Changes in bone turnover markers in patients without bone metastases receiving immune checkpoint inhibitors: An exploratory analysis

•

Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) are correlated with immune-related adverse events (irAEs) that may potentially affect all host tissues.

•

The effects of ICIs on the skeleton are poorly investigated, thus we evaluated the changes of specific markers of bone resorption and formation.

•

We found an increase of type I collagen C-terminal telopeptide (CTX-I) levels after 3 months of ICIs treatment with a concomitant reduction of N-terminal propeptide of type I procollagen (PINP) levels with a trend toward statistical significance.

•

CTX-I increase was also associated with poor prognosis in terms of treatment response and survival.

Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) has revolutionized the treatment of different advanced solid tumors, but most patients develop severe immune-related adverse events (irAEs). Although a bi-directional crosstalk between bone and immune systems is widely described, the effect of ICIs on the skeleton is poorly investigated. Here, we analyze the changes in plasma levels of type I collagen C-terminal telopeptide (CTX-I) and N-terminal propeptide of type I procollagen (PINP), reference makers of bone turnover, in patients treated with ICIs and their association with clinical outcome.

A series of 44 patients affected by advanced non-small cell lung cancer or renal cell carcinoma, without bone metastases, and treated with ICIs as monotherapy were enrolled. CTX-I and PINP plasma levels were assessed at baseline and after 3 months of ICIs treatment by ELISA kits.

A significant increase of CTX-I with a concomitant decreasing trend towards the reduction of PINP was observed after 3 months of treatment. Intriguingly, CTX-I increase was associated with poor prognosis in terms of treatment response and survival. These data suggest a direct relationship between ICIs treatment, increased osteoclast activity and potential fracture risk.

Overall, this study reveals that ICIs may act as triggers for skeletal events, and if confirmed in larger prospective studies, it would identify a new class of skeletal-related irAEs.

Elevated tumor markers for monitoring tumor response to immunotherapy

BACKGROUND

As the immune-related response evaluation criteria in solid tumors (irRECIST) by imaging greatly underestimated the objective response to immunotherapy, we established the response evaluation criteria in solid tumors based on tumor markers (RecistTM) to explore whether RecistTM can compensate for the deficiencies of the irRECIST criteria.

METHODS

This was an observational study, which consisted of two parts. The first part (Group A) was a retrospective study including the patients with malignant solid tumors. The second part (Group B) was a prospective study, which were EGFR-negative and ALK-negative patients with stage IIIB-IV non-small cell lung cancer receiving first-line treatment. From January 2017 to September 2020, one hundred and ten patients with a three-time increase in tumor markers receiving immunotherapy were recruited. The treatment response to immunotherapy was evaluated by irRECIST and RecistTM. Efficacy, overall survival (OS), first evaluation time and earliest response time under the different evaluation criteria were compared by statistics.

FINDINGS

The treatment response evaluated by the RecistTM criteria was not consistent with that evaluated by the irRECIST criteria (Kappa = 0.386, p < 0.001). RecistTM had a higher completed response (CR) rate compared to irRECIST criteria (20.9% vs 1.8%, p < 0.001). The earliest response time under the RecistTM criteria was 3.42 weeks earlier than that under the irRECIST criteria (u = -5.233, p < 0.001). There were significant differences in median OS between tumor marker-related complete response (tmCR) and tumor marker-related partial response (tmPR), as well as between tmPR and tumor marker-related stable disease (tmSD) (χ² = 15.572, p < 0.001; χ² = 7.720, p = 0.005), but not between tmSD and tumor marker-related progressive disease (tmPD) (χ² = 1.596, p = 0.206). When applying both criteria together, for patients with immune-related CR / immune-related PR (irCR/irPR) (n = 54) under irRECIST criteria, there was a significant difference in median OS between achieving tmCR (n = 22) and tmPR (n = 32) (χ² = 14.011, p < 0.001). RecistTM criteria can predict 1-year and 2-year OS more accurately than irRECIST criteria (AUCs:0.862 vs 0.552, 0.649 vs 0.521, respectively;both p < 0.001). In RecistTM, 4 patients had been observed with pseudoprogression in tumor markers.

INTERPRETATION

The RecistTM criteria could effectively distinguish CR, PR, and SD, which may help resolve the shortcomings of the RECIST criteria in evaluating the treatment response to immunotherapy, especially in assessing whether patients can achieve deep or even complete response as soon as possible.

FUNDING

This work was supported by the Key projects of Chongqing Health and Family Planning Commission (to Xueqin Yang, 2019ZDXM011).

Neoadjuvant docetaxel, oxaliplatin plus S-1 for treating clinical stage III squamous cell carcinoma of the esophagus: Study protocol of an open-label phase II trial

In Japan, esophagectomy after two courses of 5-fluorouracil plus cisplatin is regarded a standard strategy for treating resectable stage II or III esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC). However, 5-fluorouracil plus cisplatin does not benefit cohorts with clinical stage III ESCC, suggesting the requirement for a more effective regimen. We are conducting a single-arm phase II study to assess the safety and efficacy of neoadjuvant docetaxel, oxaliplatin plus S-1 (DOS) for treating patients with clinical stage III ESCC. The primary endpoint is the pathological response rate, and the target number is 45 patients. Safety, response rate, R0 resection rate, and survival are secondary endpoints. This trial is registered in the Japan Registry of Clinical Trials as jRCTs041210023. We are conducting a prospective phase II trial to evaluate the safety and efficacy of three courses of neoadjuvant DOS treatment followed by radical esophagectomy for clinical stage III ESCC.

Adjuvant therapies after curative treatments for hepatocellular carcinoma: Current status and prospects

Tumor recurrence rate after surgery or ablation of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is as high as 70%. However, there are no widely accepted adjuvant therapies; therefore, no treatment has been recommended by guidelines from the American Association for the Study of Liver Disease or the European Association for the Study of the Liver. All the registered trials failed to find any treatment to prolong recurrence-free survival, which is the primary outcome in most studies, including sorafenib. Some investigator-initiated studies revealed that anti-hepatitis B virus agents, interferon-α, transcatheter chemoembolization, chemokine-induced killer cells, and other treatments prolonged patient recurrence-free survival or overall survival after curative therapies. In this review, we summarize the current status of adjuvant treatments for HCC and explain the challenges associated with designing a clinical trial for adjuvant therapy. Promising new treatments being used as adjuvant therapy, especially anti-PD-1 antibodies, are also discussed.

Targeting angiogenesis for liver cancer: Past, present, and future

Liver cancer, mostly hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), is the second leading cause of cancer mortality globally. Most patients were diagnosed at an advanced stage, and systemic therapy is the standard of care. All the approved systemic therapies for HCC are molecular targeted therapies with anti-angiogenic effects targeting the vascular endothelial growth factor signaling pathway. Sorafenib and lenvatinib are the first-line treatment, and regorafenib, ramucirumab, and cabozantinib are second-line treatment options. Although anti-PD-1 antibodies, including nivolumab and pembrolizumab, demonstrated promising anti-tumor effects as monotherapy for advanced HCC in phase II clinical trials, both failed in phase III studies. Anti-angiogenic treatment remains the backbone of systemic therapy for HCC. In this review, we summarized the approved anti-angiogenic medicines and discussed the potential strategies to improve the efficacy of anti-angiogenic therapy, including combination therapy with other treatments, and discussed the approaches to overcome the drawbacks of anti-angiogenic therapies.

A randomized phase II trial of best supportive care with or without hyperthermia and vitamin C for heavily pretreated, advanced, refractory non-small-cell lung cancer

Our previous study indicated that intravenous vitamin C (IVC) treatment concurrent with modulated electrohyperthermia (mEHT) was safe and improved the quality of life (QoL) of non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients. The aim of this trial was to further verify the efficacy of the above combination therapy in previously treated patients with refractory advanced (stage IIIb or IV) NSCLC. A total of 97 patients were randomized to receive IVC and mEHT plus best supportive care (BSC) (n = 49 in the active arm, receiving 1 g/kg * d IVC concurrently with mEHT, three times a week for 25 treatments in total) or BSC alone (n = 48 in the control arm). After a median follow-up of 24 months, progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were significantly prolonged by combination therapy compared to BSC alone (PFS: 3 months vs 1.85 months, P < 0.05; OS: 9.4 months vs 5.6 months, P < 0.05). QoL was significantly increased in the active arm despite the advanced stage of disease. The 3-month disease control rate after treatment was 42.9% in the active arm and 16.7% in the control arm (P < 0.05). Overall, IVC and mEHT may have the ability to improve the prognosis of patients with advanced NSCLC.

Comparison of efficacy and tolerance between combination therapy and monotherapy as first-line chemotherapy in elderly patients with advanced gastric cancer: Study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

INTRODUCTION

The combination of a fluoropyrimidine [5-fluorouracil (5-FU), capecitabine, or S-1] with a platinum analog (cisplatin or oxaliplatin) is the most widely accepted first-line chemotherapy regimen for metastatic or recurrent advanced gastric cancer (AGC), based on the results of clinical trials. However, there is little evidence to guide chemotherapy for elderly patients with AGC because of under-representation of this age group in clinical trials. Thus, the aim of this study is to determine the optimal chemotherapy regimen for elderly patients with AGC by comparing the efficacies and safeties of combination therapy versus monotherapy as first-line chemotherapy.

METHODS

This study is a randomized, controlled, multicenter, phase III trial. A total of 246 elderly patients (≥70 years old) with metastatic or recurrent AGC who have not received previous palliative chemotherapy will be randomly allocated to a combination therapy group or a monotherapy group. Patients randomized to the combination therapy group will receive fluoropyrimidine plus platinum combination chemotherapy (capecitabine/cisplatin, S-1/cisplatin, capecitabine/oxaliplatin, or 5-FU/oxaliplatin), and those randomized to the monotherapy group will receive fluoropyrimidine monotherapy (capecitabine, S-1, or 5-FU). The primary outcome is the overall survival of patients in each treatment group. The secondary outcomes include progression-free survival, response rate, quality of life, and safety.

DISCUSSION

We are conducting this pragmatic trial to determine whether elderly patients with AGC will obtain the same benefit from chemotherapy as younger patients. We expect that this study will help guide decision-making for the optimal treatment of elderly patients with AGC.

IMA901: a multi-peptide cancer vaccine for treatment of renal cell cancer

Despite a major improvement in the treatment of advanced kidney cancer by the recent introduction of targeted agents such as multi-kinase inhibitors, long-term benefits are still limited and a significant unmet medical need remains for this disease. Cancer immunotherapy has shown its potential by the induction of long-lasting responses in a small subset of patients, however, the unspecific immune interventions with (high dose) cytokines used so far are associated with significant side effects. Specific cancer immunotherapy may circumvent these problems by attacking tumor cells while sparing normal tissue with the use of multi-peptide vaccination being one of the most promising strategies. We here summarize the clinical and translational data from phase I and II trials investigating IMA901. Significant associations of clinical benefit with detectable T cell responses against the IMA901 peptides and encouraging survival data in treated patients has prompted the start of a randomized, controlled phase III trial in 1st line advanced RCC with survival results expected toward the end of 2015. Potential combination strategies with the recently discovered so-called checkpoint inhibitors are also discussed.

Regulatory considerations for clinical development of cancer vaccines

Cancer vaccines are aimed at stimulating an immune response to tumor tissue. There is a high level of clinical activity in this rapidly advancing field with over 1,400 trials registered on Clincaltrials.gov. The recent approval of Sipuleucel-T which is the first cancer vaccine approved in the US and EU has encouraged developers in this field. In contrast to more established approaches for treating cancer such as chemotherapy, regulatory guidelines have been developed relatively recently for cancer vaccines. These guidelines advise on general clinical requirements. As there is an increase in innovative strategies with novel products, a 2-way dialog with regulators is recommended on a case-by-case basis to justify the clinical development plan, taking into account specific quality issues related to the product(s) in development. It is important that the rationale, background and justification for the planned development is convincing when interacting with the regulatory authorities, to enable drug developers and regulators to reach agreement.

The Indian National Association for Study of the Liver (INASL) Consensus on Prevention, Diagnosis and Management of Hepatocellular Carcinoma in India: The Puri Recommendations

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is one of the major causes of morbidity, mortality and healthcare expenditure in patients with chronic liver disease. There are no consensus guidelines on diagnosis and management of HCC in India. The Indian National Association for Study of the Liver (INASL) set up a Task-Force on HCC in 2011, with a mandate to develop consensus guidelines for diagnosis and management of HCC, relevant to disease patterns and clinical practices in India. The Task-Force first identified various contentious issues on various aspects of HCC and these issues were allotted to individual members of the Task-Force who reviewed them in detail. The Task-Force used the Oxford Center for Evidence Based Medicine-Levels of Evidence of 2009 for developing an evidence-based approach. A 2-day round table discussion was held on 9th and 10th February, 2013 at Puri, Odisha, to discuss, debate, and finalize the consensus statements. The members of the Task-Force reviewed and discussed the existing literature at this meeting and formulated the INASL consensus statements for each of the issues. We present here the INASL consensus guidelines (The Puri Recommendations) on prevention, diagnosis and management of HCC in India.