Publications by authors named "Stephane Oudard"

272 Publications

Belzutifan for Renal Cell Carcinoma in von Hippel-Lindau Disease.

N Engl J Med 2021 11;385(22):2036-2046

From the University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston (E.J.); Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark (F.D.); Massachusetts General Hospital Cancer Center and Harvard Medical School, Boston (O.I.); Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville (W.K.R.); University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia (V.K.N.); the University of Utah, Salt Lake City (B.L.M.); Hôpital Européen Georges-Pompidou, University of Paris, Paris (S.O.); the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor (T.E.); the University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh (J.K.M.); Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Cambridge, United Kingdom (S.J.W.); Merck, Kenilworth, NJ (S.T., E.K.P., R.F.P.); and the Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD (W.M.L., R.S.).

Background: Patients with von Hippel-Lindau (VHL) disease have a high incidence of renal cell carcinoma owing to gene inactivation and constitutive activation of the transcription factor hypoxia-inducible factor 2α (HIF-2α).

Methods: In this phase 2, open-label, single-group trial, we investigated the efficacy and safety of the HIF-2α inhibitor belzutifan (MK-6482, previously called PT2977), administered orally at a dose of 120 mg daily, in patients with renal cell carcinoma associated with VHL disease. The primary end point was objective response (complete or partial response) as measured according to the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors, version 1.1, by an independent central radiology review committee. We also assessed responses to belzutifan in patients with non-renal cell carcinoma neoplasms and the safety of belzutifan.

Results: After a median follow-up of 21.8 months (range, 20.2 to 30.1), the percentage of patients with renal cell carcinoma who had an objective response was 49% (95% confidence interval, 36 to 62). Responses were also observed in patients with pancreatic lesions (47 of 61 patients [77%]) and central nervous system hemangioblastomas (15 of 50 patients [30%]). Among the 16 eyes that could be evaluated in 12 patients with retinal hemangioblastomas at baseline, all (100%) were graded as showing improvement. The most common adverse events were anemia (in 90% of the patients) and fatigue (in 66%). Seven patients discontinued treatment: four patients voluntarily discontinued, one discontinued owing to a treatment-related adverse event (grade 1 dizziness), one discontinued because of disease progression as assessed by the investigator, and one patient died (of acute toxic effects of fentanyl).

Conclusions: Belzutifan was associated with predominantly grade 1 and 2 adverse events and showed activity in patients with renal cell carcinomas and non-renal cell carcinoma neoplasms associated with VHL disease. (Funded by Merck Sharp and Dohme and others; MK-6482-004 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03401788.).
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa2103425DOI Listing
November 2021

Apalutamide Compared with Darolutamide for the Treatment of Non-metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer: Efficacy and Tolerability in a Matching-Adjusted Indirect Comparison.

Adv Ther 2021 Nov 19. Epub 2021 Nov 19.

German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Partner Site University Hospital Essen, University of Duisburg-Essen, Essen, Germany.

Introduction: Apalutamide and darolutamide are next-generation androgen receptor inhibitors that have demonstrated superior efficacy compared to placebo in men with non-metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (nmCRPC) receiving androgen deprivation therapy (ADT). In the absence of head-to-head studies, the present study sought to indirectly compare the efficacy and tolerability between these two treatments.

Methods: This anchored matching-adjusted indirect comparison (MAIC) used patient-level data from the phase 3, randomized, controlled SPARTAN study (apalutamide + ADT), weighted to match aggregate published data from the ARAMIS study (darolutamide + ADT) for clinically relevant baseline measures. Hazard ratios (HR) and 95% credible intervals (CrI) were estimated for efficacy endpoints: metastasis-free survival (MFS), prostate-specific antigen (PSA) progression, progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS). Odds ratios were estimated for tolerability outcomes: adverse events and serious adverse events.

Results: Before weighting, baseline characteristics from SPARTAN versus ARAMIS were different for median PSA (7.8 vs. 9.2 ng/mL), Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 1 (23% vs. 31%), use of bone-targeted agents (10% vs. 4%), median time from initial diagnosis (94.9 vs. 85.4 months), and proportion of patients from North America (35% vs. 12%) and Europe (50% vs. 64%). After matching (n = 455), our analysis demonstrated that apalutamide + ADT had a Bayesian probability of being more effective than darolutamide + ADT for MFS [98.3%; HR 0.70 (95% CrI 0.51, 0.98)], PSA progression [~ 100%; HR 0.46 (95% CrI 0.33, 0.64)], and PFS [93.2%; HR 0.79 (95% CrI 0.59, 1.08)]. Results for OS and tolerability were similar between apalutamide + ADT and darolutamide + ADT.

Conclusion: This anchored MAIC analysis of pivotal phase 3 studies in patients with nmCRPC suggests that apalutamide + ADT is more effective than darolutamide + ADT for MFS, progression-free survival (PFS), and prostate-specific antigen (PSA) progression, with a similar OS benefit and tolerability profile.

Trial Registration: ARAMIS ClinicalTrials.gov number: NCT02200614; SPARTAN ClinicalTrials.gov number: NCT01946204.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12325-021-01885-6DOI Listing
November 2021

Everolimus or sunitinib as first-line treatment of metastatic papillary renal cell carcinoma: A retrospective study of the GETUG group (Groupe d'Etude des Tumeurs Uro-Génitales).

Eur J Cancer 2021 Oct 4;158:1-11. Epub 2021 Oct 4.

Department of Medical Oncology, Gustave Roussy, Villejuif, France.

Background: Two phase II trials (NCT00688753 and NCT00541008) reported efficacy data of sunitinib and everolimus in first-line treatment of metastatic papillary renal cell carcinoma (mpRCC). Although most patients receive sunitinib or a mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) inhibitor in first- and second-line treatment, the optimal strategy remained unknown.

Material And Methods: In 23 centres of the Groupe d'Etude des Tumeurs Urogénitales group, after centralised pathological review, we analysed retrospectively progression-free survival (PFS) of patients with mpRCC treated in first-line treatment (PFS-1) with sunitinib or everolimus (primary end-point), PFS in second-line treatment (PFS-2), overall survival (OS), objective response rate, disease control rate (DCR), overall sequence and prognostic factors for OS (secondary end-points).

Results: One hundred thirty-eight patients (119 men and 19 women), median age 62.5 years, with mpRCC type 1 (n = 24) or non-type 1 (n = 114), received first-line sunitinib (n = 107) or everolimus (n = 31). With a median follow-up of 92 months, we found no significant difference between the treatment groups in terms of PFS-1 (5.5 versus 6.2 months) and DCR (69% versus 83%). Ninety-eight patients received a second-line treatment, 69% with mTOR inhibitors after sunitinib and 100% with tyrosine kinase inhibitors after everolimus, with similar DCR (64% versus 58%), median PFS-2 (3.4 versus 4.8 months) and OS (16.0 versus 20.3 months). No factor was prognostic for PFS-1, whereas leukocytosis, anaemia and the time from diagnosis to first systemic therapy < 1 year were prognostic for OS. We found no prognostic difference between both pRCC subtypes. The International Metastatic Renal Cell Database Consortium risk factors were prognostic for OS.

Conclusion: Sunitinib and everolimus had similar efficacy in first-line treatment of patients with mpRCC.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ejca.2021.08.046DOI Listing
October 2021

Apalutamide plus abiraterone acetate and prednisone versus placebo plus abiraterone and prednisone in metastatic, castration-resistant prostate cancer (ACIS): a randomised, placebo-controlled, double-blind, multinational, phase 3 study.

Lancet Oncol 2021 11 30;22(11):1541-1559. Epub 2021 Sep 30.

Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center and Weill Cornell Medicine, New York, NY, USA.

Background: The majority of patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) will have disease progression of a uniformly fatal disease. mCRPC is driven by both activated androgen receptors and elevated intratumoural androgens; however, the current standard of care is therapy that targets a single androgen signalling mechanism. We aimed to investigate the combination treatment using apalutamide plus abiraterone acetate, each of which suppresses the androgen signalling axis in a different way, versus standard care in mCRPC.

Methods: ACIS was a randomised, placebo-controlled, double-blind, phase 3 study done at 167 hospitals in 17 countries in the USA, Canada, Mexico, Europe, the Asia-Pacific region, Africa, and South America. We included chemotherapy-naive men (aged ≥18 years) with mCRPC who had not been previously treated with androgen biosynthesis signalling inhibitors and were receiving ongoing androgen deprivation therapy, with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status of 0 or 1, and a Brief Pain Inventory-Short Form question 3 (ie, worst pain in the past 24 h) score of 3 or lower. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) via a centralised interactive web response system with a permuted block randomisation scheme (block size 4) to oral apalutamide 240 mg once daily plus oral abiraterone acetate 1000 mg once daily and oral prednisone 5 mg twice daily (apalutamide plus abiraterone-prednisone group) or placebo plus abiraterone acetate and prednisone (abiraterone-prednisone group), in 28-day treatment cycles. Randomisation was stratified by presence or absence of visceral metastases, ECOG performance status, and geographical region. Patients, the investigators, study team, and the sponsor were masked to group assignments. An independent data-monitoring committee continually monitored data to ensure ongoing patient safety, and reviewed efficacy data. The primary endpoint was radiographic progression-free survival assessed in the intention-to-treat population. Safety was reported for all patients who received at least one dose of study drug. This study is completed and no longer recruiting and is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02257736.

Findings: 982 men were enrolled and randomly assigned from Dec 10, 2014 to Aug 30, 2016 (492 to apalutamide plus abiraterone-prednisone; 490 to abiraterone-prednisone). At the primary analysis (median follow-up 25·7 months [IQR 23·0-28·9]), median radiographic progression-free survival was 22·6 months (95% CI 19·4-27·4) in the apalutamide plus abiraterone-prednisone group versus 16·6 months (13·9-19·3) in the abiraterone-prednisone group (hazard ratio [HR] 0·69, 95% CI 0·58-0·83; p<0·0001). At the updated analysis (final analysis for overall survival; median follow-up 54·8 months [IQR 51·5-58·4]), median radiographic progression-free survival was 24·0 months (95% CI 19·7-27·5) versus 16·6 months (13·9-19·3; HR 0·70, 95% CI 0·60-0·83; p<0·0001). The most common grade 3-4 treatment-emergent adverse event was hypertension (82 [17%] of 490 patients receiving apalutamide plus abiraterone-prednisone and 49 [10%] of 489 receiving abiraterone-prednisone). Serious treatment-emergent adverse events occurred in 195 (40%) patients receiving apalutamide plus abiraterone-prednisone and 181 (37%) patients receiving abiraterone-prednisone. Drug-related treatment-emergent adverse events with fatal outcomes occurred in three (1%) patients in the apalutamide plus abiraterone-prednisone group (2 pulmonary embolism, 1 cardiac failure) and five (1%) patients in the abiraterone-prednisone group (1 cardiac failure and 1 cardiac arrest, 1 mesenteric arterial occlusion, 1 seizure, and 1 sudden death).

Interpretation: Despite the use of an active and established therapy as the comparator, apalutamide plus abiraterone-prednisone improved radiographic progression-free survival. Additional studies to identify subgroups of patients who might benefit the most from combination therapy are needed to further refine the treatment of mCRPC.

Funding: Janssen Research & Development.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S1470-2045(21)00402-2DOI Listing
November 2021

Health-related Quality of Life at the SPARTAN Final Analysis of Apalutamide for Nonmetastatic Castration-resistant Prostate Cancer Patients Receiving Androgen Deprivation Therapy.

Eur Urol Focus 2021 Aug 31. Epub 2021 Aug 31.

Massachusetts General Hospital Cancer Center and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.

Background: In SPARTAN, apalutamide improved metastasis-free and overall survival for patients with nonmetastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (nmCRPC) with a prostate-specific antigen doubling time of ≤10 mo.

Objective: We evaluated health-related quality of life (HRQoL) at the final analysis of the SPARTAN study.

Intervention: Patients received apalutamide (240 mg/d) or placebo in 28-d cycles. All patients continued androgen deprivation therapy (ADT).

Design, Setting, And Participants: A total of 1207 patients with nmCRPC were randomized 2:1 to apalutamide or placebo.

Outcome Measurements And Statistical Analysis: HRQoL was assessed using Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Prostate (FACT-P) and EQ-5D-3L questionnaires at day 1 of cycle 1 (predose/baseline), cycles 2-6, every two cycles during cycles 7-13, every four cycles thereafter, at the end of treatment, and every 4 mo after progression to 1  yr. Results are presented using descriptive statistics. A mixed model for repeated measures was fitted to estimate the mean scores at each scheduled visit during treatment.

Results: At final analysis, with 52 mo follow-up for survival, the median treatment duration was 32.9 mo for apalutamide and 11.5 mo for placebo. Patients had good baseline HRQoL. At each scheduled collection during treatment, >90% per group completed the questionnaires. The change in FACT-P total score from baseline to cycles 21 and 25 significantly favored apalutamide over placebo (p = 0.0138 and 0.0009, respectively). The apalutamide group generally maintained favorable FACT-P (total and subscales) and EQ-5D-3L scores, while placebo scores tended to decline over time (starting in cycles 11-13 and pronounced by cycles 21-25). Notably, patient-reported fatigue did not worsen with apalutamide. Most patients reported being "not at all bothered" by side effects, and bother did not increase over time with apalutamide or placebo. Patients receiving apalutamide had minimal change in side-effect bother following symptomatic adverse events.

Conclusions: Final analysis of SPARTAN confirms that HRQoL is preserved in patients with nmCRPC receiving apalutamide plus ADT, but declines in patients receiving placebo plus ADT after approximately 1 yr.

Patient Summary: Responses from patients with prostate cancer who were included in the SPARTAN study indicated that treatment with apalutamide, even after the most extensive follow-up time possible, did not reduce their quality of life. These results, along with improved survival and longer time to the development of metastases (reported separately), confirm the benefits of apalutamide for patients with nonmetastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.euf.2021.08.005DOI Listing
August 2021

Adjuvant Pembrolizumab after Nephrectomy in Renal-Cell Carcinoma.

N Engl J Med 2021 08;385(8):683-694

From Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston (T.K.C.); Poznan University of Medical Sciences, Poznan (P.T.), and Wojewódzki Szpital Zespolony im. L. Rydygiera w Toruniu, Torun (P.S.) - both in Poland; Sungkyunkwan University, Samsung Medical Center (S.H.P.), and Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine (J.L.L.) - both in Seoul, South Korea; Beatson West of Scotland Cancer Centre and University of Glasgow, Glasgow (B.V.), Edinburgh Cancer Centre and University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh (S.N.S.), and Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust (N.S.) and the Royal Free Hospital NHS Trust, University College London (T.P.), London - all in the United Kingdom; Fiona Stanley Hospital, Perth, WA (T.F.), and Macquarie University, Sydney (H.G.) - both in Australia; Taipei Veterans General Hospital, Taipei, Taiwan (Y.-H.C.); Fakultni Nemocnice Ostrava, Ostrava (J.H.), and Palacký University and University Hospital Olomouc, Olomouc (B.M.) - both in the Czech Republic; University Hospital Jean Minjoz, Besançon (A.T.-V.), University Hospital Bordeaux-Hôpital Saint-André, Bordeaux (M.G.-G.), Institut Universitaire du Cancer Toulouse-Oncopole, Toulouse (C.C.), Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Montpellier, Montpellier (D.T.), and Hôpital Européen Georges Pompidou, University of Paris, Paris (S.O.) - all in France; Fundación Arturo López Pérez, Santiago, Chile (M.M.); Abramson Cancer Center, Philadelphia (N.H.); Omsk Clinical Oncology Dispensary, Omsk, Russia (E.K.); the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor (A.A.); Rocky Mountain Cancer Centers and U.S. Oncology Research, Denver (J.M.B.); Texas Oncology, U.S. Oncology Research, Woodlands (G.D.), and the University of Texas Southwestern, Dallas (H.H.); the University of Toyama, Toyama, Japan (H.K.); Eberhard Karls University Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany (J.B.); Merck, Kenilworth, NJ (R.F.P., P.Z., K.I., J.W.-R.); and USC Norris Comprehensive Cancer Center, Los Angeles (D.I.Q.).

Background: Patients with renal-cell carcinoma who undergo nephrectomy have no options for adjuvant therapy to reduce the risk of recurrence that have high levels of supporting evidence.

Methods: In a double-blind, phase 3 trial, we randomly assigned, in a 1:1 ratio, patients with clear-cell renal-cell carcinoma who were at high risk for recurrence after nephrectomy, with or without metastasectomy, to receive either adjuvant pembrolizumab (at a dose of 200 mg) or placebo intravenously once every 3 weeks for up to 17 cycles (approximately 1 year). The primary end point was disease-free survival according to the investigator's assessment. Overall survival was a key secondary end point. Safety was a secondary end point.

Results: A total of 496 patients were randomly assigned to receive pembrolizumab, and 498 to receive placebo. At the prespecified interim analysis, the median time from randomization to the data-cutoff date was 24.1 months. Pembrolizumab therapy was associated with significantly longer disease-free survival than placebo (disease-free survival at 24 months, 77.3% vs. 68.1%; hazard ratio for recurrence or death, 0.68; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.53 to 0.87; P = 0.002 [two-sided]). The estimated percentage of patients who remained alive at 24 months was 96.6% in the pembrolizumab group and 93.5% in the placebo group (hazard ratio for death, 0.54; 95% CI, 0.30 to 0.96). Grade 3 or higher adverse events of any cause occurred in 32.4% of the patients who received pembrolizumab and in 17.7% of those who received placebo. No deaths related to pembrolizumab therapy occurred.

Conclusions: Pembrolizumab treatment led to a significant improvement in disease-free survival as compared with placebo after surgery among patients with kidney cancer who were at high risk for recurrence. (Funded by Merck Sharp and Dohme, a subsidiary of Merck; KEYNOTE-564 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03142334.).
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa2106391DOI Listing
August 2021

Cabazitaxel multiple rechallenges in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer.

Cancer Med 2021 Sep 12;10(18):6304-6309. Epub 2021 Aug 12.

Oncology Department, Hôpital Européen Georges Pompidou, AP-HP, University of Paris, Paris, France.

Introduction: Cabazitaxel multiple rechallenges may be a treatment option in heavily pretreated patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) who had a good initial response to cabazitaxel and who are still fit to receive it. Our objective was to assess the efficacy and toxicity of multiple rechallenges.

Patients And Methods: We retrospectively identified 22 mCRPC patients previously treated with docetaxel and/or androgen receptor-targeted agents who received multiple cabazitaxel rechallenges in 9 French centers. Cabazitaxel was initiated at a dose of 25 mg/m q3week. A reduced dose (20 mg/m q3w) or an alternative schedule (mainly 16 mg/m q2w) was increasingly used for subsequent rechallenges. Progression-free survival, prostate-specific antigen (PSA) response, best clinical response, and grade ≥3 toxicities were collected. Overall survival was calculated from various time points.

Results: Twenty-two patients with an initial response to cabazitaxel were rechallenged at least twice. The median number of cabazitaxel cycles was 7 at first cabazitaxel treatment, 6 at first rechallenge, and 5 at subsequent rechallenges. Median progression-free survival at first rechallenge was 9.6 months and 5.6 months at second rechallenge. Median overall survival was 50.9 months from the first cabazitaxel dose, 114.9 months from first life-extending therapy initiation in mCRPC, and 105 months from mCRPC diagnosis. There was no cumulative grade ≥3 neuropathy or nail disorder and one case of febrile neutropenia.

Conclusion: Cabazitaxel multiple rechallenges may be a treatment option without cumulative toxicity in heavily pretreated patients having a good response to first cabazitaxel use and still fit to receive it.

Novelty & Impact Statements: Patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer can be treated with Cabazitaxel after docetaxel and androgen receptor-targeted agent. This chemotherapy can be used multiple times with efficacy and manageable toxicity.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/cam4.4172DOI Listing
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8446560PMC
September 2021

Sunitinib Alone or After Nephrectomy for Patients with Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma: Is There Still a Role for Cytoreductive Nephrectomy?

Eur Urol 2021 Oct 27;80(4):417-424. Epub 2021 Jun 27.

Gustave Roussy Institute, Villejuif, France.

Background: The CARMENA trial in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) demonstrated that treatment with sunitinib alone was noninferior to cytoreductive nephrectomy (CN) followed by sunitinib (nephrectomy⬜sunitinib).

Objective: The objective of this study was to provide updated overall survival (OS) outcomes of CARMENA and assess whether some subgroups may still benefit from upfront CN.

Design, Setting, And Participants: CARMENA was a phase III trial in 450 patients with mRCC enrolled from 2009 to 2017.

Intervention: Patients in the intention-to-treat population received nephrectomy⬜sunitinib (standard of care [SOC]; n = 226) or sunitinib alone (n = 224).

Outcome Measurements And Statistical Analysis: Primary endpoint was OS, assessed using an updated data cut-off (October 2018; median OS event-free follow-up, 36.6 mo). Patients were reclassified by risk using International Metastatic RCC Database Consortium (IMDC) criteria.

Results And Limitations: Sunitinib alone was noninferior to nephrectomy⬜sunitinib (hazard ratio [HR], 0.97; 95% confidence interval, 0.79⬜1.19; p = 0.8) and demonstrated longer median OS (19.8 mo vs 15.6 mo, respectively). For patients with two or more IMDC risk factors, OS was significantly longer with sunitinib alone than with nephrectomy⬜sunitinib (31.2 mo vs 17.6 mo, respectively; HR, 0.65; p = 0.03). For patients with one IMDC risk factor, OS was longer for nephrectomy⬜sunitinib versus sunitinib alone although not significantly (31.4 mo vs 25.2 mo; HR, 1.30; p = 0.2). The post hoc nature of the subgroup analyses may limit their interpretation.

Conclusions: Sunitinib alone was noninferior compared with nephrectomy⬜sunitinib, suggesting that CN should not be considered SOC in patients with mRCC requiring systemic treatment. Certain subgroups, including patients with one IMDC risk factor, may still benefit from upfront CN.

Patient Summary: We assessed the survival of patients with metastatic kidney cancer in a clinical trial. Patients treated with sunitinib on its own had the same survival as patients who had surgery before sunitinib treatment. We conclude that surgery may not be necessary for some patients with metastatic kidney cancer.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2021.06.009DOI Listing
October 2021

ctDNA guiding adjuvant immunotherapy in urothelial carcinoma.

Nature 2021 07 16;595(7867):432-437. Epub 2021 Jun 16.

Roche/Genentech, South San Francisco, CA, USA.

Minimally invasive approaches to detect residual disease after surgery are needed to identify patients with cancer who are at risk for metastatic relapse. Circulating tumour DNA (ctDNA) holds promise as a biomarker for molecular residual disease and relapse. We evaluated outcomes in 581 patients who had undergone surgery and were evaluable for ctDNA from a randomized phase III trial of adjuvant atezolizumab versus observation in operable urothelial cancer. This trial did not reach its efficacy end point in the intention-to-treat population. Here we show that ctDNA testing at the start of therapy (cycle 1 day 1) identified 214 (37%) patients who were positive for ctDNA and who had poor prognosis (observation arm hazard ratio = 6.3 (95% confidence interval: 4.45-8.92); P < 0.0001). Notably, patients who were positive for ctDNA had improved disease-free survival and overall survival in the atezolizumab arm versus the observation arm (disease-free survival hazard ratio = 0.58 (95% confidence interval: 0.43-0.79); P = 0.0024, overall survival hazard ratio = 0.59 (95% confidence interval: 0.41-0.86)). No difference in disease-free survival or overall survival between treatment arms was noted for patients who were negative for ctDNA. The rate of ctDNA clearance at week 6 was higher in the atezolizumab arm (18%) than in the observation arm (4%) (P = 0.0204). Transcriptomic analysis of tumours from patients who were positive for ctDNA revealed higher expression levels of cell-cycle and keratin genes. For patients who were positive for ctDNA and who were treated with atezolizumab, non-relapse was associated with immune response signatures and basal-squamous gene features, whereas relapse was associated with angiogenesis and fibroblast TGFβ signatures. These data suggest that adjuvant atezolizumab may be associated with improved outcomes compared with observation in patients who are positive for ctDNA and who are at a high risk of relapse. These findings, if validated in other settings, would shift approaches to postoperative cancer care.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41586-021-03642-9DOI Listing
July 2021

Blood Biomarker Landscape in Patients with High-risk Nonmetastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer Treated with Apalutamide and Androgen-Deprivation Therapy as They Progress to Metastatic Disease.

Clin Cancer Res 2021 Aug 10;27(16):4539-4548. Epub 2021 Jun 10.

Helen Diller Family Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, California.

Purpose: In the placebo-controlled SPARTAN study, apalutamide added to androgen-deprivation therapy (ADT) improved metastasis-free survival, second progression-free survival (PFS2), and overall survival (OS) in patients with nonmetastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (nmCRPC). Mechanisms of resistance to apalutamide in nmCRPC require evaluation.

Patients And Methods: In a subset of patients from SPARTAN, aberrations were assessed at baseline and end of study treatment (EOST) using targeted next-generation sequencing or qRT-PCR. Circulating-tumor DNA (ctDNA) levels were assessed qualitatively. Select aberrations in androgen receptor (AR) and other common PC-driving genes were detected and summarized by the treatment group; genomic aberrations were summarized in ctDNA-positive samples. Association between detection of aberrations in all patients and outcomes was assessed using Cox proportional-hazards models and multivariate analysis.

Results: In 247 patients, the overall prevalence of ctDNA, AR aberrations, and inactivation increased from baseline (40.6%, 13.6%, and 22.2%) to EOST (57.1%, 25.4%, and 35.0%) and was comparable between treatment groups at EOST. In patients who received subsequent androgen signaling inhibition after study treatment, detectable biomarkers at EOST were significantly associated with poor outcomes: ctDNA with PFS2 or OS (HR, 2.01 or 2.17, respectively; < 0.0001 for both), any AR aberration with PFS2 (1.74; = 0.024), and or inactivation with OS (2.06; = 0.003; or 3.1; < 0.0001).

Conclusions: Apalutamide plus ADT did not increase detectable AR/non-AR aberrations over ADT alone. Detectable ctDNA, AR aberrations, and inactivation at EOST were associated with poor outcomes in patients treated with first subsequent androgen signaling inhibitor.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-21-0358DOI Listing
August 2021

Primary Renal Tumour Response in Patients Treated with Nivolumab for Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma: Results from the GETUG-AFU 26 NIVOREN Trial.

Eur Urol 2021 09 5;80(3):325-329. Epub 2021 Jun 5.

Gustave Roussy Cancer Campus, Université Paris-Saclay, Villejuif, France. Electronic address:

Primary tumour response may impact therapeutic strategies in metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) but remains unknown in the era of immune checkpoint inhibitors. We aimed to describe the response of the primary tumour in patients who did not undergo upfront cytoreductive nephrectomy (uCN) and were treated with nivolumab in the GETUG-AFU-26 NIVOREN phase 2 trial. Primary tumour response was prospectively assessed, as well as the overall response rate (ORR), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS). Among 720 patients, 111 did not undergo uCN, mainly patients with intermediate (45%) and poor (49%) International mRCC Database Consortium (IMDC) risk. In the 111 patients, nivolumab was used in the second line for 63% of patients and the third line or more for 37%, with an ORR of 16% (95% confidence interval [CI] 1025%); with a median follow-up of 24.5 mo (95% CI 21.6-27.1), median PFS was 2.7 mo (95% CI 2.5-4.0) and median OS was 15.9 mo (95% CI 9.5-19.8). A total of 67 patients had an evaluable primary renal lesion, four of whom (6%) experienced shrinkage of more than 30%. Overall, patients who did not undergo uCN had adverse baseline characteristics and nivolumab activity against the primary tumour was limited. PATIENT SUMMARY: In this report, we observed that nivolumab was associated with a limited response of the primary tumour in previously treated patients with metastatic kidney cancer.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2021.05.020DOI Listing
September 2021

Elucidating Prostate Cancer Behaviour During Treatment via Low-pass Whole-genome Sequencing of Circulating Tumour DNA.

Eur Urol 2021 08 5;80(2):243-253. Epub 2021 Jun 5.

The Institute of Cancer Research, University of London, London, UK; The Royal Marsden Hospital, London, UK.

Background: Better blood tests to elucidate the behaviour of metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) are urgently needed to drive therapeutic decisions. Plasma cell-free DNA (cfDNA) comprises normal and circulating tumour DNA (ctDNA). Low-pass whole-genome sequencing (lpWGS) of ctDNA can provide information on mCRPC behaviour.

Objective: To validate and clinically qualify plasma lpWGS for mCRPC.

Design, Setting, And Participants: Plasma lpWGS data were obtained for mCRPC patients consenting to optional substudies of two prospective phase 3 trials (FIRSTANA and PROSELICA). In FIRSTANA, chemotherapy-naïve patients were randomised to treatment with docetaxel (75 mg/m) or cabazitaxel (20 or 25 mg/m). In PROSELICA, patients previously treated with docetaxel were randomised to 20 or 25 mg/m cabazitaxel. lpWGS data were generated from 540 samples from 188 mCRPC patients acquired at four different time points (screening, cycle 1, cycle 4, and end of study). OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: lpWGS data for ctDNA were evaluated for prognostic, response, and tumour genomic measures. Associations with response and survival data were determined for tumour fraction. Genomic biomarkers including large-scale transition (LST) scores were explored in the context of prior treatments.

Results And Limitations: Plasma tumour fraction was prognostic for overall survival in univariable and stratified multivariable analyses (hazard ratio 1.75, 95% confidence interval 1.08-2.85; p = 0.024) and offered added value compared to existing biomarkers (C index 0.722 vs 0.709; p = 0.021). Longitudinal changes were associated with drug response. PROSELICA samples were enriched for LSTs (p = 0.029) indicating genomic instability, and this enrichment was associated with prior abiraterone and enzalutamide treatment but not taxane or radiation therapy. Higher LSTs were correlated with losses of RB1/RNASEH2B, independent of BRCA2 loss.

Conclusions: Plasma lpWGS of ctDNA describes CRPC behaviour, providing prognostic and response data of clinical relevance. The added prognostic value of the ctDNA fraction over established biomarkers should be studied further.

Patient Summary: We studied tumour DNA in blood samples from patients with prostate cancer. We found that levels of tumour DNA in blood were indicative of disease prognosis, and that changes after treatment could be detected. We also observed a "genetic scar" in the results that was associated with certain previous treatments. This test allows an assessment of tumour activity that can complement existing tests, offer insights into drug response, and detect clinically relevant genetic changes.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2021.05.030DOI Listing
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8329366PMC
August 2021

Treatments Outcomes in Histological Variants and Non-Urothelial Bladder Cancer: Results of a Multicenter Retrospective Study.

Front Oncol 2021 20;11:671969. Epub 2021 May 20.

Medical Oncology Department, Hôpital Européen Georges Pompidou, AP-HP, Université de Paris, Paris, France.

Introduction: Less than one-third of bladder cancers are non-pure urothelial carcinoma [with variant histological (VH) or non-urothelial carcinoma (non-UC)] for which no treatment guidelines are available. We aim to evaluate the efficacy of systemic treatments in VH or non-UC bladder cancers.

Materials: Multicenter retrospective analysis of patients treated for advanced or metastatic VH or non-UC bladder cancers. Primary endpoint was overall response rate (ORR) according to treatment line, regimen and histology subtype. Secondary endpoints were progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS).

Results: Between 2005 and 2020, 46 patients from seven centers were included. The median age was 66 years (58.75; 74.75), 65.2% were male and 67.2% presented VH. At first line, the ORR for the entire population was 54.4% and median OS was 21.6 months (95% confidence interval [CI]: 14.2-38.6). The ORR of the 37 patients treated with chemotherapy at first line was 62.2% with median PFS and OS of 7.3 (95% CI: 4.5-8.6) and 21.6 months (95% CI: 14.2-35.7), respectively. Dose dense MVAC and platinum doublet chemotherapy had the highest ORR (71.4% and 65.2%). The 9 patients treated with immunotherapy at first line had an ORR of 22.2%, a median PFS of 3.3 months (95% CI:2.3-NR) and the median OS was not reached (95% CI:13.8-NR). Response to treatment varied depending on the histological sub-types and on the treatment type.

Conclusion: Chemotherapy and immunotherapy have shown to be effective in VH or non-UC cancers, a rare histological subtype for which we currently have very little data in the literature.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fonc.2021.671969DOI Listing
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8173179PMC
May 2021

Pembrolizumab alone or combined with chemotherapy versus chemotherapy as first-line therapy for advanced urothelial carcinoma (KEYNOTE-361): a randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial.

Lancet Oncol 2021 07 26;22(7):931-945. Epub 2021 May 26.

University of Michigan Health System, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.

Background: PD-1 and PD-L1 inhibitors are active in metastatic urothelial carcinoma, but positive randomised data supporting their use as a first-line treatment are lacking. In this study we assessed outcomes with first-line pembrolizumab alone or combined with chemotherapy versus chemotherapy for patients with previously untreated advanced urothelial carcinoma.

Methods: KEYNOTE-361 is a randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial of patients aged at least 18 years, with untreated, locally advanced, unresectable, or metastatic urothelial carcinoma, with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of up to 2. Eligible patients were enrolled from 201 medical centres in 21 countries and randomly allocated (1:1:1) via an interactive voice-web response system to intravenous pembrolizumab 200 mg every 3 weeks for a maximum of 35 cycles plus intravenous chemotherapy (gemcitabine [1000 mg/m] on days 1 and 8 and investigator's choice of cisplatin [70 mg/m] or carboplatin [area under the curve 5] on day 1 of every 3-week cycle) for a maximum of six cycles, pembrolizumab alone, or chemotherapy alone, stratified by choice of platinum therapy and PD-L1 combined positive score (CPS). Neither patients nor investigators were masked to the treatment assignment or CPS. At protocol-specified final analysis, sequential hypothesis testing began with superiority of pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy versus chemotherapy alone in the total population (all patients randomly allocated to a treatment) for the dual primary endpoints of progression-free survival (p value boundary 0·0019), assessed by masked, independent central review, and overall survival (p value boundary 0·0142), followed by non-inferiority and superiority of overall survival for pembrolizumab versus chemotherapy in the patient population with CPS of at least 10 and in the total population (also a primary endpoint). Safety was assessed in the as-treated population (all patients who received at least one dose of study treatment). This study is completed and is no longer enrolling patients, and is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02853305.

Findings: Between Oct 19, 2016 and June 29, 2018, 1010 patients were enrolled and allocated to receive pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy (n=351), pembrolizumab monotherapy (n=307), or chemotherapy alone (n=352). Median follow-up was 31·7 months (IQR 27·7-36·0). Pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy versus chemotherapy did not significantly improve progression-free survival, with a median progression-free survival of 8·3 months (95% CI 7·5-8·5) in the pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy group versus 7·1 months (6·4-7·9) in the chemotherapy group (hazard ratio [HR] 0·78, 95% CI 0·65-0·93; p=0·0033), or overall survival, with a median overall survival of 17·0 months (14·5-19·5) in the pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy group versus 14·3 months (12·3-16·7) in the chemotherapy group (0·86, 0·72-1·02; p=0·0407). No further formal statistical hypothesis testing was done. In analyses of overall survival with pembrolizumab versus chemotherapy (now exploratory based on hierarchical statistical testing), overall survival was similar between these treatment groups, both in the total population (15·6 months [95% CI 12·1-17·9] with pembrolizumab vs 14·3 months [12·3-16·7] with chemotherapy; HR 0·92, 95% CI 0·77-1·11) and the population with CPS of at least 10 (16·1 months [13·6-19·9] with pembrolizumab vs 15·2 months [11·6-23·3] with chemotherapy; 1·01, 0·77-1·32). The most common grade 3 or 4 adverse event attributed to study treatment was anaemia with pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy (104 [30%] of 349 patients) or chemotherapy alone (112 [33%] of 342 patients), and diarrhoea, fatigue, and hyponatraemia (each affecting four [1%] of 302 patients) with pembrolizumab alone. Six (1%) of 1010 patients died due to an adverse event attributed to study treatment; two patients in each treatment group. One each occurred due to cardiac arrest and device-related sepsis in the pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy group, one each due to cardiac failure and malignant neoplasm progression in the pembrolizumab group, and one each due to myocardial infarction and ischaemic colitis in the chemotherapy group.

Interpretation: The addition of pembrolizumab to first-line platinum-based chemotherapy did not significantly improve efficacy and should not be widely adopted for treatment of advanced urothelial carcinoma.

Funding: Merck Sharp and Dohme, a subsidiary of Merck, Kenilworth, NJ, USA.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S1470-2045(21)00152-2DOI Listing
July 2021

Complement C1s and C4d as Prognostic Biomarkers in Renal Cancer: Emergence of Noncanonical Functions of C1s.

Cancer Immunol Res 2021 Aug 26;9(8):891-908. Epub 2021 May 26.

Centre de Recherche des Cordeliers, INSERM, Sorbonne Université, Université de Paris, Paris, France.

The complement system plays a complex role in cancer. In clear cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC), local production of complement proteins drives tumor progression, but the mechanisms by which they do this are poorly understood. We found that complement activation, as reflected by high plasma C4d or as C4d deposits at the tumor site, was associated with poor prognosis in two cohorts of patients with ccRCC. High expression of the C4-activating enzyme C1s by tumor cells was associated with poor prognosis in three cohorts. Multivariate Cox analysis revealed that the prognostic value of C1s was independent from complement deposits, suggesting the possibility of complement cascade-unrelated, protumoral functions for C1s. Silencing of C1s in cancer cell lines resulted in decreased proliferation and viability of the cells and in increased activation of T cells in cocultures. Tumors expressing high levels of C1s showed high infiltration of macrophages and T cells. Modification of the tumor cell phenotype and T-cell activation were independent of extracellular C1s levels, suggesting that C1s was acting in an intracellular, noncanonical manner. In conclusion, our data point to C1s playing a dual role in promoting ccRCC progression by triggering complement activation and by modulating the tumor cell phenotype and tumor microenvironment in a complement cascade-independent, noncanonical manner. Overexpression of C1s by tumor cells could be a new escape mechanism to promote tumor progression.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1158/2326-6066.CIR-20-0532DOI Listing
August 2021

Intracellular Factor H Drives Tumor Progression Independently of the Complement Cascade.

Cancer Immunol Res 2021 Aug 26;9(8):909-925. Epub 2021 May 26.

Team Inflammation, Complement and Cancer, Centre de Recherche des Cordeliers, INSERM, Sorbonne Université, Université de Paris, Paris, France.

The complement system is a powerful and druggable innate immune component of the tumor microenvironment. Nevertheless, it is challenging to elucidate the exact mechanisms by which complement affects tumor growth. In this study, we examined the processes by which the master complement regulator factor H (FH) affects clear cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC) and lung cancer, two cancers in which complement overactivation predicts poor prognosis. FH was present in two distinct cellular compartments: the membranous (mb-FH) and intracellular (int-FH) compartments. Int-FH resided in lysosomes and colocalized with C3. In ccRCC and lung adenocarcinoma, FH exerted protumoral action through an intracellular, noncanonical mechanism. FH silencing in ccRCC cell lines resulted in decreased proliferation, due to cell-cycle arrest and increased mortality, and this was associated with increased p53 phosphorylation and NFκB translocation to the nucleus. Moreover, the migration of the FH-silenced cells was reduced, likely due to altered morphology. These effects were cell type-specific because no modifications occurred upon silencing in other FH-expressing cells tested: tubular cells (from which ccRCC originates), endothelial cells (human umbilical vein endothelial cells), and squamous cell lung cancer cells. Consistent with this, in ccRCC and lung adenocarcinoma, but not in lung squamous cell carcinoma, int-FH conferred poor prognosis in patient cohorts. Mb-FH performed its canonical function of complement regulation but had no impact on tumor cell phenotype or patient survival. The discovery of intracellular functions for FH redefines the role of the protein in tumor progression and its use as a prognostic biomarker or potential therapeutic target..
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1158/2326-6066.CIR-20-0787DOI Listing
August 2021

Cost-effectiveness Analysis of Innovative Therapy for Patients with Newly Diagnosed Hormone-Sensitive Metastatic Prostate Cancer.

Clin Genitourin Cancer 2021 10 5;19(5):e326-e333. Epub 2021 Apr 5.

Department of Pharmacy, University Hospital of Besançon, Besançon, France; INSERM UMR 1098, University of Bourgogne-Franche-Comté, Besançon, France. Electronic address:

Background: The optimal therapeutic strategies for patients with metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC) followed by metastatic castrate-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC), in terms of cost and effectiveness, remains unknown. This study aims to compare the cost-effectiveness of various potential strategies, from the start of first-line treatment in mHSPC to the death of the patients.

Methods: Two Markov decision-analysis models were developed, one for cohort A "asymptomatic/mildly symptomatic patients in mCRPC", and one for cohort B "symptomatic patients in mCRPC". Each strategy reflects daily practice for mHSPC until progression in mCRPC from the start of first treatment regimen with either docetaxel or abiraterone acetate plus prednisone (AA) in mHSPC to the death of the patient. The cost-effectiveness analysis was performed from the French public health care system perspective. Only direct medical costs were included. Survival data were extracted from results of published randomized clinical trials.

Results: For cohort A, docetaxel followed by AA is the most cost-effective therapeutic strategy (€96,925 for 4.24 life-years). For cohort B, docetaxel followed by docetaxel is the most cost-effective therapeutic strategy (€81,463 for 4.05 life-years). Sensitivity analyses confirmed the robustness of our results except for a price reduction of 70% for AA or enzalutamide.

Conclusion: Our approach is innovative to the extent that our analysis considers various potential strategies for metastatic prostate cancer (mPC). Our economic evaluation suggests that a price reduction of AA or enzalutamide impacts on the results. This approach must continue, including new drugs for patients with mPC.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.clgc.2021.03.022DOI Listing
October 2021

Post Hoc Health-Related Quality of Life Analysis According to Response Among Patients with Prostate Cancer in the PROSELICA and FIRSTANA Studies.

Oncologist 2021 07 21;26(7):e1179-e1188. Epub 2021 May 21.

Royal Marsden and The Institute of Cancer Research, Sutton, UK.

Background: The phase III PROSELICA (NCT01308580) and FIRSTANA (NCT01308567) trials investigated taxane chemotherapy among men with postdocetaxel metastatic, castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) or chemotherapy-naïve mCRPC, respectively. We present a post hoc analysis of patient-reported health-related quality of life (HRQL) among patients with or without a clinical (pain, tumor, or prostate-specific antigen [PSA]) response.

Materials And Methods: PROSELICA and FIRSTANA HRQL and pain data were collected and analyzed using protocol-defined Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Prostate (FACT-P) and McGill-Melzack (Present Pain Intensity scale) questionnaires. Outcomes included definitive FACT-P Total Score (TS) improvements and longitudinal assessment of FACT-P TS.

Results: In PROSELICA and FIRSTANA, the proportion of patients receiving taxane chemotherapy with a definitive FACT-P TS improvement was significantly higher among patients with versus without a pain or PSA response (pain: PROSELICA: 67% vs. 33.5%; p < .001; FIRSTANA: 75.2% vs. 45.8%; p < .001; PSA: PROSELICA: 50.3% vs. 34.2%; p < .001; FIRSTANA: 49.8% vs. 38.9%; p = .001). In PROSELICA, the proportion of patients receiving taxane chemotherapy with a definitive FACT-P TS improvement was significantly higher among patients with versus without a tumor response; the proportion was numerically higher in FIRSTANA (PROSELICA: 54.4% vs. 36.7%; p = .001; FIRSTANA: 50.6% vs. 45.3%). FACT-P TS was significantly improved or maintained for the majority of treatment cycles analyzed.

Conclusion: In PROSELICA and FIRSTANA, HRQL improvements were significantly higher among patients with a pain, tumor, or PSA response versus those without, with the exception of patients with a tumor response in FIRSTANA.

Implications For Practice: Using data from the FIRSTANA and PROSELICA phase III clinical trials, this study demonstrated that patients with metastatic, castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) receiving docetaxel or cabazitaxel who exhibited a response (pain, tumor, prostate-specific antigen), often experienced significantly greater improvements in health-related quality of life (HRQL) compared with patients without a response. For patients with a pain response, significant HRQL improvements occurred early and were maintained. This study provides further insight into the impact of taxane chemotherapy on the HRQL of patients with mCRPC and allows for a better understanding of the relationship between treatment, response, and HRQL, supporting therapeutic decision making.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/onco.13803DOI Listing
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8265338PMC
July 2021

Pain Progression at Initiation of Cabazitaxel in Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer (mCRPC): A Post Hoc Analysis of the PROSELICA Study.

Cancers (Basel) 2021 Mar 13;13(6). Epub 2021 Mar 13.

Medical Oncology, Université de Paris, 75015 Paris, France.

Background: In the PROSELICA phase III trial (NCT01308580), cabazitaxel 20 mg/m (CABA20) was non-inferior to cabazitaxel 25 mg/m (CABA25) in mCRPC patients previously treated with docetaxel (DOC). The present post hoc analysis evaluates how the type of progression at randomization affected outcomes.

Methods: Progression type at randomization was defined as follows: PSA progression only (PSA-p; no radiological progression (RADIO-p), no pain), RADIO-p (±PSA-p, no pain), or pain progression (PAIN-p, ±PSA-p, ±RADIO-p). Relationships between progression type and overall survival (OS), radiological progression-free survival (rPFS), and PSA response (confirmed PSA decrease ≥ 50%) were analyzed.

Results: All randomized patients ( = 1200) had received prior DOC, and 25.7% had received prior abiraterone or enzalutamide. Progression type at randomization was evaluable in 1075 patients (PSA-p = 24.4%, RADIO-p = 20.8%, PAIN-p = 54.8%). Pain progression was associated with clinical and biological features of aggressive disease. Median OS from CABA initiation or date of mCRPC diagnosis, all arms combined, was shorter in the PAIN-p group than in the RADIO-p or the PSA-p groups (12.0 versus 16.8 and 18.4 months, respectively, < 0.001). In multivariate analysis, all arms combined, PAIN-p was an independent predictor of poor OS (HR = 1.44, < 0.001). PSA response, rPFS, and OS were numerically higher with CABA25 versus CABA20 in patients with PAIN-p.

Conclusions: This post hoc analysis of the PROSELICA phase III study shows that pain progression at initiation of CABA in mCRPC patients previously treated with DOC is associated with a poor prognosis. Disease progression should be carefully monitored, even in the absence of PSA rise.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/cancers13061284DOI Listing
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8002173PMC
March 2021

Pleural effusion is a negative prognostic factor for immunotherapy in patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC): The pluie study.

Lung Cancer 2021 05 24;155:114-119. Epub 2021 Mar 24.

Medical and Thoracic Oncology Department, Hôpital Européen Georges Pompidou AP-HP, Université de Paris, France. Electronic address:

Background: Pleural effusion (PE) is a common metastatic site of NSCLC, associated with poor outcomes. As very few data are available about immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) and PE, we aimed to assess the clinical outcome of PE in NSCLC treated with ICI.

Method: Multicenter international retrospective study of patients with metastatic NSCLC treated with ICI, between 2012 and 2019. Stratification according to the presence of PE at ICI baseline or appearance under ICI treatment (PE group) versus no history of PE (non-PE group). Primary endpoints were overall survival (OS) and early death rate (EDR, OS ≤ 3 months).

Results: A total of 538 patients were included: 196 in the PE group and 342 in the non-PE group. In the PE group, median age was 64, 31.6 % were female, 77.6 % had non-squamous histology, PD-L1 was ≥50 % in 38.6 % of cases (95 missing). PE was more likely associated with >2 metastatic sites (70.4 % vs. 50 %) and worse performance status (PS ≥ 2, 30.8 % vs 23.1 %). Globally, the overall median OS was 9.7 months [95 %CI: 8.1-11.8]; 6.3 [95 % CI: 4.0-8.6] in PE vs. 11.4 [95 %CI: 9.7-13.8] in the non-PE respectively, P = 0.002. Overall the EDR was 31.4 %; higher in the PE group (38.3 % vs. 27.5 %; OR 1.63, 95 %CI: 1.13-2.37, P = 0.01). In the PE PD-L1≥50 % group, EDR was 33.3 %. In multivariate analysis, after adjustment on PS, liver/intracranial/bone metastasis, ICI line and dNLR, PE remained an independent prognostic factor for OS [HR: 1.38, 95 %CI: 1.09-1.74, P = 0.007]. In the PE group, PE appeared under ICI for 31 patients (16.4 %). We observed lower EDR in this group compared to patients whom PE was already present (29.0 % vs 40.5 %, P = 0.2).

Conclusion: PE is associated with worse immunotherapy outcomes in NSCLC treated with ICI, including in patients with ≥50 % PD-L1 tumors. Thus, in these patients, combination strategies should be explored.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.lungcan.2021.03.015DOI Listing
May 2021

Adjuvant atezolizumab versus observation in muscle-invasive urothelial carcinoma (IMvigor010): a multicentre, open-label, randomised, phase 3 trial.

Lancet Oncol 2021 04 12;22(4):525-537. Epub 2021 Mar 12.

Barts Cancer Institute, Queen Mary University of London, St Bartholomew's Hospital, London, UK.

Background: Despite standard curative-intent treatment with neoadjuvant cisplatin-based chemotherapy, followed by radical surgery in eligible patients, muscle-invasive urothelial carcinoma has a high recurrence rate and no level 1 evidence for adjuvant therapy. We aimed to evaluate atezolizumab as adjuvant therapy in patients with high-risk muscle-invasive urothelial carcinoma.

Method: In the IMvigor010 study, a multicentre, open-label, randomised, phase 3 trial done in 192 hospitals, academic centres, and community oncology practices across 24 countries or regions, patients aged 18 years and older with histologically confirmed muscle-invasive urothelial carcinoma and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0, 1, or 2 were enrolled within 14 weeks after radical cystectomy or nephroureterectomy with lymph node dissection. Patients had ypT2-4a or ypN+ tumours following neoadjuvant chemotherapy or pT3-4a or pN+ tumours if no neoadjuvant chemotherapy was received. Patients not treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy must have been ineligible for or declined cisplatin-based adjuvant chemotherapy. No post-surgical radiotherapy or previous adjuvant chemotherapy was allowed. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) using a permuted block (block size of four) method and interactive voice-web response system to receive 1200 mg atezolizumab given intravenously every 3 weeks for 16 cycles or up to 1 year, whichever occurred first, or to observation. Randomisation was stratified by previous neoadjuvant chemotherapy use, number of lymph nodes resected, pathological nodal status, tumour stage, and PD-L1 expression on tumour-infiltrating immune cells. The primary endpoint was disease-free survival in the intention-to-treat population. Safety was assessed in patients who either received at least one dose of atezolizumab or had at least one post-baseline safety assessment. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02450331, and is ongoing but not recruiting patients.

Findings: Between Oct 5, 2015, and July 30, 2018, we enrolled 809 patients, of whom 406 were assigned to the atezolizumab group and 403 were assigned to the observation group. Median follow-up was 21·9 months (IQR 13·2-29·8). Median disease-free survival was 19·4 months (95% CI 15·9-24·8) with atezolizumab and 16·6 months (11·2-24·8) with observation (stratified hazard ratio 0·89 [95% CI 0·74-1·08]; p=0·24). The most common grade 3 or 4 adverse events were urinary tract infection (31 [8%] of 390 patients in the atezolizumab group vs 20 [5%] of 397 patients in the observation group), pyelonephritis (12 [3%]) vs 14 [4%]), and anaemia (eight [2%] vs seven [2%]). Serious adverse events occurred in 122 (31%) patients who received atezolizumab and 71 (18%) who underwent observation. 63 (16%) patients who received atezolizumab had a treatment-related grade 3 or 4 adverse event. One treatment-related death, due to acute respiratory distress syndrome, occurred in the atezolizumab group.

Interpretation: To our knowledge, IMvigor010 is the largest, first-completed phase 3 adjuvant study to evaluate the role of a checkpoint inhibitor in muscle-invasive urothelial carcinoma. The trial did not meet its primary endpoint of improved disease-free survival in the atezolizumab group over observation. Atezolizumab was generally tolerable, with no new safety signals; however, higher frequencies of adverse events leading to discontinuation were reported than in metastatic urothelial carcinoma studies. These data do not support the use of adjuvant checkpoint inhibitor therapy in the setting evaluated in IMvigor010 at this time.

Funding: F Hoffmann-La Roche/Genentech.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S1470-2045(21)00004-8DOI Listing
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8495594PMC
April 2021

Precision immunity: Immunoscore and neoadjuvant treatment in bladder cancer.

Oncoimmunology 2021 02 17;10(1):1888488. Epub 2021 Feb 17.

Laboratory of Integrative Cancer Immunology, INSERM, Paris, France.

This review details the clinical utility of Immunoscore, measuring the immune response to cancer within the tumor microenvironment, in bladder cancer. Immunoscore was recently introduced into ESMO Clinical Practice Guidelines for gastrointestinal cancer and into the WHO classification of the Digestive System Tumors. In muscle-invasive bladder cancer (MIBC), the standard-of-care treatment is neo-adjuvant chemotherapy and cystectomy. However, only 50% of the patients are still alive at 5 years. The degree of histologic response positively correlated with Immunoscore and patients at lower risk of relapse or death were associated with a high-Immunoscore. Immunoscore is also predicting response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy-based treatment in several indications. This paves the way for the use of Immunoscore in clinical practice not only in gastrointestinal tumors but also in bladder cancer, and beyond.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/2162402X.2021.1888488DOI Listing
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7899086PMC
February 2021

Bayesian predictive model to assess BRCA2 mutational status according to clinical history: Early onset, metastatic phenotype or family history of breast/ovary cancer.

Prostate 2021 05 18;81(6):318-325. Epub 2021 Feb 18.

GRC n°5 Predictive Onco-Urology, Tenon Hospital, AP-HP, Sorbonne University, Paris, France.

Background: Mutations of the BRCA2 gene are the most frequent alterations found in germline DNA from men with prostate cancer (PrCa), but clinical parameters that could better orientate for BRCA2 mutation screening need to be established.

Methods: Germline DNA from 325 PrCa patients (median age at diagnosis: 57 years old) was screened for BRCA2 mutation. The mutation frequency was compared between three subgroups: patients with an age at diagnosis at 55 years old and under (Group I); a personal or family history of breast, uterine or ovarian cancer (Group II); or a metastatic disease (Group III). Frequency of BRCA2 mutations was established for each combination of phenotypes, and compared between patients meeting or not the criteria for each subgroup using Fisher's exact test. Mutual information, direct effect, elasticity and contribution to the mutational status of each phenotype, taking into account overlap between subgroups, were also estimated using Bayesian algorithms.

Results: The proportion of BRCA2 mutation was 5.9% in Group I, 10.9% in Group II and 6.9% in Group III. The frequency of BRCA2 mutation was significantly higher among patients of Group II (p = .006), and reached 15.6% among patients of this group who presented a metastatic disease. Mutual information, direct effect, elasticity and contribution to the mutational status were the highest for phenotype II. Fifteen (71.4%) of the 21 BRCA2 mutation carriers had an aggressive form of the disease. Four (19%) of them died from PrCa after a median follow-up duration of 64.5 months.

Conclusions: Our results showed that a higher frequency of BRCA2 mutation carriers is observed, not only among PrCa patients with young onset or a metastatic disease, but also with a personal or a familial history of breast cancer.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/pros.24109DOI Listing
May 2021

Enhance the Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors Efficacy with Radiotherapy Induced Immunogenic Cell Death: A Comprehensive Review and Latest Developments.

Cancers (Basel) 2021 Feb 8;13(4). Epub 2021 Feb 8.

Hôpital Européen Georges Pompidou, Service d'Oncologie Médicale, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris (AP-HP) Paris-Centre, F-75015 Paris, France.

The immunogenic cell death (ICD) is defined as a regulated cell death able to induce an adaptive immunity. It depends on different parameters including sufficient antigenicity, adjuvanticity and favorable microenvironment conditions. Radiation therapy (RT), a pillar of modern cancer treatment, is being used in many tumor types in curative, (neo) adjuvant, as well as metastatic settings. The anti-tumor effects of RT have been traditionally attributed to the mitotic cell death resulting from the DNA damages triggered by the release of reactive oxygen species. Recent evidence suggests that RT may also exert its anti-tumor effect by recruiting tumor-specific immunity. RT is able to induce the release of tumor antigens, to act as an immune adjuvant and thus to synergize with the anti-tumor immunity. The advent of new efficient immunotherapeutic agents, such as immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI), in multiple tumor types sheds new light on the opportunity of combining RT and ICI. Here, we will describe the biological and radiobiological rationale of the RT-induced ICD. We will then focus on the interest to combine RT and ICI, from bench to bedside, and summarize the clinical data existing with this combination. Finally, RT technical adaptations to optimize the ICD induction will be discussed.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/cancers13040678DOI Listing
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7915834PMC
February 2021

Outcomes of systemic targeted therapy in recurrent renal cell carcinoma treated with adjuvant sunitinib.

BJU Int 2021 08 19;128(2):254-261. Epub 2021 Apr 19.

Medical Oncology, Gustave Roussy, Université Paris-Saclay, Villejuif, France.

Objective: To assess the efficacy and tolerability of rechallenge with sunitinib and other targeted therapies (TTs) in patitents with relapsed recurrent renal cell carcinoma (RCC) in the advanced setting.

Methods: In this multi-institutional retrospective study, patients with relapsed RCC were rechallenged with sunitinib or other systemic TTs as a first-line therapeutic approach after failed adjuvant sunitinib treatment. Patient characteristics, treatments and clinical outcomes were recorded. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS). Secondary endpoints were objective response rate (ORR) and overall survival (OS).

Results: A total of 34 patients with relapses were recorded, and 25 of these (73.5%) were men. Twenty-five patients were treated with systemic TT: 65% of patients received TT against the vascular endothelial growth factor pathway (including sunitinib), 21.7% received mammalian target of rapamycin inhibitors and 13% received immunotherapy. The median (interquartile range) time to relapse was 20.3 (5.2-20.4) months from diagnosis, and 7.5 months (1.0-8.5) from the end of adjuvant suntinib treatment. At a median follow-up of 23.5 months, 24 of the 25 patients had progressed on first-line systemic therapy. The median PFS was 12.0 months (95% confidence interval [CI] 5.78-18.2). There were no statistical differences in PFS between different treatments or sunitinib rechallenge. PFS was not statistically different in patients relapsing on or after adjuvant suntinib treatment (≤ 6 or >6 months after adjuvant suntinib ending). The ORR was 20.5%. The median OS was 29.1 months (95% CI 16.4-41.8).

Conclusions: Rechallenge with sunitinib or other systemic therapies is still a feasible therapeutic option that provides patients with advanced or metastastic RCC with additional clinical benefits with regard to PFS and OS after failed response to adjuvant sunitinib.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/bju.15356DOI Listing
August 2021

The Immunoscore in Localized Urothelial Carcinoma Treated with Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy: Clinical Significance for Pathologic Responses and Overall Survival.

Cancers (Basel) 2021 Jan 28;13(3). Epub 2021 Jan 28.

Centre de Recherche des Cordeliers, Laboratory of Integrative Cancer Immunology, INSERM, Université de Paris, 75015 Paris, France.

(1) Background-The five-year overall survival (OS) of muscle-invasive bladder cancer (MIBC) with neoadjuvant chemotherapy and cystectomy is around 50%. There is no validated biomarker to guide the treatment decision. We investigated whether the Immunoscore (IS) could predict the pathologic response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy and survival outcomes. (2) Methods-This retrospective study evaluated the IS in 117 patients treated using neoadjuvant chemotherapy for localized MIBC from six centers (France and Greece). Pre-treatment tumor samples were immunostained for CD3+ and CD8+ T cells and quantified to determine the IS. The results were associated with the response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy, time to recurrence (TTR), and OS. (3) Results-Low (IS-0), intermediate (IS-1-2), and high (IS-3-4) ISs were observed in 36.5, 43.7, and 19.8% of the cohort, respectively. IS was positively associated with a pathologic complete response (pCR; -value = 0.0096). A high IS was found in 35.7% of patients with a pCR, whereas it was found in 11.3% of patients without a pCR. A low IS was observed in 48.4% of patients with no pCR and in 21.4% of patients with a pCR. Low-, intermediate-, and high-IS patients had five-year recurrence-free rates of 37.2%, 36.5%, and 72.6%, respectively. In the multivariable analysis, a high IS was associated with a prolonged TTR (high vs. low: = 0.0134) and OS (high vs. low: = 0.011). (4) Conclusions-This study showed the significant prognostic and predictive roles of IS regarding localized MIBC.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/cancers13030494DOI Listing
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7865364PMC
January 2021

Cabazitaxel schedules in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer: a review.

Future Oncol 2021 Jan 2;17(1):91-102. Epub 2020 Dec 2.

Department of Medical Oncology, European Hospital Georges Pompidou & University of Paris, 20 rue Leblanc, Paris, 75015, France.

Cabazitaxel (25 mg/m every 3 weeks) is the standard second-line chemotherapy for patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer previously treated with docetaxel. It is associated with a risk of neutropenic complications, which may be a barrier to its use in daily clinical practice, particularly in frail elderly patients. Here the authors reviewed key studies conducted with cabazitaxel (TROPIC, PROSELICA, AFFINITY, CARD and the European compassionate use program) and pilot studies with adapted schedules. Based on this review, the use of prophylactic granulocyte colony-stimulating factor from cycle 1 appears crucial to maximize the benefit-risk ratio of cabazitaxel in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer. Preliminary data with alternative schedules look promising, especially for frail patients. Results of the ongoing Phase III CABASTY trial (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02961257) are awaited.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.2217/fon-2020-0672DOI Listing
January 2021

Tumor Microenvironment Features as Predictive Biomarkers of Response to Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors (ICI) in Metastatic Clear Cell Renal Cell Carcinoma (mccRCC).

Cancers (Basel) 2021 Jan 10;13(2). Epub 2021 Jan 10.

Medical Oncology, Hôpital Européen Georges Pompidou, APHP Centre-Université de Paris, 75015 Paris, France.

Renal cell carcinoma (RCC) is the seventh most frequently diagnosed malignancy with an increasing incidence in developed countries. Despite a greater understanding of the cancer biology, which has led to an increase of therapeutic options, metastatic clear cell renal cell carcinoma (mccRCC) still have a poor prognosis with a median five-years survival rate lower than 10%. The standard of care for mccRCC has changed dramatically over the past decades with the emergence of new treatments: anti-VEGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors, mTOR Inhibitors and immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) such as anti-Programmed cell-Death 1 (PD-1) and anti-anti-Programmed Death Ligand-1 (PD-L1) used as monotherapy or as a combination with anti CTLA-4 or anti angiogenic therapies. In the face of these rising therapeutic options, the question of the therapeutic sequences is crucial. Predictive biomarkers are urgently required to provide a personalized treatment for each patient. Disappointingly, the usual ICI biomarkers, PD-L1 expression and Tumor Mutational Burden, approved in melanoma or non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) have failed to distinguish good and poor mccRCC responders to ICI. The tumor microenvironment is known to be involved in ICI response. Innovative technologies can be used to explore the immune contexture of tumors and to find predictive and prognostic biomarkers. Recent comprehensive molecular characterization of RCC has led to the development of robust genomic signatures, which could be used as predictive biomarkers. This review will provide an overview of the components of the RCC tumor microenvironment and discuss their role in disease progression and resistance to ICI. We will then highlight the current and future ICI predictive biomarkers assessed in mccRCC with a major focus on immunohistochemistry markers and genomic signatures.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/cancers13020231DOI Listing
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7827724PMC
January 2021

Update on the most promising biomarkers of response to immune checkpoint inhibitors in clear cell renal cell carcinoma.

World J Urol 2021 May 2;39(5):1377-1385. Epub 2021 Jan 2.

Medical Oncology Department, Hôpital Européen Georges Pompidou, 20 rue Leblanc, 75015, Paris, France.

In the last few years, the standard of care for metastatic clear cell renal cell carcinoma (mccRCC) has changed dramatically with the emergence of the immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI): anti-PD(L)-1 used as a monotherapy or as in combination either with an anti CTLA-4 or with an anti-angiogenic molecule (VEGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI)). These combinations are now recommended in first line setting for mccRCC, according to the last European recommendations. In the face of these new therapeutic options, the question of selecting the best treatment arises as well as the optimal sequence. Predictive biomarkers are required to guide the therapeutic choice and provide a personalized treatment for each patient. This narrative review will provide an overview of the main predictive biomarkers assessed in mccRCC treatment, with a particular focus on mRNA panel signatures.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00345-020-03528-xDOI Listing
May 2021
-->