HRs For Overall Survival Research Articles

Clinical trial design and treatment effects: a meta-analysis of randomised controlled and single-arm trials supporting 437 FDA approvals of cancer drugs and indications

ObjectivesThis study aims to analyse the association between clinical trial design and treatment effects for cancer drugs with US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval.DesignCross-sectional study and meta-analysis.SettingData from Drugs@FDA,...

Results from the randomized KEYNOTE-355 study of pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy for Asian patients with advanced TNBC

In the phase 3 KEYNOTE-355 study (NCT02819518), pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy demonstrated statistically significant and clinically meaningful improvements in progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) versus placebo plus chemotherapy among patients with previously untreated locally recurrent inoperable or metastatic triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) and programmed cell death ligand 1 (PD-L1) combined positive score (CPS) ≥ 10 tumors. We analyzed outcomes for the subgroup of patients enrolled in Asia in KEYNOTE-355. Patients received pembrolizumab 200 mg or placebo (2:1 randomization) every 3 weeks for 35 cycles plus investigator’s choice chemotherapy. Primary endpoints were PFS per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1 and OS. Among patients enrolled in Hong Kong, Japan, Korea, Malaysia and Taiwan (pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy, n = 113; placebo plus chemotherapy, n = 47), 117 (73.1%) had PD-L1 CPS ≥ 1 and 56 (35.0%) had PD-L1 CPS ≥ 10. Median time from randomization to data cutoff (June 15, 2021) was 43.8 (range, 36.8‒53.2) months (intent-to-treat [ITT] population). Hazard ratios (HRs [95% CI]) for PFS in the CPS ≥ 10, CPS ≥ 1, and ITT populations were 0.48 (0.24‒0.98), 0.58 (0.37‒0.91), and 0.66 (0.44‒0.99), respectively. Corresponding HRs (95% CI) for OS were 0.54 (0.28‒1.04), 0.62 (0.40‒0.97), and 0.57 (0.39‒0.84). Grade 3/4 treatment-related adverse events (AEs) occurred in 77.9% versus 78.7% of patients with pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy versus placebo plus chemotherapy. No grade 5 AEs occurred. Clinically meaningful improvement in PFS and OS with manageable toxicity were observed with pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy versus placebo plus chemotherapy in patients enrolled in Asia with previously untreated, inoperable or metastatic TNBC.Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02819518.

Outcomes in the Asian subgroup of the phase III randomised HIMALAYA study of tremelimumab plus durvalumab in unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma

In the global, phase III HIMALAYA study in unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (uHCC), STRIDE (Single Tremelimumab Regular Interval Durvalumab) improved overall survival (OS) vs. sorafenib; durvalumab was non-inferior to sorafenib. HBV is the predominant HCC aetiology in most of Asia vs. HCV or non-viral aetiologies in Western countries and Japan. This analysis evaluated safety and efficacy outcomes for STRIDE and durvalumab monotherapy vs. sorafenib, in HIMALAYA participants enrolled in Asia, excluding Japan. In HIMALAYA, participants were randomised to STRIDE, durvalumab, or sorafenib. The Asian subgroup in this analysis included participants enrolled in Hong Kong, India, South Korea, Taiwan, Thailand, and Vietnam. OS, objective response rate (ORR; per RECIST, version 1.1), and safety were assessed in the Asian subgroup and in an exploratory subgroup of participants in Hong Kong and Taiwan. The Asian subgroup included 479 participants randomised to STRIDE (n= 156), durvalumab (n= 167), or sorafenib (n= 156). OS was improved for STRIDE vs. sorafenib (hazard ratio [HR] 0.68; 95% CI 0.52-0.89). The OS HR for durvalumab vs. sorafenib was 0.83 (95% CI 0.64-1.06). In Hong Kong and Taiwan (n= 141), OS HRs for STRIDE vs. sorafenib and durvalumab vs. sorafenib were 0.44 (95% CI 0.26-0.77) and 0.64 (95% CI 0.37-1.08), respectively. In the Asian subgroup, ORR (including unconfirmed responses) was numerically higher for STRIDE (28.2%) and durvalumab (18.6%) vs. sorafenib (9.0%), and Grade 3/4 treatment-related adverse events were numerically lower for STRIDE (19.9%) and durvalumab (13.3%) vs. sorafenib (30.5%). STRIDE improved outcomes vs. sorafenib in the Asian subgroup. These results support the benefits of STRIDE for participants with uHCC globally, including in the Asia-Pacific region. NCT03298451. The global, phase III HIMALAYA study found that the STRIDE (Single Tremelimumab Regular Interval Durvalumab) regimen improved overall survival (OS), including long-term OS vs. sorafenib, and that durvalumab monotherapy was non-inferior to sorafenib in participants with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (uHCC). However, there are differences in the aetiology and clinical practices related to HCC in parts of Asia, compared to Western countries and Japan, which could lead to differences in treatment outcomes between these regions. The results of this analysis demonstrate the benefits of STRIDE for participants in the Asia-Pacific region, consistent with the full, global study population. Overall, these findings continue to support the use of STRIDE in a diverse population, reflective of uHCC globally.

Association between neutrophil-to-eosinophil ratio and efficacy outcomes with avelumab plus axitinib or sunitinib in patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma: post hoc analyses from the JAVELIN Renal 101 trial

ObjectiveWe report post hoc analyses of efficacy with first-line avelumab plus axitinib or sunitinib according to baseline neutrophil-to-eosinophil ratio (NER) in patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma (aRCC) from the...

Neoadjuvant/adjuvant pembrolizumab (pembro) + chemotherapy (chemo) vs placebo (pbo) + chemo for gastric/gastroesophageal junction (G/GEJ) adenocarcinoma: Major pathologic response (mPR) in KEYNOTE-585.

4073 Background: Pathologic tumor downstaging (pDS) is more accurate than clinical staging for prognosis; generally, patients (pts) with downstaged tumors have lower recurrence rates and improved overall survival (OS). mPR is an important surrogate end point in non–small cell lung cancer, but data are scarce in gastric cancer. In the randomized phase 3 KEYNOTE-585 trial (NCT03221426), neoadjuvant or adjuvant pembro + chemo (cisplatin + capecitabine [XP] or cisplatin + 5-fluorouracil [FP]) was not superior to pbo + chemo (XP or FP) for event-free survival (EFS) in the intention-to-treat (ITT) population of pts with locally advanced G/GEJ adenocarcinoma; pembro + chemo significantly improved pathologic complete response (pCR) vs pbo + chemo (difference, 10.9%; 95% CI, 7.5-14.8; P<0.00001). In this post hoc analysis we examined the utility of mPR and pDS as surrogate end points in KEYNOTE-585. Methods: Pts with untreated localized G/GEJ adenocarcinoma (including Siewert type 2 or 3 tumors) and ECOG PS 0 or 1 who planned to undergo surgery after preoperative chemo were eligible. The main cohort of KEYNOTE-585 received pembro or pbo + XP or FP; the safety cohort received pembro or pbo + docetaxel, oxaliplatin, FP, and leucovorin (FLOT). Objectives for the post hoc analysis were the relation between mPR (≤10% residual viable tumor, comparable to Mandard tumor regression grade 1 or 2) and EFS per RECIST v1.1 per investigator and OS, plus the percentage of pts who had improved survival, by stage, compared with downstaging in the pTNM group. Overall downstaging was derived by comparing answers to questions regarding primary tumor and nodal involvement from clinical and pathologic assessments for each pt. Pts could have tumor downstaging, nodal downstaging, or both. If both, the number of levels downstaged for tumor and nodes were added together to calculate a total number of levels downstaged. The database cutoff was February 9, 2023. Results: A total of 1007 pts were analyzed (n=502, pembro + chemo; n=505, pbo + chemo); 44.0% and 34.1%, respectively, had pathologic nodal stage N0. The incidence of mPR (grade 1/2 tumor regression) was 31.5% with pembro + chemo vs 22.2% with pbo + chemo. In pts who had mPR, the HRs (95% CI) for EFS and OS were 0.6 (0.4-1.0) and 0.7 (0.4-1.2), respectively, for pembro + chemo vs pbo + chemo. Downstaging results are shown (Table). Conclusions: In this post hoc analysis, pts with mPR had numerically improved PFS and OS with pembro + chemo vs pbo + chemo; these findings were consistent with analysis of the ITT population. Further studies in this population are warranted. Clinical trial information: NCT03221426 . [Table: see text]

Abstract PO2-15-06: ctDNA-based DNADX in hormone receptor-positive and HER2-negative (HR+/HER2-) advanced breast cancer following endocrine therapy and CDK4/6 inhibition: a correlative analysis from the randomized phase 2 PARSIFAL trial

Abstract ctDNA-based DNADX in hormone receptor-positive and HER2-negative (HR+/HER2-) advanced breast cancer following endocrine therapy and CDK4/6 inhibition: a correlative analysis from the randomized phase 2 PARSIFAL trial Background: DNADX, a novel machine learning-based approach, utilizes DNA from tumor tissue or plasma ctDNA to identify clinically relevant phenotypic tumor features and classify breast cancer into 4 subtypes (Nat Comm 2023). Here, we evaluated DNADX's ability to predict prognosis and treatment benefit in HR+/HER2- advanced breast cancer following endocrine therapy and a CDK4/6 inhibitor. Methods: DNADX was evaluated centrally in available baseline plasma ctDNA samples from PARSIFAL trial (NCT02491983) which randomized 486 patients (pts) with HR+/HER2- advanced breast cancer to receive (1:1 ratio) first line palbociclib with either fulvestrant or letrozole. Shallow whole genome sequencing was performed on ctDNA, and the 4 DNA-based subtypes (Clusters-1, -2, -3, and -4) were identified if the ctDNA tumor fraction (TF)≥3%. The main objective was to evaluate the association of DNADX subtypes with progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). Secondary objective was to identify the subgroup of pts who benefit more from each endocrine treatment. Uni- and multi-variable Cox regression models were used after adjusting for TF, menopausal status, ECOG status, de novo metastasis (vs. recurrence), visceral disease and number of metastatic sites. Results: DNADX was evaluated in plasma ctDNA samples from 122 pts (25.1%). Clinical variables and median PFS (27.6 months) were similar as the overall PARSIFAL population. DNADX identified 56.6% pts with TF of < 3%, 14.8% with Cluster-1, 19.7% with Cluster-2, 5.7% with Cluster-3 and 3.3% with Cluster-4. In terms of PFS, pts classified with TF< 3% had a lower risk of progression compared to Cluster-1, Cluster-2, Cluster-3, Cluster-4 subtypes (pairwise PFS hazard ratios [HRs] of 1.88, 2.02, 3.15, and 5.62, respectively, with a global log-rank test of p=0.010). Similar results were obtained after adjusting for other clinical-pathologic variables. A numerical benefit of fulvestrant in comparison with letrozole was observed in pts classified in Cluster-1 and Cluster-4 (HR=0.42, 95% CI 0.14-1.24) in contrast to the other groups (HR=1.21, 95% CI 0.68-2.18), and the interaction test was statistically significant after adjusting for clinical-pathologic variables (anova p-value=0.037). In terms of OS, pts classified with TF< 3% had a lower risk of death compared to Cluster-1, Cluster-2, Cluster-3, and Cluster-4 subtypes (pairwise OS HRs of 1.90, 4.23, 11.13, and 6.80, respectively, with a global log-rank test of p=0.003). In the multivariable analysis, results were consistent after adjusting for clinical-pathologic variables and TF. Conclusions: Liquid biopsy-based DNADX subtypes predict outcomes in pts with HR+/HER2- advanced breast cancer on endocrine therapy and CDK4/6 inhibitors, potentially identifying the most optimal endocrine treatment for each pt. Citation Format: Fara Brasó-Maristany, Javier Cortés, José Manuel Pérez-García, Rosario Vega-León, Laia Paré, Guillermo Villacampa, Judit Matito, Francisco Pardo, Marina Gomez-Rey, Mario Mancino, Elena Martínez-García, Carmen Mora Gallardo, Leonardo Mina, Florence Dalenc, Meritxell Bellet- Ezquerra, Manuel Ruíz - Borrego, Miguel Gil-Gil, Peter Schmid, Charles M. Perou, Joel S. Parker, Patricia Villagrasa, Ana Vivancos, Aleix Prat, Antonio Llombart-Cussac. ctDNA-based DNADX in hormone receptor-positive and HER2-negative (HR+/HER2-) advanced breast cancer following endocrine therapy and CDK4/6 inhibition: a correlative analysis from the randomized phase 2 PARSIFAL trial [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 PO2-15-06.

Prognostic Value of Postneoadjuvant Chemotherapy Neutrophil-to-Lymphocyte Ratio in Patients undergoing Radical Cystectomy.

Background: Neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR), a widely assessed biomarker in most common diseases, is typically evaluated before treatment initiation. However, data on NLR in the post-treatment setting is limited. Therefore, we assessed the NLR calculated after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) initiation in patients with bladder cancer (BC). We hypothesised that changes in blood cells after NAC could be a marker of tumour response and long-term survival. Materials and Methods: Our study included 214 patients who underwent NAC followed by radical cystectomy (RC) in two urological departments, wherein post-NAC NLR was used to categorize patients into the low (NLR ≤ 1.75) and high (NLR > 1.75) groups. Results: Logistic regression analysis indicated that a post-NAC NLR ≥ 1.75 is a good biomarker for pathologic response (odds ratio (OR), 0.045; p <0.001), emphasizing its ability to predict patient survival. The HRs for overall survival and cancer-specific survival were 2.387 (p = 0.048) and 2.342 (p < 0.001), respectively. Conclusions: We believe that post-NAC NLR can be used for patient stratification after NAC. Consequently, the post-NAC NLR may serve as a guide for the decision-making process regarding RC versus bladder-preserving strategies.

Efficacy of olaparib (O) plus abiraterone (A) versus placebo (P) plus A in patients (pts) with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) with single homologous recombination repair gene mutations (HRRm) in the PROpel trial.

165 Background: PROpel (NCT03732820) met its primary endpoint and showed a significant investigator-assessed radiographic progression-free survival (rPFS) benefit with O + A vs P + A in first-line mCRPC (hazard ratio [HR] 0.66, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.54–0.81; P&lt;0.001). At final prespecified analysis, median overall survival (OS) with O + A vs P + A was 42.1 vs 34.7 months (HR 0.81, 95% CI 0.67–1.00; P=0.0544). We report gene-by-gene efficacy of O + A vs P + A for pts from PROpel with a HRRm. Methods: PROpel was a Phase 3 randomized (1:1), double-blind trial. Pts were enrolled irrespective of biomarker status and received O (300 mg twice daily [bid]) or P, plus A (1000 mg once daily) and prednisone/prednisolone (5 mg bid). rPFS by investigator assessment was the primary endpoint (data cutoff [DCO]: 7/30/2021). OS was a key secondary endpoint (DCO: 10/12/2022). Following randomization and before primary analysis, HRRm status was assessed by tumor tissue (FoundationOne CDx) and ctDNA (FoundationOne Liquid CDx) tests and is reported using aggregated results from both tests. Genes assessed were ATM, BRCA1, BRCA2, BARD1, BRIP1, CDK12, CHEK1, CHEK2, FANCL, PALB2, RAD51B, RAD51C, RAD51D, and RAD54L. HR and CIs are not reported in subgroups with &lt;5 events in either arm for both rPFS and OS. Results: 28.4% pts had an HRRm.For most pts with a single gene HRRm, there was a lower proportion of rPFS events and deaths in the O + A arm relative to the P + A arm (Table). The most prevalent gene mutations were BRCA2, ATM and CDK12; HRs for rPFS and OS numerically favored O + A (rPFS: BRCA2, HR 0.20, 95% CI 0.08–0.44; ATM, HR 0.55, 95% CI 0.20–1.38; CDK12, HR 0.51, 95% CI 0.20–1.18. OS: BRCA2, HR 0.20, 95% CI 0.07–0.48; ATM, HR 0.79, 95% CI 0.33–1.77; CDK12, HR 0.57, 95% CI 0.24–1.27). Conclusions: BRCA2, ATM and CDK12 were the most prevalent single gene mutations and clinical benefit was observed with O + A. Other single gene mutations were rare, limiting interpretation. The greatest treatment benefit was observed in pts with BRCA mutations. Clinical trial information: NCT03732820 . [Table: see text]

Matched control analysis suggests that R-CHOP followed by (R)-ICE may improve outcome in non-GCB DLBCL compared with R-CHOP

AbstractRituximab, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone (R-CHOP) is considered the standard-of-care for patients with advanced-stage diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL), despite findings that patients with nongerminal center B-cell like (non-GCB) have significantly worse outcome with this regimen. We evaluated the prognostic significance of baseline risk factors, including cell of origin (COO) classified by the Hans algorithm, within an alternative chemoimmunotherapy program. At Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center (MSK), 151 patients with DLBCL received sequential R-CHOP induction and (R)-ICE (rituximab, ifosfamide, carboplatin, and etoposide) consolidation. Outcome analysis based on COO was validated with a propensity score–matched cohort treated with R-CHOP from the Mayo Clinic component of the Molecular Epidemiology Resource (MER). Among the patients with GCB (n = 69) and non-GCB (n = 69) at MSK, event-free survival (EFS) of non-GCB was superior to that of GCB (hazard ratio [HR], 0.53; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.29-0.98). Overall survival (OS) demonstrated an association in the same direction but was not statistically significant (HR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.33-1.42). Propensity score–matched patients from MSK (n = 108) demonstrated a small attenuation in the HRs for EFS (HR, 0.57; 95% CI, 0.27-1.18) and OS (HR, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.33-1.79) and were no longer statistically significant. In contrast, the matched MER cohort (n = 108) demonstrated an EFS association (HR, 1.17; 95% CI, 0.70-1.95) and OS association (HR, 1.13; 95% CI, 0.64-2.00) in the opposite direction, but were also not statistically significant. R-CHOP induction and (R)-ICE consolidation may overcome the negative prognostic impact of the non-GCB phenotype, per the Hans algorithm, and can be preferentially selected for this population. This trial was registered at www.ClinicalTrials.gov as #NCT00039195 and #NCT00712582.

Fruquintinib with PD-1 inhibitors versus TAS-102 with bevacizumab in late-line mCRC: A retrospective cohort study based on propensity score matching.

95 Background: Fruquintinib with PD-1 inhibitors (FP) and TAS-102 with bevacizumab (TB) are two common therapies for patients with previous-treated metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). However, it’s still not clear that which therapy can bring better prognosis. Methods: This is a retrospective cohort study conducted in Hunan Cancer Hospital. Patients (pts) with mCRC who had received at least the 2nd line treatment were eligible. Propensity score (PS) would be calculated to balance the baseline characteristics of two arms. Overall survival (OS) was set as the primary endpoint. Results: From July 2019 to October 2022, 106 eligible pts in total were enrolled. According to the treatment received, 72 and 34 pts were respectively allocated into FP cohort and TB cohort. With a global median follow-up of 14, the crude OS was 19.4 (95% CI: 17.9-NA) mo in FP cohort vs. 11.6 (10.0-17.2) mo in TB cohort. The HR of FP was 0.384 (95% CI: 0.192-0.769, TB as reference). Multivariate Cox regression showed that the adjusted HR was 0.323 (95% CI: 0.149-0.704), which was adjusted with sex, age greater than 65 yr, ECOG-PS, resection of primary lesion, radiotherapy history, location of lesion (left or right), metastases (liver, lung, and bone), and current line (3 or later). With PS, we performed three statistical methods, namely inverse probability weighting, PS matching (the sample size was 49 vs. 29 after matching), and additional adjustment for PS with multivariate cox regression. The HRs of FP were 0.437 (95% CI: 0.200-0.953), 0.446 (95% CI: 0.201-0.990), and 0.339 (95% CI: 0.153-0.748), respectively. Subgroup analysis indicated that FP demonstrated lower HR in subgroup of male (0.296, 95% CI: 0.117- 0.753), right-sided lesion (0.177, 95% CI: 0.043- 0.736), liver metastasis (0.291, 95% CI: 0.112- 0.756), and current line greater than 3 (0.303, 95% CI: 0.113- 0.812). Additionally in the raw set, the ORR was 16.67% vs. 8.82% (ORFP=2.067, 95% CI: 0.602-9.559), and the DCR was 93.06% vs. 73.53% (ORFP=4.824, 95% CI: 1.518-17.030). Conclusions: FP demonstrated robustly lower HRs for OS in both crude and PS analysis. Likewise, FP showed better OS and DCR in pts with late-line mCRC than TB, which suggested FP might be a better therapy in late-line mCRC.

No detrimental association between antibiotic use and immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy: an observational cohort study comparing patients with ICI-treated and TKI-treated melanoma and NSCLC

BackgroundThe role of antibiotics in malignancies treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) remains unclear. Several studies suggested a detrimental impact of antibiotic use on the response to ICI, but were...

First-line treatments for advanced non-squamous non-small cell lung cancer with immune checkpoint inhibitors plus chemotherapy: a systematic review, network meta-analysis, and cost-effectiveness analysis.

The combination of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) and chemotherapy is a promising first-line therapy for patients with advanced non-squamous non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). The cost-effectiveness of combinations with different ICIs is yet to be compared. We utilized Bayesian network meta-analyses for the comparisons of overall survival, progression-free survival, and incidence of adverse events of the included treatments in the total population and subgroups with different programmed death-ligand 1 tumor proportional scores (TPS). The cost-effectiveness of the treatments from the perspectives of the US and Chinese healthcare systems was assessed using Markov models. Three combinations, including pembrolizumab + chemotherapy (PembroC), nivolumab + ipilimumab + chemotherapy (NivoIpiC), and atezolizumab + chemotherapy (AteC), were included in our study. In terms of efficacy, PembroC was most likely to be ranked first for extending progression-free survival (PFS) (93.16%) and overall survival (OS) (90.73%). Nevertheless, from the US perspective, NivoIpiC and PembroC showed incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) of $68,963.1/quality-adjusted life-years (QALY) and $179,355.6/QALY, respectively, compared with AteC. The one-way sensitivity analysis revealed that the results were primarily sensitive to the hazard ratios for OS or the cost of immunotherapy agents. At a willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of $150,000/QALY, NivoIpiC had the highest probability of being cost-effective (63%). As for the Chinese perspective, NivoIpiC and PembroC had ICERs of $145,983.4/QALY and $195,863.3/QALY versus AteC, respectively. The results were primarily sensitive to the HRs for OS. At a WTP threshold of $38,017/QALY, AteC had the highest probability of cost-effectiveness (94%). Although PembroC has the optimal efficacy, NivoIpiC and AteC were the most favorable treatments in terms of cost-effectiveness for patients with advanced non-squamous NSCLC from the US and Chinese perspectives, respectively.

A Novel Scoring System Using Geriatric Nutritional Risk Index, C-Reactive Protein, and Disease Status Predicts Survival after Second Allogeneic Stem Cell Transplantation

Introduction: Second allogeneic stem cell transplantation (SCT2) is generally associated with poorer overall survival (OS) and non-relapse mortality (NRM) than first SCT (SCT1). However, some patients survive long after SCT2, and the number of SCT2 cases increases yearly. Thus, a prognostic stratification system is required to select optimally eligible patients for SCT2. We have previously shown that the geriatric nutritional risk index (GNRI) predicts OS and NRM for SCT2 (Ann Haematol. 2020;99:1655). In this study, using a multicenter database, we aimed to validate the importance of the GNRI and establish a scoring system that can more accurately stratify the prognosis after SCT2. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed patients with hematopoietic malignancies who underwent SCT2 between 2004 and 2020 at transplant centers of the Kanto Study Group for Cell Therapy (KSGCT), using the KSGCT database. The primary endpoint was 3-year OS. The secondary endpoints were disease-free survival (DFS), NRM, and cumulative incidence of relapse (CIR). The GNRI was defined as 1.489×albumin(g/L) + 41.7×(weight/ideal weight) (Am J Clin Nutr. 2005;82:777). We chose a GNRI cutoff value of 92.0 according to our previous report. We defined acute leukemia and malignant lymphoma in the first or second complete remission, CML in the 1st or 2nd chronic phase, and MDS with refractory anemia as standard risk, and other malignant diseases as high risk. Results: Among 722 patients who underwent SCT2, we were able to calculate the GNRI and perform a detailed analysis for 376. The median patient age was 44 years (range: 16-69). The underlying diseases were AML (n=207, 55.1%), ALL/LBL (n=107, 28.5%), MDS (n=33, 8.8%), CML (n=11, 2.9%), and other (n=18, 4.8%). The median follow-up period for survivors was 1375 days (range: 223-4213). Three years after SCT2, the OS, DFS, NRM, and CIR were 26.6%, 21.7%, 40.4%, and 37.9%, respectively. Based on previous research, we divided patients into two groups: low GNRI ( ≤92) (n=162, 43.1%) and high GNRI (&amp;gt;92) (n=214, 56.9%). In the low GNRI group, OS was better, NRM was lower, and CIR was comparable to that in the high GNRI group (3y-OS 36.0% vs. 14.3%, p&amp;lt;0.001; 3y-NRM 29.5% vs. 55.2%, p&amp;lt;0.001; 3y-CIR 33.4% vs. 41.3%, p=0.146). Through univariate analysis and stepwise multivariate regressions on the dependent variables for OS, low GNRI (hazard ratio [HR] 1.39, 95%CI 1.05-1.85, p=0.024), high C-reactive protein (CRP) (&amp;gt;0.5 mg/dl; HR 1.96, 95%CI 1.16-2.63, p&amp;lt;0.001), and disease status at SCT2 (HR 1.54, 95%CI 1.16-2.04, p=0.003) were associated with poor OS. Likewise, low GNRI (HR 1.71, 95%CI 1.18-2.47, p=0.0045), high CRP (HR 1.69, 95%CI 1.20-2.38, p=0.0029), high HCT-CI (≥3) (HR 1.58, 95%CI 1.12-2.23, p=0.0092) were unfavorable factors for NRM, while the shorter interval from SCT1 to SCT2 (HR 1.53, 95%CI 1.10-2.13 p=0.011) and high-risk disease status at SCT2 (HR 1.62, 95%CI 1.16-2.27, p=0.0046) were associated with high CIR. To predict OS after SCT2, we developed a scoring system consisting of three factors: low GNRI, high CRP level, and high-risk disease status. As the HRs for OS were comparable, a score of 1 was assigned to each factor. OS at 3 years was 50.7%, 29.5%, and 11.1% for patients with low (score 0, n=89), intermediate (score 1, n=106), and high (scores 2 and 3, n=174), respectively (p&amp;lt;0.001, Fig 1). Differences between groups were revealed using the Holm-Bonferroni correction. Conclusion: Low GNRI, high CRP level, and high-risk disease status were significantly associated with inferior OS after SCT2. The scoring system with these factors stratified the entire cohort into three risk groups including low risk with over 50% OS, and high risk with a very limited chance of survival.

Efficacy of avelumab plus axitinib versus sunitinib by numbers of IMDC risk factors and target tumor sites at baseline in advanced renal cell carcinoma: long-term follow-up results from JAVELIN Renal 101

In the phase III JAVELIN Renal 101 trial, first-line avelumab+ axitinib improved progression-free survival (PFS) and objective response rate versus sunitinib in patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma across all International Metastatic RCC Database Consortium (IMDC) risk groups (favorable, intermediate, and poor); analyses of overall survival (OS) remain immature. Here, we report post hoc analyses of efficacy from the third interim analysis (data cut-off, April 2020) by the numbers of IMDC risk factors and target tumor sites at baseline. Efficacy endpoints assessed were PFS, objective response, and best overall response per investigator assessment (RECIST v1.1) and OS. Best percentage change and percentage change from baseline in target tumor size over time during the study were also assessed. In patients with 0, 1, 2, 3, or 4-6 IMDC risk factors, hazard ratios [HRs; 95% confidence interval (CIs)] for OS with avelumab+ axitinib versus sunitinib were 0.660 (0.356-1.223), 0.745 (0.524-1.059), 0.973 (0.668-1.417), 0.718 (0.414-1.248), and 0.443 (0.237-0.829), and HRs (95% CIs) for PFS were 0.706 (0.490-1.016), 0.709 (0.540-0.933), 0.711 (0.527-0.960), 0.501 (0.293-0.854), and 0.395 (0.214-0.727), respectively. In patients with 1, 2, 3, or ≥4 target tumor sites, HRs (95% CIs) for OS with avelumab+ axitinib versus sunitinib were 0.912 (0.640-1.299), 0.715 (0.507-1.006), 0.679 (0.442-1.044), and 0.747 (0.346-1.615), and HRs (95% CIs) for PFS were 0.706 (0.548-0.911), 0.552 (0.422-0.723), 0.856 (0.589-1.244), and 0.662 (0.329-1.332), respectively. Across all subgroups, analyses of objective response rate and complete response rate favored avelumab+ axitinib versus sunitinib, and a greater proportion of patients treated with avelumab+ axitinib had tumor shrinkage. In post hoc analyses, first-line treatment with avelumab+ axitinib was generally associated with efficacy benefits versus treatment with sunitinib in patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma across subgroups defined by different numbers of IMDC risk factors or target tumor sites.

Effect modification in network meta-analyses for relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma: systematic review and meta-analysis

ObjectivesTo systematically review and meta-analyse the evidence for effect modification by refractory status and number of treatment lines in relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM); and to assess whether effect modification is...

Survival and quality of life after CSF diversion in adult patients with leptomeningeal metastasis-associated hydrocephalus: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Leptomeningeal metastasis (LM) is associated with altered CSF flow dynamics in 50%-70% of patients. Approximately 1%-5% of patients develop symptomatic LM-associated hydrocephalus (LM-H), which adversely impacts quality of life (QOL), functional status, and overall survival (OS). There is equipoise for CSF diversion procedures in LM-H. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to assess the effect of CSF diversion on OS and QOL in this context. This systematic review was conducted according to the PRISMA guidelines. PubMed/Medline, Embase, Web of Science, and Scopus were searched for articles that evaluated the role of CSF diversion for LM-H due to systemic cancer in adult patients. A meta-analysis was conducted using random effects models, with mean differences and 95% CIs reported. Bias was assessed using the Risk of Bias in Nonrandomized Studies of Interventions (ROBINS-I) tool. Ten eligible studies with a total of 494 patients were included. Two studies reported multivariate HRs for median OS, suggesting no significant effect of shunting on OS (pooled HR 0.42, 95% CI 0.09-1.94, p = 0.27). A difference between preoperative and postoperative Karnofsky Performance Status of mean 17.6 points (95% CI 10.44-24.68, p < 0.0001) was calculated from 4 studies. Across all studies, a symptomatic improvement rate of 67%-100% was observed, with high rates of improvement for headaches and nausea and lower rates for cranial nerve palsies. Complication rates across 9 studies ranged from 0% to 21.1%. Based on the present findings, shunting does not improve OS but does relieve symptoms, suggesting that individuals who exhibit certain symptoms should be considered for CSF diversion. The present findings prompt the generation of a standardized decision-making tool and a critical analysis of the individual patient risk-benefit ratio. Implementation of these will optimize surgical management of LM-H patients.

Association of perioperative allogeneic blood transfusions and long-term outcomes following radical surgery for gastric and colorectal cancers: systematic review and meta-analysis of propensity-adjusted observational studies.

Previous meta-analyses reporting significant associations between perioperative allogeneic blood transfusions and poor prognosis in gastric cancer or colorectal cancer had a high risk of confounding bias. This meta-analysis explored this issue using observational studies that applied propensity score analysis. PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched for manuscripts published between 2013 and 2022. Studies applying propensity score analysis were included to investigate the association between perioperative allogeneic blood transfusions and prognosis in gastric cancer or colorectal cancer after radical surgery. Pooled HRs for overall survival and disease-free survival were calculated using a fixed-effect model or random-effect model according to heterogeneity. Twelve retrospective cohort studies with 17 607 patients reported were included. Ten studies applied propensity score matching and two applied inverse probability of treatment weighting using propensity score. A total of 5962 patients were analysed after propensity score adjustment. After propensity score adjustment, perioperative allogeneic blood transfusions did not correlate with disease-free survival in gastric cancer (HR 1.16; 95 per cent c.i. 0.96-1.39; heterogeneity was assessed by the chi-squared test and inconsistency index (I2) = 57 per cent) or colorectal cancer (HR 1.12; 95 per cent c.i. 0.84-1.49; I2 = 54 per cent). However, after propensity score adjustment, perioperative allogeneic blood transfusions were significantly associated with worse overall survival in gastric cancer (HR 1.20; 95 per cent c.i. 1.08-1.32; I2 = 25 per cent) and colorectal cancer (HR 1.40; 95 per cent c.i. 1.06-1.85; I2 = 52 per cent). Subgroup analyses showed that perioperative allogeneic blood transfusions did not correlate with overall survival in colorectal cancer when major postoperative complications were balanced after propensity score. Perioperative allogeneic blood transfusion is not correlated with recurrence of gastric cancer and colorectal cancer. Perioperative allogeneic blood transfusions are significantly associated with worse overall survival in gastric cancer and colorectal cancer, which may be attributable to unbalanced major postoperative complications after propensity score adjustment.

Seven-Year Follow-Up of the Phase III KEYNOTE-006 Study: Pembrolizumab Versus Ipilimumab in Advanced Melanoma.

Clinical trials frequently include multiple end points that mature at different times. The initial report, typically based on the primary end point, may be published when key planned co-primary or secondary analyses are not yet available. Clinical Trial Updates provide an opportunity to disseminate additional results from studies, published in JCO or elsewhere, for which the primary end point has already been reported.Immune checkpoint inhibitors have led to unprecedented prolongation of overall survival (OS) for patients with advanced melanoma. Five-year follow-up of KEYNOTE-006 showed pembrolizumab prolonged survival versus ipilimumab. Efficacy results with 7-year follow-up are presented. At data cutoff (April 19, 2021), median follow-up was 85.3 months (range, 0.03-90.8 months). Median OS was 32.7 months for pembrolizumab versus 15.9 months for ipilimumab (hazard ratio [HR], 0.70; 95% CI, 0.58 to 0.83); 7-year OS was 37.8% and 25.3%, respectively. OS HRs favored pembrolizumab regardless of BRAF status or prior BRAF/MEK-inhibitor treatment and prognostic characteristics (elevated lactate dehydrogenase, large tumor size, and brain metastasis). Median modified progression-free survival (mPFS) was 9.4 months for pembrolizumab versus 3.8 months for ipilimumab; 7-year mPFS was 23.8% and 13.3%, respectively. In patients who completed ≥94 weeks of pembrolizumab, the 5-year OS was 92.9% and the 5-year mPFS was 70.1%. The objective response rate with second-course pembrolizumab (n = 16) was 56% (95% CI, 30 to 80) and the 2-year mPFS was 62.5%. These findings confirm that pembrolizumab provides long-term survival benefit in advanced melanoma.

Final overall survival (OS) in PROpel: Abiraterone (abi) and olaparib (ola) versus abiraterone and placebo (pbo) as first-line (1L) therapy for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC).

LBA16 Background: PROpel (NCT03732820) met its primary endpoint showing significant investigator-assessed radiographic progression-free survival (rPFS) benefit for patients with mCRPC treated with abi + ola vs abi + pbo in the 1L setting (hazard ratio [HR] 0.66, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.54–0.81, P&lt; 0.001, data cut-off: 7/30/2021). Sensitivity analysis by blinded independent central review was consistent. A trend toward OS benefit with abi + ola was observed at the time of the primary rPFS analysis (28.6% maturity, HR 0.86, 95% CI 0.66–1.12) and a subsequent interim analysis (40.1% maturity, HR 0.83, 95% CI 0.66–1.03). We report OS and safety from the pre-planned final analysis (data cut-off: 10/12/2022). Methods: PROpel is a randomized, double-blind phase 3 trial of 1L therapy for patients with mCRPC eligible for abiraterone. Patients were prospectively assessed for homologous recombination repair mutation (HRRm) status using tumor tissue (FoundationOne CDx) and/or circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA; FoundationOne Liquid CDx) tests after randomization 1:1 to ola (300 mg twice daily [bid]) or pbo, and abi (1000 mg once daily) plus prednisone/prednisolone (5 mg bid). Treatment continued until radiographic disease progression, unacceptable toxicity or withdrawal of consent. OS was a key secondary endpoint (2-sided boundary for significance 0.0377). Aggregate results from tumor tissue and ctDNA tests were used to assign patients to HRRm/BRCAm subgroups. Results: Patient (n = 796) characteristics (including prior docetaxel, site of metastasis, symptom score and HRRm status) were generally balanced. There was a consistent trend toward OS benefit in the intention-to-treat (ITT) population with abi + ola vs abi + pbo (maturity 47.9%, HR 0.81, 95% CI 0.67–1.00, P= 0.0544), with median OS 42.1 months (m) vs 34.7 m, respectively. OS medians and HRs for HRRm, non-HRRm, BRCAm and non-BRCAm subgroups all favored abi + ola vs abi + pbo. In the abi + ola arm the most common Grade ≥3 adverse event was anemia (16.1%). Conclusions: At the prespecified final analysis in PROpel, abi + ola prolonged OS by &gt; 7 m vs standard-of-care abiraterone (abi + pbo) in the ITT population. The median OS of &gt; 42 m is the longest median reported to date in a phase 3 trial in 1L mCRPC. Consistent with rPFS results, a trend toward OS benefit was observed in HRRm, non-HRRm, BRCAm and non-BRCAm subgroups with greatest benefit in the BRCAm subgroup. No new long-term safety issues were identified. These results support the use of abi + ola in 1L mCRPC. Clinical trial information: NCT03732820 . [Table: see text]

Negative hyperselection of patients with RAS wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer for panitumumab: A biomarker study of the phase III PARADIGM trial.

11 Background: The PARADIGM trial showed longer median overall survival (OS) with first-line mFOLFOX6 plus panitumumab (PAN) vs bevacizumab (BEV) in patients (pts) with RAS wild type (WT) and left-sided metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) (37.9 vs 34.3 months, respectively; hazard ratio [HR], 0.82; P=0.031) and similar OS in right-sided pts (HR 1.09; Yoshino T, et al. ASCO 2022 LBA1). We evaluated the usefulness of negative hyperselection by gene alterations in ctDNA related to primary resistance to anti-EGFR therapy. Methods: Baseline plasma ctDNA (&gt;10 ng/mL and &gt;10 nM DNA) from pts enrolled in the biomarker study (NCT02394834) was assessed using a custom panel (PlasmaSELECT-R 91, PGDx). Preplanned gene alterations for hyperselection included KRAS, NRAS, PTEN, and extracellular domain EGFR mutations, HER2 and MET amplifications, and ALK, RET, or NTRK1 fusions. Results: Among 802 pts in the full analysis set, 733 (91%) had evaluable pretreatment samples for ctDNA analysis. Of these pts, 204 (28%) had at least 1 gene alteration, including KRAS/NRAS (8%), BRAF V600E (11%), PTEN (5%), EGFR (3%), HER2 (5%), MET (1%), and fusions (1%). In 529 (72%) hyperselected pts without any gene alterations, OS tended to be longer with PAN vs BEV regardless of primary sidedness; the OS HRs ranged from 0.76 to 0.82, and the median OS gains ranged from 6.6 to 8.0 months (Table). Meanwhile, OS was similar or inferior with PAN vs BEV irrespective of the primary sidedness in pts with any of these gene alterations (Table). Conclusions: Negative hyperselection using ctDNA rather than tumor sidedness may identify appropriate pts for first-line PAN over BEV. These results warrant further validation in additional cohorts. Clinical trial information: NCT02394834 . [Table: see text]