Increased survival with enzalutamide in prostate cancer after chemotherapy

BACKGROUND

Enzalutamide (formerly called MDV3100) targets multiple steps in the androgen-receptor-signaling pathway, the major driver of prostate-cancer growth. We aimed to evaluate whether enzalutamide prolongs survival in men with castration-resistant prostate cancer after chemotherapy.

METHODS

In our phase 3, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, we stratified 1199 men with castration-resistant prostate cancer after chemotherapy according to the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance-status score and pain intensity. We randomly assigned them, in a 2:1 ratio, to receive oral enzalutamide at a dose of 160 mg per day (800 patients) or placebo (399 patients). The primary end point was overall survival.

RESULTS

The study was stopped after a planned interim analysis at the time of 520 deaths. The median overall survival was 18.4 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 17.3 to not yet reached) in the enzalutamide group versus 13.6 months (95% CI, 11.3 to 15.8) in the placebo group (hazard ratio for death in the enzalutamide group, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.53 to 0.75; P<0.001). The superiority of enzalutamide over placebo was shown with respect to all secondary end points: the proportion of patients with a reduction in the prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level by 50% or more (54% vs. 2%, P<0.001), the soft-tissue response rate (29% vs. 4%, P<0.001), the quality-of-life response rate (43% vs. 18%, P<0.001), the time to PSA progression (8.3 vs. 3.0 months; hazard ratio, 0.25; P<0.001), radiographic progression-free survival (8.3 vs. 2.9 months; hazard ratio, 0.40; P<0.001), and the time to the first skeletal-related event (16.7 vs. 13.3 months; hazard ratio, 0.69; P<0.001). Rates of fatigue, diarrhea, and hot flashes were higher in the enzalutamide group. Seizures were reported in five patients (0.6%) receiving enzalutamide.

CONCLUSIONS

Enzalutamide significantly prolonged the survival of men with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer after chemotherapy. (Funded by Medivation and Astellas Pharma Global Development; AFFIRM ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00974311.).

EAU guidelines on renal cell carcinoma: 2014 update

CONTEXT

The European Association of Urology Guideline Panel for Renal Cell Carcinoma (RCC) has prepared evidence-based guidelines and recommendations for RCC management.

OBJECTIVES

To provide an update of the 2010 RCC guideline based on a standardised methodology that is robust, transparent, reproducible, and reliable.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

For the 2014 update, the panel prioritised the following topics: percutaneous biopsy of renal masses, treatment of localised RCC (including surgical and nonsurgical management), lymph node dissection, management of venous thrombus, systemic therapy, and local treatment of metastases, for which evidence synthesis was undertaken based on systematic reviews adhering to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Relevant databases (Medline, Cochrane Library, trial registries, conference proceedings) were searched (January 2000 to November 2013) including randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and retrospective or controlled studies with a comparator arm. Risk of bias (RoB) assessment and qualitative and quantitative synthesis of the evidence were performed. The remaining sections of the document were updated following a structured literature assessment.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

All chapters of the RCC guideline were updated. For the various systematic reviews, the search identified a total of 10,862 articles. A total of 151 studies reporting on 78,792 patients were eligible for inclusion; where applicable, data from RCTs were included and meta-analyses were performed. For RCTs, there was low RoB across studies; however, clinical and methodological heterogeneity prevented data pooling for most studies. The majority of studies included were retrospective with matched or unmatched cohorts based on single or multi-institutional data or national registries. The exception was for systemic treatment of metastatic RCC, in which several RCTs have been performed, resulting in recommendations based on higher levels of evidence.

CONCLUSIONS

The 2014 guideline has been updated by a multidisciplinary panel using the highest methodological standards, and provides the best and most reliable contemporary evidence base for RCC management.

PATIENT SUMMARY

The European Association of Urology Guideline Panel for Renal Cell Carcinoma has thoroughly evaluated available research data on kidney cancer to establish international standards for the care of kidney cancer patients.

Comparison of Immediate vs Deferred Cytoreductive Nephrectomy in Patients With Synchronous Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Receiving Sunitinib: The SURTIME Randomized Clinical Trial

Importance

In clinical practice, patients with primary metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) have been offered cytoreductive nephrectomy (CN) followed by targeted therapy, but the optimal sequence of surgery and systemic therapy is unknown.

Objective

To examine whether a period of sunitinib therapy before CN improves outcome compared with immediate CN followed by sunitinib.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This randomized clinical trial began as a phase 3 trial on July 14, 2010, and continued until March 24, 2016, with a median follow-up of 3.3 years and a clinical cutoff date for this report of May 5, 2017. Patients with mRCC of clear cell subtype, resectable primary tumor, and 3 or fewer surgical risk factors were studied.

Interventions

Immediate CN followed by sunitinib therapy vs treatment with 3 cycles of sunitinib followed by CN in the absence of progression followed by sunitinib therapy.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Progression-free survival was the primary end point, which needed a sample size of 458 patients. Because of poor accrual, the independent data monitoring committee endorsed reporting the intention-to-treat 28-week progression-free rate (PFR) instead. Overall survival (OS), adverse events, and postoperative progression were secondary end points.

Results

The study closed after 5.7 years with 99 patients (80 men and 19 women; mean [SD] age, 60 [8.5] years). The 28-week PFR was 42% in the immediate CN arm (n = 50) and 43% in the deferred CN arm (n = 49) (P = .61). The intention-to-treat OS hazard ratio of deferred vs immediate CN was 0.57 (95% CI, 0.34-0.95; P = .03), with a median OS of 32.4 months (95% CI, 14.5-65.3 months) in the deferred CN arm and 15.0 months (95% CI, 9.3-29.5 months) in the immediate CN arm. In the deferred CN arm, 48 of 49 patients (98%; 95% CI, 89%-100%) received sunitinib vs 40 of 50 (80%; 95% CI, 67%-89%) in the immediate arm. Systemic progression before planned CN in the deferred CN arm resulted in a per-protocol recommendation against nephrectomy in 14 patients (29%; 95% CI, 18%-43%).

Conclusions and Relevance

Deferred CN did not improve the 28-week PFR. With the deferred approach, more patients received sunitinib and OS results were higher. Pretreatment with sunitinib may identify patients with inherent resistance to systemic therapy before planned CN. This evidence complements recent data from randomized clinical trials to inform treatment decisions in patients with primary clear cell mRCC requiring sunitinib.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01099423.

Enzalutamide in Men with Chemotherapy-naïve Metastatic Castration-resistant Prostate Cancer: Extended Analysis of the Phase 3 PREVAIL Study

Enzalutamide significantly improved radiographic progression-free survival (rPFS) and overall survival (OS) among men with chemotherapy-naïve metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer at the prespecified interim analysis of PREVAIL, a phase 3, double-blind, randomized study. We evaluated the longer-term efficacy and safety of enzalutamide up to the prespecified number of deaths in the final analysis, which included an additional 20 mo of follow-up for investigator-assessed rPFS, 9 mo of follow-up for OS, and 4 mo of follow-up for safety. Enzalutamide reduced the risk of radiographic progression or death by 68% (hazard ratio [HR] 0.32, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.28-0.37; p<0.0001) and the risk of death by 23% (HR 0.77, 95% CI 0.67-0.88; p=0.0002). Median investigator-assessed rPFS was 20.0 mo (95% CI 18.9-22.1) in the enzalutamide arm and 5.4 mo (95% CI 4.1-5.6) in the placebo arm. Median OS was 35.3 mo (95% CI 32.2-not yet reached) in the enzalutamide arm and 31.3 mo (95% CI 28.8-34.2) in the placebo arm. At the time of the OS analysis, 167 patients in the placebo arm had crossed over to receive enzalutamide. The most common adverse events in the enzalutamide arm were fatigue, back pain, constipation, and arthralgia. This final analysis of PREVAIL provides more complete assessment of the clinical benefit of enzalutamide. PREVAIL is registered on ClinicalTrials.gov as NCT01212991.

PATIENT SUMMARY

According to data from longer follow-up, enzalutamide continued to provide benefit over placebo in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer.

An adjuvant autologous therapeutic vaccine (HSPPC-96; vitespen) versus observation alone for patients at high risk of recurrence after nephrectomy for renal cell carcinoma: a multicentre, open-label, randomised phase III trial

BACKGROUND

Treatment of localised renal cell carcinoma consists of partial or radical nephrectomy. A substantial proportion of patients are at risk for recurrence because no effective adjuvant therapy exists. We investigated the use of an autologous, tumour-derived heat-shock protein (glycoprotein 96)-peptide complex (HSPPC-96; vitespen) as adjuvant treatment in patients at high risk of recurrence after resection of locally advanced renal cell carcinoma.

METHODS

In this open-label trial, patients were randomly assigned to receive either vitespen (n=409) or observation alone (n=409) after nephrectomy. Randomisation was done in a one to one ratio by a computer-generated pseudo-random number generator, with a block size of four, and was stratified by performance score, lymph node status, and nuclear grade. Vitespen was given intradermally once a week for 4 weeks, then every 2 weeks until vaccine depletion. The primary endpoint was recurrence-free survival. The final analysis of recurrence-free survival was planned to take place after 214 or more events of disease recurrence or deaths before recurrence had occurred. Analysis was by intention to treat (ITT). This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00033904.

FINDINGS

48 patients in the vitespen group and 42 in the observation group were excluded from the ITT population because they did not meet post-surgery inclusion criteria; the ITT population thus consisted of 361 patients in the vitespen group and 367 in the observation group. Final analysis of recurrence-free survival was triggered in November, 2005. Re-review of all patients in the ITT population by the clinical events committee identified 149 actual recurrences (73 in the vitespen group and 76 in the observation group), nine deaths before recurrence (two in the vitespen group and seven in the observation group), and 124 patients with baseline metastatic or residual disease (61 in the vitespen group and 63 in the observation group). Thus, after a median follow-up of 1.9 years (IQR 0.9-2.5) in the ITT population, recurrence events were reported in 136 (37.7%) patients in the vitespen group and 146 (39.8%) in the observation group (hazard ratio 0.923, 95% CI 0.729-1.169; p=0.506). After continued follow-up until March, 2007, there had been 70 deaths in the vitespen group and 72 in the observation group (p=0.896); however, overall survival data were not mature, and patients continue to be followed up for survival. In predefined exploratory analyses by AJCC stage, recurrence events in patients with stage I or II disease were reported in 19 (15.2%) patients in the vitespen group and 31 (27.0%) in the observation group (hazard ratio 0.576, 95% CI 0.324-1.023; p=0.056). The most commonly reported adverse events in the vitespen group were injection-site erythema (n=158) and injection-site induration (n=153). One serious adverse event-autoimmune thyroiditis of grade 2 severity-was reported in the vitespen group; no treatment-related grade 3 or 4 adverse events were reported.

INTERPRETATION

No difference in recurrence-free survival was seen between patients given vitespen and those who received no treatment after nephrectomy for renal cell carcinoma. A possible improvement in recurrence-free survival in patients with early stage disease who received vitespen will require further validation.

Targeted therapies for renal cell carcinoma: review of adverse event management strategies

With the advent of targeted agents for the treatment of renal cell carcinoma (RCC), overall survival has improved, and patients are being treated continuously for increasingly long periods of time. This has raised challenges in the management of adverse events (AEs) associated with the six targeted agents approved in RCC-sorafenib, sunitinib, pazopanib, bevacizumab (in combination with interferon alpha), temsirolimus, and everolimus. Suggestions for monitoring and managing AEs have been published, but there are few consensus recommendations. In addition, there is a risk that patients will be subjected to multiple unnecessary investigations. In this review, we aimed to identify the level of supporting evidence for suggested AE management strategies to provide practical guidance on essential monitoring and management that should be undertaken when using targeted agents. Five databases were systematically searched for relevant English language articles (including American Society of Clinical Oncology abstracts) published between January 2007 and March 2011; European Society of Medical Oncology congress abstracts were hand searched. Strategies for AE management were summarized and categorized according to the level of recommendation. A total of 107 articles were identified that describe a large number of different investigations for monitoring AEs and interventions for AE management. We identify and summarize clear recommendations for the management of dermatologic, gastrointestinal, thyroid, cardiovascular, and other AEs, based predominantly on expert opinion. However, because the evidence for the suggested management strategies is largely anecdotal, there is a need for further systematic investigation of management strategies for AEs related to targeted therapies for RCC.

Role of Antigen Spread and Distinctive Characteristics of Immunotherapy in Cancer Treatment

Immunotherapy is an important breakthrough in cancer. US Food and Drug Administration-approved immunotherapies for cancer treatment (including, but not limited to, sipuleucel-T, ipilimumab, nivolumab, pembrolizumab, and atezolizumab) substantially improve overall survival across multiple malignancies. One mechanism of action of these treatments is to induce an immune response against antigen-bearing tumor cells; the resultant cell death releases secondary (nontargeted) tumor antigens. Secondary antigens prime subsequent immune responses (antigen spread). Immunotherapy-induced antigen spread has been shown in clinical studies. For example, in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer patients, sipuleucel-T induced early immune responses to the immunizing antigen (PA2024) and/or the target antigen (prostatic acid phosphatase). Thereafter, most patients developed increased antibody responses to numerous secondary proteins, several of which are expressed in prostate cancer with functional relevance in cancer. The ipilimumab-induced antibody profile in melanoma patients shows that antigen spread also occurs with immune checkpoint blockade. In contrast to chemotherapy, immunotherapy often does not result in short-term changes in conventional disease progression end points (eg, progression-free survival, tumor size), which may be explained, in part, by the time taken for antigen spread to occur. Thus, immune-related response criteria need to be identified to better monitor the effectiveness of immunotherapy. As immunotherapy antitumor effects take time to evolve, immunotherapy in patients with less advanced cancer may have greater clinical benefit vs those with more advanced disease. This concept is supported by prostate cancer clinical studies with sipuleucel-T, PSA-TRICOM, and ipilimumab. We discuss antigen spread with cancer immunotherapy and its implications for clinical outcomes.

Immunisation of metastatic cancer patients with MAGE-3 protein combined with adjuvant SBAS-2: a clinical report

Fifty-seven patients with MAGE-3-positive measurable metastatic cancer, most of them with melanoma, were vaccinated with escalating doses of a recombinant MAGE-3 protein combined with a fixed dose of the immunological adjuvant SBAS-2, which contained MPL and QS21. The immunisation schedule included 4 intramuscular (i.m.) injections at 3-week intervals. Patients whose tumour stabilised or regressed after 4 vaccinations received 2 additional vaccinations at 6-week intervals. The vaccine was generally well tolerated. Among the 33 melanoma patients who were evaluable for tumour response, we observed 2 partial responses, 2 mixed responses and 1 stabilisation. Time to progression in these 5 patients varied from 4 to 29 months. In addition, a partial response lasting 10 months was observed in 1 of the 3 metastatic bladder cancer patients included. None of the tumour responses described above involved visceral metastases. Immunological responses to the vaccine will be reported separately.

A systematic review of sequencing and combinations of systemic therapy in metastatic renal cancer

CONTEXT

The introduction of novel molecular-targeted agents has revolutionised the management of patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). However, uncertainties remain over sequential or simultaneous combination therapies.

OBJECTIVE

To systematically review relevant literature comparing the clinical effectiveness and harms of different sequencing and combinations of systemic targeted therapies for mRCC.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

Relevant databases (including Medline, Cochrane Library, trial registries, and conference proceedings) were searched (January 2000 to September 2013) including only randomised controlled trials (RCTs). Risk of bias assessment was performed. A qualitative and quantitative synthesis of the evidence was presented.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

The literature search identified 5149 articles. A total of 24 studies reporting on 9589 patients were eligible for inclusion; data from four studies were included for meta-analysis. There were generally low risks of bias across studies; however, clinical and methodological heterogeneity prevented pooling of data for most studies. Overall, the data showed several targeted therapies were associated with an improvement in progression-free survival in patients with mRCC. There were limited data from RCTs regarding the issue of sequencing; studies on combination therapies have been hampered by difficulties with tolerability and safety.

CONCLUSIONS

Although the role of vascular endothelial growth factor/vascular endothelial growth factor receptor targeting therapies and mammalian target of rapamycin inhibition in the management of mRCC is now established, limited reliable data are available regarding sequencing and combination therapies. Although data from retrospective cohort studies suggest a potential benefit for sequencing systemic therapies, significant uncertainties remain. Presently, mRCC systemic treatment should follow international guidelines (such as the European Society for Medical Oncology, National Comprehensive Cancer Network, and European Association of Urology) for patients fit to receive several lines of systemic therapies.

PATIENT SUMMARY

We thoroughly examined the literature on the benefits and harms of combining drugs for the treatment of kidney cancer that has spread and on the sequence in which the drugs should be given.

ICUD-EAU International Consultation on Kidney Cancer 2010: treatment of metastatic disease

CONTEXT

Until the development of novel targeted agents directed against angiogenesis and tumour growth, few treatment options have been available for the treatment of metastatic renal-cell carcinoma (mRCC).

OBJECTIVE

This review discusses current targeted therapies for mRCC and provides consensus statements regarding treatment algorithms.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

Medical literature was retrieved from PubMed up to April 2011. Additional relevant articles and abstract reviews were included from the bibliographies of the retrieved literature.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

Targeted treatment for mRCC can be categorized for the following patient groups: previously untreated patients, those refractory to immunotherapy, and those refractory to vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF)-targeted therapy. Sunitinib and bevacizumab combined with interferon alpha are generally considered first-line treatment options in patients with favourable or intermediate prognoses. Temsirolimus is considered a first-line treatment option for poor-risk patients. Either sorafenib or sunitinib may be valid second-line treatments for patients who have failed prior cytokine-based therapies. For patients refractory to treatment with VEGF-targeted therapy, everolimus is now recommended. Pazopanib is a new treatment option in the first- and second-line setting (after cytokine failure). Sequential and combination approaches, and the roles of nephrectomy and tumour metastasectomy will also be discussed.

CONCLUSIONS

Increasing clinical evidence is clarifying appropriate first- and second-line treatments with targeted agents for patients with mRCC. Based on phase 2 and 3 trials, a sequential approach is most promising, while combination therapy is still investigational. The role of nephrectomy in mRCC is being evaluated in ongoing phase 3 clinical trials.

Castration-resistant prostate cancer: from new pathophysiology to new treatment

CONTEXT

Until recently, the only approved agent for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) was docetaxel chemotherapy. But over the last 5 years, significant advances in the field have led to the approval of five new agents, each with different mechanisms of action and demonstrating improved overall survival in separate randomized phase 3 trials. Many of these novel agents are now also being evaluated in earlier stages of the disease, which may ultimately lead to even better outcomes.

OBJECTIVE

To summarize the current literature on the management of mCRPC with a particular focus on novel chemotherapy approaches, hormonal approaches, immunotherapy, and radiopharmaceuticals showing survival benefits in phase 3 clinical trials. Emerging therapies in late stages of development are also discussed briefly.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

A comprehensive search of PubMed, identified studies pertaining to novel therapies evaluated in mCRPC since the initial approval of docetaxel in 2004. Abstracts from major international meetings were hand searched to identify studies of novel agents in late stage development in mCRPC. The Clinical Trials.gov database was used to find ongoing clinical trials in the area of mCRPC. A detailed search of each new agent was also performed to ensure that additional trials of these agents in other stages of the disease were included where relevant.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

The main agents discussed are the androgen synthesis inhibitor abiraterone acetate, the androgen receptor inhibitor enzalutamide, the novel taxane chemotherapy cabazitaxel, the immunotherapy sipuleucel-T, and the radiopharmaceutical radium 223. Other emerging agents and a brief discussion of negative phase 3 results are also included.

CONCLUSIONS

It is a very exciting time in the field of mCRPC, where therapeutic advances have improved outcomes in this disease, although once metastatic overall median survival remains a dismal 2-3 years. The key now will be to understand how best to use these new agents, understand the mechanisms of resistance to them, continue to develop novel treatment strategies, and ultimately test these agents earlier in the disease when cure may be possible.

Improved outcomes in elderly patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer treated with the androgen receptor inhibitor enzalutamide: results from the phase III AFFIRM trial

BACKGROUND

The randomized, double-blind phase III AFFIRM trial demonstrated that enzalutamide, an oral androgen receptor inhibitor, significantly prolonged overall survival (OS) [median 18.4 versus 13.6 months (hazard ratio, HR) 0.63 (95% confidence interval, CI, 0.53-0.75); P<0.001] compared with placebo in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer who received prior docetaxel chemotherapy.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A post hoc analysis was carried out to assess the efficacy and safety of enzalutamide on outcomes in younger (<75 years) and elderly (≥75 years) patients in the AFFIRM population. Statistics are presented by age group (<75 years, ≥75 years) for efficacy outcomes of OS, radiographic progression-free survival (rPFS), time to prostate-specific antigen (PSA) progression, PSA response, and safety.

RESULTS

OS was significantly improved with enzalutamide over placebo in patients<75 years [median not yet reached versus 13.6 months; HR 0.63 (95% CI 0.52-0.78), P<0.001] and in patients ≥75 years [median 18.2 versus 13.3 months; HR 0.61 (95% CI 0.43-0.86), P=0.004], respectively. rPFS was similarly improved in both the younger [HR 0.45 (95% CI 0.38-0.53), P<0.001] and elderly patient cohorts [HR 0.27 (95% CI 0.20-0.37), P<0.001] relative to placebo, as were time to PSA progression and PSA response. Adverse events (AEs) were similar between the two enzalutamide age groups, with the exception of an increase in patients≥75 years in the rates of all grade peripheral edema (22.1% versus 12.5%), fatigue (39.7% versus 31.6%), and diarrhea (26.6% versus 19.6%). The overall grade≥3 AE rates were low with no major difference in frequency or severity between age groups or treatment arms. Five patients were reported with seizure events; three patients<75 years and two patients ≥75 years.

CONCLUSIONS

Enzalutamide significantly improves outcomes in both younger (<75 years) and elderly patients (≥75 years), with comparable safety and tolerability.

Adjuvant therapy in renal cell carcinoma-past, present, and future

To date, no effective adjuvant treatment for renal cell carcinoma (RCC) has been described, but research in this area is important since the 5-year relapse rate for intermediate- and high-risk early-stage RCC is 30%-40%. Metastatic RCC can be treated successfully with immune therapy and targeted therapy. Adjuvant trials with immune therapy have been conducted, but they reported no benefit in disease-free survival, and clinical trials with targeted agents have not yet reported results. Further advances in our understanding of the molecular pathogenesis of RCC will identify additional potential targets for adjuvant treatment trials. Future challenges will consequently include target identification, as well as trial design to answer multiple trial questions concurrently, comprehensively, and economically. We review the past efforts, summarize the current adjuvant clinical trial landscape, and consider the challenges in adjuvant trials for RCC. Additionally, we identify potential future adjuvant trial treatments and propose an alternative design for future adjuvant clinical trials.

Randomized Phase II/III Trial of Interferon Alfa-2a With and Without 13-cis-Retinoic Acid in Patients With Progressive Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma: The European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Genito-Urinary Tract Cancer Group (EORTC 30951)

Purpose

A randomized phase II/III trial was conducted to determine whether combination treatment with 13-cis-retinoic acid (13-CRA) plus interferon alfa-2a (IFN-α-2a) was superior to IFN-α-2a alone in patients with progressive metastatic renal cell carcinoma.

Patients and Methods

Three hundred twenty patients were randomly assigned to treatment with IFN-α-2a plus 13-CRA or to IFN-α-2a alone. IFN-α-2a was given daily subcutaneously, starting at a dose of 3 million units (MU). The dose was escalated every 7 days from 3 to 9 MU by increments of 3 MU. Patients randomly assigned to combination therapy received oral 13-CRA 1 mg/kg/d plus IFN-α-2a.

Results

Median time to progression was 5.1 months for patients treated with the combination and 3.4 months for patients on IFN-α-2a alone (P = .008). Progression-free survival rates at 6 months were 43% for patients receiving combined therapy and 30% for patients on IFN-α-2a, and at 12 months, 27% and 17%, respectively. Median overall survival was 17.3 months for patients on IFN-α-2a and 13-CRA, and 13.2 months for patients treated with IFN-α-2a (P = .048). Twenty-two percent of the patients receiving the combination stopped treatment due to toxicity, as compared with 16% on IFN-α-2a.

Conclusion

Progression-free and overall survival for patients with progressive metastatic renal cell carcinoma treated with IFN-α-2a plus 13-CRA were significantly longer compared with patients on IFN-α-2a alone (P = .007 and P = .048, respectively). Improvement in efficacy in the combination arm was accompanied by increased, though not serious, toxicity.

Circulating tumour tissue fragments in patients with pulmonary metastasis of clear cell renal cell carcinoma

Tumour metastasis is the result of a complex sequence of events, including migration of tumour cells through stroma, proteolytic degradation of stromal and vessel wall elements, intravasation, transport through the circulation, extravasation and outgrowth at compatible sites in the body (the 'seed and soil' hypothesis). However, the high incidence of metastasis from various tumour types in liver and lung may be explained by a stochastic process as well, based on the anatomical relationship of the primary tumour with the circulation and mechanical entrapment of metastatic tumour cells in capillary beds. We previously reported that constitutive VEGF-A expression in tumour xenografts facilitates this type of metastatic seeding by promoting shedding of multicellular tumour tissue fragments, surrounded by vessel wall elements, into the circulation. After transport through the vena cava, such fragments may be trapped in pulmonary arteries, allowing them to expand to symptomatic lesions. Here we tested whether this process has clinical relevance for clear cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC), a prototype tumour in the sense of high constitutive VEGF-A expression. To this end we collected and analysed outflow samples from the renal vein, directly after tumour nephrectomy, in 42 patients diagnosed with ccRCC. Tumour fragments in venous outflow were observed in 33% of ccRCC patients and correlated with the synchronous presence or metachronous development of pulmonary metastases (p < 0.001, Fisher's exact test). In patients with tumours that, in retrospect, were not of the VEGF-A-expressing clear cell type, tumour fragments were never observed in the renal outflow. These data suggest that, in ccRCC, a VEGF-A-induced phenotype promotes a release of tumour cell clusters into the circulation that may contribute to pulmonary metastasis.

Inter-individual differences in human brain structure and morphology link to variation in demographics and behavior

We perform a comprehensive integrative analysis of multiple structural MR-based brain features and find for the first-time strong evidence relating inter-individual brain structural variations to a wide range of demographic and behavioral variates across a large cohort of young healthy human volunteers. Our analyses reveal that a robust 'positive-negative' spectrum of behavioral and demographic variates, recently associated to covariation in brain function, can already be identified using only structural features, highlighting the importance of careful integration of structural features in any analysis of inter-individual differences in functional connectivity and downstream associations with behavioral/demographic variates.

Cediranib monotherapy in patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma: results of a randomised phase II study

BACKGROUND

Cediranib is a highly potent vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) signalling inhibitor with activity against VEGF receptors 1, 2 and 3. This Phase II, randomised, double-blind, parallel-group study compared the efficacy of cediranib with placebo in patients with metastatic or recurrent clear cell renal cell carcinoma who had not previously received a VEGF signalling inhibitor.

METHODS

Patients were randomised (3:1) to cediranib 45 mg/day or placebo. The primary objective was comparison of change from baseline in tumour size after 12 weeks of therapy. Secondary objectives included response rate and duration, progression-free survival (PFS) and safety and tolerability. Patients in the placebo group could cross over to open-label cediranib at 12 weeks or earlier if their disease had progressed. This study has been completed and is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00423332.

FINDINGS

Patients (n=71) were randomised to receive cediranib (n=53) or placebo (n=18). The primary study outcome revealed that, after 12weeks of therapy, there was a significant difference in mean percentage change from baseline in tumour size between the cediranib (-20%) and placebo (+20%) arms (p<0.0001). Eighteen patients (34%) on cediranib achieved a partial response and 25 (47%) experienced stable disease. Cediranib treatment prolonged PFS significantly compared with placebo (hazard ratio (HR)=0.45, 90%confidence interval: 0.26-0.76, p=0.017; median PFS 12.1 versus 2.8 months). The most common adverse events in patients receiving cediranib were diarrhoea (74%), hypertension (64%), fatigue (58%) and dysphonia (58%).

INTERPRETATION

Cediranib monotherapy demonstrated significant evidence of antitumour activity in patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma. The adverse event profile was consistent with previous studies of cediranib 45 mg.

A pilot trial of tumor lysate-loaded dendritic cells for the treatment of metastatic renal cell carcinoma

Cultured tumor lysate-loaded dendritic cells (TuLy-DC) have been demonstrated in vitro to stimulate potent immune modulations and generate significant antitumor response. We report the results of a pilot trial of TuLy-DC vaccine for patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). Fourteen mRCC patients underwent nephrectomy to obtain autologous TuLy prepared by subjecting tumor cells to 3 freeze/thaw cycles. Dendritic cells were generated from peripheral blood CD14+ precursors cultured in the presence of GM-CSF, IL-4, and 10% autologous serum. Patients received one vaccination of TuLy alone as an immunologic control, followed by 3 weekly vaccinations of DC-TuLy injected intradermally in the midaxillary region. Peripheral blood lymphocytes were collected before and after weekly vaccines and were assessed for changes in phenotype, cytotoxicity, and cytokine profile. The TuLy-DC vaccine was successfully prepared and administered to 12 patients, whereas 2 patients did not receive vaccine treatment due to declines in postoperative performance status. The vaccines were well tolerated, with only grade 1 toxicities noted. One patient had a partial response to treatment that did not correspond to any significant change in immunologic profile. This pilot trial demonstrated both the safety and feasibility of reliably preparing a DC-based vaccine for mRCC patients. Our data suggest that autologous TuLy-DC vaccines generate only limited clinical response. Further clinical studies are needed to identify the most potent treatment regimen that can consistently mediate an antitumor immune response in vivo.

Effect of MDV3100, an androgen receptor signaling inhibitor (ARSI), on overall survival in patients with prostate cancer postdocetaxel: Results from the phase III AFFIRM study

LBA1

Background: MDV3100, a novel androgen receptor signaling inhibitor (ARSI), competitively inhibits binding of androgens to the androgen receptor (AR), inhibits AR nuclear translocation, and inhibits association of the AR with DNA (Tran et al, Science. 2009;324:787). MDV3100 was selected for development based on activity in prostate cancer model systems with overexpressed AR, and was active in a phase I-II trial enrolling pre- and post-chemotherapy treated patients with progressive castration resistant disease (CRPC) (Scher et al, Lancet. 2010;375:1437). The AFFIRM trial evaluated whether MDV3100 could prolong overall survival (OS) in men with CRPC who progressed following docetaxel-based chemotherapy.

Methods: In this randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multinational phase III study ( NCT00974311 ), patients who had received ≤ 2 regimens of docetaxel-based chemotherapy were randomized 2:1 to MDV3100 160 mg/day or placebo. Treatment with corticosteroids was allowed but not required. Patients were stratified by baseline ECOG performance status and mean brief pain inventory score. The primary endpoint was OS. Other efficacy endpoints included radiographic progression-free survival (PFS), time to first skeletal-related event, time to prostate-specific antigen (PSA) progression, and circulating tumor cell count conversion rate.

Results: 1,199 patients were randomized between Sep 2009 and Nov 2010. Based on a planned interim analysis at 520 death events, the Independent Data Monitoring Committee (IDMC) recommended the study be unblinded and placebo patients offered MDV3100 due to a significant OS benefit (p<0.0001; hazard ratio 0.631). The estimated median OS was 18.4 months for MDV3100 treated compared to 13.6 months for placebo treated men, a median OS difference of 4.8 months. Data to be available include PFS, time to PSA progression, and safety.

Conclusions: MDV3100, a novel ARSI, significantly improves OS in men with postdocetaxel-treated CRPC reducing the risk of death by 37% relative to placebo. The IDMC determined the risk:benefit of MDV3100 was favorable and recommended the phase III AFFIRM trial be unblinded.

A New Staging System for Locally Advanced (pT3–4) Renal Cell Carcinoma: A Multicenter European Study Including 2,000 Patients

PURPOSE

We provide an adequate prognostic stratification for locally advanced renal cell carcinoma and propose a new TNM classification.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We analyzed clinical and pathological data on a large series of patients undergoing radical nephrectomy for pT3-4 renal cell carcinoma at 12 European centers. Cancer specific survivals were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. The log rank test was used for comparing survival curves and for univariate analysis. The Cox proportional hazards regression model was used for multivariate analysis.

RESULTS

The analysis included 1,969 patients. Median survivor followup was 49 months. Five-year cancer specific survival was 60% for pT3a, 46.2% for pT3b, 10% for pT3c and 12% for pT4 tumors (p <0.0001). According to median survival we identified 3 prognostic groups, including 1--patients with renal vein thrombosis (117 months), fat invasion (98 months) or infradiaphragmatic vena caval thrombosis (67 months), 2--patients with adrenal invasion alone (24 months), renal vein thrombosis plus fat invasion (24 months) or infradiaphragmatic vena cava plus fat invasion (24 months) and 3--patients with renal or infradiaphragmatic caval thrombosis plus adrenal involvement (11 months), supradiaphragmatic vena caval thrombosis (12 months) or Gerota's fascia invasion (12 months). Five-year cancer specific survival rates in groups 1 to 3 were 61%, 35% and 12.9%, respectively (p <0.0001). On multivariate analysis the proposed classification had an independent prognostic value.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results suggest the necessity of reclassifying locally advanced renal cell carcinoma according to the 3 described prognostic categories.

Vitespen: a preclinical and clinical review

Vitespen is a heat shock protein (gp96)-peptide complex purified from resected autologous tumors, developed as a means of capturing the antigenic 'fingerprint' of a specific cancer for use as a patient-specific vaccine. Vitespen has been extensively assessed in animal models, and clinically in a range of cancers, including Phase I and II trials in colorectal cancer, glioblastoma, lung cancer, melanoma and renal cell carcinoma, and two Phase III studies in melanoma and renal cell carcinoma. Vitespen has shown itself capable of inducing major histocompatibility class I-restricted immune responses in a range of tumor types, and clinical responses in patients with earlier-stage disease, in line with previously published data on cancer vaccines. Vitespen is almost devoid of side effects aside from minor injection-site reactions.