Patients Received Second-line Treatment Research Articles

Abstract PO1-04-05: Effectiveness and safety of inetetamab + pyrotinib + vinorelbine in ≥second-line treatment of HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer

Abstract Background: In real-world settings, Patients with HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer (MBC) who cannot receive antibody-drug conjugates (ADCs) as standard second-line therapy due to cost–benefit ratios and who have no preferred options as ≥third-line regimen by NCCN guidelines, require new regimens to meet their clinical needs. This study aims to explore the effectiveness and safety of inetetamab + pyrotinib + vinorelbine for ≥second-line treatment of HER2-positive MBC. Methods: Patients with HER2-positive MBC who received ≥second-line treatment at our hospital from June 2020 to December 2022 were enrolled. Progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate (ORR), clinical benefit rate (CBR) and adverse reactions were assessed. Patients received inetetamab + pyrotinib + vinorelbine until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity were evaluated every two cycles according to the RECIST 1.1 criteria. Results: 89 patients were included based on the inclusion and exclusion criteria. Among them, 45 patients received second-line treatment who couldn't use T-DM1 or T-DXd, and 44 patients received ≥third-line treatment. The median PFS of the second-line treatment subgroup was 17months, the ORR and CBR were 60.0% and 86.7%, respectively, which were significantly higher than those in the ≥third-line treatment subgroup and numerically superior to T-DM1 as a second-line treatment option. Additionally, the ORR and CBR of patients with baseline brain metastasis who did not receive radiotherapy were 27.3% and 72.7%, respectively. The most common adverse events observed were leukopenia (37.1%), neutropenia (42.7%), anemia (34.8%) and diarrhea (67.4%). The incidence of grade 3-4 leukopenia, neutropenia, anemia and diarrhea were 11.2%, 15.7%, 55.6% and 27.0%, respectively. A total of 8 patients (8.9%) discontinued medication due to adverse reactions. Conclusions: Inetetamab + pyrotinib + vinorelbine demonstrates good efficacy and controllable toxicity as a second-line treatment for HER2-positive MBC. This therapeutic regimen provides a viable alternative option for patients who are unable to receive ADCs as the second-line treatment. Citation Format: Fan Wu, Mulan Chen, Weiwei Huang, Lili Wang, Nani Li, Xiufeng Wu, Xinhua Chen, Yi Hong, Lin Lin, Kan Chen, Jian liu. Effectiveness and safety of inetetamab + pyrotinib + vinorelbine in ≥second-line treatment of HER2-positive metastatic 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 PO1-04-05.

A retrospective analysis of prognostic factors and treatment choices in small cell lung cancer with liver metastasis.

Small cell lung cancer (SCLC) is characterized by high aggressiveness and early dissemination, with the liver being the most common site of metastasis. Although it has been established that the prognosis for SCLC with liver metastasis is exceedingly poor, comprehensive data on clinical features, prognostic factors, treatment options, and outcomes of this patient population remain limited. This retrospective study aims to examine the clinicopathological features and current treatment landscape and to identify prognostic factors associated with SCLC with liver metastasis in real-world settings. We conducted a retrospective analysis of data on SCLC patients with liver metastasis at initial diagnosis between January 1, 2013, and January 1, 2022. Kaplan-Meier analysis and log-rank tests were employed to estimate the overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). Cox regression models were utilized to identify independent prognostic factors. A total of 349 patients were included in the study, with 97.7% of patients exhibiting pure SCLC and 42.4% of patients presenting with concomitant bone metastasis. Approximately one-fourth of the patients had metastases in ≥3 organs, and 18.9% of patients had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (ECOG PS) ≥2. The median OS was 10.97 months (95% CI: 9.88-12.06) for those who received first-line therapy (n=286). Of these, 263 patients were treated with chemotherapy, showing a median OS of 11.37 months. Furthermore, 43.8% of patients received second-line treatment, and 81 patients proceeded to third-line treatment. ECOG PS ≥2 and mixed-SCLC were identified as independent adverse prognostic factors in SCLC with liver metastasis, whereas treatments including systemic treatment alone or in combination with local radiotherapy were associated with better prognoses. This retrospective study substantiated that ECOG PS ≥2 and mixed SCLC are independent predictors of poor prognosis for SCLC with liver metastasis. Additionally, different treatment strategies can improve the survival of this patient population, with chemotherapy currently being the main treatment option.

Efficacy and safety of regorafenib in combination with immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy as second-line and third-line regimen for patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma: a retrospective study.

Despite the emergence of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) as first-line treatment for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), there is an unmet need regarding subsequent treatments in patients that fail ICI. Regorafenib is a vascular endothelial growth factor receptor (VEGFR) inhibitor, which could increase programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression in tumors and increase intra-tumoral CD8+ T-cell infiltration by normalizing the cancer vasculature and improving the efficacy of the programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1) antibody. Thus, we evaluated the combination of regorafenib and a PD-1 inhibitor for advanced HCC patients that had failed combined tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) plus ICI. Data of patients with advanced HCC who had failed combined TKIs plus ICI treatment and were afterwards treated with combined regorafenib plus a PD-1 inhibitor were reviewed. All patients had received PD-1 inhibitors as part of the first-line treatment and regorafenib every 4 weeks until disease progression, intolerable toxicities, or physician/patient withdrawal. The clinical data, previous treatment strategies, follow-up imaging results, and adverse events (AEs) during follow-ups were recorded. Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) v. 5.0 was used to evaluate AEs and Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) v. 1.1 was used to evaluate response. The primary endpoint was safety, and the secondary endpoints were the objective response rate (ORR), progression-free survival (PFS), disease control rate (DCR), overall survival (OS), and duration of response (DOR). From November 15, 2020, to January 31, 2022, data of 17 patients with advanced HCC that met the criteria were reviewed. The cohort included 16 men and 1 woman with a median age of 54 years (interquartile range, 46 to 63 years). Sixteen patients had Child-Pugh class A (n=16, 94.12%) and one with class B (n=1, 15.9%) liver disease. Thirteen patients received second-line treatment, and the remaining patients received third-line treatment. All patients received at least 1 dose of PD-1 inhibitors. The median follow-up duration was 7.62 months. Twelve recipients experienced treatment-related AEs. The most frequent AE (≥5%) included fatigue (17.64%), diarrhea (17.65%), proteinuria (5.88%), bleeding gums (11.76%), and hypertension (11.76%). No grade-4 AE or new safety signals were identified. The ORR and DCR were 41.2% and 64.7%, respectively, and the median PFS was 5.09 months. Regorafenib combined with PD-1 inhibitor is a promising regimen in treating patients with advanced HCC owing to its safety and effectiveness as well as low incidence of serious AEs with its use.

The MAGIC Algorithm Probability Predicts Long-Term Outcomes and Treatment Response to Second-Line Therapy for Acute Gvhd

Introduction: Risk stratification approaches using clinical criteria or biomarkers in acute graft-versus-host disease (GVHD) have traditionally been implemented at diagnosis or initiation systemic treatment with corticosteroids. For patients who require second-line treatment, the significance of biomarkers at salvage therapy and the relationship between biomarker risk and choice of therapy are unknown. Methods: We studied adult patients who received second-line treatment for acute GVHD between January 2016 and December 2021 in the Mount Sinai Acute GVHD Consortium (MAGIC) database, which collects clinical data and longitudinal serum samples from allogeneic HCT recipients using a rigorous PRoBE study design. Exclusion criteria included relapse of underlying malignant disease prior to second-line therapy, missing response data, or missing serum sample. Serum samples collected from 7 days prior to 3 days after initiation of second-line therapy met criteria for biomarker analysis. The MAGIC algorithm probability (MAP) was calculated as a single value based on concentrations of ST2 and REG3α and was stratified at a threshold of 0.290 to define high MAP and low MAP groups. The primary objective evaluated the association between MAP and survival for patients receiving second-line therapy for acute GVHD. The key secondary objective was to investigate the MAP and choice of second-line systemic agent on Day 28 overall response rate (ORR) and survival. Results: In total, 316 adult patients received second-line treatment for acute GVHD; 149 patients (47%) were excluded for disease relapse (n=27), missing response data (n=48), or missing sample (n=74).Of the 167 evaluable patients, most had steroid-refractory acute GVHD (n=146, 87%), rather than steroid-dependent (n=8, 5%) or steroid-sensitive (n=14, 8%) disease. 62 patients received ruxolitinib while 102 received other systemic agents (best available therapy: BAT). Baseline clinical characteristics of the study population according to treatment choice were similar, except for donor type (Rux: MRD 15%, MUD 74%, haplo 11%; BAT: MRD 30%, MUD 67%, haplo 3%; P=0.014) and median days from corticosteroids to second-line treatment (Rux: 18, BAT: 12; P=0.02).In total, 81 patients had high MAPs and 86 patients had low MAPs, with similar distribution in each treatment cohort (P=0.53). For the entire cohort, the median follow-up for survivors was 22 months (range, 1.5-27).The MAP separated patients into 2 groups (high vs low) with significantly different mortality (NRM at 2 years, 76% vs 29%, P<.0001) and survival (OS at 2 years, 12% vs 63%, P<.0001). Patients who received ruxolitinib as second-line therapy had lower mortality (NRM at 2 years, 35% vs 60%, P<.002) and improved survival (OS at 2 years, 51% vs 32%, P<.008), compared to those who received other systemic agents. However, the outcomes of patients with high MAP were poor, regardless of second-line treatment choice ( Figure 1A). The MAP (low vs high), time from corticosteroids to second-line treatment (≥14 days vs < 14 days), GVHD grade at second-line (0-2 vs 3-4), and choice of second-line therapy (Rux vs BAT) were all significant (P<0.05) predictors of lower NRM and higher OS in multivariate analysis. The MAP also separated patients into 2 groups with significantly different D28 ORR (low: 49%, high: 30%, P<.0001). In agreement with prospective trials, ruxolitinib resulted in higher D28 response rates compared to other systemic therapies (ORR 54.9% vs 30.5%, P=0.005), which was observed in both low MAP (ORR, 64.5% vs 38.5%, P=0.017) and high MAP cohorts (ORR, 42.9% vs 22.6%, P=0.06) ( Figure 1B). The MAP (low vs high), GVHD grade at second line (0-2 vs 3-4), and choice of second-line therapy (Rux vs BAT) were significant predictors (P<0.05) of higher D28 ORR in multivariate analysis. Conclusion: The MAP measured at the initiation of second-line systemic treatment for acute GVHD predicts NRM and OS, as well as treatment response. The outcomes of patients with high MAP are poor, regardless of second-line treatment choice, and the higher CR rate in low MAP patients may drive higher survival rates. Incorporation of MAP into clinical trials in this setting warrants investigation. The results also support the current use of ruxolitinib as second-line treatment for acute GVHD, particularly in patients with low MAP.

Elevated serum thyroid stimulating immunoglobulin linked to failure of first-line intravenous methylprednisolone monotherapy in moderate-to-severe thyroid eye disease.

To assess factors associated with failure of intravenous methylprednisolone (IVMP) monotherapy as the first-line treatment for thyroid eye disease (TED) and to identify patients who might benefit from supplementing mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) to IVMP. Data for all patients with TED treated with IVMP according to the EUGOGO protocol in our center between 2016-2021 were retrospectively analysed. Forty-seven patients (mean age 51.32 ± 14 years, 27 females) were enrolled. The mean time from first reported symptoms to first IVMP treatment was 12.1 ± 5.59 months (range 0-120). The mean clinical activity score (CAS) before treatment and at a mean of 5 and 12.2 weeks after treatment initiation was 6.00, 2.96, and 1.81, respectively (P < 0.01). Twenty-one patients (44.68%) were recommended second-line treatment: nine due to no response or worsening of CAS, six due to partial response, four with good response but early relapse after completion of treatment, and one due to late relapse. Eighteen of those 21 patients received second-line treatment which included rituximab (n = 7), MMF (n = 6), a second course of IVMP (n = 4), and tocilizumab (n = 1). Serum thyroid-stimulating immunoglobulin (TSI) levels were higher in patients who received second-line treatment compared with patients who responded well to first-line IVMP monotherapy at presentation (2135% vs 1159%, P = 0.05) and after completion of first-line treatment (2201% vs. 986%, P = 0.043). TED patients requiring second-line treatment after failed IVMP monotherapy had higher baseline and post-first-line treatment serum TSI levels. Those with elevated TSI may benefit from dual therapy (IVMP and MMF) and require closer monitoring.

Systemic Inflammatory Indices in Second-Line Soft Tissue Sarcoma Patients: Focus on Lymphocyte/Monocyte Ratio and Trabectedin.

A second-line standard of treatment has not yet been identified in patients with soft tissue sarcomas (STS), so identifying predictive markers could be a valuable tool. Recent studies have shown that the intratumoral and inflammatory systems significantly influence tumor aggressiveness. We aimed to investigate prognostic values of pre-therapy neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR), platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio (PLR), lymphocyte-to-monocyte ratio (LMR), systemic inflammatory index (SII), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS) of STS patients receiving second-line treatment. In this single-center retrospective analysis, ninety-nine patients with STS were enrolled. All patients received second-line treatment after progressing to anthracycline. PFS and OS curves were calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method of RNA sequencing, and CIBERSORT analysis was performed on six surgical specimens of liposarcoma patients. A high NLR, PLR, and SII were significantly associated with worse PFS (p = 0.019; p = 0.004; p = 0.006). Low LMR was significantly associated with worse OS (p = 0.006). Patients treated with Trabectedin showed a better PFS when the LMR was low, while patients treated with other regimens showed a worse PFS when the LMR was low (p = 0.0154). The intratumoral immune infiltrates analysis seems to show a correlation between intratumoral macrophages and LMR. PS ECOG. The metastatic onset and tumor burden showed prognostic significance for PFS (p = 0.004; p = 0.041; p = 0.0086). According to the histologies, PFS was: 5.7 mo in liposarcoma patients vs. 3.8 mo in leiomyosarcoma patients vs. 3.1 months in patients with other histologies (p = 0.053). Our results confirm the prognostic role of systemic inflammatory markers in patients with STS. Moreover, we demonstrated that LMR is a specific predictor of Trabectedin efficacy and could be useful in daily clinical practice. We also highlighted a possible correlation between LMR levels and the percentage of intratumoral macrophages.

Prognostic factors and clinical efficacy of second-line treatments of Pneumocystis jirovecii pneumonia for non-HIV patients after first-line treatment failure

BackgroundPneumocystis jirovecii pneumonia (PCP) is a life-threatening opportunistic infection. In non-HIV immunocompromised patients with PCP, a standard second-line treatment has not been established up to now.MethodsNon-HIV immunocompromised patients with confirmed PCP between April 2013 and December 2020 were included. Their PCP treatment history was tracked. Factors related to first-line trimethoprim/sulfamethoxazole (TMP/SMX) and second-line treatment failure were identified. Different second-line treatment strategies were compared.ResultsAmong the 220 patients, 127 (57.73%) did not respond to first-line TMP/SMX treatment. Risk factors related to treatment failure included symptom triad with breathlessness at rest, persistent fever and cough (85% in the treatment failure group versus 74% in the treatment success group, P = 0.034), treatment with invasive mechanical ventilation (67 vs. 19%, P < 0.001), coinfection with CMV (69 vs. 47%, P = 0.035), and bacteremia (59 vs. 10%, P < 0.001). A total of 49 patients received second-line treatment on the basis of TMP/SMX, and 28 (57.1%) of them responded to the treatment. No clinical parameter, including selection of different therapies, was found to be significantly associated with second-line treatment failure. Further, the prognosis of different second-line therapies showed no drug or drug combination strategy superior to others. The primaquine group had lower 90-day mortality rate (45.9%) but showed no statistically significant difference compared with the non-primaquine group (64.6%). The patients in the clindamycin plus primaquine group had the lowest in-hospital mortality rate (22.2%, P = 0.042) among different second-line therapies, although the in-hospital mortality of the primaquine group was not significantly different from that of the non-primaquine group. The differences in 28 day mortality and overall mortality rates were not statistically significant, too.ConclusionCMV infection and bacteremia were risk factors significantly associated with treatment failure of TMP/SMX. The response and survival rates of second-line treatment, including clindamycin, primaquine, and caspofungin, were poor, maybe clindamycin plus primaquine as second line treatment was better than other treatment strategies. These results suggest that clinicians should carefully evaluate whether the treatment of TMP/SMX has failed due to a coinfection rather than hastily changing to a second-line drug when the patient worsens.

Preliminary results of raltitrexed in Chinese patients with metastatic colorectal cancer: A prospective, multicenter, real-world study.

3591 Background: Raltitrexed-based chemotherapy regimen is one of the common regimens for the treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). This prospective observational real-world study aimed to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of raltitrexed administered to Chinese patients with mCRC in real life setting. Methods: This is a prospective, multicenter, real-world study. Prospectively registered Patients received second-line treatment of raltitrexed plus irinotecan combined with or without target therapy until progression disease or unacceptable toxicity. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS), and the secondary endpoints were objective response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR), overall survival (OS), quality of life (QOL) and safety. Totally,1000 patients were required for primary point testing. Results: Between May 2018 and December 2021,a total of 1039 patients from 57 centers were screened for enrollment,among which 271 patients were treated with raltitrexed plus irinotecan, 753 patients accepted target therapy (bevacizumab or cetuximab) additionally, and 15 patients combined with other drugs. Overall mPFS was 6.8 months (95%CI: 6.5-7.1),ORR was 20.2%, and DCR was 85.7%; The ORR of combined with or without target therapy were 21.6% and 16.2% ( p = 0.038),respectively, the DCR were 88.2% and 79.0% ( p &lt; 0.001). The mPFS of combined without or with target therapy were 5.2 months (95% CI: 4.7 to 5.7) and 7.3 months respectively (95% CI: 7.0-7.7) [HR = 0.67, 95% CI 0.56̃0.80, p &lt; 0.001], The mPFS of combined with bevacizumab or cetuximab were 7.4 months (95% CI: 7.0 -7.8) and 6.8 months (95% CI: 5.9-7.7) [HR = 1.15, 95% CI 0.88̃1.51, p = 0.3]. mOS has not yet reached. Majority of treatment-related adverse events (TEAEs) were grade I or II. The most common grade III or IV TRAEs reported by 116 patients (11.2%) were aspartate aminotransferase increased (4.0%), alanine aminotransferase increased (3.7%), neutrocytopenia (2.7%), glutamyltransferase increased (2.5%), leukocytopenia (1.1%). Conclusions: The real-world study confirmd that raltitrexed was an effective and safe regimen for the second-line treatment in Chinese patients with mCRC, especially combined with target therapy additionally, which was aligned with previous trials. Clinical trial information: ChiCTR1800016185.

Efficacy and Safety of FOLFOX in Advanced Gastric Cancer Initially Presenting With Disseminated Intravascular Coagulation.

Advanced gastric cancer (AGC) rarely presents with disseminated intravascular coagulation (DIC) at the time of diagnosis. Chemotherapy should be selected in consideration of hematological toxicities because these patients are at high risk of hemorrhagic complications. The leucovorin, fluorouracil, and oxaliplatin (FOLFOX) regimen is an effective and less toxic regimen for patients with AGC and poor performance status. The present study assessed overall survival of all patients receiving first-line chemotherapy with and without DIC using Kaplan-Meier methods and examined the clinicopathological factors, DIC parameters, response, and survival of five patients with AGC and DIC who received FOLFOX in the first-line setting between February 2017 and February 2020. Among the patients, four patients (80%) recovered from DIC after a median of 12 days of FOLFOX therapy (range=12-25), and their platelet count gradually increased within 1 week after the start of chemotherapy. The median progression-free survival and overall survival were 46 (range=22-296) and 115 days (range=83-324), respectively. No patients experienced adverse events necessitating treatment discontinuation, including gastrointestinal bleeding and thrombocytopenia. Moreover, all patients received second-line treatment after progression, and one patient exhibited improvement of DIC symptoms following nab-paclitaxel and ramucirumab treatment. FOLFOX therapy is well tolerated and effective in patients with AGC initially presenting with DIC and subsequent second-line treatment might be crucial for better prognosis.

Validation of the Clinical Assessment Scale in Autoimmune Encephalitis in Chinese Patients.

Background and ObjectivesThe Clinical Assessment Scale in Autoimmune Encephalitis (CASE) is a scale for assessing severity in autoimmune encephalitis. We aimed to validate the CASE score in a Chinese population and evaluate its clinical significance.MethodsPatients diagnosed with autoimmune encephalitis were recruited between June 2014 and May 2019 from two hospitals. CASE and modified Rankin Scale (mRS) scores were obtained. Data regarding clinical features, treatment, and available information were gathered from the hospital information system.ResultsOf the 176 patients with autoimmune encephalitis, 11 died and 14 had tumors. Ten patients received second-line treatment. The CASE scores of patients receiving second-line treatment were significantly higher (median CASE: 15) than in those receiving first-line treatment (median CASE: 8) (p<0.001). Twenty-two patients had poor functional status (mRS>2). Areas under the curve of CASE on whether functional status was poor at 1 year were 0.89 (p<0.001). Sixty patients were admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU), and the CASE scores were positively correlated with days in the ICU (r=0.58, p<0.001). There was no statistically significant association between the CASE scores and relapse (p=0.39>0.05). Additionally, the CASE scores were positively associated with the mRS scores (r=0.85 p<0.001).ConclusionsThe CASE score is suitable for the comprehensive assessment of Chinese patients with autoimmune encephalitis, which may help clinicians to select the appropriate intervention and estimate the disease severity and prognosis.

Real-World Pattern of Treatment and Clinical Outcomes of EGFR-Mutant Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer in a Single Academic Centre in Quebec.

The discovery of EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKI) for the treatment of EGFR mutant (EGFRm) metastatic NSCLC is regarded as a landmark in lung cancer. EGFR-TKIs have now become a standard first-line treatment for EGFRm NSCLC. The aim of this retrospective cohort study is to describe real-world patterns of treatment and treatment outcomes in patients with EGFRm metastatic NSCLC who received EGFR-TKI therapy outside of clinical trials. One hundred and seventy EGFRm metastatic NSCLC patients were diagnosed and initiated on first-line TKI therapy between 2004 and 2018 at the Peter Brojde Lung Cancer Centre in Montreal. Following progression of the disease, 137 (80%) patients discontinued first-line treatment. Moreover, 80/137 (58%) patients received second-line treatment, which included: EGFR-TKIs, platinum-based, or single-agent chemotherapy. At the time of progression on first-line treatment, 73 patients were tested for the T790M mutation. Moreover, 30/73 (41%) patients were found to be positive for the T790M mutation; 62/80 patients progressed to second-line treatment and 20/62 were started on third-line treatment. The median duration of treatment was 11.5 (95% CI; 9.62–13.44) months for first-line treatment, and 4.4 (95% CI: 1.47–7.39) months for second-line treatment. Median OS from the time of diagnosis of metastatic disease was 23.5 months (95% CI: 16.9–30.1) and median OS from the initiation of EGFR-TKI was 20.6 months (95% CI: 13.5–27.6). We identified that ECOG PS ≤ 2, presence of exon 19 deletion mutation, and absence of brain metastases were associated with better OS. A significant OS benefit was observed in patients treated with osimertinib in second-line treatment compared to those who never received osimertinib. Overall, our retrospective observational study suggests that treatment outcomes in EGFRm NSCLC in real-world practice, such as OS and PFS, reflect the result of RCTs. However, given the few observational studies on real-world treatment patterns of EGFR-mutant NSCLC, this study is important for understanding the potential impact of EGFR-TKIs on survival outside of clinical trials. Further real-world studies are needed to characterize patient outcomes for emerging therapies, including first-line osimertinib use and combination of osimertinib with chemotherapy and potential future combination of osimertinib and novel anticancer drug, outside of a clinical trial setting.

IBCL-057: Clinical Characteristics and Survival of Patients with Hairy Cell Leukemia Treated at the National Cancer Institute in Peru from 1999 to 2018

Context Hairy cell leukemia (HCL) is a hematological malignancy (HM) with long survival in patients who receive purine analogs. Objective To describe the clinical characteristics and survival of HCL. Design Retrospective study, from 1999–2018. Setting National Cancer Institute in Peru. Patients HCL. Interventions Cladribine. Main Outcomes Measures Survival curves were drawn according to the Kaplan-Meier method. Results During the study period 24,744 patients with HM were diagnosed, of whom 27 had HCL, accounting for 0.001%. Twenty patients had enough clinical information to be included. The median age was 52.5 years (range, 35–88), and 60% were male. Ninety-five percent (n=19) of patients had indication of receiving any treatment. Eighty percent (n=15) of patients received treatment, of whom 26.6% (n=4), 40% (n=6), and 33.3% (n=5) received cladribine, interferon, and rituximab, respectively. Among patients without treatment, three were lost to follow-up. Fourteen patients had assessment of response: 42.8% (n=6), 42.8% (n=6), and 14.3% (n=2) achieved complete response (CR), stable disease (SD), and progressive disease (PD), respectively. Six patients received second-line treatment; 83% (n=5) received cladribine and achieved CR. With a median follow-up time of 42 months (range 1–181), for the whole cohort, the 5-year overall survival (OS) was 85.9% (95%CI, 54–96.3), and the 10-year OS was 57.2% (95%CI, 8.5–88.1). The median survival time was not achieved. For the cladribine treatment group (first- or second-line treatment) (n=9), the 5-year OS was 100%, and for the non-cladribine treatment group (n=6), the 5-year OS was 80% (95%CI, 20.3–96.9) and the 10-year OS was 0%. The median survival time was 98 months. The difference in survivals between the cladribine vs non-cladribine groups was not statistically significant (p=0.06). Conclusions HCL is rare in Peruvian patients. CR was achieved in all patients who received cladribine regardless the line of therapy. OS for the whole cohort was shorter compared to other reports, probably because most patients received a non-cladribine-based first-line treatment. In our cohort, the cladribine group had an OS of 100%. No patient who received a non-cladribine treatment was alive at 10 years post-diagnosis.

First-line Immuno-Oncology Combination Therapies in Metastatic Renal-cell Carcinoma: Results from the International Metastatic Renal-cell Carcinoma Database Consortium

BackgroundIn metastatic renal-cell carcinoma (mRCC), recent data have shown efficacy of first-line ipilimumab and nivolumab (ipi-nivo) as well as immuno-oncology (IO)/vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) inhibitor combinations. Comparative data between these strategies are limited. ObjectiveTo compare the efficacy of ipi-nivo versus IO-VEGF (IOVE) combinations in mRCC, and describe practice patterns and effectiveness of second-line therapies. Design, setting, and participantsUsing the International Metastatic Renal-cell Carcinoma Database Consortium (IMDC) dataset, patients treated with any first-line IOVE combination were compared with those treated with ipi-nivo. InterventionAll patients received first-line IO combination therapies. Outcome measurements and statistical analysisFirst- and second-line response rates, time to treatment failure (TTF), time to next treatment (TNT), and overall survival (OS) were analysed. Hazard ratios were adjusted for IMDC risk factors. Results and limitationsIn total, 113 patients received IOVE combinations and 75 received ipi-nivo. For IOVE combinations versus ipi-nivo, first-line response rates were 33% versus 40% (between-group difference 7%, 95% confidence interval [CI] –8% to 22%, p = 0.4), TTF was 14.3 versus 10.2 mo (p = 0.2), TNT was 19.7 versus 17.9 mo (p = 0.4), and median OS was immature but not statistically different (p = 0.17). Adjusted hazard ratios for TTF, TNT, and OS were 0.71 (95% CI 0.46–1.12, p = 0.14), 0.65 (95% CI 0.38–1.11, p = 0.11), and 1.74 (95% CI 0.82–3.68, p = 0.14), respectively. Sixty-four (34%) patients received second-line treatment. In patients receiving subsequent VEGF-based therapy, second-line response rates were lower in the IOVE cohort than in the ipi-nivo cohort (15% vs 45%; between-group difference 30%, 95% CI 3–57%, p = 0.04; n = 40), though second-line TTF was not significantly different (3.7 vs 5.4 mo; p = 0.4; n = 55). Limitations include the study’s retrospective design and sample size. ConclusionsThere were no significant differences in first-line outcomes between IOVE combinations and ipi-nivo. Most patients received VEGF-based therapy in the second line. In this group, second-line response rate was greater in patients who received ipi-nivo initially. Patient summaryThere were no significant differences in key first-line outcomes for patients with metastatic renal-cell carcinoma receiving immuno-oncology/vascular endothelial growth factor inhibitor combinations versus ipilimumab and nivolumab.

Progression Free Survival below 12 Months Following Stem Cell Transplant Is a Hallmark of High-Risk Myeloma Which Is Associated with Inferior Overall Survival — Data from the Ukmrc Myeloma XI Trial

Introduction Multi-agent induction chemotherapy followed by autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT) is a standard of care for younger patients with multiple myeloma, aimed at maximising the depth and duration of first response (PFS1). However, the duration of PFS1 is variable between patients. Improved understanding of how to identify high risk patients who relapse early and the ability to design strategies applicable to their biology represents the central aim of personalized medicine approaches for MM. This landmarked analysis of the Myeloma XI trial was designed to identify the characteristics of patients with PFS1 of less than a year after ASCT. Patients and methods In MXI patients were randomised to induction therapy with CTD (cyclophosphamide, thalidomide and dexamethasone) or RCD (lenalidomide, cyclophosphamide and dexamethasone) and +/- CVD (bortezomib, cyclophosphamide, dexamethasone) intensification in patients with Patients who completed ASCT were identified with very early relapse (PFS1 Results Of 1274 patients receiving ASCT: 178 (14%) relapsed within 12m and 1096 (86%) thereafter. There were higher rates of ≥VGPR in the PFS1≥12m group (70% vs 59%) and in both groups most patients responded at ≥PR (PFS1 Inferior outcomes continued for the PFS1 As PFS1 Discussion Nearly three quarters of those with PFS1 Disclosures Bygrave:Amgen: Honoraria; Takeda: Honoraria, Other: Travel Support; Janssen: Honoraria, Other: Travel support; Celgene: Honoraria, Other: Travel support, Research Funding. Pawlyn:Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel Support; Celgene Corporation: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel support; Takeda Oncology: Consultancy, Other: Travel support; Janssen: Honoraria, Other: Travel support. Davies:Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Takeda: Consultancy, Membership on an entity9s Board of Directors or advisory committees; MMRF: Honoraria; ASH: Honoraria; TRM Oncology: Honoraria; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity9s Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Consultancy, Membership on an entity9s Board of Directors or advisory committees; Abbvie: Consultancy. Cairns:Merck Sharp and Dohme: Research Funding; Amgen: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding. Striha:MSD: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Abbvie: Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; Amgen: Research Funding. Hockaday:Millenium: Research Funding; MSD: Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Amgen: Research Funding; Abbvie: Research Funding. Jones:Celgene: Honoraria, Other: Travel support, Research Funding. Kishore:Celgene: Honoraria; Takeda: Honoraria, Other: travel support. Garg:Amgen: Honoraria, Other: Travel Support; Takeda: Other: Travel Grant; Novartis: Other: travel support, Research Funding; Janssen: Honoraria. Williams:Janssen: Honoraria, Other: Travel support, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Honoraria, Other: Travel Support, Speakers Bureau; Takeda: Honoraria, Other: Travel support; Amgen: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. Karunanithi:Janssen: Other: Travel support, Research Funding; Celgene: Other: Travel support, Research Funding. Lindsay:Celgene: Honoraria, Other: Travel support; BMS: Consultancy, Other: Travel support; Takeda: Other: Travel support; Janssen: Consultancy; Novartis: Other: Travel support. Jenner:Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity9s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity9s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity9s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Chugai: Membership on an entity9s Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity9s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: travel support, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity9s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel support, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Cook:Amgen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, GlycoMimetics, Celgene, Janssen and Takeda and Sanofi: Honoraria; Celgene, Janssen and Takeda: Research Funding. Drayson:Abingdon Health: Equity Ownership, Membership on an entity9s Board of Directors or advisory committees. Owen:Takeda: Honoraria, Other: Travel Support; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Other: Travel support. Gregory:Janssen: Honoraria; Amgen: Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Merck Sharp and Dohme: Research Funding. Morgan:Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria; BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria. Jackson:Amgen: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria; Chugai: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria; Takeda: Honoraria. Kaiser:Chugai: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Other: Travel support; Takeda: Consultancy, Other: Travel Support; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding.

Characteristics and management of primary and other immune thrombocytopenias: Spanish registry study

ABSTRACTBackground: The natural history and its modulation by treatments administered for immune thrombocytopenia (ITP) in the clinical practice remains unknown. In addition, little information is available on the characteristics and management of ITP in Spain.Methods: We conducted an observational, multicenter, registry in 70 Hematology Services from Spain between 2009 and 2011, which included children from 2 months of age and adults with primary ITP or another ITP diagnosed within the last 6 months (platelet count [PC] < 100 × 109/l). Patients were followed-up at 6 and 12 months.Results: 484 patients were included (median [Q1, Q3] age 52 [29,74] years, 87.6% adults), 56% women, 10.5% with secondary ITP. Median (Q1, Q3) PC at diagnosis was 12 × 109/l (4, 32); 72% of patients had bleeding symptoms (62% cutaneous bleeding, 29% oral cavity bleeding, 18% epistaxis). 81% of patients with primary ITP received first-line treatment, mainly with corticosteroids (>6 weeks in 59% of cases), either alone (41%) or associated with intravenous immunoglobulin (33%). The response (≥30 × 109/L) to first-line treatment was 92%. A total of 19% of patients received second-line treatment and 6% additional treatments. At 12 months, 74% of primary ITP patients maintained a PC ≥ 100 × 109/L in absence of treatment (10% still had hemorrhagic manifestations).Conclusions: Characteristics of Spanish ITP patients are comparable to those from other countries. Although a high response rate to first-line treatments is observed, at 1 year, the disease persists in around one quarter of patients. Overall therapeutic management in Spain conforms to current recommendations, except for an excessive duration of corticosteroids therapy.

Investigating the poor outcomes ofBRAF-mutant advanced colorectal cancer: analysis from 2530 patients in randomised clinical trials

To improve strategies for the treatment of BRAF-mutant advanced colorectal cancer (aCRC) patients, we examined individual data from patients treated with chemotherapy alone in three randomised trials to identify points on the treatment pathway where outcomes differ from BRAF wild-types. 2530 aCRC patients were assessed from three randomised trials. End-points were progression-free survival, response rate, disease control rate, post-progression survival (P-PS) and overall survival. Treatments included first-line oxaliplatin/fluorouracil (OxFU) and second-line irinotecan. Clinicians were unaware of BRAF-status. 231 patients (9.1%) had BRAF-mutant tumours. BRAF-mutation conferred significantly worse survival independent of associated clinicopathological factors known to be prognostic. Compared with wild-type, BRAF-mutant patients treated with first-line OxFU had similar DCR (59.2% versus 72%; adjusted OR = 0.76, P = 0.24) and PFS (5.7 versus 6.3 months; adjusted HR = 1.14, P = 0.26). Following progression on first-line chemotherapy, BRAF-mutant patients had a markedly shorter P-PS (4.2 versus 9.2 months, adjusted HR = 1.69, P < 0.001). Fewer BRAF-mutant patients received second-line treatment (33% versus 51%, P < 0.001), but BRAF-mutation was not associated with inferior second-line outcomes (RR adjusted OR = 0.56, P = 0.45; PFS adjusted HR = 1.01, P = 0.93). Significant clinical heterogeneity within the BRAF-mutant population was observed: a proportion (24.3%) had good first-line PFS and P-PS (both >6 months; OS = 24.0 months); however, 36.5% progressed rapidly through first-line chemotherapy and thereafter, with OS = 4.7 months. BRAF-mutant aCRC confers a markedly worse prognosis independent of associated clinicopathological features. Chemotherapy provides meaningful improvements in outcome throughout treatment lines. Post-progression survival is markedly worse and vigilance is required to ensure appropriate delivery of treatment after first-line progression.

Sunitinib versus sorafenib as first-line therapy followed by sorefenib and sunitinib for patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (RCC) with clear cell histology: A multicenter randomized trial, CROSS-J-RCC.

469 Background: SWITCH, a prospective, randomized sequential trial to evaluate SU/SO versus SO/SU, revealed no difference in first-line or total PFS or OS, but no direct comparison was obtained between 1st line sunitinib (SU) and sorafenib (SO) for clear cell (CC) metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). Methods: Treatment-naïve patients with CC mRCC, ECOG PS 0/1 and MSKCC favorable or intermediate risk were randomized to receive open-label SU/SO or SO/SU at the standard dosage and schedule. The primary endpoint was 1st line PFS, and secondary endpoints were total PFS and OS. The calculated sample size was 59 per group, with α = 0.05, β = 0.10, and a censoring rate of 15%. Results: Of 124 patients enrolled in this study from February 2010 to July 2012 from 39 institutions, 120 could be evaluated (SU/SO, 57 and SO/SU, 63). Baseline patients' characteristics in the SU/SO and SO/SU groups were as follows: favorable risk, 21% and 22%; and presence ofnephrectomy, 88% and 89%, respectively. First-line mPFS was 8.7 and 7.0 months in the SU/SO and SO/SU groups, respectively (HR, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.42–1.08; p= 0.095). There was no statistically significant difference in total (T)-PFS, 27.8 M, and 22.6 m (HR 0.73, CI 0.428-1.246; p=0.247), or OS 38.4 m and 30.9 m (HR 0.934, CI 0.588-1.485; p=0.773). Subgroup analyses showed that T-PFS was NR and 27.8 m (p=0.021) in the favorable risk, and 38.4 m and 16.1 m (p=0.009) in with less than 5 metastatic sites, 6.5 m and 13.6 m (p=0.025) without nephrectomy in the SU/SO and SO/SU groups, respectively. The most common adverse events (AEs) in case of first-line SU or SO (all grade, all cause) were hand–foot syndrome (71% vs. 86%), hypothyroidism (70% vs. 33%), fatigue (57% vs. 40%), hypertension (55% vs. 44%), and diarrhea (23% vs. 38%). AEs were generally lower during second-line therapy. Conclusions: There was no significant difference in first-line PFS, T-PFS, and OS between the two sequential treatments. Although fewer patients received second-line treatment in the SU/SO group, OS in this group was numerically longer than that in the SO/SU group. Clinical trial information: 01481870.

Outcomes of Patients With Late-Relapse Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Treated With Targeted Therapies: A Single Institution Experience.

Late relapse with presentation of metastatic disease >5 years after nephrectomy with curative intent is a known behavior of renal cell carcinoma (RCC), but data on outcomes, especially regarding targeted therapies, are limited. In this study, we analyze clinicopathologic features and response to targeted therapy in patients with late-relapse metastatic RCC (mRCC). We retrospectively reviewed clinical data on consecutive patients treated with targeted therapy for mRCC diagnosed >5 years after nephrectomy with curative intent. A total of 24 patients (100% clear cell histology, median age 72 years, 83% males, all with prior nephrectomies) met inclusion criteria; 71% had favorable risk, and 25% had intermediate risk by International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium criteria. The estimated median overall survival for all patients was 60.5 months, and the 3-year overall survival rate was 71.78% (95% confidence interval, 47.98%-84.77%). All patients were treated with targeted therapy; first-line treatments included pazopanib (46%), sorafenib (25%), sunitinib (17%), and cytokine (13%), with no significant difference in time to treatment failure between therapies. Median time on first-line therapy was 19.7 months; 67% of patients received second-line treatment. Metastases were detected at considerable rates in sites considered historically uncommon, such as the pancreas, adrenal glands, and soft tissue. Patients with late-relapse mRCC treated with targeted therapy had prolonged survival that compared favorably to historical controls, and metastases in uncommon sites were noted.

Real-World Treatment Patterns among Patients with Advanced Gastric Cancer in South Korea.

PurposeThe purpose of this study was to understand patient treatment patterns, outcomes, and healthcare resource use in cases of metastatic and/or locally recurrent, unresectable gastric cancer (MGC) in South Korea.Materials and MethodsThirty physicians reviewed charts of eligible patients to collect de-identified data. Patients must have received platinum/fluoropyrimidine first-line therapy followed by second-line therapy or best supportive care, had no other primary cancer, and not participated in a clinical trial following MGC diagnosis. Data were summarized using descriptive statistics. Kaplan-Meier analysis was used to describe survival.ResultsOf 198 patients, 73.7% were male, 78.3% were diagnosed with MGC after age 55 (mean, 61.3 years), and 47.0% were current or former smokers. The majority of tumorswere located in the antrum/pylorus (51.5%). Metastatic sites most often occurred in the peritoneum (53.5%), lymph nodes (47.5%), and liver (38.9%). At diagnosis, the mean Charlson comorbidity indexwas 0.4 (standard deviation, 0.6). The most common comorbidities were chronic gastritis (22.7%) and cardiovascular disease (18.7%). Most patients (80.3%) received second-line treatment. Single-agent fluoropyrimidine was reported for 22.0% of patients, while 19.5% were treated with irinotecan and a fluoropyrimidine or platinum agent. The most common physician-reported symptoms during second-line treatment were nausea/vomiting (44.7%) and pain (11.3%), with antiemetics (44.7%), analgesics (36.5%), and nutritional support (11.3%) most often used as supportive care. Two-thirds of inpatient hospitalizations were for chemotherapy infusion. Outpatient hospitalization (31.6%) and visits to the oncologist (58.8%) were common among second-line patients.ConclusionMost patients received second-line treatment, although regimens varied. Understanding MGC patient characteristics and treatment patterns in South Korea will help address unmet needs.

Treatment patterns and clinical outcomes in patients with renal cell carcinoma in the UK: insights from the RECCORD registry

The aim of the RECCORD registry was to gather real-world UK data on the use of targeted therapies in renal cell carcinoma (RCC) and assess clinical outcomes. Here, demographic and outcome data are presented with the treatment patterns and demographic profile of patients on the registry. Patients were retrospectively identified at seven UK hospitals with large cancer centres in England (5), Scotland (1) and Wales (1). Anonymised data were collected through an online registry covering demographics, treatments and outcomes. Five hundred and fourteen UK adult patients with metastatic RCC were included in the study for analysis. Patients were included if they were treated for metastatic RCC at one of the seven centres, and started systemic anti-cancer treatment from March 2009 to November 2012 inclusive. In addition to demographic factors, the principal outcome measures were overall survival (OS), time to disease progression and toxicity. The majority of first-line treatment was with sunitinib; first-line use of pazopanib increased as the study progressed. 15.8% of patients received second-line treatment, half of whom were prescribed everolimus. Median OS (from initiation of first-line treatment) was 23.9 months (95% confidence interval [CI] 18.6-29.1 months), similar to that reported for clinical trials of targeted RCC therapies [Ljungberg B, Campbell SC, Choi HY et al. The epidemiology of renal cell carcinoma. Eur Urol 2011; 60: 615-621; Abe H, Kamai T. Recent advances in the treatment of metastatic renal cell carcinoma. Int J Urol 2013; 20: 944-955; Motzer RJ, Hutson TE, Tomczak P et al. Overall survival and updated results for sunitinib compared with interferon alfa in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma. J Clin Oncol 2009; 27: 3584-3590]. OS was significantly longer for those who received second-line treatment after disease progression (33.0 months; 95% CI 30.8-35.2 months) than those who did not (20.9 months; 95% CI 16.4-25.3 months; P = 0.008). RECCORD is a large 'real-world' database assessing metastatic RCC treatment patterns and outcomes. Treatment patterns changed over time as targeted therapies were approved and became widely available; survival data in RECCORD are consistent with those reported for systemic treatments in clinical trials. Kaplan-Meier analysis of results demonstrated that receiving second-line therapy was a major prognostic factor for longer OS.