Activation and transcriptional profile of monocytes and CD8+ T cells are altered in checkpoint inhibitor-related hepatitis.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Checkpoint inhibitor-related hepatitis (CPI-Hep) is an emerging clinical challenge. We aimed to gain insights into the immunopathology of CPI-Hep by comprehensively characterising myeloid and lymphoid subsets. METHODS: CPI-treated patients with or without related hepatitis (CPI-Hep; n = 22 and CPI-noHep; n = 7) were recruited. Phenotypic and transcriptional profiling of peripheral immune subsets was performed and compared with 19 healthy controls (HCs). In vitro monocyte-derived macrophages (MoMFs) were assessed for activation and cytokine production. CD163, CCR2, CD68, CD3, CD8 and granzyme B expression was assessed using immunohistochemistry/immunofluorescence (n = 4). RESULTS: A significant total monocyte depletion was observed in CPI-Hep compared with HCs (p = 0.04), along with a proportionate increase in the classical monocyte population (p = 0.0002) and significant upregulation of CCR2, CD163 and downregulation of CCR7. Soluble CD163 levels were significantly elevated in CPI-Hep compared with HCs (p <0.0001). In vitro MoMFs from CPI-Hep showed enhanced production of pro-inflammatory cytokines. CD8+ T cells demonstrated increased perforin, granzyme B, ICOS and HLA-DR expression in CPI-Hep. Transcriptional profiling indicated the presence of activated monocyte and enhanced effector CD8+ T cell populations in CPI-Hep. Immunohistochemistry demonstrated co-localisation of CD8+/granzyme B+ T cells with CD68+CCR2+/CD68+CD163+ macrophages in CPI-Hep liver tissue. CONCLUSIONS: CPI-Hep is associated with activation of peripheral monocytes and an enhanced cytotoxic, effector CD8+ T cell phenotype. These changes were reflected by liver inflammation composed of CD163+/CCR2+ macrophages and CD8+ T cells. LAY SUMMARY: Some patients who receive immunotherapy for cancer develop liver inflammation, which requires cessation of cancer treatment. Herein, we describe ways in which the white blood cells of patients who develop liver inflammation differ from those of patients who receive the same immunotherapy but do not experience liver-related side effects. Targeting some of the pathways we identify may help to prevent or manage this side effect and facilitate cancer treatment.

Ano-uro-genital mucosal melanoma UK national guidelines.

Ano-uro-genital (AUG) mucosal melanomas are rare cancers associated with poor outcomes and limited evidence-based management. The United Kingdom AUG mucosal melanoma guideline development group used an evidence-based systematic approach to make recommendations regarding the diagnosis, treatment and surveillance of patients diagnosed with AUG mucosal melanomas. The guidelines were sent for international peer review, and are accredited by The National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE). A summary of the key recommendations is presented. The full documents are available on the Melanoma Focus website.

Less is more: A systematic review and meta-analysis of the outcomes of radical versus conservative primary resection in anorectal melanoma.

INTRODUCTION: Anorectal melanoma (ARM) is a rare disease with a poor prognosis. There is no consensus as to the optimal primary surgical treatment for ARM, with advocates for both radical (abdominoperineal resection [APR]) and conservative strategies (wide local excision [WLE]). Here, we report a systematic review of studies comparing outcomes between these strategies. METHODS: Studies comparing APR with WLE in patients with ARM were included, and a systematic review using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation methodology was performed. Outcomes deemed critical included overall survival, disease-free survival, local recurrence and quality of life. RESULTS: Forty studies were identified, of which 27 were suitable for inclusion. Twenty-three studies compared overall survival between WLE and APR, with no difference in outcomes noted (risk ratio [RR]: 0.80, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.60-1.07, p = 0.13). Seven studies compared disease-free survival, with no difference in outcomes noted (RR: 1.08, 95% CI: 0.61-1.91, p = 0.79). A total of 19 studies compared local recurrence rates, with again no significant difference in outcomes noted (RR: 0.71, 95% CI: 0.44-1.14, p = 0.16). None of the studies identified reported quality of life-related outcomes. CONCLUSION: There is no evidence to suggest that a radical primary surgical strategy improves outcomes in ARM. Therefore, given the well-documented morbidity associated with APR, WLE with regular surveillance for local recurrence should be the primary strategy in most patients.

British Society of Gastroenterology endorsed guidance for the management of immune checkpoint inhibitor-induced enterocolitis.

Immune checkpoint inhibitors are a novel class of cancer treatment that have improved outcomes for a subset of cancer patients. They work by antagonising inhibitory immune pathways, thereby augmenting immune-mediated antitumour responses. However, immune activation is not cancer-specific and often results in the activation of immune cells in non-cancer tissues, resulting in off-target immune-mediated injury and organ dysfunction. Diarrhoea and gastrointestinal tract inflammation are common and sometimes serious side-effects of this type of therapy. Prompt recognition of gastrointestinal toxicity and, in many cases, rapid institution of anti-inflammatory or biologic therapy (or both) is required to reverse these complications. Management of organ-specific complications benefits from multidisciplinary input, including engagement with gastroenterologists for optimal management of immune checkpoint inhibitor-induced enterocolitis. In this British Society of Gastroenterology endorsed guidance document, we have developed a consensus framework for the investigation and management of immune checkpoint inhibitor-induced enterocolitis.

Results of a randomized, double-blind phase II clinical trial of NY-ESO-1 vaccine with ISCOMATRIX adjuvant versus ISCOMATRIX alone in participants with high-risk resected melanoma.

BACKGROUND: To compare the clinical efficacy of New York Esophageal squamous cell carcinoma-1 (NY-ESO-1) vaccine with ISCOMATRIX adjuvant versus ISCOMATRIX alone in a randomized, double-blind phase II study in participants with fully resected melanoma at high risk of recurrence. METHODS: Participants with resected stage IIc, IIIb, IIIc and IV melanoma expressing NY-ESO-1 were randomized to treatment with three doses of NY-ESO-1/ISCOMATRIX or ISCOMATRIX adjuvant administered intramuscularly at 4-week intervals, followed by a further dose at 6 months. Primary endpoint was the proportion free of relapse at 18 months in the intention-to-treat (ITT) population and two per-protocol populations. Secondary endpoints included relapse-free survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS), safety and NY-ESO-1 immunity. RESULTS: The ITT population comprised 110 participants, with 56 randomized to NY-ESO-1/ISCOMATRIX and 54 to ISCOMATRIX alone. No significant toxicities were observed. There were no differences between the study arms in relapses at 18 months or for median time to relapse; 139 vs 176 days (p=0.296), or relapse rate, 27 (48.2%) vs 26 (48.1%) (HR 0.913; 95% CI 0.402 to 2.231), respectively. RFS and OS were similar between the study arms. Vaccine recipients developed strong positive antibody responses to NY-ESO-1 (p≤0.0001) and NY-ESO-1-specific CD4+ and CD8+ responses. Biopsies following relapse did not demonstrate differences in NY-ESO-1 expression between the study populations although an exploratory study demonstrated reduced (NY-ESO-1)+/Human Leukocyte Antigen (HLA) class I+ double-positive cells in biopsies from vaccine recipients performed on relapse in 19 participants. CONCLUSIONS: The vaccine was well tolerated, however, despite inducing antigen-specific immunity, it did not affect survival endpoints. Immune escape through the downregulation of NY-ESO-1 and/or HLA class I molecules on tumor may have contributed to relapse.

An immunotherapy survivor population: health-related quality of life and toxicity in patients with metastatic melanoma treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors.

PURPOSE: The immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have resulted in subgroups of patients with metastatic melanoma achieving high-quality durable responses. Metastatic melanoma survivors are a new population in the era of cancer survivorship. The aim of this study was to evaluate metastatic melanoma survivors in terms of health-related quality of life (HRQoL), immune-related adverse events (irAEs) and exposure to immunosuppressive agents in a large single centre in the UK. METHODS: We defined the survivor population as patients with a diagnosis of metastatic melanoma who achieved a durable response to an ICI and had been followed-up for a minimum of 12 months from initiation of ICI without disease progression. HRQoL was assessed using SF-36. Electronic health records were accessed to collect data on demographics, treatments, irAEs and survival. HRQoL data was compared with two norm-based datasets. RESULTS: Eighty-four metastatic melanoma survivors were eligible and 87% (N = 73) completed the SF-36. ICI-related toxicity of any grade occurred in 92% of patients and 43% had experienced a grade 3 or 4 toxicity. Almost half (49%) of the patients required steroids for the treatment of ICI-related toxicity, whilst 14% required treatment with an immunosuppressive agent beyond steroids. Melanoma survivors had statistically significant lower HRQoL scores with regard to physical, social and physical role functioning and general health compared with the normative population. There was a trend towards inferior scores in patients with previous exposure to ipilimumab compared with those never exposed to ipilimumab. CONCLUSIONS: Our results show that metastatic melanoma survivors have potentially experienced significant ICI-related toxicity and experience significant impairments in specific HRQoL domains. Future service planning is required to meet this population's unique survivorship needs.

An international, phase III randomized trial in patients with mucinous epithelial ovarian cancer (mEOC/GOG 0241) with long-term follow-up: and experience of conducting a clinical trial in a rare gynecological tumor.

OBJECTIVES: We evaluated four different treatment regimens for advanced-stage mucinous epithelial ovarian cancer. METHODS: We conducted a multicenter randomized factorial trial (UK and US). Patients were diagnosed with primary mEOC: FIGO stage II-IV or recurrence after stage I disease. Treatment arms were paclitaxel-carboplatin, oxaliplatin-capecitabine, paclitaxel-carboplatin-bevacizumab, or oxaliplatin-capecitabine-bevacizumab. Chemotherapy was given 3-weekly for 6 cycles, and bevacizumab (3-weekly) was continued as maintenance (for 12 cycles). Endpoints included overall-survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), toxicity and quality of life (QoL). RESULTS: The trial stopped after 50 patients were recruited due to slow accrual. Median follow-up was 59 months. OS hazard ratios (HR) for the two main comparisons were: 0.78 (p = 0.48) for Oxal-Cape vs. Pac-Carbo (each with/without bevacizumab), and 1.04 (p = 0.92) for bevacizumab vs. no bevacizumab. Corresponding PFS HRs were: 0.84 and 0.80. Retrospective central pathology review revealed only 45% (18/40) cases with available material had confirmed primary mEOC. Among these, OS HR for Oxal-Cape vs. Pac-Carbo was 0.36 (p = 0.14); PFS HR = 0.62 (p = 0.40). Grade 3-4 toxicity was seen in 61% Pac-Carbo, 61% Oxal-Cape, 54% Pac-Carbo-Bev, and 85% Oxal-Cape-Bev. QoL was similar between the four arms. CONCLUSION: mEOC/GOG0241 represents an example of a randomized rare tumor trial. Logistical challenges led to early termination, including difficulties in local histopathological diagnosis and accessing drugs outside their labelled indication. There was misalignment between central funders who support clinical trials in rare cancers and the deprioritisation of such work by those managing and funding research at a local level. Rare cancer trials should include centralised pathology review before treatment. Clinical trial registry number: ISRCTN83438782.

Randomized phase II study of the PDGFRα antibody olaratumab plus liposomal doxorubicin versus liposomal doxorubicin alone in patients with platinum-refractory or platinum-resistant advanced ovarian cancer.

BACKGROUND: Olaratumab is a platelet-derived growth factor receptor-α (PDGFRα)-targeting monoclonal antibody blocking PDGFRα signaling. PDGFRα expression is associated with a more aggressive phenotype and poor ovarian cancer outcomes. This randomized, open label phase II study evaluated olaratumab plus liposomal doxorubicin compared with liposomal doxorubicin alone in advanced ovarian cancer patients. METHODS: Patients with platinum-refractory or platinum-resistant advanced ovarian cancer were randomized 1:1 to receive liposomal doxorubicin (40 mg/m2, intravenous infusion) administered every 4 weeks with or without olaratumab (20 mg/kg, IV infusion) every 2 weeks. Patients were stratified based on prior response to platinum therapy (refractory vs resistant). The primary efficacy endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS). Secondary endpoints included overall survival (OS), objective response rate, duration of response, and safety. RESULTS: A total of 123 patients were treated (62 olaratumab+liposomal doxorubicin; 61 liposomal doxorubicin). Median PFS was 4.2 months for olaratumab+liposomal doxorubicin and 4.0 months for liposomal doxorubicin (stratified hazard ratio [HR] = 1.043; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.698-1.558; p = 0.837). Median OS was 16.6 months and 16.2 months in the olaratumab+liposomal doxorubicin and liposomal doxorubicin arms, respectively (HR = 1.098; 95% CI 0.71-1.71). In the platinum-refractory subgroup, median PFS was 5.5 months (95% CI 1.6-9.2) and 3.7 months (95% CI 1.9-9.2) in the olaratumab+liposomal doxorubicin (n = 15) and liposomal doxorubicin arms (n = 16), respectively (HR = 0.85; 95% CI 0.38-1.91). Overall, 59.7% (olaratumab+liposomal doxorubicin) and 65.6% (liposomal doxorubicin) of patients reported grade ≥ 3 adverse events regardless of causality. The most common treatment-emergent adverse events (all grades) regardless of causality were fatigue related (61%), nausea (57%), and constipation (52%) with olaratumab+liposomal doxorubicin and nausea (64%), fatigue related (62%), and mucositis (46%) with liposomal doxorubicin. CONCLUSIONS: The addition of olaratumab to liposomal doxorubicin did not result in significant prolongation of PFS or OS in platinum-resistant or platinum-refractory ovarian cancer. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00913835 ; registered June 2, 2009.

Publisher Correction: Clinical activity and molecular correlates of response to atezolizumab alone or in combination with bevacizumab versus sunitinib in renal cell carcinoma.

In the version of this article originally published, there was an error in Fig. 2n. The top line of the HR comparison chart originally was Atezo + bev vs sun. It should have been Atezo + bev vs atezo. The error has been corrected in the HTML and PDF versions of this article.

Clinical activity and molecular correlates of response to atezolizumab alone or in combination with bevacizumab versus sunitinib in renal cell carcinoma.

We describe results from IMmotion150, a randomized phase 2 study of atezolizumab (anti-PD-L1) alone or combined with bevacizumab (anti-VEGF) versus sunitinib in 305 patients with treatment-naive metastatic renal cell carcinoma. Co-primary endpoints were progression-free survival (PFS) in intent-to-treat and PD-L1+ populations. Intent-to-treat PFS hazard ratios for atezolizumab + bevacizumab or atezolizumab monotherapy versus sunitinib were 1.0 (95% confidence interval (CI), 0.69-1.45) and 1.19 (95% CI, 0.82-1.71), respectively; PD-L1+ PFS hazard ratios were 0.64 (95% CI, 0.38-1.08) and 1.03 (95% CI, 0.63-1.67), respectively. Exploratory biomarker analyses indicated that tumor mutation and neoantigen burden were not associated with PFS. Angiogenesis, T-effector/IFN-γ response, and myeloid inflammatory gene expression signatures were strongly and differentially associated with PFS within and across the treatments. These molecular profiles suggest that prediction of outcomes with anti-VEGF and immunotherapy may be possible and offer mechanistic insights into how blocking VEGF may overcome resistance to immune checkpoint blockade.

Timing the Landmark Events in the Evolution of Clear Cell Renal Cell Cancer: TRACERx Renal.

Clear cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC) is characterized by near-universal loss of the short arm of chromosome 3, deleting several tumor suppressor genes. We analyzed whole genomes from 95 biopsies across 33 patients with clear cell renal cell carcinoma. We find hotspots of point mutations in the 5' UTR of TERT, targeting a MYC-MAX-MAD1 repressor associated with telomere lengthening. The most common structural abnormality generates simultaneous 3p loss and 5q gain (36% patients), typically through chromothripsis. This event occurs in childhood or adolescence, generally as the initiating event that precedes emergence of the tumor's most recent common ancestor by years to decades. Similar genomic changes drive inherited ccRCC. Modeling differences in age incidence between inherited and sporadic cancers suggests that the number of cells with 3p loss capable of initiating sporadic tumors is no more than a few hundred. Early development of ccRCC follows well-defined evolutionary trajectories, offering opportunity for early intervention.

Tracking Cancer Evolution Reveals Constrained Routes to Metastases: TRACERx Renal.

Clear-cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC) exhibits a broad range of metastatic phenotypes that have not been systematically studied to date. Here, we analyzed 575 primary and 335 metastatic biopsies across 100 patients with metastatic ccRCC, including two cases sampledat post-mortem. Metastatic competence was afforded by chromosome complexity, and we identify 9p loss as a highly selected event driving metastasis and ccRCC-related mortality (p = 0.0014). Distinct patterns of metastatic dissemination were observed, including rapid progression to multiple tissue sites seeded by primary tumors of monoclonal structure. By contrast, we observed attenuated progression in cases characterized by high primary tumor heterogeneity, with metastatic competence acquired gradually and initial progression to solitary metastasis. Finally, we observed early divergence of primitive ancestral clones and protracted latency of up to two decades as a feature of pancreatic metastases.

Contemporary outcomes from the use of regular imaging to detect relapse in high-risk cutaneous melanoma.

BACKGROUND: Agreement on the utility of imaging follow-up in patients with high-risk melanoma is lacking. A UK consensus statement recommends a surveillance schedule of CT or positron-emission tomography-CT and MRI brain (every 6 months for 3 years, then annually in years 4 and 5) as well as clinical examination for high-risk resected Stages II and III cutaneous melanoma. Our aim was to assess patterns of relapse and whether imaging surveillance could be of clinical benefit. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A retrospective study of patients enrolled between July 2013 and June 2015 from three UK tertiary cancer centres followed-up according to this protocol was undertaken. We evaluated time-to-recurrence (TTR), recurrence-free survival (RFS), method of detection and characteristics of recurrence, treatment received and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: A total of 173 patients were included. Most (79%) had treated Stages IIIB and IIIC disease. With a median follow-up of 23.3 months, 82 patients (47%) had relapsed. Median TTR was 10.1 months and median RFS was 21.2 months. The majority of recurrences (66%) were asymptomatic and detected by scheduled surveillance scan. Fifty-six (68%) patients recurred with Stage IV disease, with a median OS of 25.3 months; 26 (31.7%) patients had a locoregional recurrence, median OS not reached (P=0.016). Patients who underwent surgery at recurrence for either Stage III (27%) or IV (18%) disease did not reach their median OS. The median OS for the 33 patients (40%) who received systemic therapy was 12.9 months. CONCLUSION: Imaging appears to reliably detect subclinical disease and identify patients suitable for surgery, conferring favourable outcomes. The short median TTR provides rationale to intensify imaging schedule in the first year of surveillance. The poor OS of patients treated with systemic therapy probably reflects the relatively inferior treatment options during this time and requires further evaluation in the current era.

Fc Effector Function Contributes to the Activity of Human Anti-CTLA-4 Antibodies.

With the use of a mouse model expressing human Fc-gamma receptors (FcγRs), we demonstrated that antibodies with isotypes equivalent to ipilimumab and tremelimumab mediate intra-tumoral regulatory T (Treg) cell depletion in vivo, increasing the CD8+ to Treg cell ratio and promoting tumor rejection. Antibodies with improved FcγR binding profiles drove superior anti-tumor responses and survival. In patients with advanced melanoma, response to ipilimumab was associated with the CD16a-V158F high affinity polymorphism. Such activity only appeared relevant in the context of inflamed tumors, explaining the modest response rates observed in the clinical setting. Our data suggest that the activity of anti-CTLA-4 in inflamed tumors may be improved through enhancement of FcγR binding, whereas poorly infiltrated tumors will likely require combination approaches.

Phase 2 study evaluating intermittent and continuous linsitinib and weekly paclitaxel in patients with recurrent platinum resistant ovarian epithelial cancer.

BACKGROUND: Linsitinib, an oral, dual inhibitor of insulin-like growth factor-1 receptor and insulin receptor, in combination with weekly paclitaxel, may improve clinical outcomes compared with paclitaxel alone in patients with refractory or platinum-resistant ovarian cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This open-label phase 1/2 clinical trial (NCT00889382) randomized patients with refractory or platinum-resistant ovarian cancer (1:1:1) to receive either oral intermittent linsitinib (600mg once daily on Days 1-3 per week) combined with paclitaxel (80mg/m2 on Days 1, 8, and 15; Arm A) or continuous linsitinib (150mg twice daily) in combination with paclitaxel (Arm B), or paclitaxel alone (Arm C). Primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS); secondary endpoints included overall survival (OS), overall response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR), and safety/tolerability. RESULTS: A total of 152 women were randomized to treatment (n=51 Arm A; n=51 Arm B, n=50 Arm C). In combination with paclitaxel, neither intermittent linsitinib (median PFS 2.8months; 95% confidence interval [CI]:2.5-4.4) nor continuous linsitinib (median PFS 4.2months; 95% CI:2.8-5.1) improved PFS over weekly paclitaxel alone (median PFS 5.6months; 95% CI:3.2-6.9). No improvement in ORR, DCR, or OS in either linsitinib dosing schedule was observed compared with paclitaxel alone. Adverse event (AE) rates, including all-grade and grade 3/4 treatment-related AEs, and treatment-related AEs leading to discontinuation, were higher among patients receiving intermittent linsitinib compared with the other treatment arms. CONCLUSION: Addition of intermittent or continuous linsitinib with paclitaxel did not improve outcomes in patients with platinum-resistant/refractory ovarian cancer compared with paclitaxel alone.

Insertion-and-deletion-derived tumour-specific neoantigens and the immunogenic phenotype: a pan-cancer analysis.

BACKGROUND: The focus of tumour-specific antigen analyses has been on single nucleotide variants (SNVs), with the contribution of small insertions and deletions (indels) less well characterised. We investigated whether the frameshift nature of indel mutations, which create novel open reading frames and a large quantity of mutagenic peptides highly distinct from self, might contribute to the immunogenic phenotype. METHODS: We analysed whole-exome sequencing data from 5777 solid tumours, spanning 19 cancer types from The Cancer Genome Atlas. We compared the proportion and number of indels across the cohort, with a subset of results replicated in two independent datasets. We assessed in-silico tumour-specific neoantigen predictions by mutation type with pan-cancer analysis, together with RNAseq profiling in renal clear cell carcinoma cases (n=392), to compare immune gene expression across patient subgroups. Associations between indel burden and treatment response were assessed across four checkpoint inhibitor datasets. FINDINGS: We observed renal cell carcinomas to have the highest proportion (0·12) and number of indel mutations across the pan-cancer cohort (p<2·2 × 10-16), more than double the median proportion of indel mutations in all other cancer types examined. Analysis of tumour-specific neoantigens showed that enrichment of indel mutations for high-affinity binders was three times that of non-synonymous SNV mutations. Furthermore, neoantigens derived from indel mutations were nine times enriched for mutant specific binding, as compared with non-synonymous SNV derived neoantigens. Immune gene expression analysis in the renal clear cell carcinoma cohort showed that the presence of mutant-specific neoantigens was associated with upregulation of antigen presentation genes, which correlated (r=0·78) with T-cell activation as measured by CD8-positive expression. Finally, analysis of checkpoint inhibitor response data revealed frameshift indel count to be significantly associated with checkpoint inhibitor response across three separate melanoma cohorts (p=4·7 × 10-4). INTERPRETATION: Renal cell carcinomas have the highest pan-cancer proportion and number of indel mutations. Evidence suggests indels are a highly immunogenic mutational class, which can trigger an increased abundance of neoantigens and greater mutant-binding specificity. FUNDING: Cancer Research UK, UK National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) at the Royal Marsden Hospital National Health Service Foundation Trust, Institute of Cancer Research and University College London Hospitals Biomedical Research Centres, the UK Medical Research Council, the Rosetrees Trust, Novo Nordisk Foundation, the Prostate Cancer Foundation, the Breast Cancer Research Foundation, the European Research Council.

Long-Term Response to Sunitinib Treatment in Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma: A Pooled Analysis of Clinical Trials.

BACKGROUND: We characterized clinical outcomes of patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) treated with sunitinib who were long-term responders (LTRs), defined as patients having progression-free survival (PFS) > 18 months. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A retrospective analysis of data from 5714 patients with mRCC treated with sunitinib in 8 phase II/III clinical trials and the expanded access program. Duration on-study and objective response rate (ORR) were compared between LTRs and patients with PFS ≤ 18 months ("others"). PFS and overall survival (OS) were summarized using Kaplan-Meier methodology. RESULTS: Overall, 898 (15.7%) patients achieved a long-term response and 4816 (84.3%) patients did not achieve long-term response. The median (range) duration on-study was 28.6 (16.8-70.7) months in LTRs and 5.5 (0-68.8) months in others. ORR was 51% in LTRs versus 14% in others (P < .0001). Median PFS in LTRs was 32.11 months and median OS was not reached. LTRs had higher percentage of early tumor shrinkage ≥ 10% at the first scan (67.1% vs. 51.2%; P = .0018) and greater median maximum on-study tumor shrinkage from baseline (-56.9 vs. -27.1; P < .0001) versus others. White race, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0, time from diagnosis to treatment ≥ 1 year, clear cell histology, no liver metastasis, lactate dehydrogenase ≤ 1.5 upper limit of normal (ULN), corrected calcium ≤ 10 mg/dL, hemoglobin greater than the lower limit of normal, platelets less than or equal to ULN, body mass index ≥ 25 kg/m2, and low neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio were associated with LTR. CONCLUSION: A subset of patients with mRCC treated with sunitinib achieved long-term response. LTRs had improved ORR, PFS, and OS.

The role of hormonal therapy in patients with relapsed high-grade ovarian carcinoma: a retrospective series of tamoxifen and letrozole.

BACKGROUND: Hormonal therapy is used as a treatment option in high-grade ovarian carcinoma (HGOC), but the role and choice of treatment remains unclear. Agents used include tamoxifen and aromatase inhibitors. Our aim was to evaluate the efficacy of tamoxifen (T) and letrozole (L) in HGOC in clinical practice and investigate factors influencing clinical outcome. METHODS: A retrospective review of patients with relapsed HGOC treated with either tamoxifen or letrozole at the Royal Marsden Hospital between 2007 and 2012 was performed. The primary endpoint of the study was objective response rate (ORR). Secondary endpoints included CA125 response, clinical benefit rate (CBR) and duration of response. Platinum-sensitivity and ER-status were evaluated as predictors of treatment response. RESULTS: 97 patients were included (43 T, 54 L); median age 63 years (20-92); 91% high-grade serous; median number of lines of prior chemotherapy 3 (1-8); 60% platinum-resistant, 40% platinum-sensitive; 52% ER + ve, 1% ER-ve, 47% unknown. 14 patients (6 T, 8 L) achieved a partial response, with ORR (RECIST) of 14% (T) and 15% (L). The CBR for ≥3 months was 65% (22/43) for tamoxifen and 56% (22/54) for letrozole. There was no significant difference in ORR (p = 0.99) or CBR (p = 0.14) between tamoxifen and letrozole. 22 patients (23%) had a CA-125 response with hormonal therapy (10 T - 23% and 12 L - 22%). ORR did not differ by platinum sensitivity (p = 0.42); or ER-status (positive vs unknown, p = 0.12). Responders to letrozole had longer durations of response than responders to tamoxifen (26 vs 11.5 months, p = 0.03), but equivalent disease stability duration (9.6 vs 7.2 months respectively, p = 0.11). CONCLUSIONS: Within the constraints of a retrospective study, we identified that patients treated with letrozole had a significantly longer duration of response than those treated with tamoxifen. Treatment with either tamoxifen or letrozole is a rational treatment option for patients with ER + ve HGOC, with equivalent ORR, CBR and disease stability.