The Double Antibody Drug Conjugate (DAD) phase I trial: sacituzumab govitecan plus enfortumab vedotin for metastatic urothelial carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: The antibody-drug conjugates sacituzumab govitecan (SG) and enfortumab vedotin (EV) are standard monotherapies for metastatic urothelial carcinoma (mUC). Given the different targets and payloads, we evaluated the safety and efficacy of SG + EV in a phase I trial in mUC (NCT04724018). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with mUC and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status ≤1 who had progressed on platinum and/or immunotherapy were enrolled. SG + EV were administered on days 1 + 8 of a 21-day cycle until progression or unacceptable toxicity. Primary endpoint was the incidence of dose-limiting toxicities during cycle 1. The number of patients treated at each of four pre-specified dose levels (DLs) and the maximum tolerated doses in combination (MTD) were determined using a Bayesian Optimal Interval design. Objective response, progression-free survival, and overall survival were secondary endpoints. RESULTS: Between May 2021 and April 2023, 24 patients were enrolled; 1 patient never started therapy and was excluded from the analysis. Median age was 70 years (range 41-88 years); 11 patients received ≥3 lines of therapy. Seventy-eight percent (18/23) of patients experienced grade ≥3 adverse event (AE) regardless of attribution at any DL, with one grade 5 AE (pneumonitis possibly related to EV). The recommended phase II doses are SG 8 mg/kg with EV 1.25 mg/kg with granulocyte colony-stimulating factor support; MTDs are SG 10 mg/kg with EV 1.25 mg/kg. The objective response rate was 70% (16/23, 95% confidence interval 47% to 87%) with three complete responses; three patients had progressive disease as best response. With a median follow-up of 14 months, 9/23 patients have ongoing response including 6 responses lasting over 12 months. CONCLUSIONS: The combination of SG + EV was assessed at different DLs and a safe dose for phase II was identified. The combination had encouraging activity in patients with mUC with high response rates, including clinically significant complete responses. Additional study of this combination is warranted.

EV-301 long-term outcomes: 24-month findings from the phase III trial of enfortumab vedotin versus chemotherapy in patients with previously treated advanced urothelial carcinoma.

INTRODUCTION: This exploratory analysis evaluated efficacy and safety data for enfortumab vedotin versus chemotherapy over a median follow-up of ∼2 years from EV-301. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients with locally advanced/metastatic urothelial carcinoma with prior platinum-containing chemotherapy and disease progression during/after programmed cell death protein 1/ligand 1 inhibitor treatment were randomized to enfortumab vedotin or chemotherapy (docetaxel, paclitaxel, vinflunine). Endpoints were overall survival (primary), progression-free survival (PFS), objective response, and safety. RESULTS: In total, 608 patients were included (enfortumab vedotin, n = 301; chemotherapy, n = 307). With a median follow-up of 23.75 months, 444 deaths had occurred (enfortumab vedotin, n = 207; chemotherapy, n = 237). Risk of death was reduced by 30% with enfortumab vedotin versus chemotherapy [hazard ratio (HR) 0.70 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.58-0.85); one-sided, log-rank P = 0.00015]; PFS improved with enfortumab vedotin [HR 0.63 (95% CI 0.53-0.76); one-sided, log-rank P < 0.00001]. Treatment-related adverse event rates were 93.9% for enfortumab vedotin and 91.8% for chemotherapy; grade ≥ 3 event rates were 52.4% and 50.5%, respectively. Grade ≥ 3 treatment-related decreased neutrophil count (14.1% versus 6.1%), decreased white blood cell count (7.2% versus 1.4%), and anemia (7.9% versus 2.7%) were more common with chemotherapy versus enfortumab vedotin; maculopapular rash (7.4% versus 0%), fatigue (6.8% versus 4.5%), and peripheral sensory neuropathy (5.1% versus 2.1%) were more common with enfortumab vedotin. Of special interest adverse events, treatment-related skin reactions occurred in 47.3% of patients receiving enfortumab vedotin and 15.8% of patients receiving chemotherapy; peripheral neuropathy occurred in 48.0% versus 31.6%, respectively, and hyperglycemia in 6.8% versus 0.3%. CONCLUSIONS: After a median follow-up of ∼2 years, enfortumab vedotin maintained clinically meaningful overall survival benefit versus chemotherapy, consistent with findings from the EV-301 primary analysis; PFS and overall response benefit remained consistent. Adverse events were manageable; no new safety signals were observed.

An economic analysis comparing health care resource use and cost of dose-dense methotrexate, vinblastine, doxorubicin, and cisplatin versus gemcitabine and cisplatin as neoadjuvant therapy for muscle invasive bladder cancer.

PURPOSE: To compare healthcare resource utilization (HRU) and costs associated with dose-dense methotrexate, vinblastine, doxorubicin, cisplatin (ddMVAC) and gemcitabine, cisplatin (GC) as neoadjuvant chemotherapy for muscle-invasive bladder cancer (MIBC). METHODS: Patient treated at Dana-Farber Cancer Institute from 2010 to 2019 were identified. HRU data on chemotherapy administered, supportive medications, patient monitoring, clinic, infusion, emergency department (ED) visits and hospitalization were collected retrospectively. Unit costs for HRU components were obtained from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Website and HRU was compared between groups using quantile regression analysis. RESULTS: 137 patients were included; 51 received ddMVAC and 86 GC. Baseline characteristics were similar, except lower mean age (P < 0.001) and higher proportion of ECOG-PS = 0 (P < 0.001) for ddMVAC. ddMVAC required more granulocyte-colony stimulating factor support (P < 0.001), central line placement (P = 0.017), cardiac imaging (P < 0.001), and infusion visits (P < 0.001), whereas GC required more clinic visits. ED visits were higher for ddMVAC (P = 0.048), while chemotherapy cycle delays and hospitalization days were higher for GC (P = 0.008). After adjusting for ECOG-PS and age, the cost per patient was approximately 41% lower (95%CI: 28% to 52%; P < 0.001) for GC vs. ddMVAC, which translated to a median adjusted cost savings of $7,410 (95%CI: $5,474-$9,347) per patient. CONCLUSIONS: Although excess HRU did not clearly favor one regimen, adjusting for PS and age indicated lower costs with GC vs. ddMVAC. Given the similar cumulative cisplatin delivery with both regimens, the associated values and costs supports the preferential selection of GC in the neoadjuvant setting of MIBC.

Development and validation of a prognostic model for overall survival in chemotherapy-naïve men with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer.

Background: Prognostic models are needed that reflect contemporary practice for men with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). We sought to identify predictive and prognostic variables for overall survival (OS) in chemotherapy-naïve men with mCRPC treated with enzalutamide. Patients and methods: Patients from the PREVAIL trial database (enzalutamide versus placebo) were randomly split 2 : 1 into training (n = 1159) and testing (n = 550) sets. Using the training set, 23 predefined variables were analyzed and a multivariable model predicting OS was developed and validated in an independent testing set. Results: Patient characteristics and outcomes were well balanced between training and testing sets; median OS was 32.7 months in each. The final validated multivariable model included 11 independent prognostic variables. Median OS for low-, intermediate-, and high-risk groups (testing set) defined by prognostic risk tertiles were not yet reached (NYR) (95% CI NYR-NYR), 34.2 months (31.5-NYR), and 21.1 months (17.5-25.0), respectively. Hazard ratios (95% CI) for OS in the low- and intermediate-risk groups versus high-risk group were 0.20 (0.14-0.29) and 0.40 (0.30-0.53), respectively. Secondary outcomes of response and progression differed widely in model-defined risk groups. Enzalutamide improved outcomes in all prognostic risk groups. Conclusions: Our validated prognostic model incorporates variables routinely collected in chemotherapy-naïve men with mCRPC treated with enzalutamide, identifying subsets of patients with widely differing survival outcomes that provide useful information for external validation, patient care, and clinical trial design. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01212991.

Upper tract urothelial carcinoma topical issue 2016: treatment of metastatic cancer.

PURPOSE: To review the management of metastatic upper tract urothelial carcinoma (UTUC) including recent advances in targeted and immune therapies as an update to the 2014 joint international consultation on UTUC, co-sponsored by the Société Internationale d'Urologie and International Consultation on Urological Diseases. METHODS: A PubMed database search was performed between January 2013 and May 2016 related to the treatment of metastatic UTUC, and 54 studies were selected for inclusion. RESULTS: The management of patients with metastatic UTUC is primarily an extrapolation from evidence guiding the management of metastatic urothelial carcinoma of the bladder. The first-line therapy for metastatic UTUC is platinum-based combination chemotherapy. Standard second-line therapies are limited and ineffective. Patients with UTUC who progress following platinum-based chemotherapy are encouraged to participate in clinical trials. Recent advances in genomic profiling present exciting opportunities to guide the use of targeted therapy. Immunotherapy with checkpoint inhibitors has demonstrated extremely promising results. Retrospective studies provide support for post-chemotherapy surgery in appropriately selected patients. CONCLUSIONS: The management of metastatic UTUC requires a multi-disciplinary approach. New insights from genomic profiling using targeted therapies, novel immunotherapies, and surgery represent promising avenues for further therapeutic exploration.

Impact of single-agent daily prednisone on outcomes in men with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer.

BACKGROUND: Despite palliative benefits and PSA responses, the objective clinical impact of daily oral prednisone (P) for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) is unknown. We performed a pooled analysis of control arms of randomized trials that either did or did not administer single-agent P to evaluate its impact on overall survival (OS) and toxicities. METHODS: Individual patient data from control arms of randomized trials of men with mCRPC who received placebo or P+placebo post docetaxel were eligible for analysis. The impact of P on OS and severe toxicities was investigated in Cox regression models adjusted for known prognostic factors. Statistical significance was defined as P<0.05 and all tests were two sided. RESULTS: Data from the control arms of two randomized phase III trials were available totaling 794 men: the COU-AA-301 trial (n=394) administered P plus placebo and the CA184-043 trial (n=400) administered placebo alone. P plus placebo was not significantly associated with OS compared with placebo in a multivariable analysis (hazard ratio=0.89 (95% confidence interval 0.72-1.10), P=0.27). Other factors associated with poor OS were Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG)-performance status (PS) ⩾1, Gleason score ⩾8, liver metastasis, high PSA, hypoalbuminemia and elevated lactate dehydrogenase (LDH). Grade ⩾3 therapy-related toxicities were significantly increased with P plus placebo compared with placebo (hazard ratio=1.48 (95% confidence interval 1.03-2.13), P=0.034). Other baseline factors significantly associated with a higher risk of grade ⩾3 toxicities were ECOG-PS ⩾1, hypoalbuminemia and elevated LDH. Fatigue, asthenia, anorexia and pain were not different based on P administration. CONCLUSIONS: P plus placebo was associated with higher grade ⩾3 toxicities but not extension of OS compared with placebo alone in men with mCRPC who received prior docetaxel. Except for the use of P with abiraterone to alleviate toxicities, the use of P should be questioned given its association with toxicities and resistance.

Impact of Prior Platinum-Based Therapy on Patients Receiving Salvage Systemic Treatment for Advanced Urothelial Carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Trials of salvage therapy for advanced urothelial carcinoma have required prior platinum-based therapy. This practice requires scrutiny because non-platinum-based first-line therapy may be offered to cisplatin-ineligible patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Data of patients receiving salvage systemic chemotherapy were collected. Data on prior first-line platinum exposure were required in addition to treatment-free interval, hemoglobin, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status, albumin, and liver metastasis status. Cox proportional hazard regression was used to evaluate their association with overall survival (OS) after accounting for salvage single-agent or combination chemotherapy. RESULTS: Data were obtained from 455 patients previously exposed to platinum-based therapy and 37 not exposed to platinum. In the group exposed to prior platinum therapy, salvage therapy consisted of a single-agent taxane (n = 184) or a taxane-containing combination chemotherapy (n = 271). In the group not exposed to prior platinum therapy, salvage therapy consisted of taxane or vinflunine (n = 20), 5-fluorouracil (n = 1), taxane-containing combination chemotherapy (n = 12), carboplatin-based combinations (n = 2), and cisplatin-based combinations (n = 2). The median OS for the prior platinum therapy group was 7.8 months (95% confidence interval, 7.0, 8.1), and for the group that had not received prior platinum therapy was 9.0 months (95% confidence interval, 6.0, 11.0; P = .50). In the multivariable analysis, prior platinum therapy versus no prior platinum exposure did not confer an independent impact on OS (hazard ratio, 1.10; 95% confidence interval, 0.75, 1.64; P = .62). CONCLUSION: Prior platinum- versus non-platinum-based chemotherapy did not have a prognostic impact on OS after accounting for major prognostic factors in patients receiving salvage systemic chemotherapy for advanced urothelial carcinoma. Lack of prior platinum therapy should not disqualify patients from inclusion onto trials of salvage therapy.

Second-line single-agent versus doublet chemotherapy as salvage therapy for metastatic urothelial cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: The efficacy and safety of a combination of chemotherapeutic agent compared with single-agent chemotherapy in the second-line setting of advanced urothelial carcinoma (UC) are unclear. We aimed to study the survival impact of single-agent compared with doublet chemotherapy as second-line chemotherapy of advanced UC. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Literature was searched for studies including single-agent or doublet chemotherapy in the second-line setting after platinum-based chemotherapy. Random-effects models were used to pool trial-level data according to treatment arm, including median progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), objective response rate (ORR) probability, and grade 3-4 toxicity. Univariable and multivariable analyses, including sensitivity analyses, were carried out, adjusting for the percent of patients with ECOG performance status ≥1 and hepatic metastases. RESULTS: Forty-six arms of trials including 1910 patients were selected: 22 arms with single agent (n = 1202) and 24 arms with doublets (n = 708). The pooled ORR with single agents was 14.2% [95% confidence interval (CI) 11.1-17.9] versus 31.9% [95% CI 27.3-36.9] with doublet chemotherapy. Pooled median PFS was 2.69 and 4.05 months, respectively. The pooled median OS was 6.98 and 8.50 months, respectively. Multivariably, the odds ratio for ORR and the pooled median difference of PFS were statistically significant (P < 0.001 and P = 0.002) whereas the median difference in OS was not (P = 0.284). When including single-agent vinflunine or taxanes only, differences were significant only for ORR (P < 0.001) favoring doublet chemotherapy. No statistically significant differences in grade 3-4 toxicity were seen between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: Despite significant improvements in ORR and PFS, doublet regimens did not extend OS compared with single agents for the second-line chemotherapy of UC. Prospective trials are necessary to elucidate the role of combination chemotherapy, with or without targeted agents, in the salvage setting. Currently, improvements in this field should be pursued considering single-agent chemotherapy as the foundation for new more active combinations.

Radiotherapy or chemotherapy for clinical stage IIA and IIB seminoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis of patient outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Outcomes of radiotherapy (RT) compared with chemotherapy (CT) remain poorly defined for clinical stage (CS) IIA and IIB seminoma. We aimed to evaluate the current role of the two treatment modalities in this setting of testicular seminoma. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A systematic review and meta-analysis (MA) was carried out to identify all evaluable studies. Search was limited to studies published after 1990 and included the Medline, Embase databases, and abstracts from ASCO (GU), ESMO, AUA, and ASTRO meetings up to April 2014. Sensitivity analyses were applied including the following: CSIIA and CSIIB, paraortic + iliac RT only in both stages, RT dose (≥30 versus <30 Gy), and PEB/EP regimens only. RESULTS: Thirteen studies have been selected for MA on relapse outcome. No randomized trials compared RT and CT. There were 4 prospective and 9 retrospective studies, with a total of 607 patients receiving RT and 283 patients CT. The pooled relapse rate (RR) was similar between the RT [0.11, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.08-0.14, P for heterogeneity = 0.096, I(2) = 38%] and CT groups (0.08, 95% CI 0.01-0.15, P for heterogeneity <0.001, I(2) = 82.5%). However, in the sensitivity analysis, the pooled RR for RT in CSIIB was 0.12 (95% CI 0.06-0.17) while it was 0.05 (95% CI 0-0.11) for CT. Long-term side-effects and incidence of second cancers were more frequently reported following RT. The overall incidence of nontesticular second malignancies was 0.04 (95% CI 0.01-0.02) in the RT group and 0.02 (95% CI 0.003-0.04) in the CT group. CONCLUSIONS: Although RT and CT appeared to be equal options in CSIIA and IIB seminoma, a trend in favor of CT for a lower incidence of side-effects and RR in CSIIB was found. This evidence is limited by the retrospective quality of studies and their small sample size.

QTc interval prolongation with vascular endothelial growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitors.

BACKGROUND: Multi-targeted vascular endothelial growth factor receptor (VEGFR) tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) are known to cause cardiac toxicity, but the relative risk (RR) of QTc interval prolongation and serious arrhythmias associated with them are not reported. METHODS: We conducted a trial-level meta-analysis of randomised phase II and III trials comparing arms with and without a US Food and Drug Administration-approved VEGFR TKI (sunitinib, sorafenib, pazopanib, axitinib, vandetanib, cabozantinib, ponatinib and regorafenib). A total of 6548 patients from 18 trials were selected. Statistical analyses were conducted to calculate the summary incidence, RR and 95% CIs. RESULTS: The RR for all-grade and high-grade QTc prolongation for the TKI vs no TKI arms was 8.66 (95% CI 4.92-15.2, P<0.001) and 2.69 (95% CI 1.33-5.44, P=0.006), respectively, with most of the events being asymptomatic QTc prolongation. Respectively, 4.4% and 0.83% of patients exposed to VEGFR TKI had all-grade and high-grade QTc prolongation. On subgroup analysis, only sunitinib and vandetanib were associated with a statistically significant risk of QTc prolongation, with higher doses of vandetanib associated with a greater risk. The rate of serious arrhythmias including torsades de pointes did not seem to be higher with high-grade QTc prolongation. The risk of QTc prolongation was independent of the duration of therapy. CONCLUSIONS: In the largest study to date, we show that VEGFR TKI can be associated with QTc prolongation. Although most cases were of low clinical significance, it is unclear whether the same applies to patients treated off clinical trials.

Neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio as a prognostic biomarker for men with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer receiving first-line chemotherapy: data from two randomized phase III trials.

BACKGROUND: The neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR), a marker of host inflammation, has been associated with poor outcome in several solid tumors. Here, we investigated associations of the derived NLR (dNLR) and duration of initial androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) with survival of men with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) receiving first-line chemotherapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Data from the multinational randomized phase III studies VENICE and TAX327 included a total of 2230 men with mCRPC randomized to receive first-line chemotherapy, and were used as training and validation sets, respectively. Associations of dNLR and duration of initial ADT with overall survival (OS) were evaluated by multivariable Cox regression analysis in the training set stratified for performance status and treatment arm. The model was then tested in the validation set. Subsequently, we investigated the treatment effect of docetaxel on OS in subgroups according to dNLR and duration of initial ADT. RESULTS: In the training set, both dNLR ≥median (2) and duration of initial ADT

Impact of the number of prior lines of therapy and prior perioperative chemotherapy in patients receiving salvage therapy for advanced urothelial carcinoma: implications for trial design.

BACKGROUND: The differential impact of the number of prior lines of therapy and the setting of prior therapy (perioperative or metastatic) is unclear in advanced urothelial carcinoma. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Ten phase II trials of salvage chemotherapy, biologic agent therapy, or both, enrolling 731 patients, were available. Data on the number of prior lines of therapy and the setting of prior therapy were required in addition to known previously recognized prognostic factors: time from prior chemotherapy, hemoglobin level, performance status, and liver metastasis status. Cox proportional hazards regression was used to evaluate the association of the number of prior lines and prior perioperative therapy with overall survival (OS) as the primary clinical endpoint. Trial was a stratification factor. RESULTS: A total of 711 patients were evaluable. The overall median progression-free survival and OS were 2.7 and 6.8 months, respectively. The number of prior lines was 1 in 559 patients (78.6%), 2 in 111 (15.6%), 3 in 29 (4.1%), 4 in 10 (1.4%), and 5 in 2 (0.3%). Prior perioperative chemotherapy was given to 277 (39.1%) and chemotherapy for metastatic disease to 454 (64.1%). The number of prior lines was not independently associated with OS (hazard ratio, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.86-1.14). Prior perioperative chemotherapy was a favorable factor for OS on univariate but not multivariate analysis. CONCLUSION: The number of prior lines of therapy and prior perioperative chemotherapy were not independently prognostic in patients with urothelial carcinoma receiving salvage therapy. Adoption of these data in salvage therapy trials should enhance accrual, the interpretability of results, and drug development.

New agents for prostate cancer.

The therapeutic landscape of metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) has been revolutionized by the arrival of multiple novel agents in the past 2 years. Immunotherapy in the form of sipuleucel-T, androgen axis inhibitors, including abiraterone acetate and enzalutamide, a chemotherapeutic agent, cabazitaxel, and a radiopharmaceutical, radium-223, have all yielded incremental extensions of survival and have been recently approved. A number of other agents appear promising in early studies, suggesting that the armamentarium against castrate-resistant prostate cancer is likely to continue to expand. Emerging androgen pathway inhibitors include androgen synthesis inhibitors (TAK700), androgen receptor inhibitors (ARN-509, ODM-201), AR DNA binding domain inhibitors (EPI-001), selective AR downregulators or SARDs (AZD-3514), and agents that inhibit both androgen synthesis and receptor binding (TOK-001/galeterone). Promising immunotherapeutic agents include poxvirus vaccines and CTLA-4 inhibitor (ipilimumab). Biologic agents targeting the molecular drivers of disease are also being investigated as single agents, including cabozantinib (Met and VEGFR2 inhibitor) and tasquinimod (angiogenesis and immune modulatory agent). Despite the disappointing results seen from studies evaluating docetaxel in combination with other agents, including GVAX, anti-angiogentic agents (bevacizumab, aflibercept, lenalinomide), a SRC kinase inhibitor (dasatinib), endothelin receptor antagonists (atrasentan, zibotentan), and high-dose calcitriol (DN-101), the results from the trial evaluating docetaxel in combination with the clusterin antagonist, custirsen, are eagerly awaited. New therapeutic hurdles consist of discovering new targets, understanding resistance mechanisms, the optimal sequencing and combinations of available agents, as well as biomarkers predictive for benefit. Novel agents targeting bone metastases are being developed following the success of zoledronic acid and denosumab. Finally, all of these modalities do not appear curative, suggesting that clinical trial enrollment and a better understanding of biology remain of paramount importance.

Risk of infections in renal cell carcinoma (RCC) and non-RCC patients treated with mammalian target of rapamycin inhibitors.

BACKGROUND: Mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) inhibitors are used in a variety of malignancies. Infections have been reported with these drugs. We performed an up-to-date meta-analysis to further characterise the risk of infections in cancer patients treated with these agents. METHODS: Pubmed and oncology conferences' proceedings were searched for studies from January 1966 to June 2012. Studies were limited to phase II and III randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of everolimus or temsirolimus reporting on cancer patients with adequate safety profiles. Summary incidences, relative risks (RRs), and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated. RESULTS: A total of 3180 patients were included. The incidence of all-grade and high-grade infections due to mTOR inhibitors was 33.1% (95% CI, 24.5-43.0%) and 5.6% (95% CI, 3.8-8.3%), respectively. Compared with controls, the RR of all-grade and high-grade infections due to mTOR inhibitors was 2.00 (95% CI, 1.76-2.28, P<0.001) and 2.60 (95% CI, 1.54-4.41, P<0.001), respectively. Subgroup analysis found no difference in incidences or risks between everolimus and temsirolimus or between different tumour types (renal cell carcinoma (RCC) vs non-RCC). Infections included respiratory tract (61.7%), genitourinary (29.4%), skin/soft tissue (4.2%), and others (4.9%). CONCLUSION: Treatment with mTOR inhibitors is associated with a significant increase in risk of infections. Close monitoring for any signs of infections is warranted.

Incidence and risk of treatment-related mortality in cancer patients treated with the mammalian target of rapamycin inhibitors.

BACKGROUND: Inhibition of the mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) is an established treatment for multiple malignancies. We carried out an up-to-date meta-analysis to determine the risk of fatal adverse events (FAEs) in cancer patients treated with mTOR inhibitors. PATIENTS AND METHODS: PubMed, conferences and clinicaltrials.gov databases were searched for articles reported from January 1966 to June 2012. Eligible studies were limited to approved mTOR inhibitors (everolimus and temsirolimus) and reported on patients with cancer, randomized design and adequate safety profiles. Data extraction was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement. RESULTS: In all, 3193 patients from eight randomized, controlled trials (RCTs) were included, 2236 from everolimus trials and 957 from temsirolimus trials. The relative risk (RR) of FAEs related to mTOR inhibitors use was 2.20 (95% CI, 1.25-3.90; P = 0.006) compared with control patients. On subgroup analysis, no difference in the rate of FAEs was found between everolimus and temsirolimus or between tumor types [renal cell carcinoma (RCC) versus non-RCC]. No evidence of publication bias was observed. CONCLUSION: The use of mTOR inhibitors is associated with a small but higher risk of FAEs compared to control patients. In the appropriate clinical scenario, the use of these drugs remains justified in their approved indications.

Penile cancer: current therapy and future directions.

Background Penile cancer (PC) is a rare cancer in western countries, but is more common in parts of the developing world. Due to its rarity and the consequent lack of randomized trials, current therapy is based on retrospective studies and small prospective trials. Design Studies of PC therapy were searched in PubMed and abstracts at major conferences. Results PC is generally an aggressive malignancy characterized by early locoregional lymph node (LN) spread and later metastases in distant sites. Given the strong predictive value of LN involvement for overall survival, evaluating regional LNs is critical. Advanced LN involvement is increasingly being treated with multimodality therapy incorporating chemotherapy and/or radiation. A single superior cisplatin-based regimen has not been defined. Further advances may occur with a better collaboration on an international scale and comprehensive understanding of tumor biology. To this end, the preventive role of circumcision and understanding of the oncogenic roles of Human Papilloma Virus-16, and smoking may yield advances. Preliminary data suggest a role for agents targeting epidermal growth factor receptor and angiogenesis. Conclusion Advances in therapy for PC will require efficient trial designs, synergistic collaboration, incentives to industry and the efforts of patient advocacy groups and venture philanthropists.

Biomarkers: the next therapeutic hurdle in metastatic renal cell carcinoma.

Despite recent advances, metastatic renal cell carcinoma remains largely an incurable disease. Vascular endothelial growth factor and mammalian target of rapamycin inhibitors have provided improvements in clinical outcomes. High-dose interleukin 2 remains an option for highly selected patients and is associated with durable remissions in a small minority of patients. The toxicity profiles of specific agents and patient characteristics and comorbidities and costs have an important role in the current choice of therapy. Major challenges encountered in developing molecular biomarkers to guide therapy are tumour heterogeneity and standardisation of tissue collection and analysis. Although biomarkers are in their infancy of development, they should be a priority in early preclinical and clinical development in order to guide rational tailored development of emerging agents.

Comparative effectiveness of cisplatin-based and carboplatin-based chemotherapy for treatment of advanced urothelial carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Cisplatin-based chemotherapy is a standard treatment of metastatic urothelial carcinoma (UC), though carboplatin-based chemotherapy is frequently substituted due to improved tolerability. Because comparative effectiveness in clinical outcomes of cisplatin- versus carboplatin-based chemotherapy is lacking, a meta-analysis was carried out. METHODS: PubMed was searched for articles published from 1966 to 2010. Eligible studies included prospective randomized trials evaluating cisplatin- versus carboplatin-based regimens in patients with metastatic UC. Individual patient data were not available and survival data were inconsistently reported. Therefore, the analysis focused on overall response (OR) and complete response (CR) rates. The Mantel-Haenszel method was used for combining trials and calculating pooled risk ratios (RRs). RESULTS: A total of 286 patients with metastatic UC from four randomized trials were included. Cisplatin-based chemotherapy was associated with a significantly higher likelihood of achieving a CR [RR = 3.54; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.48-8.49; P = 0.005] and OR (RR = 1.34; 95% CI 1.04-1.71; P = 0.02). Survival end points could not be adequately assessed due to inconsistent reporting among trials. CONCLUSIONS: Cisplatin-based, as compared with carboplatin-based, chemotherapy significantly increases the likelihood of both OR and CR in patients with metastatic UC. The impact of improved response proportions on survival end points could not be assessed.