Pembrolizumab (pembro) plus abiraterone acetate (abi) and prednisone (p) in patients with chemotherapy-naive metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC): Results from KEYNOTE-365 cohort D

118

Background: Abi + p is a standard of care for mCRPC. Cohort D of the phase 1b/2 KEYNOTE-365 study (NCT02861573) was used to evaluate safety and efficacy of the PD-1 inhibitor pembro + abi and p in patients (pts) who had not received chemotherapy for mCRPC. Methods: Chemotherapy-naive pts who had not previously used next-generation hormonal agents (NHAs) for mCRPC or were intolerant to enzalutamide or for whom enzalutamide was ineffective for mCRPC, whose disease progressed ≤6 months before screening, and who had ECOG PS score 0/1 were eligible. Enrolled pts received pembro 200 mg IV Q3W + abi 1000 mg PO QD and p 5 mg PO BID. Primary end points were PSA response rate (PSA decrease ≥50% from baseline), confirmed ORR per RECIST v1.1 by blinded independent central review, and safety. Secondary end points included rPFS per PCWG3-modified RECIST v1.1, DCR (CR + PR + SD or non-CR/non-PD ≥6 mo), DOR, OS, time to symptomatic skeletal-related event, radiographic bone progression, and radiographic soft tissue progression. Results: Of 103 treated pts, 35.9% had RECIST-measurable disease and 26.2% had previously received enzalutamide. Median (range) time from enrollment to data cutoff was 17.6 (9.7-27.0) months. Confirmed PSA response rate in all 103 pts was 56.3%. Overall, 78.6% of pts had a reduction in PSA level from baseline (confirmed and unconfirmed). For 37 pts with RECIST-measurable disease, ORR was 16.2% (1 CR; 5 PRs) overall, 7.7% for those who previously received enzalutamide (n = 13) and 21.7% for those who had not previously received NHAs (n = 23). Two pts with RECIST-nonmeasurable disease had a CR. DOR was not reached (NR; range, 2.1+ to 19.4+ mo); 4 pts had a response ≥12 months. DCR was 44.7% overall, 11.1% in pts who previously received enzalutamide (n = 27), and 57.3% in pts who had not previously used NHAs (n = 75). Additional analyses are listed in the table. Treatment-related AEs (TRAEs) were experienced by 90.3% of pts; 36.9% experienced grade 3-5 TRAEs. Overall, 18.4% of pts had a grade 3/4 ALT laboratory elevation and 12.6% had a grade 3/4 AST elevation. Five pts died of AEs; 1 was treatment-related (myasthenic syndrome). Conclusions: Pembro + abi and p showed antitumor activity in chemotherapy-naive pts with mCRPC. Safety was generally consistent with individual profiles of each agent, although there was an increased incidence of grade 3/4 ALT/AST laboratory elevations than reported for the individual treatments. Clinical trial information: NCT02861573. [Table: see text]

347 KEYNOTE-365 cohort C: pembrolizumab + enzalutamide in patients with abiraterone acetate–pretreated metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC)—data after minimum of 22 months of follow-up

Background

Previous data from cohort C of phase 1b/2 study KEYNOTE-365 (NCT02861573) showed that PD-1 inhibitor pembrolizumab + enzalutamide was well tolerated and showed antitumor activity in patients with abiraterone acetate–pretreated mCRPC. Updated data after a minimum of 22 months of follow-up are presented.

Methods

Patients in the prechemotherapy mCRPC state who were intolerant to ≥4 weeks‘ treatment with abiraterone acetate or for whom this treatment failed, had progressive disease ≤6 months before screening, and had ECOG PS 0-2 were enrolled. Patients received pembrolizumab 200 mg IV Q3W + enzalutamide 160 mg orally QD. Primary end points were PSA response rate (decrease ≥50% from baseline), confirmed ORR per RECIST v1.1 by blinded independent central review (BICR), and safety. Secondary end points were time to PSA progression; DCR (CR or PR of any duration + SD or non-CR/non-PD ≥6 months) and DOR per RECIST v1.1 by BICR; rPFS per PCWG3-modified RECIST v1.1 by BICR; and OS.

Results

Of 103 enrolled patients, 102 were treated. Median age was 70.0 years (range, 43–87); 29.4% of patients were PD-L1+; 37.3% had RECIST-measurable disease. Median follow-up (time from enrollment to data cutoff) was 40.2 months (range, 22.3–49.9). Confirmed PSA response rate in patients with baseline PSA measurement (N = 101) was 23.8%. Median time to PSA progression was 4.0 months (95% CI, 3.5–4.4). In 38 patients with measurable disease, ORR was 10.5% (2 CR; 2 PR). Median DOR was 11.8 months (4.3 to 38.3+ months); 1 patient had a response ≥12 months. DCR for the total population was 33.3%. Median (95% CI) rPFS was 6.0 months (4.1–6.3); rPFS at 12 months was 30.1%. Median (95% CI) OS was 20.1 months (16.9–25.2); OS at 12 months was 76.2%. Treatment-related AEs (TRAEs) occurred in 92.2% of patients; most common (≥20%) were fatigue (39.2%), nausea (21.6%), and rash (21.6%). Grade 3–5 TRAEs occurred in 42.2%, most commonly rash (7.8%) and fatigue (5.9%). Four patients died of AEs: 1 death was treatment-related (unknown cause).

Conclusions

After a minimum follow-up of 22 months, pembrolizumab + enzalutamide continued to show antitumor activity in abiraterone acetate–pretreated mCRPC. The safety profile of pembrolizumab + enzalutamide was generally consistent with individual profiles of each agent. There was a higher incidence than typically reported for the individual agents of all-grade (21.6%) and grade 3 (7.8%) rash, which resolved with standard-of-care treatment. The combination is being further evaluated in the phase 3 study KEYNOTE-641.

Acknowledgements

Medical writing and/or editorial assistance was provided by Matthew Grzywacz, PhD, of ApotheCom (Yardley, PA, USA). This assistance was funded by Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp., a subsidiary of Merck & Co., Inc., Kenilworth, NJ, USA. Funding for this research was provided by Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp., a subsidiary of Merck & Co., Inc., Kenilworth, NJ, USA.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials

gov, identifier: NCT02861573

Ethics Approval

The study and the protocol were approved by the Institutional Review Board or ethics committee at each site.

351 KEYNOTE-365 cohort D: pembrolizumab plus abiraterone acetate and prednisone in patients with chemotherapy-naive metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC)

Background

Treatment with abiraterone acetate + prednisone can improve outcomes in mCRPC patients with or without prior chemotherapy. Cohort D of phase 1b/2 study KEYNOTE-365 (NCT02861573) evaluated safety and efficacy of PD-1 inhibitor pembrolizumab + abiraterone acetate and prednisone in patients who had not received chemotherapy for mCRPC.

Methods

Patients were enrolled who had not received second-generation hormonal manipulation for mCRPC or failed/were intolerant to enzalutamide for mCRPC; had progressive disease ≤6 months before screening; and had ECOG PS 0/1. Patients received pembrolizumab 200 mg IV Q3W + abiraterone acetate 1000 mg orally QD and prednisone 5 mg orally BID. Primary end points: safety, PSA response rate (PSA decrease ≥50% from baseline), and confirmed ORR per RECIST v1.1 by blinded independent central review (BICR). Secondary end points: rPFS per PCWG3-modified RECIST v1.1, DCR, DOR, and OS.

Results

One hundred three patients were treated. Median (range) age was 70.0 (46–89) years, 30.1% were PD-L1+, 35.9% had RECIST-measurable disease, 18.4% had visceral disease, and 26.2% had previously received enzalutamide only. Median (range) time from enrollment to data cutoff was 17.6 (9.7–27.0) months. Confirmed PSA response rate in patients with PSA measurement at baseline (n=103) was 56.3%. For 37 patients with RECIST-measurable disease, ORR was 16.2% (1 CR; 5 PRs); 2 patients with RECIST-nonmeasurable disease had CR. In total population, 5 patients had a response ≥6 months; DCR was 44.7%. ORR for RECIST-measurable patients was 7.7% for those who previously received enzalutamide only (n=13) and 21.7% for those who had not previously received NHAs (n=23); DCR was 11.1% in all patients who previously received enzalutamide (n=27) and 57.3% in all patients who had not received NHAs (n=75). Median (95% CI) rPFS was 15.1 (9.2-NR) months; rPFS at 12 months was 54.9%. Median (95% CI) OS was NR (23.3 months-NR); OS at 12 months was 82.9%. Sixty-nine patients (67.0%) discontinued treatment, mostly because of progressive disease (37.9%). Treatment-related AEs (TRAEs) were experienced by 90.3% of patients and most common (≥15%) were ALT increase (22.3%), AST increase (17.5%), asthenia (16.5%), and diarrhea (16.5%); 36.9% experienced grade 3–5 TRAEs. There were 18.4%/12.5% grade 3 or 4 ALT/AST laboratory elevations. Five patients died of AEs; 1 was treatment related (myasthenic syndrome).

Conclusions

Pembrolizumab + abiraterone acetate and prednisone demonstrated antitumor activity in patients with chemotherapy-naive mCRPC. Safety was generally consistent with individual profiles of each agent. There was an increased incidence of grade 3–4 ALT/AST laboratory elevations.

Acknowledgements

Medical writing and/or editorial assistance was provided by Matthew Grzywacz, PhD, of ApotheCom (Yardley, PA, USA). This assistance was funded by Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp., a subsidiary of Merck & Co., Inc., Kenilworth, NJ, USA. Funding for this research was provided by Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp., a subsidiary of Merck & Co., Inc., Kenilworth, NJ, USA.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials

gov, identifier: NCT02861573

Ethics Approval

The study and the protocol were approved by the Institutional Review Board or ethics committee at each site.

Cabazitaxel activity in men with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer with and without DNA damage repair defects

BACKGROUND

Cabazitaxel was shown to improve overall survival (OS) in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) after abiraterone/enzalutamine and docetaxel failure, though benefit by the presence of DNA damage repair (DDR) defects is unknown. With the advent of poly(adenosine diphosphate-ribose) polymerase inhibitors (PARPi) in partially overlapping indications with cabazitaxel, we aimed to determine cabazitaxel activity in men with mCRPC according to their DDR status.

METHODS

This is a retrospective multicenter study that enrolled patients with mCRPC treated with cabazitaxel who had undergone DDR tumour tissue profiling. Patients with at least one deleterious germline or somatic alterations were considered DDR positive (DDR+). Each DDR + patient has been matched with a DDR negative (DDR-) from the same institution who underwent the same test. An exploratory cohort of patients found to be DDR + by liquid biopsy was also included. Prostate specific antigen (PSA) decline≥50% (PSA50), PSA progression-free survival (PFS, PSA-PFS), radiographic PFS (rPFS), clinical PFS or radiographic PFS (c/rPFS) and OS were evaluated.

RESULTS

Among 190 men (95 DDR+, 95 DDR-) with tissue sequencing, PSA50 was achieved with cabazitaxel in 29/92 (32%) and 33/92 (36%) in patients with DDR+ and DDR- (P = 0.64). The median rPFS was 5.33 months [95%CI 4.34-7.04] versus 5.75 months [95%CI 4.67-7.27] (P = 0.55). The median OS was 15.4 months [95%CI 12.16-26.6] and 11.5 months [95%CI 9.76-14.4] (P = 0.036), respectively. No PSA50 responses on cabazitaxel were observed in BRCA1/2 patients previously treated with PARPi (n = 10). Similar outcomes with cabazitaxel were observed in the liquid biopsy cohort (n = 63 DDR+).

CONCLUSIONS

Our study suggests that cabazitaxel is active in patients with mCRPC regardless of their DDR status, although its activity in men pretreated with a PARPi may be lower.

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)

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.

Cabazitaxel multiple rechallenges in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer

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/m² q3week. A reduced dose (20 mg/m² q3w) or an alternative schedule (mainly 16 mg/m² 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.

Metastatic clear cell renal cell carcinoma: computed tomography texture analysis as predictive biomarkers of survival in patients treated with nivolumab

INTRODUCTION

To evaluate the value of image-based texture analysis for predicting progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) in patients with metastatic clear cell renal carcinoma (cCCR) treated with nivolumab.

METHODS

This retrospective study included 48 patients with metastatic cCCR treated with nivolumab. Nivolumab was used as a second- or third-line monotherapy. Texture analysis of metastatic lesions was performed on CT scanners obtained within 1 month before treatment. Texture features related to the gray-level histogram, gray-level co-occurrence, run-length matrix features, autoregressive model features, and Haar wavelet feature were extracted. Lasso penalized Cox regression analyses were performed to identify independent predictors of PFS and OS.

RESULTS

Median PFS and OS were 5.7 and 13.8 months. 39 patients experienced progression and 27 died. The Lasso penalized Cox regression analysis identified three texture parameters as potential predictors of PFS: skewness, S.2.2. Correlat and S.1.1. SumVarnc. Multivariate Cox regression analysis confirmed skewness (HR (95% CI) 1.49 [1.21-1.85], p < 0.001) as an independent predictor of PFS. Regarding OS, the Lasso penalized Cox regression analysis identified three texture parameters as potential predictors of OS: S20SumVarnc, S22Contrast and S22Entropy. Multivariate Cox regression analysis confirmed S22Entropy (HR (95% CI) 1.68 (1.31-2.14), p < 0.001) as an independent predictor of OS.

CONCLUSIONS

Results from this preliminary study suggest that CT texture analysis might be a promising quantitative imaging tool that predicts oncological outcomes after starting nivolumab treatment.

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

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.

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

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.

Prognosis impact of serous metastases (SMs) in clear cell renal cell carcinoma patients in the GETUG-AFU-26 NIVOREN phase II trial

e16566

Background: Nivolumab monotherapy (N) is a standard of care for patients with metastatic clear cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC) after failure of antiangiogenic therapies. IMDC criteria is the established prognostic model in anyline of systemic treatment including with N. While liver, bone and brain have been reported to convey a dismal prognosis, little is known about the pejorative prognostic impact of serous metastatic sites (pleura, peritoneum, pericardium) in patients receiving anti-PD (L) -1 treatment. Methods: We aimed to assess survival, and activity of N in patients included in the GETUG-AFU 26 NIVOREN phase II prospective trial ( NCT03013335 ), according to serous metastases (SMs). Results: Overall, 720 patients with metastatic ccRCC, and treated with N. Baseline RECIST metastases data were available for 708 patients included in this analysis. Among them, 142 (20%) had SMs (pleura, n=91 ; peritoneum, n=50 ; pericardium, n=1). Median PFS (4.5 vs 2.6 mo ; HR :1.31 ; p=0.0079), and OS (26.1 vs 15 mo ; HR :1.67 ; p<0.0001) were significantly lower in patients with SMs. The dismal prognostic impact was observed both with pleura and peritoneum SMs. These 2 sites were not significantly associated. Using multivariate Cox models, SMs remained significantly associated with poor survival, independently of IMDC category, gender, age, and number of previous lines of therapy. Objective response rate in patients with SMs was not significantly different from others patients (16.4 vs 22.1%; p=0.147). SMs were not statistically associated with known poor prognosis metastatic sites (cerebral, bone, and liver.) Conclusions: SMs are a strong independent prognostic impact in patients receiving N for metastatic ccRCC Poor prognostic metastatic sites should be considered when assessing the prognosis of patients with metastatic ccRCC

Response to systemic therapy in fumarate hydratase-deficient renal cell carcinoma

PURPOSE

Fumarate hydratase-deficient (FHdef) renal cell carcinoma (RCC) is a rare entity associated with the hereditary leiomyomatosis and RCC syndrome with no standard therapy approved. The aim of this retrospective study was to evaluate the efficacy of different systemic treatments in this population.

METHODS

We performed a multicentre retrospective analysis of Fhdef RCC patients to determine the response to systemic treatments. The endpoints were objective response rate (ORR), time-to-treatment failure (TTF), and overall survival (OS). The two latter were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method.

RESULTS

Twenty-four Fhdef RCC patients were identified, and 21 under systemic therapy were included in the analysis: ten received cabozantinib, 14 received sunitinib, nine received "other antiangiogenics" (sorafenib, pazopanib, and axitinib), three received erlotinib-bevacizumab (E-B), three received mTOR inhibitors, and 11 received immune checkpoint blockers (ICBs). ORR for treatments were 50% for cabozantinib, 43% for sunitinib, 63% for "other antiangiogenics," and 30% for E-B, whereas ORR was 0% for mTOR inhibitors and 18% for ICBs. The median TTF (mTTF) was significantly higher with antiangiogenics (11.6 months) than with mTOR inhibitors (4.4 months) or ICBs (2.7 months). In the first-line setting, antiangiogenics presented a higher ORR compared with nivolumab-ipilimumab (64% versus 25%) and a significantly superior mTTF (11.0 months vs 2.5 months; p = 0.0027). The median OS from the start of the first systemic treatment was 44.0 months (95% confidence interval: 13.0-95.0).

CONCLUSIONS

We report the first European retrospective study of Fhdef RCC patients treated with systemic therapy with a remarkably long median OS of 44.0 months. Our results suggest that antiangiogenics may be superior to ICB/mTOR inhibitors in this population.

Cetuximab, docetaxel, and cisplatin versus platinum, fluorouracil, and cetuximab as first-line treatment in patients with recurrent or metastatic head and neck squamous-cell carcinoma (GORTEC 2014-01 TPExtreme): a multicentre, open-label, randomised, phase 2 trial

BACKGROUND

Results from a phase 2 trial of the TPEx chemotherapy regimen (docetaxel-platinum-cetuximab) showed promising results, with a median overall survival of 14·0 months in first-line recurrent or metastatic head and neck squamous-cell carcinoma (HNSCC). We therefore aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of the TPEx regimen with the standard of care EXTREME regimen (platinum-fluorouracil-cetuximab) in this setting.

METHODS

This was a multicentre, open-label, randomised, phase 2 trial, done in 68 centres (cancer centres, university and general hospitals, and private clinics) in France, Spain, and Germany. Eligible patients were aged 18-70 years with histologically confirmed recurrent or metastatic HNSCC unsuitable for curative treatment; had at least one measurable lesion according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1; and had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status of 1 or less. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) using the TenAlea website by investigators or delegated clinical research associates to the TPEx regimen or the EXTREME regimen, with minimisation by ECOG performance status, type of disease evolution, previous cetuximab treatment, and country. The TPEx regimen consisted of docetaxel 75 mg/m² and cisplatin 75 mg/m², both intravenously on day 1, and cetuximab on days 1, 8, and 15 (intravenously 400 mg/m² on day 1 of cycle 1 and 250 mg/m² weekly subsequently). Four cycles were repeated every 21 days with systematic granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) support at each cycle. In case of disease control after four cycles, intravenous cetuximab 500 mg/m² was continued every 2 weeks as maintenance therapy until progression or unacceptable toxicity. The EXTREME regimen consisted of fluorouracil 4000 mg/m² on day 1-4, cisplatin 100 mg/m² on day 1, and cetuximab on days 1, 8, and 15 (400 mg/m² on day 1 of cycle 1 and 250 mg/m² weekly subsequently) all delivered intravenously. Six cycles were delivered every 21 days followed by weekly 250 mg/m² cetuximab as maintenance therapy in case of disease control. G-CSF support was not mandatory per the protocol in the EXTREME regimen. The primary endpoint was overall survival in the intention-to-treat population; safety was analysed in all patients who received at least one dose of chemotherapy or cetuximab. Enrolment is closed and this is the final analysis. This study is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02268695.

FINDINGS

Between Oct 10, 2014, and Nov 29, 2017, 541 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to the two treatment regimens (271 to TPEx, 270 to EXTREME). Two patients in the TPEx group had major deviations in consent forms and were not included in the final analysis. Median follow-up was 34·4 months (IQR 26·6-44·8) in the TPEx group and 30·2 months (25·5-45·3) in the EXTREME group. At data cutoff, 209 patients had died in the TPEx group and 218 had died in the EXTREME group. Overall survival did not differ significantly between the groups (median 14·5 months [95% CI 12·5-15·7] in the TPEx group and 13·4 months [12·2-15·4] in the EXTREME group; hazard ratio 0·89 [95% CI 0·74-1·08]; p=0·23). 214 (81%) of 263 patients in the TPEx group versus 246 (93%) of 265 patients in the EXTREME group had grade 3 or worse adverse events during chemotherapy (p<0·0001). In the TPEx group, 118 (45%) of 263 patients had at least one serious adverse event versus 143 (54%) of 265 patients in the EXTREME group. 16 patients in the TPEx group and 21 in the EXTREME group died in association with adverse events, including seven patients in each group who had fatal infections (including febrile neutropenia). Eight deaths in the TPEx group and 11 deaths in the EXTREME group were assessed as treatment related, most frequently sepsis or septic shock (four in each treatment group).

INTERPRETATION

Although the trial did not meet its primary endpoint, with no significant improvement in overall survival with TPEx versus EXTREME, the TPEx regimen had a favourable safety profile. The TPEx regimen could provide an alternative to standard of care with the EXTREME regimen in the first-line treatment of patients with recurrent or metastatic HNSCC, especially for those who might not be good candidates for up-front pembrolizumab treatment.

FUNDING

Merck Santé and Chugai Pharma.

Cabazitaxel multiple rechallenge in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer: A therapeutic option to increase overall survival?

97

Background: Cabazitaxel rechallenge could be a more efficient therapy with an acceptable toxicity than docetaxel in the treatment of patients with a metastatic castration resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). The aim of this study was to assess the feasibility and efficacy of cabazitaxel multiple rechallenge. Methods: This is a multicenter, retrospective cohort study including patients from 9 centers in France who received 3 lines or more of cabazitaxel from February 2012 to July 2020. Cabazitaxel schedule differed between patients: 25 mg/m2 q3w, 20 mg/m2 q3w, 16 mg/m2 q2w or 10 mg/m2 weekly. Efficacy was assessed by overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) from each cabazitaxel line start. Only toxicities grade ≥ 3 were reported. Results: Twenty-two patients were included. The median follow-up from mCRPC was 94.7 months, median age at initial diagnosis was 59.5 years old, median ISUP score at diagnosis was 4 and median PSA at diagnosis was 55 ng/ml. Median number of cabazitaxel cycles was 7 at first-line, 6 at first rechallenge, and 5 for subsequent rechallenges. Median OS from mCRPC diagnosis was 105 months. Median PFS from cabazitaxel line start was 11.8 months at first use, 9.6 for first rechallenge and 5.6 in second rechallenge (table). Only one case of febrile neutropenia and 6 events of grade ≥ 3 toxicity were reported. Conclusions: Cabazitaxel multiple rechallenge could efficiently extend OS with manageable toxicities for patients. Even if anti-PARP therapy and immunotherapy are promising treatments, cabazitaxel rechallenge could be also a relevant therapeutic option for long responder patients. Specific biomarkers should be explored to predict the efficacy of cabazitaxel rechallenge. [Table: see text]

Safety and efficacy of nivolumab in older patients (pts) with renal cell carcinoma: Results of a sub-group analysis of the GETUG-AFU 26 NIVOREN multicenter phase II study

331

Background: NIVOREN GETUG AFU 26 study, is a french multicenter prospective study to evaluate safety and efficacy of Nivolumab (N) in a broad “real world setting” in mRCC after failure of 1 or 2 tyrosine kinase inhibitors. Methods: Between February 2016 and July 2017, 729 pts were enrolled across 27 institutions. Primary objective of the trial was safety assessed by grade ≥ 3 treatment related adverse event (TRAE). We report here results of older patients above 70 years old ([70;75[; [75;80[; ≥ 80) compared with their younger counterparts. Results: Overall, 720 patients were treated (median age 64 (22;90)). Among them 205 pts were ≥ 70 (28.5%) divided as follow: [70-75[:107 (14.9%) / [75-80[: 68 (9,4%) / ≥ 80: 30 (4,2%). Patients’ characteristics (Table) were similar in younger and older patients except for IMDC risk groups (IMDC) classification with less poor prognostic in pts ≥ 75 and fewer brain metastasis in pts ≥ 70. Treatment duration was similar across age groups despite a rate of discontinuation for TRAE increasing with age. Regarding efficacy, there was a non-significant trend toward improved response rate and progression free survival and lower specific survival with increasing age. Conclusions: In this large “real world” setting study a significant number of old pts were included. Prognostic profile appears better in older pts included. There is no signal for an excess of toxicity in this population and efficacy is comparable to younger patients. Age alone should not prevent prescribing N in mRCC. Clinical trial information: NCT03013335 . [Table: see text]

Adaptation of chemotherapy to the decline tumor markers in patients with poor prognosis nonseminomatous germ cell tumors:Real-world French experience

385

Background: Personalized chemotherapy based on tumor marker decline is the new standard in poor prognosis germ-cell tumor in Europe since 2014 (GETUG 13, Lancet, Fizazi et al). The purpose of this study was to analyze the reproducibility of the princeps study in patients not selected in clinical routine between 2014 and 2018. Methods: Patients (pts) were eligible if they had at least one criteria of IGCCCG classification for poor prognosis group. They had to be treated according the study terms of GETUG 13 study and did not received prior treatment. They had to received 1 BEP (Bleomycin, Etoposide, Cisplatin). Tumor markers (HCG and AFP) were dosed between day 18 and 21. Then, they received 3 additional BEP if they had favorable tumor marker decline or intensive chemotherapy if they had unfavorable decline. Results: This retrospective study included 104 patients in 14 french centers treated between 2013 and 2018: 22,1 % (n = 23) in the favorable group (Fav), 77,9 % (n = 81) in the unfavorable group (Unfav). Thirty-two pts had PS ≥ 2. In Unfav, there were more pts with HCG > 50 000 UI/L (44,2 % vs 13 %, p = 0,0067), neutrophil-to-lymphocyt ratio was also higher (median 6,4 vs 4,5, p = 0,0199). At cycle 1, all pts received BEP in Fav and 87,5 % (n = 70) in Unfav. After chemotherapy and surgery, 65,2 % in Fav and 41,3 % in Unfav obtained complete response. At 30 months (median follow-up), Fav-OS was 80,5 % (IC95% 55,8 – 92,2) and Unfav-OS was 64,4 % (IC95% 52 – 74,4). At 30 months, rates were 69,6 % (IC95% 46,6 -84,2) and 63.5 % (IC95% 51,9 – 73) respectively. In GETUG 13 study, 3-years OS was 84 % in Fav and 73 % on Unfav; 3-years PFS was 70 % and 59 % respectively. Seven pts died because of toxicity in Unfav (No one in Fav). Neuropathy, anemia and thrombopenia were more frequent in Unfav. Salvage high-dose chemotherapy with stem-cell transplant was required in 4 (66,7 %) pts in Fav and 8 (36,4 %) pts in Unfav. Conclusions: This study showed a reproducibility of the princeps study in terms of PFS and OS. Toxicity seemed more important in real world. For the congress, results will be reported with 50 additional pts.

Association of statins and nivolumab activity in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC): Results from the phase II nivoren—GETUG AFU 26 trial

359

Background: Statins are HMG-CoA inhibitors that regulate several mechanisms involved in tumor growth, including mitochondrial metabolism, activation of oncogenic signaling pathways, and immune modulation. Population-based studies showed that statin intake may be negatively associated with RCC onset. The impact of statins on response to immunotherapy in mRCC is unknown. Herein we study the association between statin administration and outcomes in patients with mRCC treated with nivolumab in the NIVOREN-GETUG AFU 26 phase II trial (NCT03013335). Methods: Patients with mRCC who failed previous VEGFR inhibitors were included. We assessed nivolumab activity, including objective response rate (ORR), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS) according to statin intake at baseline. Toxicity was assessed using CTCAE v4.0. Results: Overall,133 patients were treated with statins at baseline among 702 evaluable for concomitant therapies (19%). Among them, median age was 68 (49-90), 84% were male, 85% had a performance status ≥ 80%, 42% were overweight and 20% obese. Patients treated with statins had mostly good (23%) or intermediate (58%) IMDC risk, 64% had grade 3 or 4 tumors, and nivolumab was given in a third line setting or more in 55%. Median follow-up was 23.9 months (95%CI 23.0-24.5) in the overall cohort. The ORR was 26% in patients treated with statins, PFS 5.0 months (CI95% 3.0 – 5.5), OS 27.9 months (CI95% 19.4-30.3). Outcomes of patients with or without statins did not differ significantly. Similar rates of grade 3-5 TRAE were reported in patients with (20%) or without (18%) statin intake. Conclusions: This is the first study to evaluate statin intake and outcomes with nivolumab in patients with mRCC. Despite numerically higher ORR, statins were not significantly associated with improved outcomes. These data require other analyzes considering other factors such as BMI and other comorbidities. Further studies may help better understand the interplay between immunity and metabolic reprogramming in RCC.

Real-world evidence of cabozantinib in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma: Results from the CABOREAL Early Access Program

BACKGROUND

Real-world data on cabozantinib in metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) is limited. This study (CABOREAL) reports treatment patterns and outcomes for patients treated with cabozantinib through the French Early Access Program.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This multicentre (n = 26), observational, retrospective study enrolled patients with mRCC who had received ≥1 dose of cabozantinib. Overall survival (OS) was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method; subgroups were compared using the log-rank test. A multiple Cox regression model assessed predictive factors of OS after cabozantinib initiation.

RESULTS

Four hundred and ten recruited patients started treatment between September 2016 and February 2018: the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status ≥2, 39.3%; poor International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium (IMDC) risk, 31.7%; 0-1, 2 and ≥3 previous treatment lines, 25.3%, 33.4% and 41.2%, respectively; bone metastases, 55.9%; brain metastases, 16.8%. Median (min-max) follow-up was 14.4 (0-30) months. Overall, 57.0% of patients had a dose reduction, 15.6% an alternative dose schedule. The median average daily dose was 40.0 mg. Median (quartile [Q]1-Q3) treatment duration was 7.6 (0.1-29.1) months, median OS was 14.4 months, and the 12-month OS rate was 56.5% (95% confidence interval: 51.5-61.2). Most patients (54.4%) received subsequent treatment. Predictive factors associated with longer OS were body mass index ≥25 kg/m² (p = 0.0021), prior nephrectomy (p = 0.0109), favourable or intermediate IMDC risk (p < 0.0001) and cabozantinib initiation at 60 mg/day (p = 0.0486).

CONCLUSIONS

In the largest real-world study to date, cabozantinib was effective in unselected, heavily pretreated patients with mRCC. Initiation at 60 mg/day was associated with improved outcomes. CLINICALTRIALS.

GOV IDENTIFIER

NCT03744585.

Validation of the Correlation Between Single Nucleotide Polymorphism rs307826 in VEGFR3 and Outcome in Metastatic Clear-Cell Renal Cell Carcinoma Patients Treated with Sunitinib

BACKGROUND: Previously, we have shown a correlation between single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) rs307826 in vascular endothelial growth factor receptor-3 (VEGFR3) and outcome in metastatic clear-cell renal cell carcinoma (m-ccRCC) patients treated with sunitinib. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to validate this finding in an independent patient series. METHODS: m-ccRCC patients receiving sunitinib as first-line targeted therapy were included in a validation cohort. Endpoints were response rate (RR), progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). We also updated survival data of our discovery cohort as described previously. RESULTS: Eighty-four patients were included in the validation cohort. rs307826 AG/GG-carriers had a shorter PFS (8 versus 12 months, p = 0.04) and a trend towards a shorter OS (18 versus 27 months, p = 0.22) compared to AA-carriers. In the total series of 168 patients (from the discovery cohort, as described previously, and the validation cohort), rs307826 AG/GG-carriers had a poorer RR (29% versus 53%, p = 0.008), PFS (8 versus 15 months, p = 0.0002) and OS (22 versus 31 months, p = 0.004) compared to AA-carriers. rs307826 was independently associated with PFS and OS on multivariate analysis. CONCLUSION: VEGFR3 rs307826 seems to be associated with outcome on sunitinib in m-ccRCC. Its impact highlights the role of VEGFR3 in ccRCC pathogenesis and as a target of sunitinib.