Improvement In Overall Survival Research Articles

Preferences of physicians for treatment-related toxicity vs. recurrence in melanoma (GERMELATOX-A): the doctors’ perspective

IntroductionAdjuvant treatment with immune checkpoint inhibitors, such as PD1-antibodies (ICI) ± CTLA4-antibodies (cICI) or targeted therapy with BRAF/MEK inhibitors (TT), has shown a significant improvement in disease-free survival (DFS) for high-risk melanoma patients. However, due to specific side effects, the choice of treatment is often influenced by the risk of toxicity. Therefore, the role of physicians in treatment decisions of patients is crucial. This study investigated for the first time in a multicenter setting the attitudes and preferences of dermatooncologists in Germany and Switzerland regarding adjuvant treatment with (c)ICI and TT.MethodsIn the GERMELATOX-A study, 108 physicians (median age: 32 yrs, 67.6% female) from 11 skin cancer centers were surveyed to rate typical side effect scenarios of (c)ICI and TT treatments and then compared to patients’ ratings evaluated in a previous analysis from the same centers. The scenarios described mild-to-moderate or severe toxicity and included melanoma relapse leading to death. The physicians were asked about the level of side effects they would tolerate in exchange for a reduction in melanoma relapse and an increase in survival at 5 years.ResultsThe preferences of physicians and patients revealed significant differences regarding adjuvant melanoma treatment with (c)ICI and TT (p < 0.05). Compared to patients, physicians tend to value a melanoma relapse less severe, according to a visual analog scale. They were also less threatened by all scenarios of side effects during adjuvant treatment with (c)ICI or TT, compared to patients. Physicians required lower risk reductions for disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) for both ICI and TT and their drug-related side effects to accept these treatments. In case of severe side effects, physicians required similar 5-year DFS rates for ICI and TT (60–65%), while patients needed a 15% improvement of 5-year DFS for ICI compared to TT (80%/65%). For survival, physicians expected an OS improvement of + 10% for all three treatment modalities, whereas patients required a higher increase: + 18–22% for ICI and + 15% for TT.ConclusionOur study highlights the importance of understanding the patient’s perspective and a potential difference to the doctor’s view when making decisions about adjuvant melanoma treatment with (c)ICI and TT, especially as these treatments are increasingly being implemented in earlier stages.

Sentinel lymph node biopsy versus observation in high-risk cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma in immunosuppressed and immunocompetent patients: An inverse probability of treatment weighting study.

The survival benefit of sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) in immunocompetent and immunosuppressed patients with high-risk cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (cSCC) has not been established. To determine whether SLNB improves disease-specific survival (DSS) in high-risk cSCC. Secondary objectives were to analyse disease-free survival, nodal recurrence-free survival and overall survival (OS). Multicentre, retrospective, observational cohort study comparing survival outcomes in immunosuppressed and immunocompetent patients treated with SLNB or watchful waiting. Inverse probability of treatment weighting was used to adjust for possible confounding effects. We studied 638 tumours in immunocompetent patients (SLNB n = 42, observation n = 596) and 173 tumours in immunosuppressed patients (SLNB n = 28, observation n = 145). Overall, SLNB was positive in 15.7% of tumours. SLNB was associated with a reduced risk of nodal recurrence (NR)(hazard ratio [HR], 0.05 [95% CI, 0.01-0.43]; p = 0.006), disease specific mortality (HR, 0.17 [95% CI, 0.04-0.72]; p = 0.016) and all-cause mortality (HR, 0.33 [95% CI, 0.15-0.71]; p = 0.004) only in immunocompetent patients. SLNB was associated with improvements in NR, DSS and OS in immunocompetent but not in immunosuppressed patients with high-risk cSCC.

Abemaciclib plus a nonsteroidal aromatase inhibitor as initial therapy for HR+, HER2− advanced breast cancer: final overall survival results of MONARCH 3

In MONARCH 2, the addition of abemaciclib to fulvestrant significantly improved both progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) in patients with HR+, HER2- advanced breast cancer (ABC) with disease progression on prior endocrine therapy (ET). In MONARCH 3, the addition of abemaciclib to a nonsteroidal aromatase inhibitor (NSAI) as initial therapy for HR+, HER2- ABC significantly improved PFS. Here, we present the prespecified final OS results for MONARCH 3. MONARCH 3 is a randomized, double-blind, phase 3 study of abemaciclib plus NSAI (anastrozole or letrozole) versus placebo plus NSAI in postmenopausal women with HR+, HER2- ABC without prior systemic therapy in the advanced setting. The primary objective was investigator-assessed PFS; OS was a gated secondary endpoint, and chemotherapy-free survival (CFS) was an exploratory endpoint. A total of 493 women were randomized 2:1 to receive abemaciclib plus NSAI (n = 328) or placebo plus NSAI (n = 165). After a median follow-up of 8.1 years, there were 198 OS events (60.4%) in the abemaciclib arm and 116 (70.3%) in the placebo arm (hazard ratio, 0.804; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.637-1.015; P = 0.0664, non-significant). Median OS was 66.8 versus 53.7 months for abemaciclib versus placebo. In the subgroup with visceral disease (sVD), there were 113 OS events (65.3%) in the abemaciclib arm and 65 (72.2%) in the placebo arm (hazard ratio, 0.758; 95% CI, 0.558-1.030; P = 0.0757, non-significant). Median OS was 63.7 months versus 48.8 months for abemaciclib versus placebo. The previously demonstrated PFS benefit was sustained, and CFS numerically improved with the addition of abemaciclib. No new safety signals were observed. Abemaciclib combined with an NSAI resulted in clinically meaningful improvement in median OS (ITT: 13.1 months; sVD: 14.9 months) in patients with HR+ HER2- ABC; however, statistical significance was not reached.

Squamous cell carcinoma of the colon: evaluation of treatment modalities and survival

BackgroundSquamous cell carcinoma of the colon (CSCC) is a rare subtype of colon cancer. This study aimed to evaluate treatment strategies and overall survival (OS). MethodsUsing the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results program database from 2008 to 2019, patients aged 18 years with CSCC were identified. Treatment strategies and OS were summarized using the Kaplan-Meier analysis and the log-rank test. Adjusted Cox proportional hazards regression model ratios were calculated to evaluate the effect of confounding variables. ResultsAfter exclusions, 153 patients met the inclusion criteria. The most common treatment modalities included surgery alone (52.1%), surgery and adjuvant chemotherapy (12.9%), and no treatment (26.4%). Kaplan-Meier analysis revealed that patients who underwent surgery and adjuvant chemotherapy had significant improvements in OS (log-rank P = .002). Cox regression analysis revealed tumor grade (hazard ratio [HR], 2.12; 95% CI, 1.17–3.86) and receipt of chemotherapy (HR, 2.66; 95% CI, 1.23–5.76) as the only factors associated with improvements in OS. ConclusionPatients who underwent surgery in combination with chemotherapy had better OS than those who underwent surgery alone. Tumor grade and receipt of chemotherapy were independently associated with OS.

Abstract PO4-05-10: A Carryover Effect: Antibody Drug Conjugates Constantly Provide a Substantial Improvement in Overall Survival more than in Progression-free Survival

Abstract Background: In metastatic breast cancer (MBC), progression-free survival (PFS) improvement does not always translate into overall survival (OS) benefit. Multiple treatment options after progression resulted in a long post-progression survival in MBC patients, and these would make the dissociation of PFS benefit and OS benefit. We have reported the constant correlation of PFS improvement and OS improvement in anti-HER2 containing treatment (Breast 2021; 59:211-220). The relationship between PFS and OS improvement in antibody drug conjugate has not been thoroughly examined. Methods: “Metastatic breast cancer” and “antibody drug conjugate” (ADC) were used as keywords to search for randomized clinical trials that report both PFS and OS. Hazard ratios (HR) and median survival were analyzed. Increments in PFS (delta PFS) and increments in OS (delta OS) were compared between studies. Results: A total of 8 trials were identified and summarized in table 1. The target of ADC was HER2 (N=6) or Trop2 (N=2). In DESTINY-Breast 03 trial, the control arm was another ADC (T-DM1). The control arms in all the other 7 trials were chemotherapy. The HR of PFS (range 0.28-0.66) was smaller than HR of OS (range 0.48- 0.83) in all of the trials. The median OS was not reached (NR) in 1 of the trials (DB-03) and was thus removed from the analysis for delta PFS and delta OS. In the comparison of delta PFS, the increments of median PFS fell between 1.5 and 10.9 months(m). The increments of median OS were between 1.6 and 12.7 m. All the delta OS are greater than the delta PFS in the 7 trials with available PFS and OS data. Conclusion: In MBC, ADCs targeting HER2 and Trop2 both constantly provide improvement of OS greater than PFS. Further investigation on the potential mechanism is warranted. Table 1 Citation Format: I-Chun Chen, Ching-Hung Lin, Yen-Shen Lu. A Carryover Effect: Antibody Drug Conjugates Constantly Provide a Substantial Improvement in Overall Survival more than in Progression-free Survival [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2023 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2023 Dec 5-9; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2024;84(9 Suppl):Abstract nr PO4-05-10.

Abstract PO2-06-04: Prospective study on eribulin efficacy in advanced and metastatic breast cancer: changes in TGF-β compared to other standard chemotherapy agents (KBCSG-TR 2018, POTENTIAL)

Abstract Introduction Eribulin (E) has been demonstrated to improve overall survival (OS) compared to standard chemotherapies in pivotal phase III clinical trials (studies 301 and 305), although there was no difference in progression-free survival. These findings suggest that E might have a mechanism for OS improvement different from the common anti-tumor effect. Several studies reported that E inhibits epithelial-mesenchymal transition and the suppression of TGF-β plays a central role. Data on the relationship between the E-induced serial change in TGF-β and the improvement in OS remains insufficient. Therefore, we conducted this prospective observational study of patients treated with E while undergoing sequential TGF-β testing. This study also enrolled patients who received chemotherapy other than E as a control. Methods Patients with HER2-negative recurrent/metastatic breast cancer (MBC) were prospectively enrolled from 23 breast cancer centers in Japan, if they had not previously used E, had received two or fewer prior chemotherapy regimens, and were scheduled to start either E, capecitabine, S-1 or paclitaxel (± bevacizumab) between September 2020 and February 2022. The target sample sizes were 150 and 50 patients scheduled to receive E (Cohort E) and other drugs (Cohort Others), respectively. We collected blood samples for TGF-β testing at baseline, at two or three weeks (week 2/3), and at four or five weeks (week 4/5) from the beginning. The observation period was until February 2023. The primary endpoint was to evaluate the relationship between changes in TGF-β and clinical response, including OS and time to treatment failure (TTF). Results A total of 202 of the 203 enrolled patients were included in the analysis (1 patient declined consent). The median age was 60.0 (interquartile range, 52.0-69.0) years and ECOG performance status was 0 or 1 in all patients. Among 152 patients in Cohort E and 50 patients in Cohort Others, 37 patients (24.3%) and 12 patients (24.0%) had hormonal receptor-negative breast cancer, and 29 patients (19.1%) and 30 patients (60.0%) had no prior chemotherapy for MBC, respectively. Visceral metastasis totaled 115 (75.7%) in Cohort E and 46 (92.0%) in Cohort Others. In OS analysis of 199 patients, the median OS was 24.5 months (95% CI, 17.3-NA) for no prior chemotherapy, and 17.7 months for one or two prior chemotherapy (median follow-up 14.5 months). In Cohort E and Cohort Others, 139 and 45 patients, respectively, had paired samples for TGF-β testing at baseline and week 2/3. The proportion of patients with a percent change at week 2/3 from baseline in TGF-β (ΔTGF-β) of less than zero (decreased TGF-β) was 46.8% in Cohort E and 33.3% in Cohort Others, indicating a 13.4% (-2.6% – 29.5%) higher trend in Cohort E. Based on the time-dependent receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves at 6 months for TTF, the threshold of ΔTGF-β was determined to be 27%. For the low ΔTGF-β group (&amp;lt; 27%) and the high ΔTGF-β group (≥27%), OS rates at median follow-up (14.5 months) were 70.6% and 54.3% (p=0.085) in Cohort E and 68.9% and 58.2% (p=0.585) in Cohort Others, respectively, suggesting a relationship between low ΔTGF-β and a favorable prognosis only in Cohort E. Conclusions The current study showed the trend in the higher frequency of decreased TGF-β, as well as the important relationship between decreased TGF-β and a favorable prognosis in patients treated with E compared with those receiving other chemotherapies. As the next step, further biomarker analyses including cytokines and chemokines, and immunological analyses are planned. Citation Format: Takahiro Nakayama, Tersuhiro Yoshinami, Fumie Fujisawa, Minako Nishio, Takashi Yamanaka, Toshinari Yamashita, Chiya Oshiro, Ayaka Izui, Nobumoto Tomioka, Hideki Maeda, Masafumi Shimoda, Kenzo Shimazu, Michiko Tsuneizumi, Ryoichi Matsunuma, Hiroko Bando, Aya Ueda, Hiroyuki Yasojima, Kumiko Okada, Kenichi Inoue, Yuichiro Kai, Katsuhide Yoshidome, Hidetoshi Kawaguchi, Masayuki Nagahashi, Kazuteru Oshima, Shinichiro Kashiwagi, Tsutomu Iwasa, Kanae Taruno, Shigeru Tsuyuki, Fumine Tsukamoto, Takashi Morimoto, Nobuyoshi Kittaka, Toru Higuchi, Yoichi Naito, Ryotaro Saita, Hiroyoshi Nishikawa, Daisuke Sugiyama, Yasuo Miyoshi, Yohei Uchida, Tomomi Yamada, Norikazu Masuda. Prospective study on eribulin efficacy in advanced and metastatic breast cancer: changes in TGF-β compared to other standard chemotherapy agents (KBCSG-TR 2018, POTENTIAL) [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2023 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2023 Dec 5-9; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2024;84(9 Suppl):Abstract nr PO2-06-04.

Abstract PO2-05-11: Patient Perspectives on the Value of Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy (SBRT) in the Management of Breast Cancer: The PERSPECTIVE Study

Abstract Background: Oligometastatic disease describes limited metastases amenable to local therapy such as stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT). Within the UK National Health Service (NHS), SBRT is a standard of care for up to 3 metachronous sites of oligometastatic breast cancer (OMBC), offering high local control rates with low toxicity. The SABR-COMET study demonstrated improved progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) with SBRT compared to standard of care in a number of oligometastatic cancers, including breast cancer [1]. Conversely, the NRG-002 trial results suggest no PFS or OS improvement with the addition of SBRT to standard systemic therapy in OMBC [2]. The OS data for this study are yet to mature and in the meantime the results of other prospective studies are awaited. As patients’ attitudes and perspectives govern their preferences around treatment decisions, it is vital to understand whether PFS and OS are the most important considerations for patients. This study aims to explore patients’ perspective on the role of SBRT in breast cancer management. Their views will help inform future trial endpoints and support clinicians to support patients with their decision making and expectations. Methods: We conducted an exploratory qualitative study with focus groups and individual interviews, to understand participants knowledge, views and opinions on SBRT in treating breast cancer. All patients were asked to watch an educational video about SBRT in advance of participating in the interviews. An interview guide with open-ended questions was developed. Breast cancer patients were recruited using a purposive sampling matrix based on the patients age, presence of metastatic disease and previous experience with radiotherapy. Each focus group had at least two moderators and all interviews were digitally recorded and then transcribed. The data were managed and coded using NVivo version 12 and analysed using a thematic analysis approach. Results: A total of 18 breast cancer patients participated in this study, with 7 (39%) having primary disease and 11 (61%) with metastatic disease. The study included two focus groups (group one = 5 patients; group two = 9 patients) and four individual interviews conducted between May and June 2023. The participants had a median age of 54 years (range 38-74). The majority of participants (83%) had previous experience with radiotherapy, with 4 (27%) having received SBRT previously for their OMBC. Only 2 (2%) patients who had not previously received SBRT were aware of it before participating in this study. Most of the patients (78%) were Caucasian and 72% had attained at least an undergraduate degree level of education. Throughout the study, three main themes emerged: theme 1 - participants experience with radiotherapy; theme 2 - interests and considerations regarding SBRT (including desired treatment outcomes) and theme 3 - willingness to consider SBRT in absence of a survival benefit. Extending their life was unanimously described as the most important desired outcome of SBRT, followed by quality of life. Other desired treatment outcomes expressed included reduction of tumour size, minimal collateral damage/side effects, relief of symptoms, avoidance of recurrence and increase in time to change of systemic therapy. Conclusion: In our study, while extension of life was a desired treatment outcome of SBRT for OMBC, all participants expressed willingness to consider SBRT for its potential benefits in local control and durable pain control, even in absence of a survival benefit.

Abstract GS01-12: MONARCH 3: Final overall survival results of abemaciclib plus a nonsteroidal aromatase inhibitor as first-line therapy for HR+, HER2- advanced breast cancer

Abstract Background: Abemaciclib is approved both for high-risk early breast cancer as well as advanced breast cancer (ABC) in the first- and second-line setting. In MONARCH 2, the addition of abemaciclib to fulvestrant significantly improved both progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) in patients with HR+, HER2- ABC with disease progression on prior endocrine therapy (ET). In MONARCH 3, the addition of abemaciclib to a nonsteroidal aromatase inhibitor (NSAI) significantly improved PFS (HR, 0.540; 95% CI, 0.418-0.698; p=0.000002) as initial therapy in HR+, HER2- ABC. At the last interim OS analysis (~252 events, at 5.8 years follow-up [FU]), a numerically favorable median OS difference (12.6 months) was observed (HR, 0.754; 95% CI, 0.584-0.974; p=0.0301, non-significant [NS]). Here, we present the final OS analysis of MONARCH 3 (NCT02246621). Methods: MONARCH 3 is a randomized, double-blind, Phase 3 study of abemaciclib + NSAI (anastrozole or letrozole) vs placebo + NSAI in postmenopausal women with HR+, HER2- ABC without prior systemic therapy in the advanced setting. OS was a gated secondary endpoint and chemotherapy-free survival (CFS) an exploratory endpoint. Final OS analysis was planned after approximately 315 OS events had occurred in the intent-to-treat (ITT) population with a split alpha between the ITT population and the subgroup with visceral disease (sVD) according to a prespecified graphical testing scheme. Kaplan-Meier method and stratified Cox proportional hazards models were used for time-to-event analyses. All reported p-values are two-sided. Results A total of 493 women were randomized 2:1 to receive abemaciclib + NSAI (n=328) or placebo + NSAI (n=165). After a median FU of 8.1 years, 7% of patients were still receiving treatment in the abemaciclib arm vs 3% in the placebo arm. In the ITT population, 314 OS events were observed (198 deaths among 328 patients [60%] in the abemaciclib arm and 116 among 165 [70%] in the placebo arm; HR, 0.804; 95% CI, 0.637-1.015; p=0.0664, NS). Median OS was 66.8 months in the abemaciclib arm and 53.7 months in the placebo arm, a numerical difference of 13.1 months in the ITT population. In the sVD, 178 events were observed (113 deaths among 173 patients [65%] in the abemaciclib arm and 65 among 90 [72%] in the placebo arm; HR, 0.758; 95% CI, 0.558-1.030; p=0.0757, NS). Median OS was 63.7 months in the abemaciclib arm and 48.8 months in the placebo arm, a numerical difference of 14.9 months in the sVD. Consistent OS differences were observed across prespecified subgroups. PFS benefit was sustained (median 29.0 vs 14.8 months; HR, 0.535; 95% CI, 0.429-0.668; nominal p&amp;lt;0.0001) with substantial difference in 6-year PFS rates (23.3% vs 4.3% for abemaciclib vs placebo). CFS was also improved with abemaciclib vs placebo (median 46.7 vs 30.6 months; HR, 0.693; 95% CI, 0.557-0.863; nominal p=0.0010). No new safety signals were observed with longer term use. Conclusion In patients with HR+, HER2- ABC, abemaciclib in combination with a NSAI resulted in numerically longer OS compared to NSAI alone; however, statistical significance was not reached after a median FU of 8.1 years. The clinically meaningful improvement in median OS (&amp;gt;13 months) combined with the sustained significant improvement in median PFS (&amp;gt;14 months) and substantial extension in median CFS (&amp;gt;16 months) continue to support the use of abemaciclib in combination with NSAI as first-line therapy in ABC. Citation Format: Matthew Goetz, Masakazu Toi, Jens Huober, Joo Hyuk Sohn, Olivier Trédan, Inhae Park, Mario Campone, Shin-Cheh Chen, Luis Manual Manso, Shani Paluch-Shimon, Orit C. Freedman, Valerie Andre, Abhijoy Saha, Gertjan van Hal, Ashwin Shahir, Hiroji Iwata, Stephen RD Johnston, Joyce O'Shaughnessy, Xavier Pivot, Sara Tolaney, Sara Hurvitz, Antonio Llombart. MONARCH 3: Final overall survival results of abemaciclib plus a nonsteroidal aromatase inhibitor as first-line therapy for HR+, HER2- advanced breast cancer [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2023 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2023 Dec 5-9; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2024;84(9 Suppl):Abstract nr GS01-12.

Nivolumab plus chemotherapy or ipilimumab versus chemotherapy in patients with advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (CheckMate 648): 29-month follow-up from a randomized, open-label, phase III trial.

First-line nivolumab plus chemotherapy and nivolumab plus ipilimumab both demonstrated significant overall survival (OS) benefit versus chemotherapy in previously untreated patients with advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) in the CheckMate 648 trial, leading to approvals of both nivolumab-containing regimens in many countries. We report longer-term follow-up data. This open-label, phase III trial (NCT03143153) enrolled adults with previously untreated, unresectable, advanced, recurrent, or metastatic ESCC. Patients were randomized 1:1:1 to nivolumab plus chemotherapy, nivolumab plus ipilimumab, or chemotherapy. Primary endpoints were OS and progression-free survival (PFS) by blinded independent central review. Hierarchical testing was performed first in patients with tumor cell programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression of ≥1% and then in the overall population. A total of 970 patients were randomly assigned. After 29 months of minimum follow-up, nivolumab plus chemotherapy continued to demonstrate improvement in OS versus chemotherapy (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.59 [95% CI: 0.46-0.76]) in patients with tumor cell PD-L1 expression of ≥1% and in the overall population (HR = 0.78 [95% CI: 0.65-0.93]) and with nivolumab plus ipilimumab versus chemotherapy (HR = 0.62 [95% CI: 0.48-0.80]) in patients with tumor cell PD-L1 expression of ≥1% and in the overall population (HR = 0.77 [95% CI: 0.65-0.92]). In patients with tumor cell PD-L1 expression of ≥1%, nivolumab plus chemotherapy demonstrated PFS benefit versus chemotherapy (HR = 0.67 [95% CI: 0.51-0.89]); PFS benefit was not observed with nivolumab plus ipilimumab versus chemotherapy (HR = 1.04 [95% CI: 0.79-1.36]). Among all treated patients (n = 936), Grade 3-4 treatment-related adverse events were reported in 151 (49%, nivolumab plus chemotherapy), 105 (32%, nivolumab plus ipilimumab), and 110 (36%, chemotherapy) patients. Nivolumab plus chemotherapy and nivolumab plus ipilimumab continued to demonstrate clinically meaningful OS benefit versus chemotherapy with no new safety signals identified with longer follow-up, further supporting use as first-line standard treatment options for patients with advanced ESCC.

Breakthrough Therapy Cancer Drugs and Indications With FDA Approval: Development Time, Innovation, Trials, Clinical Benefit, Epidemiology, and Price.

The breakthrough therapy designation (BTD) facilitates the development of drugs with a large preliminary benefit in treating serious or life-threatening diseases. This study analyzes the FDA approval, trials, benefits, unmet needs, and pricing of breakthrough and nonbreakthrough therapy cancer drugs and indications. We analyzed 355 cancer indications with FDA approval (2012-2022). Breakthrough and nonbreakthrough indications were compared regarding their FDA approval, innovativeness, clinical trials, epidemiology, and price. Data were extracted from FDA labels, the Global Burden of Disease study, and the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. Hazard ratios (HRs) for overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), and relative risk (RR) of tumor response were meta-analyzed across randomized controlled trials. Objective response rates (ORRs) were meta-analyzed for single-arm trials. We identified 137 breakthrough and 218 nonbreakthrough cancer indications. The median clinical development time was 3.2 years shorter for breakthrough drugs than for nonbreakthrough drugs (5.6 vs 8.8 years; P=.002). The BTD was more frequently granted to biomarker-directed indications (46% vs 34%; P=.025) supported by smaller trials (median, 149 vs 326 patients; P<.001) of single-arm (53% vs 27%; P<.001) and phase I or II design (61% vs 31%; P<.001). Breakthrough indications offered a greater OS (HR, 0.69 vs 0.74; P=.031) and tumor response (RR, 1.48 vs 1.32; P=.006; ORR, 52% vs 40%; P=.004), but not a PFS benefit (HR, 0.53 vs 0.58; P=.212). Median improvements in OS (4.8 vs 3.2 months; P=.002) and PFS (5.4 vs 3.3 months; P=.005) but not duration of response (8.7 vs 4.7 months; P=.245) were higher for breakthrough than for nonbreakthrough indications. The BTD was more frequently granted to first-in-class drugs (42% vs 28%; P=.001) and first-in-indication treatments (43% vs 29%; P<.001). There were no differences in treatment and epidemiologic characteristics between breakthrough and nonbreakthrough drugs. Breakthrough drugs were more expensive than nonbreakthrough drugs (mean monthly price, $38,971 vs $22,591; P=.0592). The BTD expedites patient access to effective and innovative, but also expensive, new cancer drugs and indications.

A novel stratification scheme combined with internal arteries in CT imaging for guiding postoperative adjuvant transarterial chemoembolization in hepatocellular carcinoma: a retrospective cohort study.

Although postoperative adjuvant transarterial chemoembolization (PA-TACE) improves survival outcomes in a subset of patients with resected hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), the lack of reliable biomarkers for patient selection remains a significant challenge. The present study aimed to evaluate whether computed tomography imaging can provide more value for predicting benefits from PA-TACE and to establish a new scheme for guiding PA-TACE benefits. In this retrospective study, patients with HCC who had undergone preoperative contrast-enhanced computed tomography and curative hepatectomy were evaluated. Inverse probability of treatment weight was performed to balance the difference of baseline characteristics. Cox models were used to test the interaction among PA-TACE, imaging features, and pathological indicators. An HCC imaging and pathological classification (HIPC) scheme incorporating these imaging and pathological indicators was established. This study included 1488 patients [median age, 52 years (IQR, 45-61 years); 1309 male]. Microvascular invasion (MVI) positive, and diameter >5cm tumors achieved a higher recurrence-free survival (RFS), and overall survival (OS) benefit, respectively, from PA-TACE than MVI negative, and diameter ≤5cm tumors. Patients with internal arteries (IA) positive benefited more than those with IA-negative in terms of RFS ( P =0.016) and OS ( P =0.018). PA-TACE achieved significant RFS and OS improvements in HIPC3 (IA present and diameter >5 cm, or two or three tumors) patients but not in HIPC1 (diameter ≤5cm, MVI negative) and HIPC2 (other single tumor) patients. Our scheme may decrease the number of patients receiving PA-TACE by ~36.5% compared to the previous suggestion. IA can provide more value for predicting the benefit of PA-TACE treatment. The proposed HIPC scheme can be used to stratify patients with and without survival benefits from PA-TACE.

Efficacy and safety of anlotinib in combination with immune checkpoint inhibitors or not as advanced non-small cell lung cancer treatment: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.

Non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) remains a leading cause of cancer mortality. Combined anlotinib and immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) therapy may have synergistic antitumor effects in NSCLC. This study aimed to comparing the efficacy and safety of anlotinib and ICIs treatment, monotherapy and combination in NSCLC. We performed a systematic review and network meta-analysis of 14 studies involving 4,308 NSCLC patients across four regimens: anlotinib, ICIs, anlotinib plus ICIs, and placebo. Efficacy outcomes were progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), objective response rate (ORR), and disease control rate (DCR). Safety outcomes included treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs), TRAE grade three or higher (TRAE ≥3). Analyses were performed in RevMan 5.3 and R 3.5.1 (gemtc package). P<0.05 or effect estimate with 95% confidence interval (CI) that did not include 1 indicated statistical significance. Fourteen publications involving 4,308 patients across four treatment regimens (anlotinib, ICIs, anlotinib plus ICIs, placebo) were included. For PFS, network meta-analysis showed all three interventions significantly improved PFS versus placebo. Anlotinib plus ICIs demonstrated the greatest PFS improvement [hazard ratio (HR) =0.24; 95% CI: 0.14, 0.36], followed by anlotinib (HR =0.37; 95% CI: 0.23, 0.58), and ICIs (HR =0.43; 95% CI: 0.27, 0.67). For OS, compared to placebo, anlotinib plus ICIs showed the greatest OS improvement (HR =0.52; 95% CI: 0.33, 0.74), followed by anlotinib (HR =0.66; 95% CI: 0.47, 0.95), and ICIs (HR =0.72; 95% CI: 0.54, 0.97). For ORR, anlotinib plus ICIs demonstrated the greatest improvement versus placebo [odds ratio (OR) =5.29; 95% CI: 3.32, 8.58], followed by anlotinib (OR =4.38; 95% CI: 2.42, 8.19), and ICIs (OR =2.17; 95% CI: 1.65, 2.89). For DCR, anlotinib plus ICIs showed the greatest improvement versus placebo (OR =13.32; 95% CI: 4.99, 45.09), followed by anlotinib (OR =5.56; 95% CI: 2.17, 14.38), and ICIs (OR =3.46; 95% CI: 1.29, 10.85). Compared to placebo, anlotinib was associated with the highest risk of TRAEs (OR =3.67, 95% CI: 1.12, 15.77), followed by ICIs (OR =1.83; 95% CI: 1.26, 2.69). Due to lack of data on anlotinib plus ICIs, no comparison was conducted. For grade ≥3 TRAEs, compared to placebo, anlotinib increased the risk (OR =3.67; 95% CI: 1.12, 15.77), while anlotinib plus ICIs (OR =2.45; 95% CI: 0.51, 11.6) and ICIs (OR =1.29; 95% CI: 0.33, 4.38) did not increase the risk. Anlotinib combined with ICIs demonstrates improved efficacy over monotherapy for NSCLC treatment, without increased adverse events.

Trends in volumes and survival after hematopoietic cell transplantation in racial/ethnic minorities

AbstractThere has been an increase in volume as well as an improvement in overall survival (OS) after hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT) for hematologic disorders. It is unknown if these changes have affected racial/ethnic minorities equally. In this observational study from the Center for International Blood and Marrow Transplant Research of 79 904 autologous (auto) and 65 662 allogeneic (allo) HCTs, we examined the volume and rates of change of autoHCT and alloHCT over time and trends in OS in 4 racial/ethnic groups: non-Hispanic Whites (NHWs), non-Hispanic African Americans (NHAAs), and Hispanics across 5 2-year cohorts from 2009 to 2018. Rates of change were compared using Poisson model. Adjusted and unadjusted Cox proportional hazards models examined trends in mortality in the 4 racial/ethnic groups over 5 study time periods. The rates of increase in volume were significantly higher for Hispanics and NHAAs vs NHW for both autoHCT and alloHCT. Adjusted overall mortality after autoHCT was comparable across all racial/ethnic groups. NHAA adults (hazard ratio [HR] 1.13; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.04-1.22; P = .004) and pediatric patients (HR 1.62; 95% CI 1.3-2.03; P < .001) had a higher risk of mortality after alloHCT than NHWs. Improvement in OS over time was seen in all 4 groups after both autoHCT and alloHCT. Our study shows the rate of change for the use of autoHCT and alloHCT is higher in NHAAs and Hispanics than in NHWs. Survival after autoHCT and alloHCT improved over time; however, NHAAs have worse OS after alloHCT, which has persisted. Continued efforts are needed to mitigate disparities for patients requiring alloHCT.

The role of Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy (HIPEC) as second-line debulking in advanced ovarian cancer patients. A meta-analysis

Purpose: Ovarian cancer, as a type of gynecological cancer with one of the highest morbidity and recurrence rates, has been the burning issue for modern research. With new therapeutic methods coming to light, the focus on the promising Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy (HIPEC) has raised questions about its efficacy on patients’ overall survival (OS) and post-surgical quality of life. Methods: A meta-analysis was performed in order to estimate the role of HIPEC in advanced ovarian cancer, concentrating, among others, on the following quality of life. After thorough research on the PubMed and Cochrane databases, using the terms ‘HIPEC, ovarian cancer’, as well as decoding the results on the last decade, a total of nine articles were selected for this purpose. Results: Data decoding revealed a notorious improvement of OS of the cytoreductive surgery (CRS) plus HIPEC versus the CRS arm at 1, 3, 4 and 5 years respectively; (OR 1.10; 95% CI, 0.85-1.43), (OR 1.53; 95% CI, 1.12-2.10), (OR 1.70; 95% CI, 1.03-2.81), (OR 1.22; 95% CI, 0.77-1.95). At 2 years, the collected data depicted a small worsening in OS (OR 0.92; 95% CI, 0.70-1.19). Conclusion: HIPEC, in spite of its recent innovative nature, has already given positive signs for ovarian cancer therapeutic mapping. Objective of the conducted study focuses on investigating its reflection in advanced stages and recurrent ovarian cancer lesions, respectively.

Immunotherapy in Stage III-IV Colon Cancer: A Propensity Score-Matched Analysis of the National Cancer Database.

Immunotherapy for the systemic treatment of cancer offers new treatment possibilities for advanced malignancies. Despite promising initial results, evidence on efficacy of immunotherapy for colon cancer is lacking. Thus, we aimed to assess short-term and long-term outcomes of immunotherapy in patients with advanced colon cancer. A US National Cancer Database was searched for patients with stage III-IV colonic adenocarcinoma between 2010 and 2019. Propensity score matching was used to classify the cohort into 2 groups: patients who received immunotherapy and controls. Main outcome measures were primary outcome was overall survival (OS). A total of 23,778 patients with stage III-IV colonic adenocarcinoma were treated with immunotherapy during the study period compared to 114,753 controls. Immunotherapy treated patients were younger (median age 61 vs. 67 y; P<0.001), more often male (57.3% vs. 50.7%, P<0.001), had more private insurance (44.1% vs. 33.7%; P<0.001), had more left-sided tumors (49.5% vs. 39.1%; P<0.001) and liver metastasis (80.2% vs. 61.7%; P<0.001) than controls. Immunotherapy patients received more standard chemotherapy (49.8% vs. 41.6%; P<0.001). After propensity-score matching, mean OS was significantly shorter in the immunotherapy group compared with controls (34.7 vs. 36.2 mo; P=0.008). Cox regression analysis demonstrated that immunotherapy was associated with increased risk for mortality (HR: 1.1; 95% CI: 1.02-1.18; P=0.005). Patients who received immunotherapy had lower 90-day mortality rates compared with controls (2.3% vs. 3.6%; P=0.004), but the groups had equivalent 30-day mortality rates (0.7% vs. 0.8%; P=0.76). Immunotherapy showed no improvement in OS in patients with stage III-IV colon cancer.

Efficacy and safety of novel immune checkpoint inhibitor-based combinations versus chemotherapy as first-line treatment for patients with extensive-stage small cell lung cancer: A network meta-analysis.

Patients with extensive-stage small cell lung cancer (ES-SCLC) have an exceptionally poor prognosis and immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) combined with etoposide-platinum is recommended as standard first-line therapy. However, which combination pattern is the best still remains unknown. This network meta-analysis was performed to compare the efficacy and safety of currently available patterns including an antiangiogenic agent containing regimen and probed into the most appropriate therapy for patients. Hazard ratios (HRs) and odds ratios (ORs) were generated using R software. The outcomes of overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate (ORR), and adverse events of grade 3 or higher (grade ≥ 3 adverse events [AEs]) were analyzed. A total of 10 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) involving 5544 patients were included for analysis. Drug combination patterns included adebrelimab, atezolizumab, durvalumab, durvalumab plus tremelimumab, ipilimumab, pembrolizumab, serplulimab, benmelstobart plus anlotinib, tislelizumab, tiragolumab plus atezolizumab and toripalimab in combination with chemotherapy. The novel antiangiogenic agent containing regimen benmelstobart + anlotinib + chemotherapy showed the highest possibility to present the best PFS and OS versus chemotherapy. Compared with ICI plus chemotherapy, it also achieved significantly better PFS and presented a tendency of OS benefit. As for safety and toxicity, patients treated with benmelstobart + anlotinib + chemotherapy and durvalumab + tremelimumab + chemotherapy suffered a higher likelihood of more grade ≥ 3 AEs without unexpected AEs. PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors-based combinations are associated with significant improvement in both PFS and OS for treatment-naïve ES-SCLC patients. Benmelstobart plus anlotinib with chemotherapy (CT) yielded better survival benefit versus CT alone or other ICIs + CT with caution for more adverse effects along with the addition of an antiangiogenic agent.

Network meta-analysis of pembrolizumab as monotherapy and in combination with chemotherapy for first-line treatment of recurrent or metastatic head and neck squamous cell carcinoma

Pembrolizumab monotherapy or in combination with chemotherapy is approved as first-line treatment in recurrent/metastatic head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (R/M HNSCC) based on improved overall survival (OS) versus EXTREME regimen in the KEYNOTE-048 trial. The clinical outcomes of pembrolizumab were compared with other recommended first-line treatments in R/M HNSCC in this study through a Bayesian network meta-analysis. A systematic literature review was conducted in July 2022, from which six trials that matched the KEYNOTE-048 patient eligibility criteria were included in the network. The OS and progression-free survival (PFS) outcomes were compared in the approved pembrolizumab indication (i.e., total population for pembrolizumab in combination with chemotherapy and combined positive score [CPS] ≥ 1 population for pembrolizumab monotherapy). A significant OS improvement was observed for pembrolizumab in combination with chemotherapy and pembrolizumab monotherapy versus EXTREME regimen (hazard ratio, 95% credible interval: 0.72, 0.60-0.86; 0.73, 0.60-0.88), platinum+5- FU (0.58, 0.43-0.76; 0.58, 0.44-0.78), and platinum+paclitaxel (0.53, 0.35-0.79; 0.53, 0.35-0.81), respectively. A non-significant numeric trend in OS improvement was observed versus the TPEx regimen. PFS was comparable with most first-line treatments and was improved versus platinum+5-FU (0.48, 0.36-0.64; 0.59, 0.45-0.79). Additional analyses in higher CPS subgroups also showed consistent results. Overall, our study results showed an improvement in OS outcomes versus alternative first-line treatments, consistent with the findings of the KEYNOTE-048 trial. These data support using pembrolizumab as a suitable firstline treatment option in R/M HNSCC.

Abstract CT252: Nicotinamide in combination with EGFR-TKIs for the treatment of stage IV lung adenocarcinoma with EGFR mutations: A randomized double-blind (Phase IIb) trial

Abstract Background: RUNX3 is a tumor suppressor gene, which is inactivated in approximately 70% of lung adenocarcinomas. Nicotinamide, a sirtuin inhibitor, has demonstrated potential in re-activating epigenetically silenced RUNX3 in cancer cells. This study assessed the therapeutic benefits of combining nicotinamide with first-generation EGFR-TKIs for patients with stage IV lung cancer carrying EGFR mutations. Patients and Methods: We assessed the impact of nicotinamide on carcinogen-induced lung adenocarcinomas in mice and observed that nicotinamide increased RUNX3 levels and inhibited lung cancer growth. Subsequently, 110 consecutive patients with stage IV lung cancer who had EGFR mutations were recruited: 70 females (63.6%) and 84 never-smokers (76.4%). The patients were randomly assigned to receive either nicotinamide (1 g/day, n = 55) or placebo (n = 55). The primary and secondary endpoints were progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS), respectively. Results: After a median follow-up of 54.3 months, the nicotinamide group exhibited a median PFS of 12.7 months (95% CI, 10.4-18.3), while the placebo group had a PFS of 10.9 months (9.0-13.2; p = 0.2). The median OS was similar in the two groups (31.0 months with nicotinamide vs. 29.4 months with placebo; p = 0.2). Notably, subgroup analyses revealed a significant reduction in mortality risk for females (p = 0.01) and never-smokers (p = 0.03) treated with nicotinamide. Conclusion: The addition of nicotinamide with EGFR-TKIs demonstrated potential improvements in PFS and OS, with notable survival benefits for female patients and those who had never smoked. (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02416739) Citation Format: Cheol-Kyu Park, Hyung-Joo Oh, Suk-Chul Bae, In-Jae Oh, Kyoung-Mi Jung, Da-Mi Kim, Jung-Won Lee, Chang Kyun Kang, Il Yeong Park, Young-Chul Kim. Nicotinamide in combination with EGFR-TKIs for the treatment of stage IV lung adenocarcinoma with EGFR mutations: A randomized double-blind (Phase IIb) trial [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2024; Part 2 (Late-Breaking, Clinical Trial, and Invited Abstracts); 2024 Apr 5-10; San Diego, CA. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2024;84(7_Suppl):Abstract nr CT252.

XELOX (capecitabine plus oxaliplatin) plus bevacizumab (anti-VEGF-A antibody) with or without adoptive cell immunotherapy in the treatment of patients with previously untreated metastatic colorectal cancer: a multicenter, open-label, randomized, controlled, phase 3 trial

Fluoropyrimidine-based combination chemotherapy plus targeted therapy is the standard initial treatment for unresectable metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC), but the prognosis remains poor. This phase 3 trial (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03950154) assessed the efficacy and adverse events (AEs) of the combination of PD-1 blockade-activated DC-CIK (PD1-T) cells with XELOX plus bevacizumab as a first-line therapy in patients with mCRC. A total of 202 participants were enrolled and randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive either first-line XELOX plus bevacizumab (the control group, n = 102) or the same regimen plus autologous PD1-T cell immunotherapy (the immunotherapy group, n = 100) every 21 days for up to 6 cycles, followed by maintenance treatment with capecitabine and bevacizumab. The main endpoint of the trial was progression-free survival (PFS). The median follow-up was 19.5 months. Median PFS was 14.8 months (95% CI, 11.6–18.0) for the immunotherapy group compared with 9.9 months (8.0–11.8) for the control group (hazard ratio [HR], 0.60 [95% CI, 0.40–0.88]; p = 0.009). Median overall survival (OS) was not reached for the immunotherapy group and 25.6 months (95% CI, 18.3–32.8) for the control group (HR, 0.57 [95% CI, 0.33–0.98]; p = 0.043). Grade 3 or higher AEs occurred in 20.0% of patients in the immunotherapy group and 23.5% in the control groups, with no toxicity-associated deaths reported. The addition of PD1-T cells to first-line XELOX plus bevacizumab demonstrates significant clinical improvement of PFS and OS with well tolerability in patients with previously untreated mCRC.

Internal mammary lymphadenopathy in breast cancer: a narrative review and update.

While the axillary nodal basin is the most common lymphatic drainage pathway of the breast, the internal mammary (IM) lymph node chain plays a significant role in breast cancer staging and treatment. It has been identified as sentinel nodal drainage in approximately 13-37% of patients. Despite this, the data is still limited with regard to diagnosis and management when there is suspicion or confirmation of IM lymph node (IMLN) involvement by metastatic breast cancer. The objective of this publication is to provide a comprehensive assessment of the current body of literature surrounding the diagnosis, management and prognostic value of IMLNs in breast cancer treatment. Review of the literature published regarding IMLN diagnosis, significance, and management was completed in PubMed. Additional focus was placed on reviewing articles published within the past 10 years as foundation for an update regarding the current practice and future directions in this space. Improved imaging techniques, with positron emission tomography-computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging, have led to increase in the identification of IM lymphadenopathy, yielding surgical staging of the IM nodes nearly obsolete. While IM nodal metastases may play a role in overall survival (OS), it has not been demonstrated to be an independent risk factor for increased locoregional recurrence. IM nodal irradiation (IMNI) therapy has been a mainstay in the treatment of IM disease in the context of breast cancer. IMNI has demonstrated improvement in OS and risk of distant recurrence. Wide variations in radiation practices for patients with IM lymphadenopathy exist internationally, highlighting the lack of clear data driven consensus guidelines. Herein, we provide an updated assessment of the current diagnosis, clinical significance, and management of IM lymphadenopathy for breast cancer patients.