Assessing the effectiveness and safety of lenvatinib and everolimus in advanced renal cell carcinoma: insights from the RELIEVE study's analysis of heavily pretreated patients.

Background: The treatment of heavily pretreated patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) represents an unmet medical need and is still challenging. Objectives: The primary objective was to assess the effectiveness of the lenvatinib plus everolimus combination and the secondary objective was the toxicity profile of this combination. Design: We conducted a longitudinal retrospective study examining mRCC patients pre-treated with one or more lines of therapy among different cancer centers in Italy. Methods: The study included patients who received the combination of lenvatinib plus everolimus as either a second-line treatment or beyond. We assessed progression-free survival (PFS), time to treatment failure (TTF), overall survival (OS), response rate (RR), and toxicity profile. In addition, we explored the potential relationship between treatment effectiveness and clinical and laboratory parameters. Results: In all, 33 patients were assessed, the median age was 60 years, 57% had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 1-2 and. 63% received ⩾ 3 prior lines of therapy. 62% were 'intermediate risk' according to the International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium and 30% were 'poor risk'. The RR was 42% (no complete response), 18% stable disease. Median OS was 11.2 months (95% CI 6.8-19.9), median PFS was 6.7 months (95% CI 0.6-30.8), and median TTF was 6.7 months (95% CI 4.8-16.6). A shorter OS was significantly associated with lymph node metastases (p = 0.043, 95% CI), neutrophils/ lymphocytes ratio (NLR) ⩾ 3 (p = 0.007), hemoglobin/red cell distribution width ratio cutoff value <0.7 was significant (p = 0.03) while a shorter PFS was associated with lung (p = 0.048) and brain metastases (p = 0.023). The most frequent G1 toxicity was diarrhea (24%), G2 was fatigue (30%), and hypertension and skin toxicity (6%) for G3. Conclusion: Our findings suggest a clinically relevant effectiveness of lenvatinib plus everolimus combination with an acceptable toxicity profile for heavily pretreated patients with mRCC.

Development and Validation of an Inflammatory Prognostic Index to Predict Outcomes in Advanced/Metastatic Urothelial Cancer Patients Receiving Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors.

BACKGROUND: Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) improve overall survival (OS) in advanced/metastatic urothelial cancer (a/mUC) patients. Preliminary evidence suggests a prognostic role of inflammatory biomarkers in this setting. We aimed to develop a disease-specific prognostic inflammatory index for a/mUC patients on ICIs. METHODS: Fifteen variables were retrospectively correlated with OS and progression-free survival (PFS) in a development (D, n = 264) and a validation (V, n = 132) cohort of platinum-pretreated a/mUC pts receiving ICIs at L2 or further line. A nomogram and inflammatory prognostic index (U-IPI) were developed. The index was also tested in a control cohort of patients treated with chemotherapy only (C, n = 114). RESULTS: The strongest predictors of OS were baseline platelet/lymphocyte (PLR) and neutrophil/lymphocyte (NLR) ratios, and lactate dehydrogenase (LDH), NLR, and albumin changes at 4 weeks. These were used to build the U-IPI, which can distinctly classify patients into good or poor response groups. The nomogram scoring is significant for PFS and OS (p < 0.001 in the D, V, and combined cohorts) for the immunotherapy (IO) cohort, but not for the control cohort. CONCLUSIONS: The lack of a baseline systemic inflammatory profile and the absence of early serum inflammatory biomarker changes are associated with significantly better outcomes on ICIs in a/mUC pts. The U-IPI is an easily applicable dynamic prognostic tool for PFS and OS, allowing for the early identification of a sub-group with dismal outcomes that would not benefit from ICIs, while distinguishing another that draws an important benefit.

Real-world Outcome of Patients with Advanced Renal Cell Carcinoma and Intermediate- or Poor-risk International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium Criteria Treated by Immune-oncology Combinations: Differential Effectiveness by Risk Group?

BACKGROUND: Renal c carcinoma (RCC) is one of the most common urinary cancers worldwide, with a predicted increase in incidence in the coming years. Immunotherapy, as a single agent, in doublets, or in combination with anti-vascular endothelial growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs), has rapidly become a cornerstone of the RCC therapeutic scenario, but no head-to-head comparisons have been made. In this setting, real-world evidence emerges as a cornerstone to guide clinical decisions. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this retrospective study was to assess the outcome of patients treated with first-line immune combinations or immune oncology (IO)-TKIs for advanced RCC. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Data from 930 patients, 654 intermediate risk and 276 poor risk, were collected retrospectively from 58 centers in 20 countries. Special data such as sarcomatoid differentiation, body mass index, prior nephrectomy, and metastatic localization, in addition to biochemical data such as hemoglobin, platelets, calcium, lactate dehydrogenase, neutrophils, and radiological response by investigator's criteria, were collected. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. The median follow-up was calculated by the inverse Kaplan-Meier method. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: The median follow-up time was 18.7 mo. In the 654 intermediate-risk patients, the median OS and PFS were significantly longer in patients with the intermediate than in those with the poor International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium (IMDC) criteria (38.9 vs 17.3 mo, 95% confidence interval [CI] p < 0.001, and 17.3 vs 11.6 mo, 95% CI p < 0.001, respectively). In the intermediate-risk subgroup, the OS was 55.7 mo (95% CI 31.4-55.7) and 40.2 mo (95% CI 29.6-51.6) in patients treated with IO + TKI and IO + IO combinations, respectively (p = 0.047). PFS was 30.7 mo (95% CI 16.5-55.7) and 13.2 mo (95% CI 29.6-51.6) in intermediate-risk patients treated with IO + TKI and IO + IO combinations, respectively (p < 0.001). In the poor-risk subgroup, the median OS and PFS did not show a statistically significant difference between IO + IO and IO + TKI. Our study presents several limitations, mainly due to its retrospective nature. CONCLUSIONS: Our results showed differences between the IO + TKI and IO + IO combinations in intermediate-risk patients. A clear association with longer PFS and OS in favor of patients who received the IO + TKI combinations compared with the IO-IO combination was observed. Instead, in the poor-risk group, we observed no significant difference in PFS or OS between patients who received different combinations. PATIENT SUMMARY: Renal cancer is one of the most frequent genitourinary tumors. Treatment is currently based on immunotherapy combinations or immunotherapy with tyrosine kinase inhibitors, but there are no comparisons between these.In this study, we have analyzed the clinical course of 930 patients from 58 centers in 20 countries around the world. We aimed to analyze the differences between the two main treatment strategies, combination of two immunotherapies versus immunotherapy + antiangiogenic therapy, and found in real-life data that intermediate-risk patients (approximately 60% of patients with metastatic renal cancer) seem to benefit more from the combination of immunotherapy + antiangiogenic therapy than from double immunotherapy. No such differences were found in poor-risk patients. This may have important implications in daily practice decision-making for these patients.

TEAM Study: Upfront Docetaxel Treatment in Patients With Metastatic Hormone-Sensitive Prostate Cancer: A Real-World, Multicenter, Retrospective Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Treatment of metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC) dramatically changed. PEACE-1 and ARASENS trials established triplet therapy efficacy. Identifying prognostic factors supporting treatment choice is pivotal. METHODS: TEAM is an observational, retrospective study to evaluate prognostic role of variables in mHSPC patients receiving upfront docetaxel in 11 Italian centers. Outcome measures were progression-free survival (PFS) and overall-survival (OS). RESULTS: From September 2014 to December 2020, 147 patients were included. Median PFS and OS were 11.6 and 37.4 months. At univariate analysis, PFS-related variables were Gleason Score (GS) (P = .001), opioid use (P = .004), bone metastases number (P < .001), baseline PSA (P = .006), Hb (P < .001), ALP (P < .001) and LDH (P = .002), time between ADT and docetaxel start (P = .018), 3-month PSA (P < .001) and ALP (P < .001), and number of docetaxel cycles (P < .001). OS-related variables were PSA at diagnosis (P = .024), primary tumor treatment (P = .022), baseline pain (P = .015), opioid use (P < .001), bone metastases number (P < . 001), baseline Hb (P < .001), ALP (P < .001) and LDH (P = .001), NLR ratio (P = .039), 3-month PSA (P < .001) and ALP (P < .001) and docetaxel cycles number (P < .001). At multivariate analysis, independent prognostic variables were GS, opioid use, baseline LDH and time between ADT and docetaxel initiation for PFS, and baseline Hb and LDH for OS. CONCLUSION: Patients receiving upfront docetaxel with high GS, high disease burden, pain or opioid use, baseline unfavorable laboratory values had worse outcomes. Patients had greater docetaxel benefit when initiated early after ADT start. These parameters could be taken into account when selecting candidates for triplet therapy.

Combining PARP Inhibitors and Androgen Receptor Signalling Inhibitors in Metastatic Prostate Cancer: A Quantitative Synthesis and Meta-analysis.

CONTEXT: PARP inhibitors (PARPi) are established treatments for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) with homologous recombination repair (HRR) deficiency after androgen receptor signalling inhibitor (ARSI) failure. New PARPi + ARSI combinations have been tested in all comers, although their clinical relevance in HRR-proficient tumours remains uncertain. OBJECTIVE: To quantitatively synthesise evidence from randomised trials assessing the efficacy and safety of PARPi + ARSI combinations for first-line treatment of mCRPC. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: We searched the PubMed, EMBASE, SCOPUS, and Cochrane Library databases up to February 28, 2023. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing PARPi + ARSI versus placebo + ARSI for first-line treatment of mCRPC were eligible. Two reviewers independently performed screening and data extraction and assessed the risk of bias, while a third reviewer evaluated the eligibility criteria. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: Overall, three phase 3 RCTs were included in the systematic review: PROPEL, MAGNITUDE, and TALAPRO-2. A total of 2601 patients with mCRPC were enrolled. Two of these trials (PROPEL and TALAPRO-2) assessed the radiographic progression-free survival benefit of PARPi + ARSI for first-line treatment of mCRPC, independent of HRR status. The pooled hazard ratio was 0.62 (95% confidence interval 0.53-0.72). The pooled hazard ratio for overall survival was 0.84 (95% confidence interval 0.72-0.98), indicating a 16% reduction in the risk of death among patients who received the combination. CONCLUSIONS: Results from this meta-analysis support the use of ARSI + PARPi combinations in biomarker-unselected mCRPC. However, such combinations might be less clinically relevant in HRR-proficient cancers, especially considering the change in treatment landscape for mCRPC. PATIENT SUMMARY: We looked at outcomes from trials testing combinations of two classes of drugs (PARP inhibitors and ARSI) in advanced prostate cancer. We found that these combinations seem to work regardless of gene mutations identified as biomarkers of response to PARP inhibitors when used on their own.

Untargeted lipidomics reveal association of elevated plasma C18 ceramide levels with reduced survival in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer patients.

Emerging evidence highlights the potential prognostic relevance of circulating lipids in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC), with a proposed 3-lipid signature. This study aims to analyze the lipidomic profiles of individuals with mCRPC to identify lipid species that could serve as predictive indicators of prognosis and therapeutic response. Plasma samples were collected from mCRPC patients initiating first-line treatment (1 L) (n = 29) and those previously treated with at least two lines of therapy (> 2 L) (n = 19), including an androgen-receptor signaling inhibitor and a taxane. Employing an untargeted lipidomic approach, lipids were extracted from the plasma samples and subjected to analysis. A comprehensive identification and quantification of 789 plasma lipids was achieved. Notably, 75 species displayed significant dysregulation in > 2 L patients in comparison to the 1 L group. Among these, 63 species exhibited elevated levels, while 12 were reduced. Patients included in > 2 L cohort showed elevated levels of acylcarnitines (CAR), diacylglycerols (DG), phosphatidylethanolamines (PE), triacylglycerols (TG), and ceramides (Cer). Notably, some upregulated lipids, including CAR 14:0, CAR 24:1, Cer d18:1/16:0, Cer d18:1/18:0 (C18 Cer), Cer d18:2/18:0, Cer d18:1/24:1, and Cer d20:1/24:1, showed significant associations with overall survival (OS) in univariate models. Specifically, increased levels of C18 Cer remained significantly associated with poorer OS in the multivariate model, even after adjusting for treatment line and PSA levels (Hazard Ratio: 3.59 [95% Confidence Interval 1.51-8.52], p = 0.004). Employing quantitative mass spectrometry, our findings underscore the independent prognostic significance of C18 Cer in individuals with mCRPC. This discovery opens avenues for further studies within this field.

Integrating Red Blood Cell Features and Hemoglobin Levels in Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Patients Treated with Pazopanib or Cabozantinib: An Easily Exploitable Prognostic Score.

BACKGROUND: The advent of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) has revolutionized the metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) therapeutic landscape. Nevertheless, tyrosine-kinase inhibitors (TKIs) targeting the vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) axis still play a key role. The aim of the present study was to explore the prognostic performance of an integrated blood score, based on hemoglobin (Hb) concentration, mean corpuscular volume (MCV), and red cell distribution width (RDW), in mRCC patients treated with anti-VEGF TKIs. The primary endpoint was to correlate Hb, MCV, and RDW with progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Our multicenter retrospective observational study involved mRCC patients treated with pazopanib or cabozantinib from January 2012 to December 2020 in nine Italian centers. Clinical records and laboratory data, including Hb levels, MCV, and RDW, were collected at baseline. Descriptive statistics and univariate and multivariate analyses were performed. RESULTS: We enrolled 301 mRCC patients of which 179 (59%) underwent pazopanib, and 122 (41%) cabozantinib. We considered baseline Hb ≥12 g/dL, MCV >87 fL, and RDW ≤16% as good prognostic factors; hence, developing a multiparametric score capable of delineating 4 different categories. The number of good prognostic factors was associated with significantly longer PFS and OS (p < 0.001 for both). Therefore, we developed a red blood cell-based score by stratifying cases into two groups (2-3 versus 0-1, good factors). The impact on PFS and OS was even more striking (median PFS (mPFS): 16.3 vs 7.9 months; median OS (mOS): 33.7 vs 14.1 months)), regardless of the TKI agent. When challenged with univariate and multivariate analysis, the blood score maintained its high prognostic significance in terms of OS (multivariate analysis HR for OS: 0.53, 95% CI 0.39-0.75; p < 0.001, respectively), while the impact on PFS resulted in borderline significance. CONCLUSIONS: Our analyses demonstrate the prognostic role of a multiparametric score based on easily exploitable blood parameters, such as Hb concentration, MCV, and RDW. The red blood cell-based score may underlie the upregulation of the HIF-1α pathway and VEGF axis, thereby identifying a selected population who is likely to benefit from TKI therapy.

Geographical differences in the management of metastatic de novo renal cell carcinoma in the era of immune-combinations.

BACKGROUND: The upfront treatment of metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) has been revolutionized by the introduction of immune-based combinations. The role of cytoreductive nephrectomy (CN) in these patients is still debated. The ARON-1 study (NCT05287464) was designed to globally analyze real-world data of mRCC patients receiving first-line immuno-oncology combinations. This sub-analysis is focused on the role of upfront or delayed partial or radical CN in three geographical areas (Western Europe, Eastern Europe, America/Asia). METHODS: We conducted a multicenter retrospective observational study in mRCC patients treated with first-line immune combinations from 55 centers in 19 countries. From 1152 patients in the ARON-1 dataset, we selected 651 patients with de novo mRCC. 255 patients (39%) had undergone CN, partial in 14% and radical in 86% of cases; 396 patients (61%) received first-line immune-combinations without previous nephrectomy. RESULTS: Median overall survival (OS) from the diagnosis of de novo mRCC was 41.6 months and not reached (NR) in the CN subgroup and 24.0 months in the no CN subgroup, respectively (P<0.001). Median OS from the start of first-line therapy was NR in patients who underwent CN and 22.4 months in the no CN subgroup (P<0.001). Patients who underwent CN reported longer OS compared to no CN in all the three geographical areas. CONCLUSIONS: No significant differences in terms of patients' outcome seem to clearly emerge, even if the rate CN and the choice of the type of first-line immune-based combination varies across the different Cancer Centers participating in the ARON-1 project.

The role of mean corpuscular volume and red cell distribution width in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma treated with tyrosine kinase inhibitors: the MARECAP retrospective study.

Background: Tyrosine-kinase inhibitors (TKIs) and immunotherapy represent the backbone treatment for metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) patients. The aim of the present study was to describe mean corpuscular volume (MCV) and red cell distribution width (RDW) in mRCC patients treated with pazopanib or cabozantinib, and to explore their potential impact on oncological outcomes. Materials and methods: We conducted a multicenter retrospective observational study in mRCC patients treated with pazopanib or cabozantinib between January 2012 and December 2020 in nine Italian centers. Descriptive statistics, univariate, and multivariate analyses were performed. Objectives: The primary endpoints were the incidence and trend over time of anemia, macrocytosis (elevated MCV), and anisocytosis (elevated RDW). The secondary endpoints were the correlations of MCV and RDW with objective response rate (ORR), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS). Results: A total of 301 patients were enrolled; mean Hb value was 12.5 g/dl, a mean increase of 1 g/dl was observed at day 15 and maintained at 3 months. Most patients had baseline macrocytosis (MCV levels > 87 fl), with a significant mean increase after 3 months of treatment. At univariate analysis patients with macrocytosis had better ORR, longer PFS, and OS. About one third of patients had baseline anisocytosis (RDW > 16%), with a significant mean increase after 3 months of treatment. At univariate analysis, patients with RDW values ⩽ 16% had higher ORR, longer PFS, and OS. At multivariate analysis, baseline macrocytosis was significantly associated with better PFS in patients treated with pazopanib and baseline anisocytosis with shorter OS in all patients. Conclusions: mRCC patients treated with pazopanib or cabozantinib may have baseline macrocytosis and anisocytosis. A significant increase of Hb, MCV, and RDW after TKIs start was observed. Baseline macrocytosis is positively correlated with PFS in patients treated with pazopanib and baseline anisocytosis affects survival of patients treated with TKIs.

Global Real-World Outcomes of Patients Receiving Immuno-Oncology Combinations for Advanced Renal Cell Carcinoma: The ARON-1 Study.

BACKGROUND: Immuno-oncology combinations have achieved survival benefits in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). OBJECTIVE: The ARON-1 study (NCT05287464) was designed to globally collect real-world data on the use of immuno-combinations as first-line therapy for mRCC patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients aged ≥ 18 years with a cytologically and/or histologically confirmed diagnosis of mRCC treated with first-line immuno-combination therapies were retrospectively included from 47 International Institutions from 16 countries. Patients were assessed for overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall clinical benefit (OCB). RESULTS: A total of 729 patients were included; tumor histology was clear-cell RCC in 86% of cases; 313 patients received dual immuno-oncology (IO + IO) therapy while 416 were treated with IO-tyrosine kinase inhibitor (IO + TKI) combinations. In the overall study population, the median OS and PFS were 36.5 and 15.0 months, respectively. The median OS was longer with IO+TKI compared with IO+IO therapy in the 616 patients with intermediate/poor International mRCC Database Consortium (IMDC) risk criteria (55.7 vs 29.7 months; p = 0.045). OCB was 84% for IO+TKI and 72% for IO + IO combination (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Our study may suggest that immuno-oncology combinations are effective as first-line therapy in the mRCC real-world context, showing outcome differences between IO + IO and IO + TKI combinations in mRCC subpopulations. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT05287464.

Tailoring treatment with cabozantinib or pazopanib in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma: does it affect outcome?

BACKGROUND: Metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) treatment is still largely based on TKI use. Treatment adjustment due to toxicities is often needed. The aim of the present study was to determine the impact of treatment modifications on the outcome of mRCC patients treated with cabozantinib or pazopanib. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: This retrospective multicenter study enrolled consecutive patients receiving cabozantinib or pazopanib between January 2012 and December 2020. We evaluated the correlation of TKI treatment modifications with grade 3-4 toxicities and progression-free (PFS) and overall survival (OS). We also performed a landmark analysis excluding patients who did not undergo at least 5 months of therapy. RESULTS: Among 301 patients, 179 (59%) were treated with pazopanib, 122 (41%) with cabozantinib. Treatment modifications were related to grade 3-4 toxicities (p < 0.0001). We observed a statistically significant longer PFS and OS in patients who underwent dose reductions (p < 0.0001 for both PFS and OS), temporary interruption (p < 0.0001 for both PFS and OS) and schedule modifications (p = 0.007 for PFS and p = 0.012 for OS) at univariate analysis. These results were confirmed at multivariable and landmark analyses. CONCLUSIONS: Tailoring treatment with pazopanib and cabozantinib was associated with better PFS/OS.

Clinico-Pathological Features Influencing the Prognostic Role of Body Mass Index in Patients With Advanced Renal Cell Carcinoma Treated by Immuno-Oncology Combinations (ARON-1).

BACKGROUND: Obesity has been associated with improved response to immunotherapy in cancer patients. We investigated the role of body mass index (BMI) in patients from the ARON-1 study (NCT05287464) treated by dual immuno-oncology agents (IO+IO) or a combination of immuno-oncology drug and a tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKI) as first-line therapy for metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Medical records of patients with documented mRCC treated by immuno-oncology combinations were reviewed at 47 institutions from 16 countries. Patients were assessed for overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (OS), and overall clinical benefit (OCB), defined as the sum of the rate of partial/complete responses and stable disease. Univariate and multivariate analyses were used to explore the association of variables of interest with survival. RESULTS: A total of 675 patients were included; BMI was >25 kg/m2 in 345 patients (51%) and was associated with improved OS (55.7 vs. 28.4 months, P < .001). The OCB of patients with BMI >25 kg/m2 versus those with BMI ≤25 kg/m2 was significantly higher only in patients with nonclear cell histology (81% vs. 65%, P = .011), and patients with liver metastases (76% vs. 58%, P = .007), Neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio >4 (77% vs 62%, P = .022) or treated by nivolumab plus ipilimumab (77% vs. 64%, P = .044). In the BMI ≤25 kg/m2 subgroup, significant differences were found between patients with NLR >4 versus ≤4 (62% vs. 82%, P = .002) and patients treated by IO+IO versus IO+TKIs combinations (64% vs. 83%, P = .002). CONCLUSION: Our study suggests that the prognostic significance and the association of BMI with treatment outcome varies across clinico-pathological mRCC subgroups.

The impact of proton-pump inhibitors administered with tyrosine kinase inhibitors in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma.

Tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) are the backbone of the systemic treatment for patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). TKIs such as pazopanib and cabozantinib can interact with other drugs concomitantly administered, particularly with proton-pump inhibitors (PPIs), possibly impacting the effectiveness of the anticancer treatment and patients outcome. Few data are available about this interaction. We conducted a multicenter retrospective observational data collection of patients with mRCC treated with pazopanib or cabozantinib between January 2012 and December 2020 in nine Italian centers. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed. The aim was to describe the impact of baseline concomitant PPIs on the outcome of patients to pazopanib and cabozantinib in terms of response, progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS), toxicity, and treatment compliance. The use of PPI in our study population (301 patients) significantly influenced the effectiveness of TKIs with worse PFS (16.3 vs. 9.9 months; P < 0.001) and OS (30.6 vs. 18.4 months; P = 0.013) in patients taking PPI at TKI initiation. This detrimental effect was maintained both in the pazopanib and cabozantinib groups. The use of PPI influenced the toxicity and TKI treatment compliance with a reduction of dose or schedule modifications, and treatment interruptions in the population taking PPIs. Our study demonstrates that the use of PPIs can significantly influence the outcome and compliance of patients with mRCC to TKI treatment, suggesting the importance of a more careful selection of patients who need a gastroprotective therapy, avoiding indiscriminate use of PPIs.

Apalutamide, Darolutamide and Enzalutamide for Nonmetastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer (nmCRPC): A Critical Review.

Nonmetastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (nmCRPC) represents a condition in which patients with prostate cancer show biochemical progression during treatment with androgen-deprivation therapy (ADT) without signs of radiographic progression according to conventional imaging. The SPARTAN, ARAMIS and PROSPER trials showed that apalutamide, darolutamide and enzalutamide, respectively, prolong metastasis-free survival (MFS) and overall survival (OS) of nmCRPC patients with a short PSA doubling time, and these antiandrogens have been recently introduced in clinical practice as a new standard of care. No direct comparison of these three agents has been conducted to support treatment choice. In addition, a significant proportion of nmCRPC on conventional imaging is classified as metastatic with new imaging modalities such as the prostate-specific membrane antigen positron emission tomography (PSMA-PET). Some experts posit that these "new metastatic" patients should be treated as mCRPC, resizing the impact of nmCRPC trials, whereas other authors suggest that they should be treated as nmCRPC patients, based on the design of pivotal trials. This review discusses the most convincing evidence regarding the use of novel antiandrogens in patients with nmCRPC and the implications of novel imaging techniques for treatment selection.

Can we identify a preferred first-line strategy for sarcomatoid renal cell carcinoma? A network meta-analysis.

Background: Combinations based on immune checkpoint inhibitors are the new first-line standard treatment for metastatic renal cell carcinoma. Sarcomatoid renal cell carcinoma (sRCC) has a dismal prognosis but good immunogenicity. Methods: The authors performed a network meta-analysis of Phase III randomized trials of immune checkpoint inhibitor-based combinations versus standard tyrosine kinase inhibitor monotherapy reporting data for sRCC. The end points were overall survival, progression-free survival and objective response rate. Results: Five trials comprising 569 sRCC patients (out of a total of 4409 metastatic renal cell carcinoma patients) were included. Nivolumab-cabozantinib was the highest ranking treatment for overall survival (p-score = 88%) and progression-free survival (p-score = 81%). Atezolizumab-bevacizumab had the highest rank for objective response rate (p-score = 80%). Conclusion: Despite some limitations, nivolumab-cabozantinib might be the preferred first-line option for sRCC in terms of efficacy.

Is there a preferred first-line therapy for metastatic renal cell carcinoma? A network meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: In recent years, new therapeutic combinations based on immunotherapy provided significant benefits as a first-line treatment for patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). OBJECTIVE: This work aims to address the lack of head-to-head comparisons and the uncertainty of the benefit from immunotherapy-based combinations in all the International Metastatic RCC Database Consortium (IMDC) subgroups. DESIGN SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: A systematic review and a network meta-analysis were performed. Overall survival (OS) in the intention-to-treat (ITT) population was the primary endpoint. OS according to IMDC subgroups (favorable, intermediate, poor), PD-L1 expression, and grade ⩾3 adverse events (AEs) were secondary endpoints. A SUCRA analysis was performed. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: Six randomized phase III trials with 5121 patients were included. There was a high likelihood (82%) that nivolumab-cabozantinib was the preferred treatment in OS. The benefit of ICI-based combinations over sunitinib was unclear in the favorable-risk subgroup. Nivolumab-ipilimumab had the best risk/benefit ratio among all the ICI-based combinations. The limitations were the lack of individual patient data; the heterogeneity of patients' characteristics, trial designs, and follow-up times; and a limited number of studies for indirect comparisons. CONCLUSIONS: A customized approach for the first-line treatment of patients with mRCC should consider the risk/benefit profile of each treatment option, especially considering the likeliness of long-term survival finally reached in this setting.

GU-CA-COVID: a clinical audit among Italian genitourinary oncologists during the first COVID-19 outbreak.

BACKGROUND: Considering the growing genitourinary (GU) cancer population undergoing systemic treatment with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic, we planned a clinical audit in 24 Italian institutions treating GU malignancies. OBJECTIVE: The primary objective was investigating the clinical impact of COVID-19 in GU cancer patients undergoing ICI-based therapy during the first outbreak of SARS-CoV-2 contagion in Italy. DESIGN SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: The included centers were 24 Oncology Departments. Two online forms were completed by the responsible Oncology Consultants, respectively, for metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) and metastatic urothelial carcinoma (mUC) patients receiving at least one administration of ICIs between 31 January 2020 and 30 June 2020. RESULTS AND LIMITATION: In total, 287 mRCC patients and 130 mUC patients were included. The COVID-19 incidence was, respectively, 3.5%, with mortality 1%, in mRCC patients and 7.7%, with mortality 3.1%, in mUC patients. In both groups, 40% of patients developing COVID-19 permanently discontinued anticancer treatment. The pre-test SARS-CoV-2 probability in the subgroup of patients who underwent nasal/pharyngeal swab ranged from 14% in mRCC to 26% in mUC. The main limitation of the work was its nature of audit: data were not recorded at the single-patient level. CONCLUSION: GU cancer patients undergoing active treatment with ICIs have meaningful risk factors for developing severe events from COVID-19 and permanent discontinuation of therapy after the infection. Treatment delays due to organizational issues during the pandemic were unlikely to affect the treatment outcome in this population.

Optimal Sequencing and Predictive Biomarkers in Patients with Advanced Prostate Cancer.

The treatment landscape of advanced prostate cancer has completely changed during the last decades. Chemotherapy (docetaxel, cabazitaxel), androgen-receptor signaling inhibitors (ARSi) (abiraterone acetate, enzalutamide), and radium-223 have revolutionized the management of metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). Lutetium-177-PSMA-617 is also going to become another treatment option for these patients. In addition, docetaxel, abiraterone acetate, apalutamide, enzalutamide, and radiotherapy to primary tumor have demonstrated the ability to significantly prolong the survival of patients with metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC). Finally, apalutamide, enzalutamide, and darolutamide have recently provided impactful data in patients with nonmetastatic castration-resistant disease (nmCRPC). However, which is the best treatment sequence for patients with advanced prostate cancer? This comprehensive review aims at discussing the available literature data to identify the optimal sequencing approaches in patients with prostate cancer at different disease stages. Our work also highlights the potential impact of predictive biomarkers in treatment sequencing and exploring the role of specific agents (i.e., olaparib, rucaparib, talazoparib, niraparib, and ipatasertib) in biomarker-selected populations of patients with prostate cancer (i.e., those harboring alterations in DNA damage and response genes or PTEN).