Introduction
Rechallenge with antibodies targeting programmed cell death protein‐1 or its ligand (PD‐1/L1) after discontinuation or disease progression in solid tumors following a prior PD‐1/L1 ...treatment is often practiced in clinic. This study aimed to investigate if adding PD‐1/L1 inhibitors to cabozantinib, the most used second‐line treatment in real‐world patients with metastatic clear cell renal cell carcinoma (mccRCC), offers additional benefits.
Methods
Using de‐identified patient‐level data from a large real‐world US‐based database, patients diagnosed with mccRCC, who received any PD‐1/L1‐based combination in first‐line (1L) setting, followed by second‐line (2L) therapy with either cabozantinib alone or in combination with PD‐1/L1 inhibitors were included. Patients given a cabozantinib‐containing regimen in 1L were excluded. The study end points were real‐world time to next therapy (rwTTNT) and real‐world overall survival (rwOS) by 2L.
Results
Of 12,285 patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma in the data set, 348 patients met eligibility and were included in the analysis. After propensity score matching weighting, cabozantinib with PD‐1/L1 inhibitors versus cabozantinib (ref.) had similar rwTTNT and rwOS in the 2L setting. Hazard ratios and 95% confidence interval (CI) for rwTTNT and rwOS are 0.74 (95% CI, 0.49–1.12) and 1.15 (95% CI, 0.73–1.79), respectively.
Conclusion
In this study, the results align with the phase 3 CONTACT‐03 trial results, which showed no additional benefit of adding PD‐L1 inhibitor to cabozantinib compared to cabozantinib alone in 2L following PD‐1/L1–based therapies in 1L. These results from real‐world patients strengthen the evidence regarding the futility of rechallenge with PD‐1/L1 inhibitors.
This study reports, in a large real‐world data set, that there is no survival benefit of adding a PD‐1/L1 inhibitor to cabozantinib given in a second‐line setting in patients with metastatic clear cell renal cell carcinoma with prior treatment with a PD‐1/L1 inhibitor. The real‐world data concur with the results reported in the phase 3 CONTACT‐03 clinical trial further questioning the common practice of PD‐1/L1 inhibitors rechallenge in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma.
Accurate and efficient triage is crucial for prioritizing care and managing resources in emergency rooms. This study investigates the effectiveness of ChatGPT, an advanced artificial intelligence ...system, in assisting health providers with decision-making for patients presenting with metastatic prostate cancer, focusing on the potential to improve both patient outcomes and resource allocation.
Clinical data from patients with metastatic prostate cancer who presented to the emergency room between 1 May 2022 and 30 April 2023 were retrospectively collected. The primary outcome was the sensitivity and specificity of ChatGPT in determining whether a patient required admission or discharge. The secondary outcomes included the agreement between ChatGPT and emergency medicine physicians, the comprehensiveness of diagnoses, the accuracy of treatment plans proposed by both parties, and the length of medical decision making.
Of the 147 patients screened, 56 met the inclusion criteria. ChatGPT had a sensitivity of 95.7% in determining admission and a specificity of 18.2% in discharging patients. In 87.5% of cases, ChatGPT made the same primary diagnoses as physicians, with more accurate terminology use (42.9% vs. 21.4%,
= 0.02) and more comprehensive diagnostic lists (median number of diagnoses: 3 vs. 2,
< 0.001). Emergency Severity Index scores calculated by ChatGPT were not associated with admission (
= 0.12), hospital stay length (
= 0.91) or ICU admission (
= 0.54). Despite shorter mean word count (169 ± 66 vs. 272 ± 105,
< 0.001), ChatGPT was more likely to give additional treatment recommendations than physicians (94.3% vs. 73.5%,
< 0.001).
Our hypothesis-generating data demonstrated that ChatGPT is associated with a high sensitivity in determining the admission of patients with metastatic prostate cancer in the emergency room. It also provides accurate and comprehensive diagnoses. These findings suggest that ChatGPT has the potential to assist health providers in improving patient triage in emergency settings, and may enhance both efficiency and quality of care provided by the physicians.
Despite rapid advances in the treatment landscape of urothelial cancer, there is a substantial unmet need for safe and effective therapies for patients with locally advanced and metastatic urothelial ...cancer. Sacituzumab govitecan (SG) is an antibody-drug conjugate, consisting of a Trop-2 directed monoclonal antibody linked to SN-38, the active metabolite of irinotecan. Trop-2 is a glycoprotein overexpressed in various carcinomas, including urothelial carcinomas.
We review the available data on SG, including mechanism of action, pharmacology, efficacy, safety, and clinical studies regarding locally advanced or metastatic urothelial cancer.
SG performed well in the TROPHY-U-01 phase II trial with an objective response rate of 27%. The most common adverse effects were diarrhea, nausea, fatigue, alopecia, and neutropenia, with the most common grade ≥ 3 treatment-related AEs being neutropenia, leukopenia, anemia, diarrhea, and febrile neutropenia. However, these effects were managed effectively with supportive care. SG currently has an accelerated approval for patients with locally advanced or metastatic urothelial cancer who have received platinum-based chemotherapy and either programmed cell death receptor-1 (PD-1) or programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) inhibitor. Several studies are evaluating SG in urothelial cancers as single-agent or in combination with other agents.
Nivolumab with gemcitabine/cisplatin in the CheckMate 901 trial improved overall and progression-free survival in front-line locally advanced/metastatic urothelial cancer. The EV-302 trial ...establishes enfortumab-vedotin plus pembrolizumab as the preferred standard in this setting. Personalized decisions are crucial given patient eligibility and economics. Ongoing trials and predictive biomarkers will further refine treatment strategies.
Neoadjuvant cisplatin-based chemotherapy (NACC) followed by radical cystectomy is the standard treatment for localized muscle-invasive bladder cancer (MIBC). Patients who achieve a complete ...pathological response following NACC have better overall survival than those with residual disease. However, a subset of patients does not derive benefit from NACC while experiencing chemotherapy-related side effects that may delay cystectomy, which can be detrimental. There is a need for predictive and prognostic biomarkers to better stratify patients who will derive benefits from NACC. This review summarizes the currently available literature on various predictors of response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Covered predictors include clinical factors, treatment regimens (including chemotherapy and immunotherapy), histological predictors, and molecular predictors such as DNA repair genes, p53, FGFR3, ERBB2, Bcl-2, EMMPRIN, survivin, choline-phosphate cytidylyltransferase-α, epigenetic markers, immunological markers, other molecular predictors and gene expression profiling. Further, we elaborate on the potential role of neoadjuvant immunotherapy and the correlative biomarkers of response.
Display omitted
•Neoadjuvant cisplatin-based chemotherapy (NACC) followed by radical cystectomy is core treatment of muscle-invasive bladder cancer (MIBC).•While most patients benefit from NACC, some patients do not benefit from NACC due to treatment intolerance.•Several ongoing studies have demonstrated the promising efficacy and tolerability of neoadjuvant immunotherapy (NAI).•There is a need for better biomarkers in MIBC to predict benefit from NACC and NAI.•These biomarkers could aid in patient selection and help develop personalized neoadjuvant therapies for MIBC.
Intensification of androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) with either docetaxel or androgen receptor axis-targeted therapies (ARAT) are the current standard of care for patients with metastatic ...castration-sensitive prostate cancer (mCSPC). However, biomarkers guiding treatment selection are lacking. We hypothesized that ADT intensification with ARAT, but not with docetaxel, would be associated with improved outcomes in patients with de novo (dn)-mCSPC harboring SPOP mutations.
Patient-level data from a deidentified nationwide (U.S.-based) prostate cancer clinico-genomic database between January 2011 and December 2021 were extracted. Eligibility criteria: diagnosis of metastatic disease within 30 days of original prostate cancer diagnosis, genomic profiling of a tissue biopsy collected within 90 days of original diagnosis, and initiation of ARAT or docetaxel within 120 days of initial diagnosis. The log-rank test and Cox proportional hazards models were used to compare time to castration-resistant prostate cancer (TTCRPC) and overall survival (OS) for patients with and without SPOP mutations undergoing ADT intensification with ARAT or docetaxel.
In the ARAT cohort, presence of SPOP mutation compared with wild-type was associated with more favorable TTCRPC not reached (NR) vs. 16.7 months; adjusted HR (aHR), 0.20; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.06-0.63; P = 0.006 and OS (NR vs. 27.2 months; aHR, 0.19; 95% CI, 0.05-0.79; P = 0.022). In contrast, SPOP mutation status was not associated with TTCRPC or OS in docetaxel-treated cohort.
In real-world settings, SPOP mutations were associated with improved outcomes to ADT plus ARAT (but not ADT plus docetaxel) in patients with dn-mCSPC. This may serve as a predictive biomarker to guide treatment selection for patients with mCSPC.
Androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) intensification (ADTi) (i.e., ADT with androgen receptor pathway inhibitor or docetaxel, or both) has significantly improved survival outcomes of patients with ...metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC). However, the impact of prior ADTi in the mHSPC setting on the disease presentation and survival outcomes in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) is not well characterized. In this study, our objective was to compare the disease characteristics and survival outcomes of patients with new mCRPC with respect to receipt of intensified or nonintensified ADT in the mHSPC setting.
In this institutional review board-approved retrospective study, eligibility criteria were as follows: patients diagnosed with mCRPC, treated with an approved first-line mCRPC therapy, and who received either intensified or nonintensified ADT in the mHSPC setting. Progression-free survival (PFS) was defined from the start of first-line therapy for mCRPC to progression per Prostate Cancer Working Group 2 criteria or death, and overall survival (OS) was defined from the start of first-line therapy for mCRPC to death or censored at the last follow-up. A multivariable analysis using the Cox proportional hazards model was used, adjusting for potential confounders.
Patients (n = 387) treated between March 20, 2008, and August 18, 2022, were eligible and included: 283 received nonintensified ADT, whereas 104 were treated with ADTi. At mCRPC diagnosis, patients in the ADTi group were significantly younger, had more visceral metastasis, lower baseline prostate-specific antigen (all p < 0.01), and lower hemoglobin (p = 0.027). Furthermore, they had significantly shorter PFS (median 4.8 vs. 8.4 months, adjusted hazard ratio HR: 1.46, 95% confidence interval 95% CI: 1.07-2, p = 0.017) and OS (median 21.3 vs. 33.1 months, adjusted HR: 1.53, 95% CI: 1.06-2.21, p = 0.022) compared to patients in the nonintensified ADT group.
Patients treated with ADTi in the mHSPC setting and experiencing disease progression to mCRPC had more aggressive disease features of mCRPC (characterized by a higher number of poor prognostic factors at mCRPC presentation). They also had shorter PFS on first-line mCRPC treatment and shorter OS after the onset of mCRPC compared to those not receiving ADTi in the mHSPC setting. Upon external validation, these findings may impact patient counseling, prognostication, treatment selection, and design of future clinical trials in the mCRPC setting. There remains an unmet need to develop novel life-prolonging therapies with new mechanisms of action to improve mCRPC prognosis in the current era.
Immune checkpoint inhibitors have ushered in a new era in cancer management. Nivolumab is a human immunoglobulin G4 (IgG4) monoclonal antibody that selectively inhibits programmed cell death-1 (PD-1) ...activity by binding to the PD-1 receptor. This inhibits suppression of the T-cell activity, which can in turn cause increased killing of cancer cells. This alteration in the activity of the T cells can cause them to lose their ability to identify host cells and leads to immune-related adverse effects (irAE). Nivolumab-induced hepatotoxicity is rare and accounts for 3–6% of all irAE. We present a case of nivolumab-induced hepatitis. A woman who was treated for recurrent renal cell carcinoma presented with hepatitis. Workup for other causes was negative and the hepatitis was attributed to the administration of nivolumab. She was started on oral steroids followed which she initially improved. However, she later presented with massive upper gastrointestinal bleeding secondary to gastroduodenal ulcers and subsequently developed acute tubular necrosis and passed from the complications. Immune checkpoint inhibitors have proven to be a promising approach in the management of a wide array of neoplasms by immunomodulation. As these agents are becoming standard of therapy in the management of cancers, a heightened vigilance in the diagnosis of irAE is warranted. With heightened vigilance, early recognition can lead to decreased mortality and morbidity.
Both germline and somatic BReast CAncer gene (BRCA) mutations are poor prognostic markers in men with localized or metastatic prostate cancer. For instance, men with these mutations often are ...diagnosed with prostate cancer earlier and develop metastatic disease earlier compared with those who do not harbor similar mutations. Patients with germline alterations typically have more advanced disease and shorter overall survival (Castro E, Goh C, Olmos D, et al. Germline BRCA mutations are associated with higher risk of nodal involvement, distant metastasis, and poor survival outcomes in prostate cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2013;31(14):1748-1757. doi:10.1200/JCO.2012.43.1882). The risk of disease progression to metastatic disease is significant in patients with this genotype of prostate cancer. The percentage of patients free from metastatic disease was 90%, 72%, and 50%, respectively, compared with 97%, 94%, and 84% at 3, 5, and 10 years for patients with intact DNA repair (P < .001) (Castro E, Goh C, Leongamornlert D, et al. Effect of BRCA mutations on metastatic relapse and cause-specific survival after radical treatment for localised prostate cancer. Eur Urol. 2015;68(2):186-193. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2014.10.022). DNA damage repair non-BRCA mutations include alterations in genes such as ATM, CHEK2, PALB2, and RAD51. While less common than BRCA mutations, they have emerged as significant prognostic markers in prostate cancer. These BRCAness mutations are associated with a higher risk of aggressive disease and poorer survival outcomes. Given the debilitating physical and psychological side effects of androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) in relatively younger men with prostate cancer, delaying ADT in these men may be an attractive strategy. Given the proven efficacy of polyadenosine diphosphate-ribose polymerase (PARP) inhibitors in the castration-resistant prostate cancersetting, PARP inhibitor monotherapy in a nonmetastatic castration-sensitive (nmCSPC) setting has the potential to delay metastasis and delay the onset of ADT related symptoms.
This is a single-arm, single-center, open-label, phase II trial to assess the efficacy of rucaparib in patients with high-risk biochemically recurrent (BCR) nmHSPC, which was defined as PSA doubling time of <9 months, demonstrating a "BRCAness" genotype (BRCA1/2 and other homologous recombination repair mutations). A total of 15 patients were intended to be enrolled, with an expected enrollment duration of 12 months. Patients were given rucaparib 600 mg orally twice daily and were allowed to remain on study treatment until PSA progression defined by Prostate Cancer Working Group 3, with 2 years of follow-up after study treatment. We anticipated a total of 2-3 years until completion of the clinical trial. The primary endpoint was to assess the PSA progression-free survival (PSA-PFS). The secondary endpoints of the study were safety, the proportion of patients with a PSA 50% response (PSA 50), and an undetectable PSA. A 4-week treatment duration comprised one cycle.
The study started enrolling in June 2019 and was prematurely terminated in June 2022 after the accrual of 7 patients because of changing standard of care treatments with the introduction of next-generation scans, eg, prostate-specific membrane antigen positron emission tomography (PSMA-PET). Seven patients were enrolled in the study with the following pathogenic alterations: ATM (n = 3), BRCA2 (n = 2), BRCA1 (n = 1), BRIP1 (n = 1), and RAD51 (n = 1). The median duration of follow-up was 18 months. A median of 20 cycles (range 4-42) was completed, median PSA-PFS was 35.37 months (95% CI, 0-85.11 months). In total, 2 patients achieved PSA50; both also achieved nadir PSA as undetectable. Grade ≥ 3 adverse events (AEs) were anemia and rash (in 1 patient each). No dose-limiting toxicities or severe AEs were seen.
Rucaparib demonstrated acceptable toxicity and efficacy signal as an ADT-sparing approach in patients with biochemically recurrent nonmetastatic prostate cancer. It is currently challenging to understand the optimal value of systemic therapy in this disease setting due to the rapidly changing standard of care. Additionally, there are relatively few patients with BRCAness who present with nonmetastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03533946).
Idiopathic granulomatous mastitis (IGM) is a chronic inflammatory disease of the breast, the etiology of which, has still not been elucidated. There have been several mechanisms proposed to explain ...the pathogenesis. Since the first description of the disease, it has proved itself to be a great diagnostic and therapeutic challenge. It is very often misdiagnosed as cancer, resulting in myriad workup by the physician and great distress to the patient. Clear guidelines as to the management have still not been described. Here, we describe two patients who presented with IGM and have been successfully treated. The first patient was treated with a combination of steroids and antibiotics. The second patient achieved remission of the disease with antibiotics alone. We also propose an algorithm for the management of IGM.
PDF