Safety and efficacy of nivolumab in elderly patients with metastatic clear cell renal cell carcinoma: Analysis of the NIVOREN GETUG-AFU 26 study

INTRODUCTION

Immune checkpoint inhibitors are standard of care in metastatic renal cell carcinoma but their activity and safety in elderly patients is insufficiently explored. We evaluated outcomes of elderly patients with mRCC treated with nivolumab in the GETUG-AFU 26 NIVOREN phase 2 trial (NCT03013335) and conducted exploratory circulating biomarker analyses.

METHODS

Patients with mRCC were treated with nivolumab after at least one antiangiogenic therapy. The main endpoint of this analysis was safety in patients ≥ 70 years old (y.o), as per the rate of treatment-related grade 3-5 events (TRAE). Secondary endpoints included overall response rate (ORR), progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival. Exploration of candidate biomarkers associated with aging included baseline circulating cytokines involved in inflammation, adhesion, immune checkpoints, angiogenesis (IL6, IL7, IL8, BAFF, CXCL13, VCAM-1, 4-1BB, VEGF).

RESULTS

Of 720 patients, 515 were < 70 y.o and 205 ≥ 70 y.o. Patients ≥ 70 y.o exhibited numerically less IMDC poor risk disease (21.0% vs 26.9%), sarcomatoid component (4.9% vs 9.8%) or brain metastases (5.9% vs. 14.7%), but more previous treatment lines (≥ 2 in 54.1% vs 48.5%). TRAE were higher in patients ≥ 70 y.o (24.9% vs. 17.9%, p = 0.033). Respective ORR (19.2% vs. 22.1%) and median PFS (4.5 versus 3.0 months, HR 0.97 [95%CI 0.81-1.15]) were similar. Overall survival was shorter in patients ≥ 70 y.o (19.3 versus 26.9 months, HR 1.26 [95%CI 1.04-1.51]), but not significantly in a competitive risk model. Only V-CAM1 and 4-1BB were found to be increased in patients ≥ 70 y.o.

CONCLUSIONS

Nivolumab displayed higher grade 3/4 TRAE but manageable toxicity in elderly patients, with sustained activity. Elderly patients did not display specific inflammatory or angiogenic circulating profiles.

Adrenal Metastases Are Associated with Poor Outcomes in Patients with Metastatic Clear Cell Renal Cell Carcinoma Treated with Nivolumab in the GETUG-AFU-26 NIVOREN Phase 2 Trial

BACKGROUND

Glandular metastases (GMs; adrenal gland, pancreas, thyroid, ovary, breast, or prostate) are rare in metastatic clear cell renal cell carcinoma (mccRCC). Previous studies have indicated that GM patients treated with antiangiogenic therapy experience significantly longer overall survival (OS).

OBJECTIVES

To assess outcomes for mccRCC with or without GMs treated with nivolumab.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

The GETUG-AFU-26 NIVOREN phase 2 trial evaluated the activity and safety of nivolumab in patients with mccRCC who experienced failure of antiangiogenic therapies (NCT03013335). In this ancillary study, patients were divided into two groups according to the presence or absence of at least one GM.

OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS

The primary outcome was OS; secondary outcomes were progression-free survival (PFS) and the objective response rate (ORR). Survival was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Univariate and multivariable Cox regression models are used to estimate the hazard ratio (HR) with 95% confidence interval (CI) for survival outcomes. Subgroup analyses were performed for patients with pancreatic metastases and patients with adrenal metastases.

RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS

Among 720 patients treated with nivolumab between February 2016 and July 2017, 217 had GMs, of whom 151/217 had adrenal metastases and 86/217 had pancreatic metastasis. Patients with adrenal metastases had worse 12-mo OS (64% vs 71.1%) and 6-mo PFS (27.2% vs 36.6%) and a lower objective response rate (12.5%, 95% CI 7.6%-19.0%, vs 23.2%, 95% CI 19.8-27.0%; p = 0.005) than patients without adrenal metastases. Conversely, univariate analysis showed that patients with pancreatic metastases had significantly better 12-mo OS (82.3% vs 67.9%; HR 0.59, 95% CI 0.40-0.85) in comparison to patients with nonpancreatic GMs. On multivariable analysis, only adrenal metastasis remained associated with adverse prognosis.

CONCLUSIONS

Adrenal metastasis is an independent prognostic factor for poor response and survival in the GETUG-AFU-26 NIVOREN trial. Limited activity with nivolumab was observed for patients with mccRCC with adrenal metastases. These results warrant an evaluation of the prognostic value of adrenal metastases in patients treated with immunotherapy combinations with ipilimumab or tyrosine kinase inhibitors.

PATIENT SUMMARY

Our study showed that metastasis in the adrenal glands could be an independent factor associated with poor response to immunotherapy and survival for patients with metastatic kidney cancer. It would be useful to evaluate the prognostic value of adrenal gland metastasis in patients treated with immunotherapy combinations or immunotherapy agents combined with drugs called tyrosine kinase inhibitors.

Survival by Depth of Response and Efficacy by International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium Subgroup with Lenvatinib Plus Pembrolizumab Versus Sunitinib in Advanced Renal Cell Carcinoma: Analysis of the Phase 3 Randomized CLEAR Study

BACKGROUND

The extent of tumor shrinkage has been deemed a predictor of survival for advanced/metastatic renal cell carcinoma (RCC), a disease with historically poor survival.

OBJECTIVE

To perform an exploratory analysis of overall survival (OS) by tumor response by 6 mo, and to assess the efficacy and survival outcomes in specific subgroups.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

CLEAR was an open-label, multicenter, randomized, phase 3 trial of first-line treatment of advanced clear cell RCC.

INTERVENTION

Patients were randomized 1:1:1 to lenvatinib 20 mg orally daily with pembrolizumab 200 mg intravenously once every 3 wk, lenvatinib plus everolimus (not included in this analysis), or sunitinib 50 mg orally daily for 4 wk on treatment/2 wk of no treatment.

OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS

Landmark analyses were conducted to assess the association of OS with tumor shrinkage and progressive disease status by 6 mo. Progression-free survival, duration of response, and objective response rate (ORR) were analyzed by the International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium (IMDC) risk subgroup and by the presence of target kidney lesions. Efficacy was assessed by an independent review committee as per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1.

RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS

Landmark analyses by tumor shrinkage showed that patients enrolled to lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab arm with a confirmed complete response or >75% target-lesion reduction by 6 mo had a 24-mo OS probability of ≥91.7%. A landmark analysis by disease progression showed that patients with no progression by 6 mo had lower probabilities of death in both arms. Patients with an IMDC risk classification of intermediate/poor had longer median progression-free survival (22.1 vs 5.9 mo) and a higher ORR (72.4% vs 28.8%) with lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab versus sunitinib. Similarly, results favored lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab in IMDC-favorable patients and those with/without target kidney lesions. Limitations of the study are that results were exploratory and not powered/stratified.

CONCLUSIONS

Lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab showed improved efficacy versus sunitinib for patients with advanced RCC; landmark analyses showed that tumor response by 6 mo correlated with longer OS.

PATIENT SUMMARY

In this report of the CLEAR trial, we explored the survival of patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma by assessing how well they initially responded to treatment. We also explored how certain groups of patients responded to treatment overall. Patients were assigned to cycles of either lenvatinib 20 mg daily plus pembrolizumab 200 mg every 3 wk or sunitinib 50 mg daily for 4 wk (followed by a 2-wk break). Patients who either had a "complete response" or had their tumors shrunk by >75% within 6 mo after starting treatment with lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab had better survival than those with less tumor reduction by 6 mo. Additionally, patients who had more severe disease (as per the International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium) at the start of study treatment survived for longer without disease progression with lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab than with sunitinib.

Extended follow-up of a phase 2 trial of xevinapant plus chemoradiotherapy in high-risk locally advanced squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck: a randomised clinical trial

INTRODUCTION

We report long-term efficacy and overall survival (OS) results from a randomised, double-blind, phase 2 study (NCT02022098) investigating xevinapant plus standard-of-care chemoradiotherapy (CRT) vs. placebo plus CRT in 96 patients with unresected locally advanced squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (LA SCCHN).

METHODS

Patients were randomised 1:1 to xevinapant 200 mg/day (days 1-14 of a 21-day cycle for 3 cycles), or matched placebo, plus CRT (cisplatin 100 mg/m² every 3 weeks for 3 cycles plus conventional fractionated high-dose intensity-modulated radiotherapy [70 Gy/35 F, 2 Gy/F, 5 days/week for 7 weeks]). Locoregional control, progression-free survival, and duration of response after 3 years, long-term safety, and 5-year OS were assessed.

RESULTS

The risk of locoregional failure was reduced by 54% for xevinapant plus CRT vs. placebo plus CRT but did not reach statistical significance (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 0.46; 95% CI, 0.19-1.13; P = .0893). The risk of death or disease progression was reduced by 67% for xevinapant plus CRT (adjusted HR 0.33; 95% CI, 0.17-0.67; P = .0019). The risk of death was approximately halved in the xevinapant arm compared with placebo (adjusted HR 0.47; 95% CI, 0.27-0.84; P = .0101). OS was prolonged with xevinapant plus CRT vs. placebo plus CRT; median OS not reached (95% CI, 40.3-not evaluable) vs. 36.1 months (95% CI, 21.8-46.7). Incidence of late-onset grade ≥3 toxicities was similar across arms.

CONCLUSIONS

In this randomised phase 2 study of 96 patients, xevinapant plus CRT demonstrated superior efficacy benefits, including markedly improved 5-year survival in patients with unresected LA SCCHN.

Natural history of patients with muscle metastases from renal cell carcinoma: Results of the French national ARTEMIS study

618

Background: Muscle metastases (MM) are among rare secondary locations in renal cell carcinoma (RCC). Current guidelines do not provide specific advice on the management of these patients. There is a lack of scientific literature on the subject, mainly based on case reports or small retrospective monocentric cohorts. To date, therefore, there remains uncertainty about the clinical history, prognosis, and appropriate management of patients with MM. Methods: ARTEMIS is an ambispective national French multicenter, non-interventional study. It was opened to patients with metastatic RCC who had MM. The study was designed to assess overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), describe diagnostic and treatment modalities, and treatment-related serious adverse events in case of local treatments (TR-SAEs). Results: Median follow-up was 74.4 months IC95% [38.7-84.1]. The 146 enrolled patients were 73.6% male, with a median age of 57.6 years at diagnosis. They were initially diagnosed with stage IV RCC for 40.4% of them and had a favorable (36.2%), intermediate (45.7%), or poor (18.1%) IMDC risk score at the onset of metastases. Initially, metastases were mainly located in the lungs (55.5%), lymph nodes (26.7%), and bones (24.0%). Patients had a history of partial or total nephrectomy in 78.8% of cases. There were 30.0% of patients with synchronous MM. The median times from initial diagnosis or metastatic status to MM discovery were 25.5 [16.8-35.7] months and 8.4 [5.0-13.5] months, respectively. The majority (69.0%) of MM were discovered on conventional injected CT scans, whereas 8.3% were diagnosed clinically. Survival data are displayed on the table. Thirty-seven (25.3%) patients received local treatment of their MM which consisted of: external radiotherapy (48.6%), surgery (27.0%), cryotherapy (27.0%), stereotactic radiotherapy (5.4%), embolization (2.7%). Among them, local treatments prevented local relapse of MM in 28 patients (75.7%). Local TR-SAEs were seen in two patients (5.4%). Conclusions: ARTEMIS is the largest published cohort describing the disease history of patients with RCC suffering from MM. To our knowledge, this is the first study reporting the diagnostic and treatment modalities, also survival data. Despite its low incidence, the issue of these patients is not so rare in physicians’ practice. This work thus allows a greater understanding of clinical features and treatment of this pathology. [Table: see text]

Abstract CT021: PD-1 blockade in solid tumors with defects in polymerase epsilon

Context: Polymerase epsilon (POLE) gene missense hotspot mutations can generate pathogenic (p) proofreading defects resulting in hypermutated genomic profiles.

Aim: Determine the prevalence, genomic consequences and immunotherapy sensitivity of advanced POLE mutated tumors according to mutation site, primary tumor and tumor mutational burden (TMB).

Results: Pan-Cancer TCGA & MSKCC databases genomic analyses found a prevalence of non-pathogenic POLE mutations (POLEnp) of 3.4% with median TMB of 11 mutations/Megabase (mt/Mb, IQR 3-34). Pathogenic POLE mutations (POLEp) prevalence was 0.4% with median TMB of 215 mt/Mb (IQR 107-324), predominantly in colorectal and endometrial cancers. Prevalence dropped to 0.1% in metastatic cancers. We assessed prospectively the efficacy of PD-1 blockade in mismatch repair proficient advanced solid tumors harboring POLE missense mutations (phase II ASCe Nivolumab trial; NCT03012581). Variants were categorized prospectively by a molecular board as POLEp, POLEnp or Variants with Unknown significance (VUS). The primary endpoint was the Overall Response Rate (ORR) at 12 weeks according to RECIST 1.1, and secondary endpoints included survival analyses according to POLE variants pathogenicity. Among 61 screened patients, 21 were eligible and 20 received Nivolumab and 19 were assessable for response (table 1). The 12-week ORR was 37% for patients harboring POLEp and VUS and resulted in major survival improvement compared to POLEnp patients (HR=0.1 ; CI95% 0.02-0.7); see results in Table 1. Among patients POLEp tumors, while higher TMB was not predictive of response, higher proportion of POLE-related mutational signature correlated with improved benefit. In silico exonucleasic POLE domain analyses confirmed that all POLEp and 2 VUS clustered in the DNA binding or the Catalytic site. Recategorizing the VUS according to the location within the exonucleasic domain improved the prediction of survival outcomes.

Impact: This study gives new insights on how DNA repair defects, mutational burden and signatures sensitize to PD-1 blockade and may offer emerging tumor agnostic biomarkers for benefit to checkpoint blockade.

POLE variant pathogenicity All(N=21) POLEnp(N=5) VUS(N=4) POLEp(N=12) Age, years ± SD 57 ± 16 64 ± 10 56 ± 16 54 ± 17 Sex, Male (%) 12 (57) 5 (100) 2 (50) 5 (42) PS (ECOG)=1 (%) 16 (75) 4 (80) 2 (50) 10 (83) Primary tumor Colorectal 9 (43) 2 (40) 2 (50) 5 (42) Endometrial 6 (29) 0 (0) 0 (0) 6 (50) Gastric 2 (9) 2 (40) 0 (0) 0 (0) Glial 1 (5) 0 (0) 0 (0) 1 (8) Biliary tract 1 (5) 0 (0) 1 (25) 0 (0) Pancreas 2 (9) 1 (20) 1 (25) 0 (0) Number of previous treatments 2.4 ± 2 5 ± 2 1.8 ± 1 1.5 ± 1 TMB (mt/Mb, Min-Max)(N=16) 36.2 (2-385) 5 (4-9) 3 (2-4) 114 (25-385) ORR at 12 weeks (CR+PR) 37%(N=7/19) 0%(N=0/5) 50%(N=2/4) 46%(5/10) DCR at 12 weeks (CR+PR+SD) 58%(N=11/19) 0%(N=0/5) 75%(N=3/4) 80%(8/10) Median Progresssion-Free survival (months) 5.6 2.3 10.3vs POLEnp: HR=0.2 IC95% 0.1-0.7 Median Overall Survival (months) 9.1 5.0 Not Reachedvs POLEnp:HR=0.1 IC95% 0.02-0.7

Citation Format: Benoît Rousseau, Ivan Bieche, Eric Pasmant, Nadim Hamzaoui, Nicolas Leulliot, Lucas Michon, Aurelien de Reynies, Mike Foote, Julien Masliah-Planchon, Magali Svrcek, Romain Cohen, Victor Simmet, Paule Augereau, David Malka, Antoine Hollebecque, Damien Pouessel, Carlos Gomez-Roca, Rosine Guimbaud, Amandine Bruyas, Marielle Guillet, Muriel Duluc, Sophie Cousin, Christelle de la Fourchardiere, Frederic Rolland, Sandrine Hiret, Esma Saada-Bouzid, Olivier Bouche, Thierry Andre, Diane Pannier, Farid El Hajbi, Stephane Oudard, Christophe Tournigand, Jean-Charles Soria, Drew Gerber, Dennis Stephens, Michelle Lamandola-Essel, Steven B Maron, Bill Diplas, Guillem Argiles, Asha Krishnan, Neil Segal, Andrea Cercek, Nathalie Hoog-Labouret, Frederic Legrand, Clotide Simon, Assia Lamrani-Ghaouti, Luis A. Diaz, Pierre Saintigny, Sylvie Chevret, Aurelien Marabelle. PD-1 blockade in solid tumors with defects in polymerase epsilon [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2022; 2022 Apr 8-13. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2022;82(12_Suppl):Abstract nr CT021.

PD-1 Blockade in Solid Tumors with Defects in Polymerase Epsilon

Missense mutations in the polymerase epsilon (POLE) gene have been reported to generate proofreading defects resulting in an ultramutated genome and to sensitize tumors to checkpoint blockade immunotherapy. However, many POLE-mutated tumors do not respond to such treatment. To better understand the link between POLE mutation variants and response to immunotherapy, we prospectively assessed the efficacy of nivolumab in a multicenter clinical trial in patients bearing advanced mismatch repair-proficient POLE-mutated solid tumors. We found that only tumors harboring selective POLE pathogenic mutations in the DNA binding or catalytic site of the exonuclease domain presented high mutational burden with a specific single-base substitution signature, high T-cell infiltrates, and a high response rate to anti-PD-1 monotherapy. This study illustrates how specific DNA repair defects sensitize to immunotherapy. POLE proofreading deficiency represents a novel agnostic biomarker for response to PD-1 checkpoint blockade therapy.

SIGNIFICANCE

POLE proofreading deficiency leads to high tumor mutational burden with high tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes and predicts anti-PD-1 efficacy in mismatch repair-proficient tumors. Conversely, tumors harboring POLE mutations not affecting proofreading derived no benefit from PD-1 blockade. POLE proofreading deficiency is a new tissue-agnostic biomarker for cancer immunotherapy. This article is highlighted in the In This Issue feature, p. 1397.

Impact of subsequent therapies in patients (pts) with advanced renal cell carcinoma (aRCC) receiving lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab (LEN + PEMBRO) or sunitinib (SUN) in the CLEAR study

4514

Background: In the open-label, randomized, phase 3 CLEAR study, LEN + PEMBRO had significant PFS (primary endpoint) and OS (key secondary endpoint) benefits over SUN among pts with aRCC in the 1L setting (Motzer 2021, NEJM). We evaluated PFS on next-line therapy (“PFS2”) and explored the effect of subsequent anticancer therapy on OS in the LEN + PEMBRO and SUN treatment arms of CLEAR. Methods: PFS2 was defined as time from randomization to disease progression (as assessed by investigator) on next-line treatment or death from any cause (whichever occurred first). PFS2 was evaluated in all pts randomly assigned to LEN 20 mg orally QD + PEMBRO 200 mg IV Q3W (n=355) or SUN 50 mg orally QD (4 wks on/2 wks off) (n=357) using Kaplan-Meier estimates, and compared between treatment arms via a log-rank test stratified by geographic region and MSKCC prognostic groups. The HR and corresponding CI were estimated using the Cox regression model with Efron’s method for ties, using the same stratification factors. A post hoc analysis accounting for the effect of subsequent anticancer therapy on OS (time from randomization to death from any cause) in the LEN + PEMBRO and SUN arms using 2-stage estimation was conducted. Results: Among pts who received subsequent anticancer therapy in the LEN + PEMBRO (n=117 pts) and SUN (n=206 pts) arms (Table), median time to next-line therapy was 12.2 mos (range 1.45–37.36) and 6.4 mos (range 0.39–28.52), respectively. Median duration of first subsequent anticancer therapy was 5.2 mos (range 0.10–30.23) in the LEN + PEMBRO arm and 6.8 mos (range 0.03–30.72) in the SUN arm. Among all pts, PFS2 was longer with LEN + PEMBRO than with SUN (median not reached vs 28.7 mos; HR, 0.50; 95% CI 0.39–0.65; nominal P<0.0001); PFS2 rates at 24 and 36 mos are in the Table. The unadjusted OS HR for LEN + PEMBRO vs SUN (from the primary analysis [Motzer 2021, NEJM]) was 0.66 (95% CI 0.49–0.88); the HR for OS adjusted for subsequent therapy was 0.54 (bootstrap 95% CI 0.39–0.72). Conclusions: LEN + PEMBRO had a statistically significant and clinically meaningful benefit over SUN in the CLEAR study. These findings remained consistent after accounting for subsequent therapies, as evidenced by prolonged PFS2 and adjusted OS. Results further support LEN + PEMBRO as a standard of care in 1L aRCC. Clinical trial information: NCT02811861. [Table: see text]

Association of adrenal metastases with outcomes in patients with metastatic clear cell renal cell carcinoma (mccRCC) treated with nivolumab in the GETUG-AFU-26 NIVOREN phase II trial

348

Background: Glandular metastases (GMs) (adrenal, pancreas, thyroid, ovary, breast, or prostate) are rare in mccRCC. Several studies have observed significantly longer overall survival (OS) for GM patients treated with anti-angiogenic therapy. This study assesses outcomes from mccRCC treated with nivolumab with or without GMs. Methods: The GETUG-AFU 26 NIVOREN, phase II trial assessed the activity and safety of nivolumab in pts with mccRCC who failed antiangiogenic therapies (NCT03013335). Pts were stratified in two subgroups according to the presence of at least one GM. Specific analyzes were performed for pancreatic and adrenal metastases. Primary endpoint was OS, secondary endpoint were progression free survival (PFS) and overall response rate (ORR). Results: Between February 2016 and July 2017, among 720 patients treated by nivolumab 217 patients had GM (151: adrenal and 86: pancreatic metastases). Clinical characteristics were comparable between the two subgroups except for IMDC poor subgroup (19% vs 28%) and for Furhman grade IV (13.5% vs 23.4%) for GM and non GM respectively. Median time between metastatic disease and nivolumab was 3.2 years (y) vs 2 y for GM and non GM respectively and 2.8 vs 2.1 y with or without adrenal metastasis. There was no statistical difference in outcomes between pts with or without GMs. However, pts with adrenal metastases had worse OS (12-months survival: 64% vs 71.1%; HR 1.51 (1.19-1.92)); shorter PFS (6-months survival: 27.2% vs 36.6%; HR 1.29 (1.07-1.57)) and lower ORR (12.5% [7.6%; 19.0%] vs 23.2% [19.8%; 27.0%]; p = 0.005) than non-adrenal metastases. Conversely, patients with pancreatic metastases had significantly longer overall survival (12-months survival: 82.3% vs 67.9%; HR 0.59 (0.40-0.85)) in univariate analysis compared to non-pancreatic metastases. In multivariate analysis, only adrenal metastasis remained associated with dismal prognosis (Table). Conclusions: Adrenal metastasis is an independent poor prognostic factor for response and survival in the GETUG-AFU 26 NIVOREN phase II trial. Limited activity with nivolumab is observed for patients with adrenal metastases from mccRCC without difference with previous anti angiogenic therapy. Molecular characterization could help to identify the angiogenic profile of adrenal metastases. Clinical trial information: NCT03013335. [Table: see text]

CIMUC: Chemotherapy following Immune checkpoints inhibitors in patients with locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma (la/mUC)

492

Background: Immune checkpoints inhibitors (ICIs) have recently changed therapeutic landscape of la/mUC. Recent studies suggested an improvement of response to salvage chemotherapy (CT) after ICIs in several cancer types including urothelial carcinoma. We assumed that efficacy of CT rechallenge after ICIs may be improved compared to second-line CT without previous ICIs in patients (pts) with la/mUC. Methods: CIMUC is a French multicentric retrospective study including all pts with la/mUC initiating second or third-line CT from January 1st 2015 to June 30th 2020. Two groups of pts were defined: pts in group 1 (G1) were treated with a second-line CT without previous ICIs; pts in group 2 (G2) were treated with third line CT after ICIs. Primary endpoint was objective response rate (ORR: proportion of patients with complete or partial response, according to RECIST 1.1 criteria) in G2 versus G1. Secondary endpoints were progression-free survival (PFS), defined as time from initiation of second or third-line CT to disease progression or death from any cause, and toxicities. This study is supported by the French Genito Urinary Group (GETUG). Results: 553 pts were included. Baseline characteristics of the 2 groups are summarized in the Table. ORRs were 31% (95%CI [26.5-35.5]) and 29.2% (95%CI [21.9-36.6]) respectively in G1 and G2, without statistically significant difference (p=0.617), even after adjustment for Bellmunt risk factors (p=0.3214). In subgroups analysis, no difference in ORR was observed by type of CT (platinum or taxanes), duration of response (DOR) to first-platinum-based CT (< 12 months or ≥ 12 months) and FGFR-status. We did not identify any predictive factor of OR in G2 in multivariate analysis. Median PFS were 4.6 months (95%CI [3.88; 5.06]) and 4.86 months (95%CI [4.11; 5.45]), respectively in G1 and G2. Grade 3/4 hematologic toxicity occurred in 35% and 22.4%, respectively in G1 and G2. Conclusions: While ORR was not superior in G2 versus G1, pts derive comparable benefit in a further line of treatment (G2) in terms of ORR and PFS. Despite limits inherent to any retrospective study, CIMUC represents one of the largest retrospective studies in this setting.[Table: see text]

Randomized phase II study to assess the efficacy and tolerability of sunitinib by dose administration regimen in anti-angiogenic naïve patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC): Final analysis of SURF study

344

Background: SUN is approved in mRCC setting at the dose of 50mg daily for 4 weeks followed by 2 weeks rest (4/2 schedule). The 4/2 schedule often requires dose modifications for toxicity. Current recommendation is to reduce the dose to 37.5mg per day. Alternative schedules (2 weeks of treatment followed by one-week rest (2/1 schedule) have shown promising results. SURF trial evaluated prospectively schedule 2/1 when toxicity occurs. Methods: SURF [NCT02689167] is a prospective, non-comparative randomized study. Patients (pts) with mRCC (clear cell) were included at SUN initiation. When a dose adjustment of SUN was required, patients were randomized between 4/2 schedule at 37.5mg daily and experimental 2/1 schedule at 50mg daily. Primary objective was to assess duration of SUN treatment among the 73 first evaluable pts. Overall 226 pts were enrolled with 133 randomized. All other analyses are shown for the 133 randomized patients. Results: Pts were 75.2% males, with a median age 63.7 years for 94% with a Karnofsky ≥ 80%. Of them, 54.9% had partial/total nephrectomy. IMDC risk score was favourable (45.1%), intermediate (46.6%) or poor (8.3%). Pts characteristics were well balanced between 2 arms. Metastatic sites were lungs (60.5%), bones (16.3%), lymph nodes (15.5%). At 6 months, 48 patients (65.8%) of the 2/1 schedule were still on treatment (above predefined threshold for positivity). Other data are listed on the table. No new safety signal was identified. Permanent SUN discontinuation due to toxicity was 22.2% in control arm vs 12.3% in experimental arm. Conclusions: SURF is the largest prospective randomised trial evaluating two different SUN schedules modifications in mRCC in case of toxicity. This positive trial confirms the role of adapting SUN to a 2/1 schedule rather than reducing SUN dose to the classical 4/2 schedule. Clinical trial information: NCT02689167. [Table: see text]

Impact of the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic on French Health students

Context

In France, care workers and health students have been intensely mobilized during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic. But few studies have evaluated psychological distress on non-medical health students, in addition to the challenges posed by pedagogical continuity while universities are closed following health and safety regulations.

Objectives

This study aims to assess COVID-19's impact on health students in France on different levels: psychological, educational and social.

Methods

An online national cross-sectional study, from April 11 to May 30 2020, included sociodemographic, work conditions and numeric scales.

Results

A total of 4411 students answered. Regarding the K6 scale, 39% of students had moderate distress, and 21% had a high level of distress. Risk factors of psychological distress included being a woman (P < 0.001), being between 19 and 21 years old (P < 0.001), living alone (P = 0.008), and not having the ability to isolate (P < 0.001). Students on the frontline had less psychological distress (57 vs 62%, P = 0.003), better quality of sleep (34% vs 28% high quality, P < 0.001) but a higher consumption of medical (8.5% vs 6.5%, P = 0.044) and non-medical (18% vs 10%, P < 0.001) psychotropic drugs. Nurse and medical students had more distress and used more non-medical psychotropic substances than other health students (15% vs 9.2%).

Discussion

COVID-19’ crisis had an important impact on health students’ mental health, social life and training with discrepancies regarding the speciality whether they were on the frontline or not. There is an urgent need for psychological and pedagogical support for students, and even more so regarding the prolongation of the COVID-19 epidemic.

Efficacy and safety of erdafitinib in patients with locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma: long-term follow-up of a phase 2 study

BACKGROUND

Erdafitinib, a pan-fibroblast growth factor receptor (FGFR) tyrosine kinase inhibitor, was shown to be clinically active and tolerable in patients with advanced urothelial carcinoma and prespecified FGFR alterations in the primary analysis of the BLC2001 study at median 11 months of follow-up. We aimed to assess the long-term efficacy and safety of the selected regimen of erdafitinib determined in the initial part of the study.

METHODS

The open-label, non-comparator, phase 2, BLC2001 study was done at 126 medical centres in 14 countries across Asia, Europe, and North America. Eligible patients were aged 18 years or older with locally advanced and unresectable or metastatic urothelial carcinoma, at least one prespecified FGFR alteration, an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-2, and progressive disease after receiving at least one systemic chemotherapy or within 12 months of neoadjuvant or adjuvant chemotherapy or were ineligible for cisplatin. The selected regimen determined in the initial part of the study was continuous once daily 8 mg/day oral erdafitinib in 28-day cycles, with provision for pharmacodynamically guided uptitration to 9 mg/day (8 mg/day UpT). The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed confirmed objective response rate according to Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors version 1.1. Efficacy and safety were analysed in all treated patients who received at least one dose of erdafitinib. This is the final analysis of this study. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02365597.

FINDINGS

Between May 25, 2015, and Aug 9, 2018, 2328 patients were screened, of whom 212 were enrolled and 101 were treated with the selected erdafitinib 8 mg/day UpT regimen. The data cutoff date for this analysis was Aug 9, 2019. Median efficacy follow-up was 24·0 months (IQR 22·7-26·6). The investigator-assessed objective response rate for patients treated with the selected erdafitinib regimen was 40 (40%; 95% CI 30-49) of 101 patients. The safety profile remained similar to that in the primary analysis, with no new safety signals reported with longer follow-up. Grade 3-4 treatment-emergent adverse events of any causality occurred in 72 (71%) of 101 patients. The most common grade 3-4 treatment-emergent adverse events of any cause were stomatitis (in 14 [14%] of 101 patients) and hyponatraemia (in 11 [11%]). There were no treatment-related deaths.

INTERPRETATION

With longer follow-up, treatment with the selected regimen of erdafitinib showed consistent activity and a manageable safety profile in patients with locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma and prespecified FGFR alterations.

FUNDING

Janssen Research & Development.

Analysis by region of outcomes for patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma treated with cabozantinib or everolimus: a sub-analysis of the METEOR study

Introduction:

METEOR was a phase 3 trial (NCT01865747) of cabozantinib versus everolimus in adults with advanced or metastatic clear cell RCC previously treated with VEGF receptor (VEGFR) tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs). This post hoc analysis of METEOR compared outcomes for patients recruited from European and non-European countries.

Material and methods:

Adults with advanced/metastatic clear cell RCC who had received ≥ 1 prior VEGFR-TKI treatment were randomized 1:1 to receive cabozantinib or everolimus. Patients were categorized by recruitment region: Europe or outside of Europe (rest of world [RoW]). Progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), objective response rate (ORR), and adverse events (AEs) were compared between regional subgroups.

Results:

In total, there were 320 eligible patients from Europe (cabozantinib, 167; everolimus, 153) and 338 from RoW (North America, 240 patients; Asia-Pacific, 86; Latin America, 12; randomized as cabozantinib, 163; everolimus, 175). PFS and OS were longer with cabozantinib than with everolimus and similar for the Europe and RoW subgroups. For PFS, the hazard ratio (HR) for cabozantinib versus everolimus was 0.54 for the Europe subgroup (p < .001) and 0.50 for the RoW subgroup (p < .001). For OS, the HR was 0.75 for the Europe subgroup (p = .034) and 0.69 for the RoW subgroup (p = .006). ORR in the Europe subgroup was 15% for cabozantinib and 3.9% for everolimus (p < .001). For the RoW subgroup, ORR was 20% for cabozantinib and 2.9% for everolimus (p < .001). Incidence of grade 3/4 AEs were similar for the Europe (cabozantinib, 74%; everolimus, 58%) and RoW subgroups (cabozantinib, 69%; everolimus, 64%).

Conclusion:

In the METEOR trial, efficacy outcomes for patients recruited from European and non-European countries favored cabozantinib over everolimus. The efficacy and safety results for the regional subgroups were consistent with those of the overall METEOR population.

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.

Analysis of the CLEAR study in patients (pts) with advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC): Depth of response and efficacy for selected subgroups in the lenvatinib (LEN) + pembrolizumab (PEMBRO) and sunitinib (SUN) treatment arms

4560

Background: In the multicenter, open-label, randomized, phase 3 CLEAR study, LEN + PEMBRO had significant PFS and OS benefits, and improved ORR vs SUN in first-line advanced RCC. Herein, we explore efficacy according to selected subgroups and the association between pts’ depth of response and OS. Methods: Pts in the CLEAR study were randomly assigned 1:1:1 to 1 of 3 treatment arms: LEN 20 mg orally QD + PEMBRO 200 mg IV Q3W; LEN 18 mg + everolimus 5 mg orally QD; or SUN 50 mg orally QD (4 weeks on/2 weeks off). We report PFS, OS, and ORR based on IMDC risk group (favorable and intermediate/poor) and presence of a target kidney lesion at baseline (post hoc analysis). Post hoc 6-month landmark analyses assessed the association between tumor shrinkage and OS. Pts who were alive at 6 months were grouped based on maximum tumor shrinkage from baseline or confirmed complete response (CR) up to 6 months. Tumor assessments were performed by independent review committee per RECIST v1.1. Odds ratios were calculated using the Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel method; HRs were based on stratified Cox proportional hazards model. Results: Among 1069 pts randomized in the CLEAR study, 355 were assigned to LEN + PEMBRO and 357 to SUN. Median follow-up was 27 months for the LEN + PEMBRO group and 26 months for the SUN group. PFS favored LEN + PEMBRO (median 22.1 months, n=243) vs SUN (median 5.9 months, n=229) in the IMDC-intermediate/poor subgroup (HR 0.36 [95% CI 0.28-0.47]); and in the IMDC-favorable subgroup (median 28.1 months, n=110 vs median 12.9 months, n=124; HR 0.41 [95% CI 0.28-0.62]). OS favored LEN + PEMBRO vs SUN in the IMDC-intermediate/poor subgroup (HR 0.58 [95% CI 0.42-0.80]); few events were observed in the IMDC-favorable subgroup thus, it was inadequate to evaluate OS. ORR favored LEN + PEMBRO vs SUN in the IMDC-intermediate/poor subgroup (72.4% vs 28.8%; odds ratio 6.60 [95% CI 4.39-9.90]) and the IMDC-favorable subgroup (68.2% vs 50.8%; odds ratio 2.00 [95% CI 1.17-3.42]). In pts with target kidney lesions, PFS, OS, and ORR were improved with LEN+PEMBRO vs SUN (table). The 6-month landmark analysis in the LEN + PEMBRO group showed that the OS rate at 24 months was 100% (95% CI not estimable [NE]-NE) for pts with confirmed CR per RECIST v1.1 and 91.7% (95% CI 53.9-98.8) both for pts with >75% to <100% target-lesion reduction and pts with 100% target-lesion reduction. Conclusions: In pts with target kidney lesions, LEN + PEMBRO conferred survival benefits vs SUN similar to benefits observed in the overall population. Overall, pts treated with LEN + PEMBRO who had greater than 75% reduction in target lesions had similar OS rates to pts with CR. Clinical trial information: NCT02811861. [Table: see text]

Avelumab first-line (1L) maintenance plus best supportive care (BSC) versus BSC alone for advanced urothelial carcinoma (UC): Analysis of time to end of next-line therapy in JAVELIN Bladder 100

4525

Background: Avelumab 1L maintenance is approved in various countries for patients (pts) with advanced UC that has not progressed with 1L platinum-based chemotherapy based on significantly prolonged overall survival (OS) seen with avelumab + BSC vs BSC alone in the phase 3 JAVELIN Bladder 100 trial. OS was prolonged despite the more frequent use of subsequent anticancer therapy in the BSC alone arm (42.3% in the avelumab + BSC arm vs 61.7% in the BSC alone arm), most commonly with immune checkpoint inhibitors (6.3% vs 43.7%, respectively). To further characterize the efficacy benefits of avelumab 1L maintenance, we report a post hoc analysis of the time to end of next-line therapy (for any reason) in the randomized trial population. Methods: In JAVELIN Bladder 100 (NCT02603432), eligible pts had unresectable locally advanced or metastatic UC without disease progression with 4 to 6 cycles of 1L gemcitabine + either cisplatin or carboplatin. The primary endpoint was OS from randomization, assessed in 2 populations: all pts and pts with PD-L1+ tumors (Ventana SP263). In this exploratory analysis, time from randomization until end of next-line treatment received after first progression (due to death or discontinuation) was assessed. Results: A total of 700 pts were randomized 1:1 to avelumab 1L maintenance + BSC or BSC alone. Among all randomized pts, time to end of next-line therapy was prolonged in the avelumab + BSC arm vs the BSC alone arm (Table). Time to end of next-line therapy was also longer in the avelumab + BSC arm vs the BSC alone arm in pts with PD-L1+ tumors (n = 358) or PD-L1− tumors (n = 270). Conclusions: Pts who received avelumab 1L maintenance + BSC had prolonged time to end of next-line treatment compared with those who received BSC alone, irrespective of PD-L1 status. These data provide further evidence of the efficacy of a maintenance approach with avelumab in pts with advanced UC that has not progressed with 1L platinum-based chemotherapy. Clinical trial information: NCT02603432. [Table: see text]

Lenvatinib plus Pembrolizumab or Everolimus for Advanced Renal Cell Carcinoma

BACKGROUND

Lenvatinib in combination with pembrolizumab or everolimus has activity against advanced renal cell carcinoma. The efficacy of these regimens as compared with that of sunitinib is unclear.

METHODS

In this phase 3 trial, we randomly assigned (in a 1:1:1 ratio) patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma and no previous systemic therapy to receive lenvatinib (20 mg orally once daily) plus pembrolizumab (200 mg intravenously once every 3 weeks), lenvatinib (18 mg orally once daily) plus everolimus (5 mg orally once daily), or sunitinib (50 mg orally once daily, alternating 4 weeks receiving treatment and 2 weeks without treatment). The primary end point was progression-free survival, as assessed by an independent review committee in accordance with Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors, version 1.1. Overall survival and safety were also evaluated.

RESULTS

A total of 1069 patients were randomly assigned to receive lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab (355 patients), lenvatinib plus everolimus (357), or sunitinib (357). Progression-free survival was longer with lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab than with sunitinib (median, 23.9 vs. 9.2 months; hazard ratio for disease progression or death, 0.39; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.32 to 0.49; P<0.001) and was longer with lenvatinib plus everolimus than with sunitinib (median, 14.7 vs. 9.2 months; hazard ratio, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.53 to 0.80; P<0.001). Overall survival was longer with lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab than with sunitinib (hazard ratio for death, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.49 to 0.88; P = 0.005) but was not longer with lenvatinib plus everolimus than with sunitinib (hazard ratio, 1.15; 95% CI, 0.88 to 1.50; P = 0.30). Grade 3 or higher adverse events emerged or worsened during treatment in 82.4% of the patients who received lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab, 83.1% of those who received lenvatinib plus everolimus, and 71.8% of those who received sunitinib. Grade 3 or higher adverse events occurring in at least 10% of the patients in any group included hypertension, diarrhea, and elevated lipase levels.

CONCLUSIONS

Lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab was associated with significantly longer progression-free survival and overall survival than sunitinib. (Funded by Eisai and Merck Sharp and Dohme; CLEAR ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02811861.).

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]

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.

Avelumab-cetuximab-radiotherapy versus standards of care in locally advanced squamous-cell carcinoma of the head and neck: The safety phase of a randomised phase III trial GORTEC 2017-01 (REACH)

BACKGROUND

Based on the hypothesis of synergistic effect of avelumab with cetuximab and radiotherapy, this new combination is tested in a randomised trial against two well-established standard of care (SOC) in locally advanced squamous-cell carcinoma of the head and neck (LA-SCCHN).

METHODS

This phase III trial comprises two cohorts of patients deemed fit to receive cisplatin (100 mg/m² Q3W) (cohort 1) or unfit to cisplatin (cohort 2). The SOC was Intensity Modulated Radiation Therapy (IMRT) with cisplatin in cohort 1 (arm A) and with weekly cetuximab in cohort 2 (arm D). In both cohorts, experimental arms (arms B and C) were IMRT with cetuximab and avelumab (10 mg/kg day 7 and every 2 weeks) followed by avelumab every two weeks for 12 months. A safety phase was planned among the first 41 patients in experimental arms by monitoring grade ≥IV adverse events (AEs) with an unacceptable rate of 35%.

RESULTS

Between September 2017 and August 2018, 82 patients with LA-SCCHN were randomised including 41 patients in experimental arms. All patients of experimental arms except one (arm C) received entire radiotherapy as planned. Most common grade ≥III AEs were mucositis, radio-dermatitis, and dysphagia. Grade ≥IV AEs occurred in 5/41 (12%) patients, all in arm C (no grade V). This rate was acceptable according to the hypotheses of the safety phase. In the SOC arms, grade ≥IV AEs occurred in 3/21 patients (14%) in arm A and 2/20 (10%) in arm D. One grade V haemorrhage occurred in arm A.

CONCLUSION

The avelumab-cetuximab-RT combination was tolerable for patients with LA-SCCHN, and the approval was given for continuing the trial without modification. CLINICALTRIAL.GOV: NCT02999087.

Validation of the lung immune prognostic index (LIPI) in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma treated with nivolumab in the GETUG-AFU 26 NIVOREN trial

735

Background: The Lung Immune Prognostic Index (LIPI) is a prognostic score combining pretreatment dNLR (neutrophils/ (leucocytes-neutrophils) and LDH correlated to immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) benefit in several advanced cancers. We aimed to correlate LIPI score with Nivolumab (N) benefit in metastatic clear cell renal cell carcinoma (mccRCC) patients. Methods: We investigated the LIPI score in the GETUG-AFU 26 NIVOREN phase II trial assessing the activity and safety of N after failure of upfront VEGF-targeted therapies. A dNLR ≥ 3 and LDH ≥ upper superior limit were analyzed for the LIPI, and patients were stratified into 3 groups (good (GG), intermediate (IG) and poor (PG)) (Mezquita et al, JAMA Oncol 2018). The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS), and secondary endpoints were progression-free survival (PFS) and objective response rate (ORR). Results: Overall, 619 pts were included. Median age was 64 years old, 22.1% pts had received more than 2 previous lines and IMDC risk groups were 18.3%, 56.5% and 25.0% for good/intermediate and poor risk respectively. Median (m) follow up was 23.7 months (mo). The mPFS with N was 4.0 mo and mOS was not reach. LIPI classified 364 pts (58.8%) as GG, 216 pts (34.9%) as IG and 39 pts (6.3%) as PG. The PFS and OS results are summarized in the Table. In multivariate analysis, LIPI score remains an independent prognostic factor after adjustment for sex, age, ECOG PS and IMDC. ORR did not seem to be influenced by the LIPI groups. Conclusions: We report for the first time that LIPI score is associated with PFS and OS in patients treated with N for mccRCC. LIPI score appears as an independent prognostic factor even after adjustment for established risk factors. External validation in a VEGF-targeted therapy cohort is ongoing and will contribute to evaluate the predictive value of LIPI in mccRCC.[Table: see text]

Is body mass index (BMI) associated with favorable outcomes in metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) treated with nivolumab? An ancillary study of the NIVOREN-GETUG AFU-26 trial

630

Background: Adipose tissue might affect response to immune checkpoint inhibitors (CPI) in cancer patients (pts). Higher BMI is associated with improved outcomes in mRCC under VEGFR TKI but BMI impact under CPI remains unclear. Methods: We analysed BMI in the NIVOREN GETUG AFU 26 study, a prospective study that evaluated the safety and efficacy of nivolumab in mRCC after failure of prior VEGFR inhibitors. We investigated the association between BMI, objective response rate (ORR), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS). BMI (weight/height 2) was classified according to the World Health Organization (WHO) categories: underweight as BMI < 18.5; normal weight as 18.5 ≤ BMI ≤ 24.9; overweight as 25 ≤ BMI ≤ 29.9 and obesity as BMI ≥ 30. Survival distributions were compared using a Log-Rank test, supported by uni- and multivariate Cox regressions to estimate the Hazard Ratio (HR) and its 95% CIs. Median follow-up (FU) and the 95% CI were calculated using the reverse Kaplan–Meier method. Results: Overall, 708 pts were included in the BMI analysis: 20 pts (2.8%) were underweight, 322(45.5%) had normal weight, 255(36.0%) were overweight and 111(15.7%) obese. Median age was 64 years, 77.3% were male, performance status was ≥ 80% in 81.2%, and IMDC risk group was good, intermediate and poor in respectively 18.2%, 56.4%, 25.4%. Outcomes according to BMI is detailed in table, median FU was 23.9 months (95%CI 23.0-24.5). BMI adjusted to known prognostic factors was not significant in the multivariate analysis. Conclusions: Higher BMI patients seems to have better outcomes with nivolumab in mRCC. Further characterisation is on-going to explore the relation of BMI with established risk factor in pts under CPI in mRCC.[Table: see text]

Vefora, GETUG-AFU V06 study: Randomized multicenter phase II/III trial of fractionated cisplatin (CI)/gemcitabine (G) or carboplatin (CA)/g in patients (pts) with advanced urothelial cancer (UC) with impaired renal function (IRF)—Results of a planned interim analysis

461

Background: Standard treatment for advanced UC is chemotherapy (CT) combining CI and G. 70% of pts with UC are over 65 and 40% of them are unfit for CI because of IRF or comorbidities. CA replaces frequently CI, when creatinine clearance (Cr Cl) is < 60 ml/min according to Cockroft and Gault formula (CGF). However, CA tends to show a lower efficacy than CI, due to decreased dose intensity of CT. Methods: We performed a multicentre randomized phase II/III study in order to compare the activity and safety of a CT regimen with fractionated CI or CA for advanced UC in 1st line setting among pts unfit for standard CT because of IRF (40 ≤ Cr Cl ≤ 60ml/min) according to CGF. We report here the results of the interim analysis of phase II. Treatment: Arm A: CA AUC4,5 D1+ G 1000 mg/m² D1, [D1 = D21]; Arm B: fractionated CI 35 mg/m² D1D8 + G 1000 mg/m² D1D8, [D1 = D21] The co-primary objectives of the phase II were to evaluate activity (non-progression (RECIST V1.1) at (D21 C6)) and safety defined by the absence during treatment of: IRF: Cr Cl <35 mL/min or deterioration of Cr Cl >20%; delayed CT (≥ 2 weeks); decrease twice G dose on day 1 for: NCI CTC grade III or IV non-hematologic toxicity; hematologic toxicity; A two-stage Bryant and Day design was used. Results: A planned first step analysis was performed after randomization of 25 and 21 pts from April 2015 to January 2018. 23 and 19 of them were evaluable (resp. Arm A/B). 8 failures were reported for safety reason in experimental arm B, 7 for renal toxicity. Conclusions: According to our pre planned first step analysis, the trial met criteria for excessive toxicity in experimental arm (fractionated CI), predominantly renal toxicity. The study was therefore definitely stopped. Survival results will be available at the meeting. Clinical trial information: NCT02240017 . [Table: see text]

Patritumab or placebo, with cetuximab plus platinum therapy in recurrent or metastatic squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck: A randomised phase II study

BACKGROUND

The fully human monoclonal antibody patritumab blocks HER3 activation, a resistance mechanism to cetuximab, induced by heregulin (HRG). A phase Ib study in recurrent and/or metastatic (R/M) squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (SCCHN) demonstrated tolerability and tumour response of patritumab + cetuximab + platinum.

METHODS

This was a randomised, double-blind, phase II study of patritumab + cetuximab with platinum-based therapy for first-line treatment of R/M SCCHN (Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT02633800). Patients aged ≥18 years received patritumab or placebo, both combined with cetuximab + cisplatin or carboplatin. Co-primary end-points were progression-free survival (PFS) in the intent-to-treat (ITT) and the high-expression HRG (HRG high) populations.

RESULTS

Eighty-seven patients (n = 43 in the patritumab group; n = 44 in placebo group) enrolled. A median (range) of 6.5 (1-24) patritumab cycles were completed. Median PFS was similar between the patritumab group and placebo group in the ITT population (5.6 versus 5.5 months; hazard ratio [HR] 0.99 [95% confidence interval [CI], 0.6-1.7]; P = 0.96) and HRG-high subgroup (n = 51; 5.6 versus 5.6 months; HR 0.93 [95% CI, 0.5-1.8]; P = 0.82). Median overall survival in the ITT population was also similar (10.0 versus 12.7 months; HR 1.3 [95% CI, 0.69-2.29]; P = 0.46). All patients experienced ≥1 treatment-emergent adverse event (TEAE). Grade ≥III TEAEs were more frequent in the patritumab than the placebo group (84.1% versus 60.5%). The most common grade ≥III patritumab-related TEAE in the patritumab group (20.5% overall) was rash (6.8%).

CONCLUSION

Patritumab + cetuximab + platinum was tolerable but not superior to cetuximab + platinum.

Long survival of patients with metastatic clear cell renal cell carcinoma. Results of real life study of 344 patients

The treatment landscape in metastatic renal cell carcinoma has changed fundamentally over the last decade by the development of antiangiogenic agents, mammalian target of rapamycin inhibitors and immunotherapy. Outside of the context of a clinical trial, the treatments are used sequentially. We describe results under real-life conditions of a sequential treatment strategy, before the era of immunotherapy. All patients were treated according to their prognostic score (either Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center or International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium) for advanced renal cell carcinoma. A treatment strategy involving 1 to 4 lines was determined including a rechallenge criterion for the repeat use of a treatment class. Three hundred forty-four patients were included over 3 years. Overall survival was 57 months in patients with good or intermediate prognosis and 19 months in patients with poor prognosis. In the former group, the proportions of patients treated with 2 to 4 treatment lines were 70%, 38% and 16%, respectively. The best objective response rates for lines 1 to 4 were 46%, 36%, 16% and 17%, respectively. Grade III/IV toxicity did not appear to be cumulative. The recommended strategy was followed in 68% of patients. A large proportion of patients with good or intermediate prognosis who progress after two lines of treatment still have a performance status good enough to receive a systemic treatment, which justifies such a strategy. Overall survival of patients with good and intermediate prognosis was long, suggesting a benefit from the applied approach. These results might be used as selection criterion for the treatment of patients in the era of immune checkpoint inhibitors.

Prostate cancer with oligometastatic relapse: Combining stereotactic ablative radiotherapy and durvalumab, a randomized phase II trial (POSTCARD - GETUG-P13)

TPS5088

Background: Following Stereotactic Body RadioTherapy (SBRT) targeting prostate cancer (PCa) oligometastasis, a tumor response assessed by PSA decrease is observed in a majority of case. To increase this tumor response, immune targeting agents can be combined with SBRT. We hypothesize that the anti-PDL1 agent Durvalumab will enhance immune response following SBRT targeting oligometastatic lesions. In this multicenter randomized phase II trial, we therefore propose to assess the comparative efficacy of SBRT with or without Durvalumab (MEDI4736) in oligometastatic recurrent hormone sensitive prostate cancer patients. Methods: Patients with PCa were eligible if they had a biochemical recurrence following treatment with curative intent, with a maximum of 5 bone or lymph node metastases, seen only on FCH-PET CT or Ga-PSMA PET CT, not seen on conventional imaging assessments (bone scan or thorax, abdomen and pelvis CT scan). Main exclusion criteria are serum testosterone level < 8.5 nmol/ml, PSA doubling time less than 6 months, lung, brain, liver or other visceral metastases, any prior immune therapy. Patients were randomly assigned (2:1) to either SBRT + Durvalumab, or SBRT alone, with a stratification by investigation center, and number of metastases (1 vs 2-5). Durvalumab (1500 mg/cycle) will be started one month prior to SBRT to be able to evaluate PSA and immune response to the drug. It will be combined with SBRT (3x 9 or 3 x 11 Gy) and then given adjuvantly until progression with a maximum of 12 months. Ninety-six patients will be recruited in 15 centers over a recruitment period of 2.5 years. The primary endpoint is two-year Progression-free survival. Secondary objectives include quality of life, androgen deprivation therapy free survival, prostate cancer specific survival, overall survival, time to first symptomatic event, acute and late toxicity. Patients in both groups will be observed for PSA progression every 3 months after random assignment, with confirming imaging at PSA progression. Clinical trial information: NCT03795207.

NISCAHN: A phase II, multicenter nonrandomized trial aiming at evaluating nivolumab (N) in two cohorts of patients (pts) with recurrent/metastatic (R/M) salivary gland carcinoma of the head and neck (SGCHN), on behalf of the Unicancer Head & Neck Group

6083

Background: SGCHN are rare tumors including adenoid cystic carcinoma (ACC) and non-ACC, with no standard systemic treatment for R/M pts. We evaluated N monotherapy in R/M SGCHN pts. Methods: R/M SGCHN pts (ACC or non-ACC) not eligible to local treatment and with centrally confirmed RECIST 1.1 disease progression over the last 6 months were enrolled and received N 3 mg/kg IV, every 2 weeks for a maximum of 12 months (mo). Possibility was given to re-start N in case of progression during the 2-year follow-up phase. Primary endpoint was 6-mo non-progression Rate (NPR6m) as per RECIST 1.1. Secondary endpoints included ORR, PFS, OS, and safety. Considering that N would be uninteresting if NPR6m ≤ 20% and promising if ≥ 40% and using a Fleming’s single-stage design (α: 5% unilateral, power: 90%), at least 14 successes/42 evaluable pts were required for each cohort to be positive. Results: 46 ACC and 52 Non-ACC pts (median age 61 yrs (range 29-81), 43.9% female, 55.1% PS1 and 2.0% PS2) were enrolled and received at least one dose of N. Median treatment duration was 5.5 mo (ACC) and 3.3 (Non-ACC). Median FU was 10.8 mo (ACC) and 8.3 mo (Non-ACC). 95 patients were evaluable for the primary endpoint. NPR6m was 15/45 pts (33.3%, 90%CI :21.8;46.6) and 7/50 pts (14.0%, 90%CI:6.8;24.7) for ACC and non-ACC pts respectively. 4 (8.7%) partial responses (PR) and 26 (56.5%) stable diseases (SD) were observed in ACC cohort while 2 (3.8%) PR and 22 (42.3%) SD were observed in non-ACC. Median PFS was 4.9 mo (95%CI = 3.4;5.6) in ACC pts and 1.8 mo (95%CI = 1.7;3.5) in non-ACC pts. The most common related adverse events (AE) ( > 10% by cohort) were asthenia, hyperthyroidism, diarrhea, rash, pruritus and hypothyroidism. 7/98 pts (7.1%) presented at least one related AE Grade 3-4 (mainly hepatic) and 9 pts (9.2%) prematurely discontinued Nivolumab due to toxicity. Conclusions: Limited efficacy was observed with N in R/M SGCHN pts. N in combination might be of interest and deserves exploration in ACC pts. Clinical trial information: NCT03132038.

ELAN-ONCOVAL (Elderly Head and Neck Cancer-Oncology Evaluation) study: Evaluation of the G8 screening tool and the ELAN geriatric evaluation (EGE) for elderly patients (pts) with head and neck squamous cell carcinomas (HNSCC)

11541

Background: About 47% and 10% of HNSCC occur in pts aged ≥65 or ≥80 respectively. This population being heterogeneous, balancing efficacy with toxicity is challenging. As the G8 screening tool includes 3 nutritional items, we need to evaluate its usefulness in HNSCC pts and to establish an adapted tool for HNSCC pts. Methods: ONCOVAL is the first step of the ELAN program for pts ≥70 with HNSCC not amenable to surgery. Pts were assessed for geriatric frailties before inclusion in appropriate trials (ELAN-RT, FIT, UNFIT) depending on curative or palliative setting and fit or unfit status. The aim was to evaluate the G8 tool and EGE usable by oncologists to classify pts as fit or unfit. The EGE was elaborated by the French GERICO group for HNSCC pts, evaluating functional status, comorbidity, cognition/mood, social status. To estimate sensitivity and specificity of G8 and EGE, we used comprehensive geriatric assessment (CGA) performed by geriatricians as gold standard. Results: From 06/2013 to 08/2018, 633 pts were included in 44 centers. Data are available for 613 pts. Median age 79 years (70-97) with 45% ≥ 80. 75% males. G8 score was ≤14, i.e. at risk of geriatric frailty, in 82% pts. Assessment by EGE was done by physicians (64%), nurses (11%), ELAN staff (21%) in 20 minutes of median time. After EGE, oncologists classified 71% pts as unfit. 49% of pts were assessed by CGA. The G8 score with cut-off ≤ 14 has sensitivity 91% and specificity 30%. Lowering cut-off to 12 increased specificity to 56% but decreased sensitivity to 75%. Sensitivity of EGE was 95% and specificity 60%. Multidisciplinary interventions were more frequently implemented in pts assessed by geriatricians than in others (71% vs 47%), even after adjusting for frailty. 58% of pts included in ONCOVAL were further included in ELAN therapeutic trials. Assessment by geriatricians did not modify the rate of inclusion in trials. Conclusions: The G8 screening tool is not appropriate for HNSCC pts. The EGE was feasible and had better sensitivity and specificity. Oncologists and geriatricians must continue such collaboration to propose tailored treatments. Clinical trial information: NCT03614936.

A safety study of nivolumab in patients with recurrent and/or metastatic platinum-refractory squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (R/M SCCHN): Interim analysis on 199 patients—The TOPNIVO study on behalf of the GORTEC and the Unicancer Head & Neck Group

6032

Background: In the randomized phase III Study CA209141, Nivolumab (N) demonstrated significant overall survival (OS) benefit with favorable safety profile for platinum refractory R/M SCCHN and is now approved for these patients (pts). The objectives of the study are to provide additional insight into the frequency of high-grade AEs related to N and the efficacy of N in real life. Methods: Between August and December 2017, 203 pts were included in the multicenter, non-controlled phase II TOPNIVO. The main inclusion criteria were patients with platinum refractory R/M SCCHN with progressive disease, ECOG 0-2. Pts received N 3mg/kg every 2 weeks intravenously over 30 minutes. Four pts did not receive N. We report here the safety during the first 6 months (mo) after inclusion and OS results on the first 199 treated pts. Results: Median age was 62 yr, 83% were male, 84% were ECOG 0-1, 16% 2. The primary site of cancer was oral cavity 26%, oropharynx 38%, larynx 16%, hypopharynx 21%. 33% had loco regional relapse, 32% metastatic disease and 35% both. 49% had received one prior line of chemotherapy and 30% two prior lines. 157 (79%) pts ended their treatment within the first six mo: 5 for AE related to N (pneumonitis 3 pts, hepatitis 1 pt, diarrhea 1 pt), 107 for progression, 33 for death (24 related to progression, 9 to intercurrent disease), 12 other. 132 pts (66%) experienced at least 1 AE grade ≥3. On the 226 AEs grade 3-4, 21 (mainly pneumopathy, lipase increase and asthenia) were related to N and occurred in 18 pts. On the 51 AEs grade 5, 3 were considered related to N (2 pneumonitis, 1 cardiac arrest). The median OS was 7.7 mo (CI 95% [6.0; 9.5]) in the whole population; 9.2 mo [6.8; 12.1] in the 167 pts with ECOG 0-1, 3.0 mo [1.1; 6.0] in the 32 pts with ECOG 2; 12.1 mo [7.6; NR] in the 64 pts with metastatic disease, 7.7 mo [5.0; 9.6] in the 66 pts with locoregional disease and 4.6 mo [3.1; 7.9] in the 69 pts with both. OS was similar in pts older or younger 70 yr. Conclusions: The interim analysis of the TOPNIVO study shows no additional toxicities of N compared to what has been described previously, confirms the previous results of OS and provides new survival data in subgroups of pts. Clinical trial information: NCT03226756.

Cytoreductive nephrectomy (CN) in metastatic renal cancer (mRCC): Update on Carmena trial with focus on intermediate IMDC-risk population

4508

Background: Carmena was a randomized phase III trial, testing the benefit of CN followed by sunitinib (arm A) vs sunitinib alone (arm B), with stratification by MSKCC risk groups in 450 mRCC patients. Based on this trial, CN is not anymore recommended in mRCC (NEJM, Mejean et al, 2018). However there are questions about which patients could still benefit from CN, especially in intermediate risk group. In the present study, we investigated different subgroups from the Carmena trial to answer these questions. Methods: Carmena trial was initially stratified according to MSKCC risk groups. For the purpose of this analysis, we reclassified the patients based on IMDC risk groups. We also analyzed patients with one metastatic site vs more than one, as well as patients with secondary nephrectomy in arm B. Overall survival (OS) was the primary endpoint. Results: With a updated median FU of 61.5 months (mo), the median OS by ITT analysis was 15.6 vs 19.8 mo in arm A and B respectively stratified on MSKCC (HR 0.933 ; 95% CI [0.76- 1.15]) / stratified on IMDC (HR 0.957 ; 95% CI [0.78- 1.18]). Using IMDC risk group factors, 58.6% patients were intermediate and 41.4 % were poor risk. When looking at intermediate risk group only, 48.1% had only one risk factor (interval between diagnosis and treatment < 1y), with a median OS of 30.5 and 25.2 mo in arm A and B respectively (HR 1.24 [0.81 – 1.90]). By contrast, 51.9 % had two risk factors (mostly low hemoglobin, high corrected calcium or neutrophils), with a median OS of 16.6 and 31.2 mo in arm A and B respectively (HR 0.61 [0.41 – 0.91] p = 0.015). Regarding number of metastatic sites, 33% had only one metastatic site. Median OS was 23.6 and 22.7 mo in arm A and B respectively (HR 1.08 [0.75 – 1.57]. Finally, 40 patients had a secondary nephrectomy in arm B, with median OS of 48.5 mo [CI 95%: 27.9-64.4] vs 15.7 mo [CI 95%: 13.3-20.5] in patients who never had surgery. Conclusions: With longer FU, Carmena trial confirms that CN is not superior to sunitinib alone in ITT population, both with MSKCC and IMDC risk groups. However for patients with only one IMDC risk factor, CN might be beneficial. Number of metastatic site is not helpful to define good candidates for surgery. Finally, patients with secondary nephrectomy have very long OS, supporting this strategy. Clinical trial information: NCT00930033.

Safety and efficacy of nivolumab in metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC): Final analysis from the NIVOREN GETUG AFU 26 study

542

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 June 2017, 729 pts have been enrolled across 27 institutions. Primary objective of the trial was safety assessed by grade ≥ 3 treatment related adverse event (TRAE). Results: Overall, 720 patients treated with N were included in this final analysis. All pts had clear cell mRCC. Median age was 64 years old, 77.4% were male, 84.7% had prior nephrectomy. ECOG PS was >1 in 15.0%, 21.3% pts had received prior everolimus, 22.4% pts had received more than 2 previous lines, IMDC risk groups were 18.3%/56.2%/25.5% for good/intermediate and poor risk respectively. Brain Metastasis at screening was noted in 83 (12.3%) pts. With a median follow up of 20.9 months (mo), median duration of treatment was 5.2 mo (0.5; 28.1) with 15% of pts still on therapy. Median PFS was 3.2 IC 95% [2.9; 4.6] mo. At the time of this analysis, 316 pts have died and 12 mo OS rate was 69% IC 95% [66; 73]. Objective response rate was 20.8% (1.2% CR, 19.6%PR). Stable disease was seen in 31.6% and PD in 47.6%. Noteworthy, 46.1% of pts were treated beyond progression. Overall, 123 pts (17.1%) have presented at least one grade ≥ 3 TRAE, including asthenia (2.4%), metabolic disorders (2.1%), gastro-intestinal disorders (1 .9%), musculoskeletal (1.7%), renal disorders (1.3%), hematologic (1.3%). 6 patients have developed grade 5 toxicity (2 cardiac failure, 1 macrophage activation syndrom, 1 Cerebral hemorrhage, 1 unknown). Treatment discontinuation due to any grade TRAE occurred in 54 pts (7.5%). Interestingly, pts with grade ≥ 3 TRAE had longer PFS than pts without grade ≥ 3 TRAE (HR 0.69 [0.55-0.87]). Conclusions: We report the primary objective analysis of the largest prospective real world setting study of N in mRCC. NIVOREN study demonstrates that N safety and efficacy in a “real world” prospective study are similar to the pivotal study. Grade ≥ 3 TRAE was associated with longer PFS. Clinical trial information: NCT03013335.