SEOM clinical guidelines for the treatment of advanced prostate cancer (2020)

The treatment of advanced prostate cancer has evolved due to recent advances in molecular research and new drug development. Dynamic aberrations in the androgen receptor, DNA repair genes, PTEN-PI3K, and other pathways drive the behavior of advanced prostate cancer allowing a better selection of therapies in each patient. Tumor testing for BRCA1 and BRCA2 is recommended for patients with metastatic prostate cancer, also considering a broad panel to guide decisions and genetic counseling. In symptomatic metastatic patients, castration should be stared to palliate symptoms and prolong survival. In high-risk or high-volume metastatic hormone-naïve patients, castration should be combined with docetaxel, abiraterone, enzalutamide or apalutamide. Radiotherapy to the primary tumor combined with systemic therapy is recommended in low-volume mHNPC patients. In patients with non-metastatic castration-resistant tumors, risk stratification can define the frequency of imaging. Adding enzalutamide, darolutamide or apalutamide to these patients prolongs metastasis-free and overall survival, but potential adverse events need to be taken into consideration. The choice of docetaxel, abiraterone or enzalutamide for treating metastatic castration-resistant patients depends on previous therapies, with cabazitaxel being also recommended after docetaxel. Olaparib is recommended in BRCA1/BRCA2 mutated castration-resistant patients after progression on at least one new hormonal therapy. Aggressive variants of prostate cancer respond to platinum-based chemotherapy. To optimize treatment efficiency, oncologists should incorporate all of these advances into an overall therapeutic strategy (AU)

SEOM clinical guidelines for the treatment of advanced prostate cancer (2020).

The treatment of advanced prostate cancer has evolved due to recent advances in molecular research and new drug development. Dynamic aberrations in the androgen receptor, DNA repair genes, PTEN-PI3K, and other pathways drive the behavior of advanced prostate cancer allowing a better selection of therapies in each patient. Tumor testing for BRCA1 and BRCA2 is recommended for patients with metastatic prostate cancer, also considering a broad panel to guide decisions and genetic counseling. In symptomatic metastatic patients, castration should be stared to palliate symptoms and prolong survival. In high-risk or high-volume metastatic hormone-naïve patients, castration should be combined with docetaxel, abiraterone, enzalutamide or apalutamide. Radiotherapy to the primary tumor combined with systemic therapy is recommended in low-volume mHNPC patients. In patients with non-metastatic castration-resistant tumors, risk stratification can define the frequency of imaging. Adding enzalutamide, darolutamide or apalutamide to these patients prolongs metastasis-free and overall survival, but potential adverse events need to be taken into consideration. The choice of docetaxel, abiraterone or enzalutamide for treating metastatic castration-resistant patients depends on previous therapies, with cabazitaxel being also recommended after docetaxel. Olaparib is recommended in BRCA1/BRCA2 mutated castration-resistant patients after progression on at least one new hormonal therapy. Aggressive variants of prostate cancer respond to platinum-based chemotherapy. To optimize treatment efficiency, oncologists should incorporate all of these advances into an overall therapeutic strategy.

Latest progress in molecular biology and treatment in genitourinary tumours.

The management of genitourinary cancer, including bladder, prostate, renal and testicular cancer, has evolved dramatically in recent years due to a better understanding of tumour genetic mutations, alterations in molecular pathways, and to the development of new kinds of drugs such as targeted therapies and immunotherapies. In the field of immunotherapy, new drugs focused on stimulating, enhancing and modulating the immune system to detect and destroy cancer, have been recently discovered. Research in oncology moves quickly and new data of great relevance for clinical practice are communicated every year. For this reason, a group of experts, focused exclusively on the treatment of genitourinary tumours and who get together every year in the BestGU conference to assess the latest progress in this field have summarized the most important advances in a single review, along with a critical assessment of whether these results should alter daily clinical practice.

SEOM clinical guideline for treatment of kidney cancer (2019).

In this article, we review de state of the art on the management of renal cell carcinoma (RCC) and provide recommendations on diagnosis and treatment. Recent advances in molecular biology have allowed the subclassification of renal tumours into different histologic variants and may help to identify future prognostic and predictive factors. For patients with localized disease, surgery is the treatment of choice with nephron-sparing surgery recommended when feasible. No adjuvant therapy has demonstrated a clear benefit in overall survival. Considering the whole population of patients with advanced disease, the combination of axitinib with either pembrolizumab or avelumab increase response rate and progression-free survival, compared to sunitinib, but a longer overall survival has only been demonstrated so far with the pembrolizumab combo. For patients with IMDC intermediate and poor prognosis, nephrectomy should not be considered mandatory. In this subpopulation, the combination of ipilimumab and nivolumab has also demonstrated a superior response rate and overall survival vs. sunitinib. In patients progressing to one or two antiangiogenic tyrosine-kinase inhibitors, both nivolumab and cabozantinib in monotherapy have shown benefit in overall survival compared to everolimus. Although no clear sequence can be recommended, medical oncologists and patients should be aware of the recent advances and new strategies that improve survival and quality of life in patients with metastatic RCC.

Correction to: SEOM clinical guideline for treatment of kidney cancer (2017).

The conflict of interest declaration was published incorrectly in the original version.

A randomized phase II study evaluating different maintenance schedules of nab-paclitaxel in the first-line treatment of metastatic breast cancer: final results of the IBCSG 42-12/BIG 2-12 SNAP trial.

Background: The phase II SNAP trial was designed to evaluate the efficacy of alternative chemotherapy schedules for prolonged administration in HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer (MBC), after a short induction at conventional doses. Patients and methods: Between April 2013 and August 2015, 258 women untreated with chemotherapy for MBC were randomly assigned to receive three different maintenance chemotherapy schedules after three cycles of identical induction chemotherapy: arm A, nab-paclitaxel 150 mg/m2 days 1 and 15 Q28; arm B, nab-paclitaxel 100 mg/m2 days 1, 8 and 15 Q28; arm C, nab-paclitaxel 75 mg/m2 days 1, 8, 15 and 22 Q28. Induction was three cycles nab-paclitaxel 150/125 mg/m2, days 1, 8 and 15 Q28. The primary objective was to evaluate the efficacy of each maintenance schedule, in terms of progression-free survival (PFS), as compared with the historical reference of 7-month median PFS reported by previous studies with first-line docetaxel. One-sample, one-sided log-rank tests were utilized. Quality-of-life (QoL) evaluation was carried out, and the global indicator for physical well-being was defined as the primary QoL end point; completion rates of QoL forms were >90%. Results: In total, 255 patients were assessable for the primary end point. After 18.2-month median follow-up, 182 PFS events were observed. Median PFS was 7.9 months [90% confidence interval CI 6.8-8.4] in arm A, 9.0 months (90% CI 8.1-10.9) in arm B and 8.5 months (90% CI 6.7-9.5) in arm C. PFS in arm B was significantly longer than the historical reference of first-line docetaxel (P = 0.03). Grade ≥2 sensory neuropathy was reported in 37.9%, 36.1% and 31.2% of the patients in arm A, B and C, respectively (Grade ≥3 in 9.1%, 5.6% and 6.6% of the patients, respectively). Noteworthy, the QoL scores for sensory neuropathy did not worsen with prolonged nab-paclitaxel administration in any of the maintenance arms. Conclusion: The SNAP trial demonstrated that alternative nab-paclitaxel maintenance schedules with reduced dosages after a short induction at conventional doses are feasible and active in the first-line treatment of MBC. Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01746225.

SEOM clinical guideline for treatment of kidney cancer (2017).

The goal of this article is to provide recommendations about the management of kidney cancer. Based on pathologic and molecular features, several kidney cancer variants were described. Nephron-sparing techniques are the gold standard of localized disease. After a randomized trial, sunitinib could be considered in adjuvant treatment in high-risk patients. Patients with advanced disease constitute a heterogeneous population. Prognostic classification should be considered. Both sunitinib and pazopanib are the standard options for first-line systemic therapy in advanced renal cell carcinoma. Based on the results of two randomized trials, both nivolumab and cabozantinib should be considered the standard for second and further lines of therapy. Response evaluation for present therapies is a challenge.

HIF pathway and c-Myc as biomarkers for response to sunitinib in metastatic clear-cell renal cell carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Clear-cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC) is a heterogeneous disease with a different clinical behavior and response to targeted therapies. Differences in hypoxia-inducible factor (HIF) expression have been used to classify von Hippel-Lindau gene (VHL)-deficient ccRCC tumors. c-Myc may be driving proliferation in HIF-2α-expressing tumors in a growth factor-independent manner. OBJECTIVE: To explore the HIF-1α, HIF-2α and c-Myc baseline expression as potential predictors of sunitinib outcome as well as the effectiveness and safety with sunitinib in patients with metastatic ccRCC in routine clinical practice. METHODS: This was an observational and prospective study involving 10 Spanish hospitals. Formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded primary tumor samples from metastatic ccRCC patients who received sunitinib as first-line treatment were analyzed. Association between biomarker expression and sunitinib treatment outcomes was evaluated. Kaplan-Meier method was applied to measure progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival. RESULTS: Eighty-one patients were included: median PFS was 10.8 months (95% CI: 7.4-13.5 months), median overall survival was 21.8 months (95% CI: 14.7-29.8 months) and objective response rate was 40.7%, with 7.4% of patients achieving a complete response. Molecular marker staining was performed in the 69 available tumor samples. Significant association with lower PFS was identified for double c-Myc/HIF-2α-positive staining tumors (median 4.3 vs 11.5 months, hazard ratio =2.64, 95% CI: 1.03-6.80, P=0.036). A trend toward a lower PFS was found in positive c-Myc tumors (median 5.9 vs 10.9 months, P=0.263). HIF-1α and HIF-2α expression levels were not associated with clinical outcome. CONCLUSION: These preliminary results suggest that predictive subgroups might be defined based on biomarkers such as c-Myc/HIF-2α. Further validation with more patients will be needed in order to confirm it. Outcomes with sunitinib in metastatic ccRCC in daily clinical practice resemble those obtained in clinical trials.

Re-treatment with radium-223: first experience from an international, open-label, phase I/II study in patients with castration-resistant prostate cancer and bone metastases.

BACKGROUND: Six radium-223 injections at 4-week intervals is indicated for patients with castration-resistant prostate cancer and symptomatic bone metastases. However, patients usually develop disease progression after initial treatment. This prospective phase I/II study assessed re-treatment safety and efficacy of up to six additional radium-223 injections. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients had castration-resistant prostate cancer and bone metastases and six initial radium-223 injections with no on-treatment bone progression; all had subsequent radiologic or clinical progression. Concomitant agents were allowed at investigator discretion, excluding chemotherapy and initiation of new abiraterone or enzalutamide. The primary endpoint was safety; additional exploratory endpoints included time to radiographic bone progression, time to total alkaline phosphatase and prostate-specific antigen progression, radiographic progression-free survival, overall survival, time to first symptomatic skeletal event (SSE), SSE-free survival, and time to pain progression. RESULTS: Among 44 patients, 29 (66%) received all six re-treatment injections. Median time from end of initial radium-223 treatment was 6 months. Forty-one (93%) reported ≥1 treatment-emergent adverse event. No grade 4-5 hematologic treatment-emergent adverse events occurred. Only one (2%) patient had radiographic bone progression; eight (18%) had radiographic soft tissue tumor progression (three lymph node and five visceral metastases). Median times to total alkaline phosphatase and prostate-specific antigen progression were not reached and 2.2 months, respectively. Median radiographic progression-free survival was 9.9 months (12.8-month maximum follow-up). Five (11%) patients died and eight (18%) experienced first SSEs. Median overall survival, time to first SSE, and SSE-free survival were not reached. Five (14%) of 36 evaluable patients (baseline worst pain score ≤7) had pain progression. After 2 years of follow-up, 28 (64%) patients died, and the median overall survival was 24.4 months. CONCLUSIONS: Re-treatment with a second course of six radium-223 injections after disease progression is well tolerated, with minimal hematologic toxicity and low radiographic bone progression rates in this small study with limited follow-up. Favorable safety and early effects on disease progression indicate that radium-223 re-treatment is feasible and warrants further evaluation in larger prospective trials.

Androgen receptor gene status in plasma DNA associates with worse outcome on enzalutamide or abiraterone for castration-resistant prostate cancer: a multi-institution correlative biomarker study.

BACKGROUND: There is an urgent need to identify biomarkers to guide personalized therapy in castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC). We aimed to clinically qualify androgen receptor (AR) gene status measurement in plasma DNA using multiplex droplet digital PCR (ddPCR) in pre- and post-chemotherapy CRPC. METHODS: We optimized ddPCR assays for AR copy number and mutations and retrospectively analyzed plasma DNA from patients recruited to one of the three biomarker protocols with prospectively collected clinical data. We evaluated associations between plasma AR and overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) in 73 chemotherapy-naïve and 98 post-docetaxel CRPC patients treated with enzalutamide or abiraterone (Primary cohort) and 94 chemotherapy-naïve patients treated with enzalutamide (Secondary cohort; PREMIERE trial). RESULTS: In the primary cohort, AR gain was observed in 10 (14%) chemotherapy-naïve and 33 (34%) post-docetaxel patients and associated with worse OS [hazard ratio (HR), 3.98; 95% CI 1.74-9.10; P < 0.001 and HR 3.81; 95% CI 2.28-6.37; P < 0.001, respectively], PFS (HR 2.18; 95% CI 1.08-4.39; P = 0.03, and HR 1.95; 95% CI 1.23-3.11; P = 0.01, respectively) and rate of PSA decline ≥50% [odds ratio (OR), 4.7; 95% CI 1.17-19.17; P = 0.035 and OR, 5.0; 95% CI 1.70-14.91; P = 0.003, respectively]. AR mutations [2105T>A (p.L702H) and 2632A>G (p.T878A)] were observed in eight (11%) post-docetaxel but no chemotherapy-naïve abiraterone-treated patients and were also associated with worse OS (HR 3.26; 95% CI 1.47-not reached; P = 0.004). There was no interaction between AR and docetaxel status (P = 0.83 for OS, P = 0.99 for PFS). In the PREMIERE trial, 11 patients (12%) with AR gain had worse PSA-PFS (sPFS) (HR 4.33; 95% CI 1.94-9.68; P < 0.001), radiographic-PFS (rPFS) (HR 8.06; 95% CI 3.26-19.93; P < 0.001) and OS (HR 11.08; 95% CI 2.16-56.95; P = 0.004). Plasma AR was an independent predictor of outcome on multivariable analyses in both cohorts. CONCLUSION: Plasma AR status assessment using ddPCR identifies CRPC with worse outcome to enzalutamide or abiraterone. Prospective evaluation of treatment decisions based on plasma AR is now required. CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER: NCT02288936 (PREMIERE trial).

Autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) in patients with mantle cell lymphoma: a retrospective study of the Spanish lymphoma group (GELTAMO).

Guidelines recommend autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) consolidation in first complete or partial response after regimens including rituximab (R) and high-dose AraC (HDAC), but its use beyond that response is questioned. We present a retrospective analysis of 268 patients with MCL who received ASCT. With a median follow-up for survival patients of 54 months, progression-free survival and overall survival for the whole series were 38 and 74 months, respectively, and for patients transplanted in first CR 49 and 97 months, respectively. Patients without CR before transplant were analyzed separately, those who achieved CR after transplantation had better PFS (48 vs 0.03 months, p < 0.001) and OS (92 vs 16 months, p < 0.001) than the remaining. In univariate analysis, first CR at transplant (p = 0.01) and prior rituximab (p = 0.02) were the variables associated with PFS. For OS, the same variables resulted significant (p = 0.03 and p < 0.001, respectively). In multivariate analysis, only the status at transplant (first CR) remained significant. This retrospective study concludes that ASCT consolidation in first CR induces high survival rates. In other stages of disease, the need of ASCT as consolidation may be questioned.

Validation of the International Metastatic Renal-Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium (IMDC) prognostic model for first-line pazopanib in metastatic renal carcinoma: the Spanish Oncologic Genitourinary Group (SOGUG) SPAZO study.

BACKGROUND: Patients with metastatic renal carcinoma (mRCC) treated with first-line pazopanib were not included in the International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium (IMDC) prognostic model. SPAZO (NCT02282579) was a nation-wide retrospective observational study designed to assess the effectiveness and validate the IMDC prognostic model in patients treated with first-line pazopanib in clinical practice. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Data of 278 patients, treated with first-line pazopanib for mRCC in 34 centres in Spain, were locally recorded and externally validated. Mean age was 66 years, there were 68.3% male, 93.5% clear-cell type, 74.8% nephrectomized, and 81.3% had ECOG 0-1. Metastatic sites were: lung 70.9%, lymph node 43.9%, bone 26.3%, soft tissue/skin 20.1%, liver 15.1%, CNS 7.2%, adrenal gland 6.5%, pleura/peritoneum 5.8%, pancreas 5%, and kidney 2.2%. After median follow-up of 23 months, 76.4% had discontinued pazopanib (57.2% due to progression), 47.9% had received second-line targeted therapy, and 48.9% had died. RESULTS: According to IMDC prognostic model, 19.4% had favourable risk (FR), 57.2% intermediate risk (IR), and 23.4% poor risk (PR). No unexpected toxicities were recorded. Response rate was 30.3% (FR: 44%, IR: 30% PR: 17.3%). Median progression-free survival (whole population) was 11 months (32 in FR, 11 in IR, 4 in PR). Median and 2-year overall survival (whole population) were 22 months and 48.1%, respectively (FR: not reached and 81.6%, IR: 22 and 48.7%, PR: 7 and 18.8%). These estimations and their 95% confidence intervals are fully consistent with the outcomes predicted by the IMDC prognostic model. CONCLUSION: Our results validate the IMDC model for first-line pazopanib in mRCC and confirm the effectiveness and safety of this treatment.

New advances in genitourinary cancer: evidence gathered in 2014.

This review provides updated information published in 2014 regarding advances and major achievements in genitourinary cancer. Sections include the best in prostate cancer, renal cancer, bladder cancer, and germ cell tumors. In the field of prostate cancer, data related to treatment approach of hormone-sensitive disease, castrate-resistant prostate cancer, mechanisms of resistance, new drugs, and molecular research are presented. In relation to renal cancer, relevant aspects in the treatment of advanced renal cell carcinoma, immunotherapy, and molecular research, including angiogenesis and von Hippel-Lindau gene, molecular biology of non-clear cell histologies, and epigenetics of clear renal cell cancer are described. New strategies in the management of muscle-invasive localized bladder cancer and metastatic disease are reported as well as salient findings of biomolecular research in urothelial cancer. Some approaches intended to improve outcomes in poor prognosis patients with metastatic germ cell cancer are also reported. Results of clinical trials in these areas are discussed.

Predicting response and survival in chemotherapy-treated triple-negative breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: In this study, we evaluated the ability of gene expression profiles to predict chemotherapy response and survival in triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC). METHODS: Gene expression and clinical-pathological data were evaluated in five independent cohorts, including three randomised clinical trials for a total of 1055 patients with TNBC, basal-like disease (BLBC) or both. Previously defined intrinsic molecular subtype and a proliferation signature were determined and tested. Each signature was tested using multivariable logistic regression models (for pCR (pathological complete response)) and Cox models (for survival). Within TNBC, interactions between each signature and the basal-like subtype (vs other subtypes) for predicting either pCR or survival were investigated. RESULTS: Within TNBC, all intrinsic subtypes were identified but BLBC predominated (55-81%). Significant associations between genomic signatures and response and survival after chemotherapy were only identified within BLBC and not within TNBC as a whole. In particular, high expression of a previously identified proliferation signature, or low expression of the luminal A signature, was found independently associated with pCR and improved survival following chemotherapy across different cohorts. Significant interaction tests were only obtained between each signature and the BLBC subtype for prediction of chemotherapy response or survival. CONCLUSIONS: The proliferation signature predicts response and improved survival after chemotherapy, but only within BLBC. This highlights the clinical implications of TNBC heterogeneity, and suggests that future clinical trials focused on this phenotypic subtype should consider stratifying patients as having BLBC or not.

Determination of polyphenolic compounds of red wines by UV-VIS-NIR spectroscopy and chemometrics tools.

Spectral analysis is a quick and non-destructive method to analyse wine. In this work, trans-resveratrol, oenin, malvin, catechin, epicatechin, quercetin and syringic acid were determined in commercial red wines from DO Rías Baixas and DO Ribeira Sacra (Spain) by UV-VIS-NIR spectroscopy. Calibration models were developed using principal component regression (PCR) or partial least squares (PLS) regression. HPLC was used as reference method. The results showed that reliable PLS models were obtained to quantify all polyphenols for Rías Baixas wines. For Ribeira Sacra, feasible models were obtained to determine quercetin, epicatechin, oenin and syringic acid. PCR calibration models showed worst reliable of prediction than PLS models. For red wines from mencía grapes, feasible models were obtained for catechin and oenin, regardless the geographical origin. The results obtained demonstrate that UV-VIS-NIR spectroscopy can be used to determine individual polyphenolic compounds in red wines.

Association of BRCA1 germline mutations in young onset triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC).

BACKGROUND: BRCA1-associated breast cancers have been associated to a triple-negative phenotype. The prevalence of BRCA1 germline mutations in young onset TNBC based on informativeness of family history has not been reported. PATIENTS AND METHODS: From January 2008 to May 2009 were collected blood and tumor samples from patients with TNBC younger than 50 years and without a family history of breast and ovarian cancer in first- and second-degree relatives. Analysis of BRCA1 germline mutations was made. Age at diagnosis and informativeness of family history (presence of female in first- and second-degree relatives alive until age 45) was collected in all cases. Immunohistochemistry of basal-like features was performed centrally in all available tumors. RESULTS: Seven pathogenic mutations were detected in 92 patients (7.6 %), two of them in patients younger than 35 years (28.6 %) (Fisher's exact test, p = 0.631). Three non-classified variants were detected (3.2 %). Family history was informative in two patients with a pathogenic mutation (28.6 %) and not informative in five (71.4 %) (Fisher's exact test, p = 0.121). Of the seven patients with a pathogenic mutation, four had a basal-like phenotype. CONCLUSION: Patients with apparently sporadic TNBC younger than 50 years and a non-informative family history are candidates for germline genetic testing of BRCA1.