Search

Purpose: In patients with metastatic prostate cancer (mPC), ATM and BRCA2 mutations dictate differences in PARPi inhibitor response and other therapies. We interrogated the molecular features of ATM- and BRCA2-mutated mPC to explain the divergent clinical outcomes and inform future treatment decisions. Experimental design: We examined a novel set of 1,187 mPCs after excluding microsatellite-instable (MSI) tumors. We stratified these based on ATM (n = 88) or BRCA2 (n = 98) mutations. As control groups, mPCs with mutations in 12 other homologous recombination repair (HRR) genes were considered non-BRCA2/ATM HRR-deficient (HRDother, n = 193), whereas lack of any HRR mutations were considered HRR-proficient (HRP; n = 808). Gene expression analyses were performed using Limma. Real-world overall survival was determined from insurance claims data. Results: In noncastrate mPCs, only BRCA2-mutated mPCs exhibited worse clinical outcomes to AR-targeted therapies. In castrate mPCs, both ATM and BRCA2 mutations exhibited worse clinical outcomes to AR-targeted therapies. ATM-mutated mPCs had reduced TP53 mutations and harbored coamplification of 11q13 genes, including CCND1 and genes in the FGF family. BRCA2-mutated tumors showed elevated genomic loss-of-heterozygosity scores and were often tumor mutational burden high. BRCA2-mutated mPCs had upregulation of cell-cycle genes and were enriched in cell-cycle signaling programs. This was distinct from ATM-mutated tumors. Conclusions: Tumoral ATM and BRCA2 mutations are associated with differential clinical outcomes when patients are stratified by treatments, including hormonal or taxane therapies. ATM- and BRCA2-mutated tumors exhibited differences in co-occurring molecular features. These unique molecular features may inform therapeutic decisions and development of novel therapies.

ImportanceCytokine storm due to COVID-19 can cause high morbidity and mortality and may be more common in patients with cancer treated with immunotherapy (IO) due to immune system activation.ObjectiveTo determine the association of baseline immunosuppression and/or IO-based therapies with COVID-19 severity and cytokine storm in patients with cancer.Design, Setting, and ParticipantsThis registry-based retrospective cohort study included 12 046 patients reported to the COVID-19 and Cancer Consortium (CCC19) registry from March 2020 to May 2022. The CCC19 registry is a centralized international multi-institutional registry of patients with COVID-19 with a current or past diagnosis of cancer. Records analyzed included patients with active or previous cancer who had a laboratory-confirmed infection with SARS-CoV-2 by polymerase chain reaction and/or serologic findings.ExposuresImmunosuppression due to therapy; systemic anticancer therapy (IO or non-IO).Main Outcomes and MeasuresThe primary outcome was a 5-level ordinal scale of COVID-19 severity: no complications; hospitalized without requiring oxygen; hospitalized and required oxygen; intensive care unit admission and/or mechanical ventilation; death. The secondary outcome was the occurrence of cytokine storm.ResultsThe median age of the entire cohort was 65 years (interquartile range [IQR], 54-74) years and 6359 patients were female (52.8%) and 6598 (54.8%) were non-Hispanic White. A total of 599 (5.0%) patients received IO, whereas 4327 (35.9%) received non-IO systemic anticancer therapies, and 7120 (59.1%) did not receive any antineoplastic regimen within 3 months prior to COVID-19 diagnosis. Although no difference in COVID-19 severity and cytokine storm was found in the IO group compared with the untreated group in the total cohort (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.80; 95% CI, 0.56-1.13, and aOR, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.41-1.93, respectively), patients with baseline immunosuppression treated with IO (vs untreated) had worse COVID-19 severity and cytokine storm (aOR, 3.33; 95% CI, 1.38-8.01, and aOR, 4.41; 95% CI, 1.71-11.38, respectively). Patients with immunosuppression receiving non-IO therapies (vs untreated) also had worse COVID-19 severity (aOR, 1.79; 95% CI, 1.36-2.35) and cytokine storm (aOR, 2.32; 95% CI, 1.42-3.79).Conclusions and RelevanceThis cohort study found that in patients with cancer and COVID-19, administration of systemic anticancer therapies, especially IO, in the context of baseline immunosuppression was associated with severe clinical outcomes and the development of cytokine storm.Trial RegistrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04354701

There is a paucity of data on the safety of cabozantinib use in combination with radiotherapy.To report the practice patterns, safety, and efficacy of cabozantinib with radiotherapy in metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC).An international multicenter retrospective study was conducted. Patients with mRCC treated with cabozantinib at any line of therapy and who received radiotherapy between 30 d prior to the start date of cabozantinib and 30 d following discontinuation of cabozantinib, from 2014 to 2020, were included. Concurrent use was defined as the use of cabozantinib on radiotherapy treatment days during any course of radiotherapy.The primary outcomes of interest were the rate of grade ≥3 adverse events (AEs) occurring within 90 d of receipt of radiotherapy. Secondary outcomes included hospitalization rate and patterns of cabozantinib and radiotherapy use. Baseline characteristics and AEs were presented descriptively.A total of 127 consecutive patients were included. Most patients had clear cell histology (88%), had International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium intermediate-risk disease (57%), and had received at least one prior line of therapy (93%). Of 127 patients, 67 (53%) received concurrent cabozantinib with radiotherapy, while the remaining held cabozantinib on radiotherapy days. Overall, grade 3-4 AEs occurred in 6.3% (n = 8/127) of patients. No grade 5 events were observed. In patients treated with conventional palliative radiotherapy (n = 88), the rate of grade 3-4 AEs in those who had concurrent versus those who had nonconcurrent cabozantinib was 6.3% (n = 3/48) versus 5.0% (n = 2/40). No patient was hospitalized due to radiotherapy-related toxicity. In patients treated with stereotactic ablative body radiotherapy (SABR; n = 50), the rate of grade 3-4 AEs in those who had concurrent versus those who had nonconcurrent cabozantinib was 3.6% (n = 1/28) versus 9.1% (n = 2/22). One patient in the nonconcurrent group was hospitalized due to muscle weakness suspected to be related to associated vasogenic edema 19 d after SABR for multiple brain metastases.In this real-world study of patients with mRCC treated with cabozantinib, 53% of patients received radiotherapy concurrently, with few grade 3-4 AEs reported within 90 d of receiving radiotherapy. The use of radiotherapy and cabozantinib requires a risk-benefit assessment of patient and disease characteristics to optimize therapy regimens.Our study reports the real-world experience of using radiotherapy in patients receiving cabozantinib for metastatic kidney cancer. Over half of the patients continued taking cabozantinib while receiving radiotherapy, and few patients developed serious side effects. The combined use of radiotherapy and cabozantinib requires a careful risk-benefit assessment to achieve optimal treatment outcomes.

Given that radium-223 is a radiopharmaceutical that induces DNA damage, and olaparib is a PARP inhibitor that interferes with DNA repair mechanisms, we hypothesized their synergy in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). We sought to demonstrate the safety and efficacy of olaparib + radium-223. We conducted a multicenter phase I 3+3 dose escalation study of olaparib with fixed dose radium-223 in patients with mCRPC with bone metastases. The primary objective was to establish the RP2D of olaparib, with secondary objectives of safety, PSA response, alkaline phosphatase response, radiographic progression-free survival (rPFS), overall survival, and efficacy by homologous recombination repair (HRR) gene status. Twelve patients were enrolled; all patients received a prior androgen receptor signaling inhibitor (ARSI; 100%) and 3 patients (25%) prior docetaxel. Dose-limiting toxicities (DLT) included cytopenias, fatigue, and nausea. No DLTs were seen in the observation period however delayed toxicities guided the RP2D. The RP2D of olaparib was 200 mg orally twice daily with radium-223. The most common treatment-related adverse events were fatigue (92%) and anemia (58%). The rPFS at 6 months was 58% (95% confidence interval, 27%–80%). Nine patients were evaluable for HRR gene status; 1 had a BRCA2 alteration (rPFS 11.8 months) and 1 had a CDK12 alteration (rPFS 3.1 months). Olaparib can be safely combined with radium-223 at the RP2D 200 mg orally twice daily with fixed dose radium-223. Early clinical benefit was observed and will be investigated in a phase II study.

In patients with renal cell carcinoma (RCC) on cabozantinib, venous thromboembolism (VTE) management remains challenging due to limited safety data regarding direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) use in conjunction with cabozantinib. We investigated the safety of cabozantinib with different anticoagulants in patients with RCC.In this retrospective multicenter study (9 sites), patients with advanced RCC were allocated into 4 groups: (1) cabozantinib without anticoagulation, cabozantinib with concomitant use of (2) DOACs, (3) low molecular weight heparin (LMWH), or (4) warfarin. The primary safety endpoint was the proportion of major bleeding events (defined per International Society on Thrombosis and Hemostasis criteria). The primary efficacy endpoint was the proportion of new/recurrent VTE while anticoagulated.Between 2016 and 2020, 298 patients with RCC received cabozantinib (no anticoagulant = 178, LMWH = 41, DOAC = 64, and warfarin = 15). Most patients had clear cell histology (78.5%) and IMDC intermediate/poor disease (78.2%). Cabozantinib was first, second, or ≥ third line in 21.8%, 31.9%, 43.3% of patients, respectively. Overall, there was no difference in major bleeding events between the no anticoagulant, LMWH, and DOAC groups (P = .088). Rate of new/recurrent VTE was similar among anticoagulant groups. Patients with a VTE had a statistically significantly worse survival than without a VTE (HR 1.48 [CI 95% 1.05-2.08, P = .02]).This real-world cohort provides first data on bleeding and thrombosis complications in patients with RCC treated with cabozantinib with or without concurrent anticoagulation. DOACs appear safe for VTE treatment for patients with RCC on cabozantinib, but optimized anticoagulation management, including individualized risk-benefit discussion, remains important in clinical practice.

The standard of care for localized renal cell carcinoma (RCC) is radical or partial nephrectomy. Despite complete resection, a subset of patients will develop locoregional recurrence or metastatic disease. Adjuvant immunotherapy has been studied since the 1980 s as the primary method to mitigate tumor recurrence after definitive surgery. We herein discuss published and ongoing clinical trials investigating adjuvant therapy in localized or locoregional RCC.

PURPOSE Liquid biopsies in metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) provide a unique approach to understand the molecular basis of treatment response and resistance. This is particularly important in the context of immunotherapies, which target key immune-tumor interactions. Unlike metastatic tissue biopsies, serial real-time profiling of mRCC is feasible with our noninvasive circulating tumor cell (CTC) approach. METHODS We collected 457 longitudinal liquid biopsies from 104 patients with mRCC enrolled in one of two studies, either a prospective cohort or a phase II multicenter adaptive immunotherapy trial. Using a novel CTC capture and automated microscopy platform, we profiled CTC enumeration and expression of HLA I and programmed cell death-ligand 1 (PD-L1). Given their diametric immunological roles, we focused on the HLA I to PD-L1 ratio (HP ratio). RESULTS Patients with radiographic responses showed significantly lower CTC abundances throughout treatment. Furthermore, patients whose CTC enumeration trajectory was in the highest quartile (> 0.12 CTCs/mL annually) had shorter overall survival (median 17.0 months v 21.1 months, P < .001). Throughout treatment, the HP ratio decreased in patients receiving immunotherapy but not in patients receiving tyrosine kinase inhibitors. Patients with an HP ratio trajectory in the highest quartile (≥ 0.0012 annually) displayed significantly shorter overall survival (median 18.4 months v 21.2 months, P = .003). CONCLUSION In the first large longitudinal CTC study in mRCC to date to our knowledge, we identified the prognostic importance of CTC enumeration and the change over time of both CTC enumeration and the HP ratio. These insights into changes in both tumor burden and the molecular profile of tumor cells in response to different treatments provide potential biomarkers to predict and monitor response to immunotherapy in mRCC.

We sought to compare outcomes between neoadjuvant therapy with a novel hormonal agent (NHA) prior to radical prostatectomy (neo-RP) and up-front radical prostatectomy (RP) in patients with high-risk prostate cancer (HRPC).HRPC patients treated on 3 trials of neoadjuvant NHA followed by RP formed the neo-RP cohort (112). The RP group (259) comprised an observational cohort of HRPC patients undergoing RP without neoadjuvant therapy between 2010-2016 at our institution who met key eligibility criteria for the neoadjuvant trials (ie ≥3 positive biopsy cores and Gleason ≥4+3=7). Inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) was used to minimize potential confounding factors when estimating treatment effects. The primary outcomes were time to biochemical recurrence (BCR) and metastasis-free survival (MFS).Before IPTW, the neo-RP cohort had higher rates of Gleason 9-10 cancer (46% vs 24%), cT3 disease (22% vs 5%), and PSA ≥20 ng/ml (14% vs 7%); after IPTW, the 2 cohorts were balanced. Overall, after IPTW, time to BCR (HR=0.25 [95% CI 0.18-0.37]) and MFS (HR=0.26 [0.15-0.46]) were significantly longer in the neo-RP compared to the RP cohort. Rates of adjuvant (7% vs 24%) and salvage therapy (34% vs 46%) were lower in the neo-RP cohort.Neoadjuvant therapy with an NHA prior to RP was associated with longer time to BCR and superior MFS compared to up-front RP in men with HRPC. These findings are hypothesis-generating but suggest benefit with neoadjuvant therapy with an NHA in HRPC, an approach which is currently being studied in the phase 3 PROTEUS trial (NCT03767244).

Immune checkpoint inhibitors are a well-established treatment option for advanced urothelial carcinoma, and biomarkers of response are needed for better patient selection. We show that metastatic disease confined to lymph nodes is associated with better outcomes, while metastases to liver, bone or both are associated with poor outcomes with immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy. Results are hypothesis-generating but relevant to practice. BACKGROUND: Sites of metastasis have prognostic significance in advanced urothelial carcinoma (aUC), but more information is needed regarding outcomes based on metastatic sites in patients treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI). We hypothesized that presence of liver/bone metastases would be associated with worse outcomes with ICI. METHODS: We identified a retrospective cohort of patients with aUC across 26 institutions, collecting demographics, clinicopathological, treatment, and outcomes information. Outcomes were compared with logistic (observed response rate; ORR) and Cox (progression-free survival; PFS, overall survival; OS) regression between patients with/without metastasis beyond lymph nodes (LN) and those with/without bone/liver/lung metastasis. Analysis was stratified by 1st or 2nd(+) line. RESULTS: We identified 917 ICI-treated patients: in the 1st line, bone/liver metastases were associated with shorter PFS (Hazard ratio; HR: 1.65 and 2.54), OS (HR: 1.60 and 2.35, respectively) and lower ORR (OR: 0.48 and 0.31). In the 2nd(+) line, bone/liver metastases were associated with shorter PFS (HR: 1.71 and 1.62), OS (HR: 1.76 and 1.56) and, for bone-only metastases, lower ORR (OR: 0.29). In the 1st line, LN-confined metastasis was associated with longer PFS (HR: 0.53), OS (HR:0.49) and higher ORR (OR: 2.97). In the 2nd(+) line, LN-confined metastasis was associated with longer PFS (HR: 0.47), OS (HR: 0.54), and higher ORR (OR: 2.79); all associations were significant. CONCLUSION: Bone and/or liver metastases were associated with worse, while LN-confined metastases were associated with better outcomes in patients with aUC receiving ICI. These findings in a large population treated outside clinical trials corroborate data from trial subset analyses.

In this multicenter retrospective study, we studied the impact of the concurrent use of renin-angiotensin system inhibitors (RASi) on the outcomes of 229 metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) patients treated with immune-checkpoint inhibitors (ICI). The findings suggest that RASi could be repurposed to enhance outcomes with ICI in patients with mRCC, which may have a large global impact given their cost-efficacy. BACKGROUND: Renin-angiotensin system inhibitors (RASi) have been shown to improve outcomes in studies of multiple malignancies by effects on the tumor microenvironment to enhance the immune repertoire and improve drug delivery. Repurposing RASi to treat metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) in combination with immune-checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) may improve survival coupled with tolerability and cost efficacy. We evaluated the impact of RASi on outcomes in mRCC patients receiving ICI. METHODS: This multicenter, retrospective cohort study included mRCC patients treated with ICI with or without RASi. The patients from Dana-Farber Cancer Institute (DFCI) were used as a discovery cohort, and the patients from University of California San Diego (UCSD) were used for validation. Receipt of an ICI (PD1/L1 and/or CTLA-4 inhibitors) was required. RASi use was defined as receipt of a RASi at baseline and for a minimum of 30 days after ICI initiation. For both the discovery and validation cohorts, the primary outcome assessed was overall survival (OS) and the secondary endpoints were time-to-treatment failure (TTF), and objective response rate (ORR). RESULTS: Overall, 229 patients who received an ICI were included: 100 patients from DFCI and 129 patients from UCSD. Concomitant RASi were administered in 30 patients (30%) in the DFCI cohort and 59 (45%) in the UCSD cohort. Median age at ICI initiation was 62.5 years in both cohorts. Median follow-up was 3.8 [IQR 3-5.3] years in the DFCI cohort, and 2.3 [IQR 1.4-3.6] years in the UCSD cohort. In the DFCI cohort, RASi was significantly associated with longer OS (adjusted-HR 0.35 [95% CI, 0.17-0.70], P = .003) and TTF (adjusted-HR 0.57 [0.36-0.92], P = .02). In the validation cohort, RASi was associated with TTF (adjusted HR, 0.60 [0.39-0.92], P = .02) and not statistically associated with OS (adjusted-HR 0.60 [0.34-1.06], P = .07). The propensity analysis, matching 83 patients from both cohorts receiving RASi while on ICI with 83 who did not, showed that RASi significantly improved OS (HR 0.59 [0.37-0.95], P = .03) and TTF (HR 0.60 [0.43-0.85], P = .0034). CONCLUSIONS: RASi was associated with improved OS and TTF in mRCC patients receiving ICI. This provides a rationale for prospective randomized studies combining ICI and RASi in mRCC patients.

Treatment paradigms for management of metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) are evolving. We examined impact of surgical metastasectomy on survival across in mRCC stratified by risk-group.Multicenter retrospective analysis from the Registry of Metastatic RCC database. The cohort was subdivided utilizing Motzer criteria (favorable-, intermediate-, high-risk). Primary outcome was all-cause mortality (ACM)/overall survival (OS); secondary outcome was cancer-specific mortality (CSM)/cancer-specific survival (CSS). Impact of metastasectomy was analyzed via Cox-Regression analysis adjusting for potential prognostic variables and Kaplan-Meier analysis (KMA) within each risk-group.Four hundred thirty-one patients (59 favorable-risk, 274 intermediate-risk, 98 high-risk; median follow-up 27.2 months) were analyzed. Metastasectomy was performed in 22 (37%), 66 (24%), and 32 (16%) of favorable-, intermediate- and high-risk groups (P = .012). Median number of metastases at diagnosis differed significantly (favorable-risk 2, intermediate-risk 3.4, high-risk 5.1, P.001). On Cox-regression, high-risk (HR = 1.72, P = .002) was associated with worsened ACM, while metastasectomy was associated with improved ACM (HR = 0.56, P = .005). On KMA, median OS (months) was longer with metastasectomy in favorable- (92.7 vs. 25.8, P = .003) and intermediate-risk (26.3 vs. 20.1, P = .038), but not high-risk (P = .911) groups. Metastasectomy was associated with longer CSS in favorable- (76.1 vs. 32.8, P = .004) but not intermediate- (P = .06) and high-risk (P = .595) groups.Metastasectomy was independently associated with improved ACM and CSM, as well as improved CSS and OS in favorable- and intermediate-risk mRCC patients. Metastasectomy may be considered as component of multimodal management strategy in favorable and intermediate-risk subgroups. In high-risk patients, metastasectomy should be deferred except in select circumstances.

A myriad of organ-specific complications have been observed with COVID-19. While racial/ethnic minorities have been disproportionately burdened by this disease, our understanding of the unique risk factors for complications among a diverse population of cancer patients remains limited. This is a multi-institutional, multi-ethnic cohort study evaluating COVID-19 complications among cancer patients. Patients with an invasive cancer diagnosis and confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection were identified from March to November 2020. Demographic and clinical data were obtained and a multivariate logistic regression was employed to evaluate the impact of demographic and clinical factors on COVID-19 complications. The study endpoints were evaluated independently and included any complication, sepsis, pulmonary complications and cardiac complications. A total of 303 patients were evaluated, of whom 48% were male, 79% had solid tumors, and 42% were Hispanic/Latinx (Hispanic). Malignant hematologic cancers were associated with a higher risk of sepsis (OR 3.93 (95% CI 1.58–9.81)). Male patients had a higher risk of sepsis (OR 4.42 (95% CI 1.63–11.96)) and cardiac complications (OR 2.02 (95% CI 1.05–3.89)). Hispanic patients had a higher odds of any complication (OR 2.31 (95% CI 1.18–4.51)) and other race was associated with a higher odds of cardiac complications (OR 2.41 (95% CI 1.01–5.73)). Clinically, fever, cough, and ≥2 co-morbidities were independently significantly associated with any complication. This analysis evaluated covariates that can significantly predict a myriad of complications among a multi-ethnic cohort of cancer patients. The conclusions drawn from this analysis elucidate a mechanistic understanding of differential illness severity from COVID-19.

Tumor mutation burden (muts/Mb) of ATM and BRCA2 mutant mPCs.

Comparisons of WTS profiles between ATMm and BRCA2m to the HRP group.

AR activities and NEPC signatures in ATM- and BRCA2- mutated tumors.

Overall survival of ATM, BRCA2 mutant, and HRDother mPCs.

Composition and rates of all detectable genomic features detectable through the Caris diagnostic platform.

Purpose:In patients with metastatic prostate cancer (mPC), ATM and BRCA2 mutations dictate differences in PARPi inhibitor response and other therapies. We interrogated the molecular features of ATM- and BRCA2-mutated mPC to explain the divergent clinical outcomes and inform future treatment decisions.Experimental design:We examined a novel set of 1,187 mPCs after excluding microsatellite-instable (MSI) tumors. We stratified these based on ATM (n = 88) or BRCA2 (n = 98) mutations. As control groups, mPCs with mutations in 12 other homologous recombination repair (HRR) genes were considered non-BRCA2/ATM HRR-deficient (HRDother, n = 193), whereas lack of any HRR mutations were considered HRR-proficient (HRP; n = 808). Gene expression analyses were performed using Limma. Real-world overall survival was determined from insurance claims data.Results:In noncastrate mPCs, only BRCA2-mutated mPCs exhibited worse clinical outcomes to AR-targeted therapies. In castrate mPCs, both ATM and BRCA2 mutations exhibited worse clinical outcomes to AR-targeted therapies. ATM-mutated mPCs had reduced TP53 mutations and harbored coamplification of 11q13 genes, including CCND1 and genes in the FGF family. BRCA2-mutated tumors showed elevated genomic loss-of-heterozygosity scores and were often tumor mutational burden high. BRCA2-mutated mPCs had upregulation of cell-cycle genes and were enriched in cell-cycle signaling programs. This was distinct from ATM-mutated tumors.Conclusions:Tumoral ATM and BRCA2 mutations are associated with differential clinical outcomes when patients are stratified by treatments, including hormonal or taxane therapies. ATM- and BRCA2-mutated tumors exhibited differences in co-occurring molecular features. These unique molecular features may inform therapeutic decisions and development of novel therapies.

PURPOSE Compared with people living without HIV (PWOH), people living with HIV (PWH) and cancer have traditionally been excluded from immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) trials. Furthermore, there is a paucity of real-world data on the use of ICIs in PWH and cancer. METHODS This retrospective study included PWH treated with anti–PD-1- or anti–PD-L1-based therapies for advanced cancers. Kaplan-Meier method was used to estimate overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). Objective response rates (ORRs) were measured per RECIST 1.1 or other tumor-specific criteria, whenever feasible. Restricted mean survival time (RMST) was used to compare OS and PFS between matched PWH and PWOH with metastatic NSCLC (mNSCLC). RESULTS Among 390 PWH, median age was 58 years, 85% (n = 331) were males, 36% (n = 138) were Black; 70% (n = 274) received anti–PD-1/anti–PD-L1 monotherapy. Most common cancers were NSCLC (28%, n = 111), hepatocellular carcinoma ([HCC]; 11%, n = 44), and head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC; 10%, n = 39). Seventy percent (152/216) had CD4+ T cell counts ≥200 cells/µL, and 94% (179/190) had HIV viral load CONCLUSION Among PWH, ICIs demonstrated differential activity across cancer types with no excess toxicity. Safety and activity of ICIs were similar between matched cohorts of PWH and PWOH with mNSCLC.

Patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer have few treatment options after novel hormonal therapy (eg, abiraterone or enzalutamide). We aimed to evaluate cabozantinib, a tyrosine kinase inhibitor with immunomodulatory properties, in combination with the PD-L1 inhibitor atezolizumab in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer.COSMIC-021 is an ongoing, multicentre, open-label, phase 1b study with a dose-escalation stage followed by tumour-specific expansion stages. Expansion cohort 6 in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer was enrolled at 42 cancer research centres in France, Italy, the Netherlands, Spain, and the USA. Eligible patients were aged 18 years or older and had metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer with radiographic soft tissue progression following treatment with either enzalutamide or abiraterone, or both; measurable soft tissue disease per Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumours (RECIST) version 1.1; and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1. Patients received oral cabozantinib 40 mg per day and intravenous atezolizumab 1200 mg once every 3 weeks. Study treatment continued until progressive disease or unacceptable toxicity. All enrolled patients were assessed for efficacy and safety. The primary endpoint was objective response rate per RECIST version 1.1 as assessed by the investigator. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03170960.Between April 24, 2018, and Aug 31, 2020, 132 patients were enrolled and received at least one dose of study treatment. At data cutoff (Feb 19, 2021), median duration of follow-up was 15·2 months (IQR 9·6-21·7). Objective response rate was 23% (95% CI 17-32; 31 of 132 patients), with three (2%) confirmed complete responses and 28 (21%) confirmed partial responses. 72 (55%) of 132 patients had grade 3-4 treatment-related adverse events, with the most common being pulmonary embolism (11 [8%] patients), diarrhoea (nine [7%]), fatigue (nine [7%]), and hypertension (nine [7%]). There was one grade 5 treatment-related adverse event (dehydration). 74 (56%) of 132 patients had serious adverse events of any causality. 28 (21%) of 132 patients had treatment-related adverse events leading to discontinuation of either study drug.Cabozantinib plus atezolizumab showed promising antitumour activity in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer after novel hormonal therapy with an acceptable safety profile, supporting further evaluation of this combination.Exelixis.

Visceral metastasis (VM) and a higher number of bone metastasis generally define high volume/risk in patients with metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer (mCSPC). Subgroup analysis of pivotal trials did not show a clear benefit of second-generation non-steroidal anti-androgens (NSAAs) in patients with VM. However, subgroup analysis of the trial assessing abiraterone acetate, a CYP 17 inhibitor, plus prednisone (AAP) showed an improved overall survival (OS) in patients with mCSPC with VM. We searched MEDLINE, Web of Science, and congress abstracts for the phase III randomized controlled trials of second-generation NSAAs and AAP in patients with mCSPC. In this pooled analysis, we included 6485 patients from the 6 phase III trials. The rate of patients with VM was 15.2%. Interestingly, in contrast to NSAAs, AAP seems to be effective in improving OS among patients with VM (hazard ratio, HR: 0.89, 95% CI, 0.72-1.11, P = .30 for second-generation NSAAs; HR: 0.58, 95% CI, 0.40-0.84, P = .004 for AAP). In contrast, both second-generation NSAAs (HR: 0.63, 95% CI, 0.57-0.70, P < .001) and AAP (HR: 0.68, 95% CI, 0.57-0.81, P < .001) improved OS in patients without VM. In this pooled analysis, we demonstrate that while AAP provided an OS improvement in patients with VM, second-generation NSAAs did not demonstrate a similar OS benefit in this population.

Patients with B-lymphoid malignancies have been consistently identified as a population at high risk of severe COVID-19. Whether this is exclusively due to cancer-related deficits in humoral and cellular immunity, or whether risk of severe COVID-19 is increased by anticancer therapy, is uncertain. Using data derived from the COVID-19 and Cancer Consortium (CCC19), we show that patients treated for B-lymphoid malignancies have an increased risk of severe COVID-19 compared with control populations of patients with non–B-lymphoid malignancies. Among patients with B-lymphoid malignancies, those who received anticancer therapy within 12 months of COVID-19 diagnosis experienced increased COVID-19 severity compared with patients with non–recently treated B-lymphoid malignancies, after adjustment for cancer status and several other prognostic factors. Our findings suggest that patients recently treated for a B-lymphoid malignancy are at uniquely high risk for severe COVID-19.Significance:Our study suggests that recent therapy for a B-lymphoid malignancy is an independent risk factor for COVID-19 severity. These findings provide rationale to develop mitigation strategies targeted at the uniquely high-risk population of patients with recently treated B-lymphoid malignancies.This article is highlighted in the In This Issue feature, p. 171

Supplementary Figure from Patients Recently Treated for B-lymphoid Malignancies Show Increased Risk of Severe COVID-19

Programmed death 1 (PD-1) and PD ligand 1 (PD-L1) inhibitors have shown activity in metastatic clear cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC). Data on the activity of these agents in patients with non–clear cell RCC (nccRCC) or patients with sarcomatoid/rhabdoid differentiation are limited. In this multicenter analysis, we explored the efficacy of PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors in patients with nccRCC or sarcomatoid/rhabdoid differentiation. Baseline and follow-up demographic, clinical, treatment, and radiographic data were collected. The primary endpoint was objective response rate. Secondary endpoints include time-to-treatment failure (TTF), overall survival (OS), and biomarker correlates. Forty-three patients were included: papillary (n = 14; 33%), chromophobe (n = 10; 23%), unclassified (n = 9; 21%), translocation (n = 3; 7%), and ccRCC with sarcomatoid differentiation (n = 7, 16%). Of those 43 patients, 11 patients (26%) had sarcomatoid and/or rhabdoid differentiation (n = 7 with ccRCC; n = 4 nccRCC). Overall, 8 patients (19%) objectively responded, including 4 patients (13%) who received PD-1/PD-L1 monotherapy. Responses were observed in patients with ccRCC with sarcomatoid and/or rhabdoid differentiation (n = 3/7, 43%), translocation RCC (n = 1/3, 33%), and papillary RCC (n = 4/14, 29%). The median TTF was 4.0 months [95% confidence interval (CI), 2.8–5.5] and median OS was 12.9 months (95% CI, 7.4–not reached). No specific genomic alteration was associated with clinical benefit. Modest antitumor activity for PD-1/PD-L1–blocking agents was observed in some patients with nccRCC. Further prospective studies are warranted to investigate the efficacy of PD-1/PD-L1 blockade in this heterogeneous patient population. Cancer Immunol Res; 6(7); 758–65. ©2018 AACR.

Includes: Table 1S. Baseline patient and disease characteristics. Table 2S. Tumor mutation burden status. Table 3S. PDL1 expression data. Figure 1S. Overall survival for the total cohort.

Given that radium-223 is a radiopharmaceutical that induces DNA damage, and olaparib is a PARP inhibitor that interferes with DNA repair mechanisms, we hypothesized their synergy in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). We sought to demonstrate the safety and efficacy of olaparib + radium-223.We conducted a multicenter phase I 3+3 dose escalation study of olaparib with fixed dose radium-223 in patients with mCRPC with bone metastases. The primary objective was to establish the RP2D of olaparib, with secondary objectives of safety, PSA response, alkaline phosphatase response, radiographic progression-free survival (rPFS), overall survival, and efficacy by homologous recombination repair (HRR) gene status.Twelve patients were enrolled; all patients received a prior androgen receptor signaling inhibitor (ARSI; 100%) and 3 patients (25%) prior docetaxel. Dose-limiting toxicities (DLT) included cytopenias, fatigue, and nausea. No DLTs were seen in the observation period however delayed toxicities guided the RP2D. The RP2D of olaparib was 200 mg orally twice daily with radium-223. The most common treatment-related adverse events were fatigue (92%) and anemia (58%). The rPFS at 6 months was 58% (95% confidence interval, 27%–80%). Nine patients were evaluable for HRR gene status; 1 had a BRCA2 alteration (rPFS 11.8 months) and 1 had a CDK12 alteration (rPFS 3.1 months).Olaparib can be safely combined with radium-223 at the RP2D 200 mg orally twice daily with fixed dose radium-223. Early clinical benefit was observed and will be investigated in a phase II study.

Color figure 3 for supplement.

Purpose: Despite the efficacy of abiraterone, a CYP17A1 inhibitor, in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC), nearly all patients develop resistance. The purpose of this phase II study was to evaluate mechanisms of resistance to more complete androgen synthesis inhibition with abiraterone and dutasteride.Experimental Design: Eligible patients with metastatic CRPC underwent a baseline metastasis biopsy. Patients received abiraterone and prednisone for two 4-week cycles. After this time, high-dose dutasteride (3.5 mg daily) was added. Patients continued therapy until study withdrawal or radiographic progression. Repeat metastasis biopsy was obtained at progression. The primary endpoint was to assess mechanisms of resistance. Serum hormone and abiraterone levels were assessed. Tissue was assessed for androgen receptor (AR) and AR splice variant-7 (ARV7) expression.Results: Forty patients were enrolled. Sixty percent (n = 24) achieved a ≥50% reduction in prostate-specific antigen (PSA). The median time to radiographic progression was 11 months. Nearly all baseline (n = 29 of 31) and posttreatment (n = 16 of 16) tumors tested for AR nuclear expression were positive. Of those tested, ARV7 expression was present in 48% (n = 10 of 21) of baseline and 42% (n = 5 of 12) of treatment discontinuation specimens. Compared with patients with higher serum abiraterone levels at treatment discontinuation, patients with lower levels had higher circulating androgens.Conclusions: Despite increased androgen synthesis inhibition, we demonstrate that tumor AR axis remains important in disease progression. We highlight that abiraterone metabolism and pharmacokinetics may play a role in resistance. The noncomparative design limits conclusions on the efficacy of dual therapy with abiraterone and dutasteride, but the results support development of further multifaceted approaches toward AR inhibition. Clin Cancer Res; 23(4); 935–45. ©2016 AACR.

Figure for online supplement

Purpose: This study investigates the biologic activity of radium-223 with VEGF-targeted therapy in patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma (aRCC) and bone metastases.Patients and Methods: Fifteen treatment-naïve patients (n = 15) received pazopanib 800 mg orally once daily, and 15 previously treated patients received sorafenib 400 mg orally twice daily. Radium-223 55 kilobecquerel/kg was administered concurrently every 4 weeks for up to six infusions in both cohorts. The primary endpoint was decline in bone turnover markers (Procollagen I Intact N-Terminal, N-telopeptide, C-telopeptide, osteocalcin, and bone-specific alkaline phosphatase) compared with baseline. Secondary endpoints included safety, rate of symptomatic skeletal event (SSE) and time to first SSE, objective response rate, change in analgesic use, and quality of life. Exploratory analysis of tumor genomic alterations was performed.Results: Of the 30 patients enrolled, 83% had IMDC intermediate- or poor-risk disease, 33% had liver metastases, and 83% had a history of SSE prior to enrollment. No dose-limiting toxicity was observed. All bone turnover markers significantly declined from baseline at week 8 and 16. Forty percent of patients experienced treatment-related grade ≥3 adverse events. Response rates were 15% and 18% per RECIST v1.1 and bone response was 50% and 30% per MD Anderson criteria, in the pazopanib and sorafenib cohort, respectively. Median SSE-free interval was 5.8 months and not reached, respectively. Analgesic use remained stable over the study time.Conclusions: Radium-223 combined with VEGF-targeted therapy is biologically active and safe. Randomized-controlled trials are needed to define the role of radium-223 in aRCC with skeletal metastases. Clin Cancer Res; 24(17); 4081–8. ©2018 AACR.

Clean version of supplement for submission.

1. Supplementary table 1S describing details of biopsies undergoing WES. 2. Table 2S includes the primers used in the CTC gene expression analysis. 3. Table 3S includes summary of PSA response based on prior treatment. 4. Table 4S includes objective response in the overall cohort and based on patients with measurable and non-measurable disease. 5. Table 5S is the PSA progression and radiographic PFS based on prior lines of treatment. 6. Table 6S is the adverse events in >10% of patients. 7. Table 7S is a listing of the biopsy procedures and outcomes. 8. Table 8S is the frequency of genomic alterations in the baseline and progression samples and PSA response data. 9. Table 9S includes the details for the AR mutations observed in the baseline and progression samples. 10. Figure 1S includes the KM curves for PSA progression and radiographic PFS. 11. Figure 2S includes the Consort Diagram for the study. 12. Figure 3S includes the integrative data of paired biopsy and CTC samples. 13. Figure 4S includes the KM curves for time to PSA progression, radiographic PFS, and overall survival in the CTC biomarker groups.

Black and white figure for supplement.

supplemental table and legend for suppl figures