The STELLAR trial:a phase II/III randomized trial of high-dose, intermittent sunitinib in patients with recurrent glioblastoma

Previously, the tyrosine kinase inhibitor sunitinib failed to show clinical benefit in patients with recurrent glioblastoma. Low intratumoural sunitinib accumulation in glioblastoma patients was reported as a possible explanation for the lack of therapeutic benefit. We designed a randomized phase II/III trial to evaluate whether a high-dose intermittent sunitinib schedule, aimed to increase intratumoural drug concentrations, would result in improved clinical benefit compared to standard treatment with lomustine. Patients with recurrent glioblastoma were randomized 1:1 to high-dose intermittent sunitinib 300 mg once weekly (Q1W, part 1) or 700 mg once every two weeks (Q2W, part 2) or lomustine. The primary end-point was progression-free survival. Based on the pre-planned interim analysis, the trial was terminated for futility after including 26 and 29 patients in parts 1 and 2. Median progression-free survival of sunitinib 300 mg Q1W was 1.5 months (95% CI 1.4–1.7) compared to 1.5 months (95% CI 1.4–1.6) in the lomustine arm (P = 0.59). Median progression-free survival of sunitinib 700 mg Q2W was 1.4 months (95% CI 1.2–1.6) versus 1.6 months (95% CI 1.3–1.8) for lomustine (P = 0.70). Adverse events (≥grade 3) were observed in 25%, 21% and 31% of patients treated with sunitinib 300 mg Q1W, sunitinib 700 mg Q2W and lomustine, respectively (P = 0.92). To conclude, high-dose intermittent sunitinib treatment failed to improve the outcome of patients with recurrent glioblastoma when compared to standard lomustine therapy. Since lomustine remains a poor standard treatment strategy for glioblastoma, innovative treatment strategies are urgently needed.</p

The STELLAR trial:a phase II/III randomized trial of high-dose, intermittent sunitinib in patients with recurrent glioblastoma

Previously, the tyrosine kinase inhibitor sunitinib failed to show clinical benefit in patients with recurrent glioblastoma. Low intratumoural sunitinib accumulation in glioblastoma patients was reported as a possible explanation for the lack of therapeutic benefit. We designed a randomized phase II/III trial to evaluate whether a high-dose intermittent sunitinib schedule, aimed to increase intratumoural drug concentrations, would result in improved clinical benefit compared to standard treatment with lomustine. Patients with recurrent glioblastoma were randomized 1:1 to high-dose intermittent sunitinib 300 mg once weekly (Q1W, part 1) or 700 mg once every two weeks (Q2W, part 2) or lomustine. The primary end-point was progression-free survival. Based on the pre-planned interim analysis, the trial was terminated for futility after including 26 and 29 patients in parts 1 and 2. Median progression-free survival of sunitinib 300 mg Q1W was 1.5 months (95% CI 1.4–1.7) compared to 1.5 months (95% CI 1.4–1.6) in the lomustine arm (P = 0.59). Median progression-free survival of sunitinib 700 mg Q2W was 1.4 months (95% CI 1.2–1.6) versus 1.6 months (95% CI 1.3–1.8) for lomustine (P = 0.70). Adverse events (≥grade 3) were observed in 25%, 21% and 31% of patients treated with sunitinib 300 mg Q1W, sunitinib 700 mg Q2W and lomustine, respectively (P = 0.92). To conclude, high-dose intermittent sunitinib treatment failed to improve the outcome of patients with recurrent glioblastoma when compared to standard lomustine therapy. Since lomustine remains a poor standard treatment strategy for glioblastoma, innovative treatment strategies are urgently needed.</p

Corticosteroids and other immunosuppressants for immune-related adverse events and checkpoint inhibitor effectiveness in melanoma

Background: Recent studies indicate an association between immunosuppression for immune-related adverse events (irAEs) and impaired survival in patients who received immune checkpoint inhibitors. Whether this is related to corticosteroids or second-line immunosuppressants is unknown. In the largest cohort thus far, we assessed the association of immunosuppressant type and dose with survival in melanoma patients with irAEs.Methods: Patients with advanced melanoma who received immunosuppressants for irAEs induced by first-line anti-PD-1 ± anti-CTLA-4 were included from 18 hospitals worldwide. Associations of cumulative and peak dose corticosteroids and use of second-line immunosuppression with survival from start of immunosuppression were assessed using multivariable Cox proportional hazard regression.Results: Among 606 patients, 404 had anti-PD-1 + anti-CTLA-4-related irAEs and 202 had anti-PD-1-related irAEs. 425 patients (70 %) received corticosteroids only; 181 patients (30 %) additionally received second-line immunosuppressants. Median PFS and OS from starting immunosuppression were 4.5 (95 %CI 3.4–8.1) and 31 (95 %CI 15-not reached) months in patients who received second-line immunosuppressants, and 11 (95 %CI 9.4–14) and 55 (95 %CI 41–not reached) months in patients who did not. High corticosteroid peak dose was associated with worse PFS and OS (HRadj 1.14; 95 %CI 1.01–1.29; HRadj 1.29; 95 %CI 1.12–1.49 for 80vs40mg), while cumulative dose was not. Second-line immunosuppression was associated with worse PFS (HRadj 1.32; 95 %CI 1.02–1.72) and OS (HRadj 1.34; 95 %CI 0.99–1.82) compared with corticosteroids alone.Conclusions: High corticosteroid peak dose and second-line immunosuppressants to treat irAEs are both associated with impaired survival. While immunosuppression is indispensable for treatment of severe irAEs, clinicians should weigh possible detrimental effects on survival against potential disadvantages of undertreatment.</p

Corticosteroids and other immunosuppressants for immune-related adverse events and checkpoint inhibitor effectiveness in melanoma

Background: Recent studies indicate an association between immunosuppression for immune-related adverse events (irAEs) and impaired survival in patients who received immune checkpoint inhibitors. Whether this is related to corticosteroids or second-line immunosuppressants is unknown. In the largest cohort thus far, we assessed the association of immunosuppressant type and dose with survival in melanoma patients with irAEs. Methods: Patients with advanced melanoma who received immunosuppressants for irAEs induced by first-line anti-PD-1 ± anti-CTLA-4 were included from 18 hospitals worldwide. Associations of cumulative and peak dose corticosteroids and use of second-line immunosuppression with survival from start of immunosuppression were assessed using multivariable Cox proportional hazard regression. Results: Among 606 patients, 404 had anti-PD-1 + anti-CTLA-4-related irAEs and 202 had anti-PD-1-related irAEs. 425 patients (70 %) received corticosteroids only; 181 patients (30 %) additionally received second-line immunosuppressants. Median PFS and OS from starting immunosuppression were 4.5 (95 %CI 3.4–8.1) and 31 (95 %CI 15-not reached) months in patients who received second-line immunosuppressants, and 11 (95 %CI 9.4–14) and 55 (95 %CI 41–not reached) months in patients who did not. High corticosteroid peak dose was associated with worse PFS and OS (HRadj 1.14; 95 %CI 1.01–1.29; HRadj 1.29; 95 %CI 1.12–1.49 for 80vs40mg), while cumulative dose was not. Second-line immunosuppression was associated with worse PFS (HRadj 1.32; 95 %CI 1.02–1.72) and OS (HRadj 1.34; 95 %CI 0.99–1.82) compared with corticosteroids alone. Conclusions: High corticosteroid peak dose and second-line immunosuppressants to treat irAEs are both associated with impaired survival. While immunosuppression is indispensable for treatment of severe irAEs, clinicians should weigh possible detrimental effects on survival against potential disadvantages of undertreatment.</p

The genomic and transcriptomic landscape of advanced renal cell cancer for individualized treatment strategies

Differences in the clinical course and treatment responses in individual patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC) can largely be explained by the different genomics of this disease. To improve the personalized treatment strategy and survival outcomes for patients with advanced RCC, the genomic make-up in patients with advanced RCC was investigated to identify putative actionable variants and signatures. In this prospective multicenter study (NCT01855477), whole-genome sequencing (WGS) data of locally advanced and metastatic tissue biopsies and matched whole-blood samples were collected from 91 patients with histopathologically confirmed RCC. WGS data were analyzed for small somatic variants, copy-number alterations and structural variants. For a subgroup of patients, RNA sequencing (RNA-Seq) data could be analyzed. RNA-Seq data were clustered on immunogenic and angiogenic gene expression patterns according to a previously developed angio-immunogenic gene signature. In all patients with papillary and clear cell RCC, putative actionable drug targets were detected by WGS, of which 94% were on-label available. RNA-Seq data of clear cell and papillary RCC were clustered using a previously developed angio-immunogenic gene signature. Analyses of driver mutations and RNA-Seq data revealed clear differences among different RCC subtypes, showing the added value of WGS and RNA-Seq over clinicopathological data. By improving both histological subtyping and the selection of treatment according to actionable targets and immune signatures, WGS and RNA-Seq may improve therapeutic decision making for most patients with advanced RCC, including patients with non-clear cell RCC for whom no standard treatment is available to data. Prospective clinical trials are needed to evaluate the impact of genomic and transcriptomic diagnostics on survival outcome for advanced RCC patients

Patients with Rare Cancers in the Drug Rediscovery Protocol (DRUP) Benefit from Genomics-Guided Treatment

Purpose: Patients with rare cancers (incidence less than 6 cases per 100,000 persons per year) commonly have less treatment opportunities and are understudied at the level of genomic targets. We hypothesized that patients with rare cancer benefit from approved anticancer drugs outside their label similar to common cancers. Experimental Design: In the Drug Rediscovery Protocol (DRUP), patients with therapy-refractory metastatic cancers harboring an actionable molecular profile are matched to FDA/European Medicines Agency–approved targeted therapy or immunotherapy. Patients are enrolled in parallel cohorts based on the histologic tumor type, molecular profile and study drug. Primary endpoint is clinical benefit (complete response, partial response, stable disease ≥ 16 weeks). Results: Of 1,145 submitted cases, 500 patients, including 164 patients with rare cancers, started one of the 25 available drugs and were evaluable for treatment outcome. The overall clinical benefit rate was 33% in both the rare cancer and nonrare cancer subgroup. Inactivating alterations of CDKN2A and activating BRAF aberrations were overrepresented in patients with rare cancer compared with nonrare cancers, resulting in more matches to CDK4/6 inhibitors (14% vs. 4%; P ≤ 0.001) or BRAF inhibitors (9% vs. 1%; P ≤ 0.001). Patients with rare cancer treated with small-molecule inhibitors targeting BRAF experienced higher rates of clinical benefit (75%) than the nonrare cancer subgroup. Conclusions: Comprehensive molecular testing in patients with rare cancers may identify treatment opportunities and clinical benefit similar to patients with common cancers. Our findings highlight the importance of access to broad molecular diagnostics to ensure equal treatment opportunities for all patients with cancer

Frailty is associated with in-hospital mortality in older hospitalised COVID-19 patients in the Netherlands:the COVID-OLD study

BACKGROUND: During the first wave of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, older patients had an increased risk of hospitalisation and death. Reports on the association of frailty with poor outcome have been conflicting. OBJECTIVE: The aim of the present study was to investigate the independent association between frailty and in-hospital mortality in older hospitalised COVID-19 patients in the Netherlands. METHODS: This was a multicentre retrospective cohort study in 15 hospitals in the Netherlands, including all patients aged ≥70 years, who were hospitalised with clinically confirmed COVID-19 between February and May 2020. Data were collected on demographics, co-morbidity, disease severity and Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS). Primary outcome was in-hospital mortality. RESULTS: A total of 1,376 patients were included (median age 78 years (interquartile range 74-84), 60% male). In total, 499 (38%) patients died during hospital admission. Parameters indicating presence of frailty (CFS 6-9) were associated with more co-morbidities, shorter symptom duration upon presentation (median 4 versus 7 days), lower oxygen demand and lower levels of C-reactive protein. In multivariable analyses, the CFS was independently associated with in-hospital mortality: compared with patients with CFS 1-3, patients with CFS 4-5 had a two times higher risk (odds ratio (OR) 2.0 (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.3-3.0)) and patients with CFS 6-9 had a three times higher risk of in-hospital mortality (OR 2.8 (95% CI 1.8-4.3)). CONCLUSIONS: The in-hospital mortality of older hospitalised COVID-19 patients in the Netherlands was 38%. Frailty was independently associated with higher in-hospital mortality, even though COVID-19 patients with frailty presented earlier to the hospital with less severe symptoms

The innate immune landscape of dMMR/MSI cancers predicts the outcome of nivolumab treatment: results from the drug rediscovery protocol

Purpose:The treatment efficacy of nivolumab was evaluated in patients with advanced, treatment-refractory solid mismatch repair deficiency/microsatellite-instable (dMMR/MSI) tumors, and in-depth biomarker analyses were performed to inform precision immunotherapy approaches.Patients and Methods:Patients with dMMR/MSI tumors who exhausted standard-of-care treatment options were enrolled in the Drug Rediscovery Protocol, a pan-cancer clinical trial that treats patients with cancer based on their tumor molecular profile with off-label anticancer drugs (NCT02925234). Patients received nivolumab (four cycles of 240 mg every 2 weeks, thereafter 480 mg every 4 weeks). The primary endpoint was clinical benefit (CB: objective response or stable disease ≥16 weeks). Whole-genome sequencing and RNA sequencing were performed on pretreatment tumor biopsies.Results:A total of 130 evaluable patients were enrolled with 16 different cancer types. CB was observed in 62% [95% confidence interval (CI), 53–70], with an objective response in 45% (95% CI, 36–54). After a median follow-up of 14.5 months (95% CI, 13–19), the median progression-free survival was 18 months (95% CI, 9–not reached), and the median overall survival was not reached. Whereas CB was not, or only weakly, associated with markers of adaptive immune cell infiltration, CB was strongly associated with expression of a broad set of innate immune receptors/ligands. This clearly contrasted findings in melanoma, in which markers of adaptive immunity dominated the biomarker landscape.Conclusions:Nivolumab proved highly effective in advanced dMMR/MSI tumors. Expression of key innate immune receptors/ligands was the main predictor of a good treatment outcome, contrasting findings in melanoma and strengthening the rationale for tumor type–specific biomarkers for guiding immunotherapy.Experimentele farmacotherapi

Tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes and immune-related adverse events in advanced melanoma

Background: The predictive value of tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs) in immune-related adverse event (irAE) development remains unknown, although an association between tumor immunogenicity and irAEs has been suggested. We investigated the association between TIL abundance in pretreatment primary and metastasis specimens and the subsequent development of severe irAEs. Patients and methods: We retrospectively identified patients with advanced cutaneous melanoma who received first-line anti-programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1) with or without anti-cytotoxic T-lymphocyte associated protein 4 (anti-CTLA-4) from 10 hospitals in the Netherlands. TILs were scored on representative hematoxylin and eosin (H&E) stains of the primary melanoma and pretreatment melanoma metastasis as ‘absent’, ‘nonbrisk’, or ‘brisk’. A univariable logistic regression analysis was carried out to assess the association between the TIL scores and the development of severe irAEs. Fine and Gray subdistribution hazard models were used to estimate the cumulative incidence of severe irAEs. Results: Of the 1346 eligible patients, 536 patients had primary melanoma specimens available, and 613 patients had metastasis specimens available. Severe irAEs occurred in 15% of anti-PD-1-treated patients and 49% of anti-PD-1 + anti-CTLA-4-treated patients. The presence of TILs was not associated with the occurrence of grade ≥3 irAEs in primary melanoma specimens (P = 0.70) nor pretreatment metastasis specimens (P = 0.91). In the univariable analysis, patients with brisk TILs did not have a higher chance of developing severe irAEs compared with patients with absent TILs, for both primary specimen (odds ratio 1.15, 95% confidence interval 0.60-2.18) and metastasis specimen (odds ratio 0.77, 95% confidence interval 0.37-1.59). There was also no significant difference in the lifetime risk or timing of the development of severe irAEs in patients with TILs present compared with patients with TILs absent. Conclusion: There was no association between the TIL scores on H&E-stained slides from the primary melanoma or pretreatment metastasis and the development of grade 3 or higher irAEs. Additionally, no correlation was found between the presence of TILs and the timing of irAEs