due to grade 3 fatigue in 2/3 patients and grade 3 nausea in 1/3 patients within 1month of therapy. The response rate at the MDT was 1/15 (7%) while the progression free survival for the MTD was 7months (95% confidence interval (CI) 2.2-11months). Pharmacokinetic data at the MTD showed stable kinetics with time. Conclusion Dovitinib and everolimus had modest activity, but did not meet all of the planned efficacy end-points. Fatigue was the dose limiting toxicity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective. Metastatic seminoma is a highly curable disease. Standard treatment comprises of combination chemotherapy. The short- and long-term toxicities of this treatment are increasingly recognised and the possibility of over treatment in such a curable disease should be considered. We have therefore assessed the use of single agent carboplatin at a dose of AUC 10 in patients with good prognosis metastatic seminoma. Materials and methods. Patients with good prognosis metastatic seminoma treated with carboplatin (AUC 10) were identified at our institution and affiliated institutions. Treatment was three weekly for a total of three or four cycles. Outcome and toxicities were analysed. Results. With a median follow-up of 36 months, 61 patients in total were treated with carboplatin AUC 10, all good prognosis by the IGCCCG criteria. Forty-eight percent had stage IIA/IIB disease and 52% had greater than stage IIB disease. Thirty-one patients (51%) had a complete response following treatment. Three-year survival was 96.3% with a three-year progression free survival of 93.2%. The main treatment toxicity was haematological with 46% having grade 3, 24% having grade 4 neutropenia and 54% experiencing grade 3/4 thrombocytopenia. There were no treatment related deaths. Conclusion. Single agent carboplatin at a dose of AUC 10 is an effective treatment for good prognosis metastatic seminoma. The outcome compares favourably to previously published outcomes of combination chemotherapy. Although haematological toxicity is a concern, single agent carboplatin treatment for good prognosis metastatic seminoma could be considered a treatment option and is associated with less toxicity than combination regimens currently used. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Background: Both sunitinib and pazopanib are widely used as first line therapy in metastatic renal cancer (mRCC). The efficacy of these agents appears similar but they may have distinct toxicity profiles. In this study we compare the severity of symptomatic and asymptomatic toxicity associated with sunitinib and pazopanib. Methods: Two sequential prospective single arm phase II studies investigated either 12weeks of sunitinib (n =43) or pazopanib (n =34) prior to nephrectomy in untreated mRCC. Toxicity was defined as either symptomatic (hand and foot syndrome, mucositis, nausea, fatigue, diarrhoea, oedema, headache, pain, anorexia and change in taste) or asymptomatic (liver toxicity or haematological toxicity). Pazopanib (800mg once daily (OD)) and sunitinib (50mg 4/2) were given. Regular Common Toxicity Criteria (CTC) toxicity assessment was performed during the first 12weeks of therapy. Results: There was no significant difference in the overall number of toxic events (grade 1–4) for sunitinib and pazopanib (mean number of toxic events/patients: 1.97 versus 1.96: p >0.05). Increased grade 2–4 symptomatic toxicity events occurred with sunitinib (hazard ratio (HR) 1.67 [95% confidence interval (CI): 1.11–2.56] p <0.03). Sunitinib was associated with an increased grade 2–4 mucositis (16% versus 0% p =0.02) and fatigue (42% versus 15% p =0.01). Pazopanib was associated with more frequent grade 1 diarrhoea (39% versus 12%: p =0.03). Dose reductions for symptomatic toxicity occurred more frequently with sunitinib (26% versus 6% p <0.05). There was no difference in the occurrence of asymptomatic toxicity. Conclusion: This indirect analysis suggests sunitinib and pazopanib have distinct toxicity profiles which may help guide patient’s choice. Further comparative data from randomised trials are awaited. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Study Type - Therapy (case series) Level of Evidence 4 What's known on the subject? and What does the study add? Sunitinib is approved for the first- and second-line treatment of advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC). Chronic kidney disease is commonly seen in patients with RCC, but knowledge regarding the effect of sunitinib in patients with severe renal impairment or on haemodialysis is limited. In this study we define the toxicity profile and clinical outcomes of a patient cohort with RCC with severe renal impairment, or on haemodialysis who were treated with sunitinib. This retrospective study suggests that these patients can be safely treated with sunitinib at the standard dose, and the observed efficacy of therapy is similar to that reported in patients with normal renal function. OBJECTIVE To further investigate the effect of sunitinib, which is currently a standard of care for the treatment of metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC), in patients with severe renal impairment or those undergoing dialysis. PATIENTS AND METHODS Clinical databases were used to identify all patients with mRCC treated with sunitinib in seven institutions internationally. Databases were searched to identify only those patients with an estimated glomerular filtration rate of <30 mL/min/1.73 m2 or those who had end-stage renal disease requiring dialysis. Baseline characteristics, adverse event data, response and progression-free survival were recorded. RESULTS Nineteen patients met the inclusion criteria, 10 of whom were undergoing haemodialysis. Of the nine non-dialysis-dependent patients at drug initiation, the median estimated glomerular filtration rate was 27 mL/min/1.73 m2 (range 23-29). Baseline characteristics included a median age of 61 years (range 44-77); 17 patients had a Karnofsky performance status of >80; eight patients had more than two metastatic sites and 17 had undergone prior nephrectomy. The estimated median progression-free survival of this cohort was 43 weeks (range 7 to 158+) and progression has not yet been reached in six patients. Partial response or stable disease was observed as best response in 15 patients. The most common treatment-related adverse events included fatigue, diarrhoea, hand-foot skin reaction (HFSR), nausea and vomiting and rash. Grade three treatment-related adverse events including fatigue (seven patients), HFSR (two patients), diarrhoea (one patient), rash (one patient) and stomatitis (one patient) occurred in a total of 12 patients. Only one patient experienced a grade four adverse event (HFSR). Only diarrhoea ( P = 0.0002), HFSR ( P < 0.0001) and neutropenia ( P = 0.001) were more common in patients undergoing haemodialysis compared with non-dialysis-dependent patients. Four of the non-dialysis dependent patients started at a dose of 50 mg compared with three of the patients undergoing haemodialysis. However five and two of the patients undergoing haemodialysis started at doses of 37.5 mg and 25 mg daily, respectively, compared with four and one of the non-dialysis-dependent patients. All patients took sunitinib for 4 out of every 6 weeks. Dose reductions during treatment were performed in eight patients but only one patient required discontinuation of treatment. CONCLUSION These data suggest that patients with severe renal impairment or end-stage renal disease on haemodialysis can be safely treated with sunitinib at doses of 25-50 mg daily for 4 weeks followed by a 2-week break. The observed efficacy of therapy is similar to that reported in patients with normal renal function. These preliminary results warrant confirmation in a larger cohort of patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Background: The role of cytoreductive nephrectomy in metastatic clear cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC) is controversial. Objective: To determine the outcome of patients with metastatic ccRCC who receive sunitinib prior to planned nephrectomy. Design, setting, and participants: The study combined the data from two prospective phase 2 studies that assessed upfront sunitinib (12–16 wk) prior to nephrectomy in previously untreated patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (RCC). Sunitinib was discontinued during the perioperative period (median: 29 d). Intervention: Sunitinib 50mg in six weekly cycles (4 wk on, 2 wk off). Measurements: Progression-free (PFS) and overall survival (OS) using the Kaplan-Meier method. Results and limitations: Twenty-one patients (32%) had Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Centre (MSKCC) poor-risk disease; 45 (68%) had intermediate-risk disease. Nephrectomy was not performed in 19 (29%), most commonly due to disease progression (n =12). The PFS for the cohort was 6.3 mo (95% confidence interval [CI], 5.1–8.5). Seventeen (36%) patients progressed during the treatment break, 13 (76%) of whom stabilised upon reinitiating of sunitinib. The OS for the cohort was 15.2 mo (95% CI, 10.3–NA). The OS for the intermediate MSKCC risk group was significantly longer than that for the poor-risk group (26.0 mo [95% CI, 13.6–NA] and 9.0 mo [95% CI, 5.8–20.5], respectively; p <0.01). In multivariate analysis, progression of disease prior to planned nephrectomy (hazard ratio [HR]: 5.34; 95% CI, 3.17–13.27), high Fuhrman grade (HR 3.27; 95% CI, 1.38–7.72), and MSKCC poor risk at diagnosis (HR 4.75; 95% CI, 2.05–11.02) were associated with short survival (p <0.01). However, in the absence of randomised studies it is not possible to determine if this approach is beneficial. Conclusions: Upfront sunitinib prior to planned nephrectomy in intermediate-risk disease is associated with a median survival of >2 yr despite frequent progression during treatment break. Progression in metastatic sites prior to planned surgery and MSKCC poor-risk disease was associated with a poor outcome. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Background: Sunitinib is standard first-line therapy for metastatic clear cell renal cancer (MCRC). It is associated with leucopenia; however, its effects on specific immune cell subsets are unclear. Alterations in immune cell subsets may contribute to tumour progression. Methods: Lymphocyte subsets (CD3, 4, 8, 19 and 56) were measured in 43 untreated MCRC patients who received sunitinib. The protocol included a structured treatment interruption of 5 weeks. Cell populations were measured at specific time points during sunitinib treatment and the treatment break. Results: Sunitinib was associated with significant declines in total leucocyte (-48%), neutrophil (-62%), CD3 total T cell (-31%) and CD4 counts (32%; p < 0.05). There was no significant change in CD19 B lymphocyte, CD8 or CD56 natural killer cells. During the sunitinib-free interval, all parameters recovered to baseline. No patients developed opportunistic infections or neutropenic sepsis. The level of specific immune subsets at presentation or occurrence of a fall in specific counts had an effect on progression-free survival (p > 0.05). Conclusions: Sunitinib is associated with reversible inhibition of specific lymphocyte subsets which has implications for the immunological control of MCRC and its use in combination with other agents. Despite suppressive effects, there was no evidence of predisposition to immune suppressive-related infection. Copyright © 2010 S. Karger AG, Basel [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Oncologist is the property of Oxford University Press / USA and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

First-line (1L) platinum-based chemotherapy (PBT) is recommended for patients with locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma (la/mUC). Among patients without disease progression following 1L PBT, avelumab maintenance (maintA) is recommended based on a survival benefit versus best supportive care in the JAVELIN Bladder 100 trial. However, there are limited data on the proportion of patients who are eligible for maintA in clinical practice. This study assessed the proportion of patients with la/mUC who are eligible for and who received maintA in US clinical practice. This retrospective, observational study used the US nationwide Flatiron Health longitudinal electronic health record-derived database comprising de-identified patient-level structured and unstructured data. Adults diagnosed with la/mUC who received ≥1 dose of 1L PBT between April 2020 to January 2022 were included. MaintA eligibility and utilization and patient disposition were assessed. MaintA eligibility was defined as complete response, partial response, or stable disease following 1L PBT. In total, 336 patients with la/mUC were included in the analysis. Mean age (SD) was 70.1 (9.3) years and 72.6% were male. 186 (55.4%) received a cisplatin-based regimen and the remainder a carboplatin-based regimen; 181 patients (53.9%) were eligible for maintA. Of 138 evaluable maintA-ineligible patients, the primary reason for maintA ineligibility was disease progression (71.7% of patients, 99/138), followed by death during/post 1L PBT (28.3%, 39/138). Of maintA-eligible patients, 37.0% (67/181) received maintA, representing 19.9% (67/336) of the 1L PBT-treated population. Among patients who initiated maintA, mean (SD) time to initiation from end of 1L PBT was 1.0 (0.74) month and duration of maintenance was 5.5 (3.9) months. Of patients initiating 1L PBT, almost half were not eligible for maintA, primarily due to disease progression (71.7%) or death (28.3%) and >80% of the overall 1L PBT-treated population did not receive maintA. These data highlight the need for novel 1L treatments for patients with la/mUC. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims of the study: Prognostic factors for recurrent germ cell tumours (GCTs) treated with dose dense salvage chemotherapy have not been identified. This study determines whether lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) or established prognostic models can predict the outcome of recurrent GCTs treated with dose dense cisplatin-based chemotherapy. Patients and methods: Retrospective analysis of 117 consecutive male patients with a first recurrence of a GCT treated with dose dense chemotherapy at a single cancer centre. Characteristics associated with progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were identified by univariate and multivariate analyses. Prognostic criteria published by the Medical Research Council (MRC) and the Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Centre (MSK) were also applied in an attempt to validate them and to compare their performance to that of LDH. Results: Raised LDH was significantly associated with poor PFS (hazard ratio (HR)=3.7; p <0.001) and OS (HR=3.4; p =0.001). Further factors associated with poor PFS and OS, respectively, were failure to achieve a complete response or marker negative partial response for at least 6months (HR=2.1; p =0.033) and seminoma histology (HR=3.4; p =0.003). The MRC prognostic model, but not the MSK model, identified groups of patients with statistically significant differences in PFS and OS but raised LDH predicted OS and PFS with a higher HR. Conclusions: Raised LDH is associated with a poor prognosis in recurrent GCTs and outperforms established prognostic models in this setting. LDH as a prognostic factor should be validated prospectively and should also be assessed in patients receiving conventional dose chemotherapy regimens. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Platinum-based combination chemotherapy is the standard treatment for patients with chemotherapy-eligible metastatic urothelial carcinoma (mUC). Immune-checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) are currently assessed in this setting. This review aimed to assess the role of ICIs alone or in combination as first-line treatment in chemotherapy-eligible patients with mUC. Multiple databases were searched for articles published until November 2020. Studies were deemed eligible if they compared overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rates (ORRs), complete response rates (CRRs), durations of response (DORs) and adverse events (AEs) in chemotherapy-eligible patients with mUC. Three studies met our eligibility criteria. ICI combination therapy was associated with significantly better OS and PFS, higher CRR and longer DOR than chemotherapy alone (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.85, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.76–0.94, P = 0.002; HR: 0.80, 95% CI: 0.71–0.90, P = 0.0002; odds ratio [OR]: 1.48, 95% CI: 1.12–1.96, P = 0.006; and mean difference: 1.39, 95% CI: 0.31–2.46, P = 0.01, respectively). ICI-chemotherapy combination therapy was also associated with significantly better OS and PFS, higher ORR and CRR and longer DOR than chemotherapy alone. Although OS and PFS benefits of ICI combination therapy were larger in patients with high expression of programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1), PD-L1 low expression patients also had a benefit; HR for OS (high PD-L1: HR 0.79 versus low PD-L1: HR 0.89) and PFS (high PD-L1: HR 0.74 versus low PD-L1: HR 0.82). ICI monotherapy was not associated with better oncological outcomes but was associated with better safety outcomes than chemotherapy alone. Our analysis indicates a superior oncologic benefit to first-line ICI combination therapies in patients with chemotherapy-eligible mUC over standard chemotherapy. In contrast, ICI monotherapy was associated with favorable safety outcomes compared with chemotherapy but failed to show its superiority over chemotherapy in oncological benefits. PD-L1 status alone cannot help guide treatment decision-making. However, caution should be exercised in interpreting the conclusions drawn from this study, given that there is the heterogeneity of the population of interest, risk of bias and the nature of the studies evaluated whose data remain immature or unpublished. • ICIs are currently assessed for patients with chemotherapy-eligible mUC. • ICIs used in combination are superior to chemotherapy in oncological benefits. • ICI monotherapy efficacy is not superior to that of chemotherapy alone. • PD-L1 alone is not a sufficiently robust, reliable and reproducible biomarker. • The analyses include the heterogeneity of the population and risk of bias. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract Background Nivolumab-ipilimumab demonstrated a survival benefit over sunitinib in first-line setting for metastatic renal cell carcinomas (mRCCs) and is becoming a new standard of care for naïve patients with intermediate or poor risk prognosis (International mRCC Database Consortium). The efficacy of subsequent vascular endothelial growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) after nivolumab-ipilimumab failure remains unclear. Methods Medical records of mRCC patients treated with nivolumab-ipilimumab, who received subsequent TKI, as part of Checkmate 214 study were reviewed in 13 institutions. Baseline characteristics, outcome data including progression-free survival (PFS), response, overall survival (OS) and toxicities were retrospectively collected. Results Overall 33 patients received subsequent TKI after nivolumab-ipilimumab failure. Median follow-up from start of subsequent TKI is 22 months (19–NR). Best response was assessed in 30 patients: 12 partial responses (36%), 13 stable diseases (39%) and five progressive diseases (15%). Median PFS from start of TKI was 8 months [5–13]. Median PFS with first-generation (sunitinib/pazopanib) and second-generation TKI (axitinib/cabozantinib) was 8 months [5–16] and 7 months (5–NA), respectively. PFS in second line was significantly longer in patients with a long first-line duration of response to the double immune checkpoint blockade (≥6 months) with 8 versus 5 months for short responder (<6 months) (p = 0.03). OS rate was 54% at 12 months. Toxicity was as expected: 42% developed at least one toxicity grade ≥3. Conclusion This is the first report of outcomes with TKI, after first-line nivolumab-ipilimumab failure. Median PFS suggests a sustained benefit of TKI and supports trials investigating the optimal sequence. Highlights • First report of tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) activity in patients after nivolumab-ipilimumab failure in mRCC. • Median TKIs progression free survival is 8 months (95% confidence interval: 5–13). • No difference was observed between first and second generation of TKI. • 75% of patients had a clinical benefit with 36% of partial response. • Investigating the optimal sequence for each patient must be the next priority. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) are active in metastatic urothelial carcinoma (MUC). They have joined chemotherapy (CT) as a standard of care. Here, we investigate the activity of CT after progression on ICIs. Two cohorts of sequential patients with MUC were described ( n = 28). Cohort A received first-line ICIs followed by CT after progression. Cohort B received CT after failure of first-line platinum-based CT followed by ICIs. Response rate (RR) to CT was assessed using Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST v1.1) by a designated radiologist. Best RR for cohort A was 64%. Two patients experienced clinical progression and died before the first radiographic assessment. RR for cohort B was 21%, which was significantly lower than that for cohort A. Progression of disease occurred in 43% of cohort B patients by the end of CT. These data suggest a lack of cross resistance between CT and ICIs in MUC. Therefore, the sequencing of these drugs is likely to be important to maximise outcomes. This is particularly true after first-line ICIs as subsequent CT has significant activity. Patient summary In this report, we studied the effect of chemotherapy in metastatic bladder cancer, which relapsed after immune checkpoint inhibitors. We found that the activity of chemotherapy was maintained despite previous exposure to immune therapy. This underlines the importance of sequencing these agents to maximise outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: First-line chemotherapy for patients with cisplatin-ineligible locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma is associated with short response duration, poor survival, and high toxicity. This study assessed atezolizumab (anti-programmed death-ligand 1 [PD-L1]) as treatment for metastatic urothelial cancer in cisplatin-ineligible patients.Methods: For this single-arm, multicentre, phase 2 study, in 47 academic medical centres and community oncology practices in seven countries in North America and Europe, we recruited previously untreated patients with locally advanced or metastatic urothelial cancer who were cisplatin ineligible. Patients were given 1200 mg intravenous atezolizumab every 21 days until progression. The primary endpoint was independently confirmed objective response rate per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1 (central review), assessed in prespecified subgroups based on PD-L1 expression and in all patients. All participants who received one or more doses of atezolizumab were included in the primary and safety analyses. This study was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02108652.Findings: Between June 9, 2014, and March 30, 2015, we enrolled 123 patients, of whom 119 received one or more doses of atezolizumab. At 17·2 months' median follow-up, the objective response rate was 23% (95% CI 16 to 31), the complete response rate was 9% (n=11), and 19 of 27 responses were ongoing. Median response duration was not reached. Responses occurred across all PD-L1 and poor prognostic factor subgroups. Median progression-free survival was 2·7 months (2·1 to 4·2). Median overall survival was 15·9 months (10·4 to not estimable). Tumour mutation load was associated with response. Treatment-related adverse events that occurred in 10% or more of patients were fatigue (36 [30%] patients), diarrhoea (14 [12%] patients), and pruritus (13 [11%] patients). One treatment-related death (sepsis) occurred. Nine (8%) patients had an adverse event leading to treatment discontinuation. Immune-mediated events occurred in 14 (12%) patients.Interpretation: Atezolizumab showed encouraging durable response rates, survival, and tolerability, supporting its therapeutic use in untreated metastatic urothelial cancer.Funding: F Hoffmann-La Roche, Genentech. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Patient summary After the introduction of systemic targeted therapies, the use of nephrectomy in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma has declined. Currently, systemic therapy is offered to more patients first as a means to select those candidates that will likely benefit from removal of their primary tumour. Although studies consistently demonstrate a survival benefit after nephrectomy, most patients with poor risk metastatic disease are unlikely to benefit from surgery. Soon studies will report on the effect of nephrectomy in patients with metastatic disease at diagnosis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Context: Surgical intervention is the primary treatment for early-stage renal cell carcinoma (RCC), but alone it has limited benefit in patients with metastatic disease. The advent of targeted agents for RCC has improved the outcome in these patients, and there is increasing interest in exploring the efficacy and safety of these agents in combination with surgery in both early and advanced disease. Objective: This article reviews approved and emerging targeted therapies for RCC and outlines the rationale and implications for combining these therapies with surgery. Evidence acquisition: A search of the literature, trial registries, and meeting proceedings was performed, and reports on surgery, receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitors, vascular endothelial growth factor antibodies, mammalian target of rapamycin inhibitors, and cytokine adjuvant therapy relating to RCC were critically reviewed. Evidence synthesis: Nephrectomy has been shown to improve overall survival in patients with metastatic RCC (mRCC) treated with interferon alpha. Combining targeted therapy with surgery has the potential to improve efficacy and tolerability relative to cytokine therapy and prospective studies are underway. In the localized setting, there is some evidence of tumor downsizing with neoadjuvant targeted therapy. The tolerability and safety of targeted agents used perioperatively must be considered, particularly in the adjuvant setting where chronic therapy is required to prevent recurrence or metastasis. Novel agents with greater specificity and improved safety profiles are under development and have the potential to enhance efficacy and minimize the risk of complications. Conclusions: For patients with mRCC, randomized controlled trials are ongoing to define the role and sequence of nephrectomy in combination with targeted therapy. Until data are available, nephrectomy remains part of the mRCC treatment algorithm for patients with good performance status and a resectable tumor. Targeted therapy to downsize large primary tumors in nonmetastatic disease is investigational, but the rate of surgically relevant down-staging and tumor shrinkage seen with the current generation of agents is limited. In patients with high-risk nonmetastatic disease, adjuvant therapy must be administered only in the context of the ongoing clinical trials since there are no data showing efficacy in this setting. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Summary Local treatment of metastases such as metastasectomy or radiotherapy remains controversial in the treatment of metastatic renal cell carcinoma. To investigate the benefits and harms of various local treatments, we did a systematic review of all types of comparative studies on local treatment of metastases from renal cell carcinoma in any organ. Interventions included metastasectomy, radiotherapy modalities, and no local treatment. The results suggest that patients treated with complete metastasectomy have better survival and symptom control (including pain relief in bone metastases) than those treated with either incomplete or no metastasectomy. Nevertheless, the available evidence was marred by high risks of bias and confounding across all studies. Although the findings presented here should be interpreted with caution, they and the identified gaps in knowledge should provide guidance for clinicians and researchers, and directions for further research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]