The PRO-RCC study:a long-term PROspective Renal Cell Carcinoma cohort in the Netherlands, providing an infrastructure for ‘Trial within Cohorts’ study designs

BACKGROUND: Ongoing research in the field of both localized, locally advanced and metastatic renal cell carcinoma has resulted in the availability of multiple treatment options. Hence, many questions are still unanswered and await further research. A nationwide collaborative registry allows to collect corresponding data. For this purpose, the Dutch PROspective Renal Cell Carcinoma cohort (PRO-RCC) has been founded, for the prospective collection of long-term clinical data, patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) and patient reported experience measures (PREMs).METHODS: PRO-RCC is designed as a multicenter cohort for all Dutch patients with renal cell carcinoma (RCC). Recruitment will start in the Netherlands in 2023. Importantly, participants may also consent to participation in a 'Trial within cohorts' studies (TwiCs). The TwiCs design provides a method to perform (randomized) interventional studies within the registry. The clinical data collection is embedded in the Netherlands Cancer Registry (NCR). Next to the standardly available data on RCC, additional clinical data will be collected. PROMS entail Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQoL), symptom monitoring with optional ecological momentary assessment (EMA) of pain and fatigue, and optional return to work- and/or nutrition questionnaires. PREMS entail satisfaction with care. Both PROMS and PREMS are collected through the PROFILES registry and are accessible for the patient and the treating physician.TRIAL REGISTRATION: Ethical board approval has been obtained (2021_218) and the study has been registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT05326620).DISCUSSION: PRO-RCC is a nationwide long-term cohort for the collection of real-world clinical data, PROMS and PREMS. By facilitating an infrastructure for the collection of prospective data on RCC, PRO-RCC will contribute to observational research in a real-world study population and prove effectiveness in daily clinical practice. The infrastructure of this cohort also enables that interventional studies can be conducted with the TwiCs design, without the disadvantages of classic RCTs such as slow patient accrual and risk of dropping out after randomization.</p

Dabrafenib plus trametinib is effective in the treatment of BRAF V600-mutated metastatic melanoma patients:analysis of patients from the dabrafenib plus trametinib Named Patient Program (DESCRIBE II)

In clinical trials, dabrafenib plus trametinib improved overall survival (OS) compared with single-agent BRAF inhibitors (BRAFi) in patients with BRAF V600-mutant unresectable or metastatic melanoma. We investigated dabrafenib plus trametinib therapy in a compassionate-use setting [Named Patient Program (NPP); DESCRIBE II]. A retrospective chart review of patients with BRAF V600-mutated unresectable stage III/IV melanoma receiving dabrafenib plus trametinib as compassionate use was conducted. Treatment patterns and duration, clinical outcomes, and tolerability were evaluated. Of 271 patients, 92.6% had stage IV melanoma, including 36.5% with brain metastases. Overall, 162 patients (59.8%) were BRAFi naive and 171 (63.1%) received first-line dabrafenib plus trametinib. Among BRAFi-naive patients, the overall response rate (ORR) was 67.3%, median OS (mOS) was 20.0 months, and median progression-free survival (mPFS) was 7.5 months. In BRAFi-naive patients with known brain metastases (n = 62), ORR was 61.3%, mOS was 15.5 months, and mPFS was 6.2 months. Eighty-four patients received BRAFi monotherapy for >30 days and switched to dabrafenib plus trametinib prior to progression. Of these 84 patients, 63 had known disease status at the time of switch, and 22 improved with the combination therapy. No new safety signals were identified, and dabrafenib plus trametinib was well tolerated. Dabrafenib plus trametinib showed substantial clinical activity in NPP patients with BRAF V600-mutated unresectable or metastatic melanoma. Analysis of treatment patterns demonstrated the effectiveness of the combination in patients with brain metastases and across lines of therapy with a well tolerated and manageable safety profile

Comparison of Immediate vs Deferred Cytoreductive Nephrectomy in Patients With Synchronous Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Receiving Sunitinib The SURTIME Randomized Clinical Trial

Item does not contain fulltex

Shear stress sustains atheroprotective endothelial KLF2 expression more potently than statins through mRNA stabilization

OBJECTIVE: The transcription factor KLF2 is considered an important mediator of the anti-inflammatory and anti-thrombotic properties of the endothelium. KLF2 is absent from low-shear, atherosclerosis-prone sites of the vascular tree but is induced by HMG-CoA reductase inhibitors (statins) in vitro. We studied KLF2-dependent induction of important determinants of the atheroprotective status of the endothelium to determine whether pharmacological intervention, e.g. by statins, can potentially replace shear stress. METHODS: Shear stress and statin effects in combination with TNF-alpha were determined in human umbilical vein endothelial cells by quantitative measurements of the steady-state levels and stability of mRNA for KLF2 and its downstream target genes thrombomodulin (TM) and endothelial nitric oxide synthase (eNOS). RESULTS: We demonstrate that prolonged shear stress has a potential that is superior to that of statins to induce the KLF2-dependent expression of eNOS and TM, especially in the presence of the pro-inflammatory cytokine tumor necrosis factor-alpha (TNF-alpha). These effects can be attributed to the sustained stabilization of KLF2 mRNA by shear, leading to an increased KLF2 protein expression and concomitant strong induction of KLF2 downstream targets. The stabilization of KLF2 mRNA is demonstrated to be dependent on signaling involving phosphoinositide 3-kinase (PI3K). CONCLUSION: The stabilization of KLF2 steady-state levels, as induced by prolonged shear stress but not by statins, may be essential for sustaining the quiescent, atheroprotective status of the vascular endothelium under inflammatory condition

Severe Adverse Reaction to Vemurafenib in a Pregnant Woman with Metastatic Melanoma

Targeted therapies have drastically changed the management of metastatic melanoma and have shown encouraging results on tumour progression but are also known for their high rates of adverse reactions. In general, targeted therapies are contraindicated during pregnancy due to concerns about teratogenesis. For the BRAF V600 inhibitor vemurafenib, the available literature about the effects on human pregnancy is limited to a single case report. In patients with metastatic melanoma that wish to continue their pregnancy, targeted therapies like vemurafenib offer the only possibility of improving maternal outcome. In this article, we report on a pregnant woman with metastatic melanoma who was treated with vemurafenib during pregnancy and experienced a fatal adverse reaction

The effect of a single dose of nivolumab prior to isolated limb perfusion for patients with in-transit melanoma metastases:An interim analysis of a phase Ib/II randomized double-blind placebo-controlled trial (NivoILP trial)

Objective: ILP has shown to achieve high response rates in patients with melanoma ITM. Possibly there is a synergistic mechanism of action of ILP and anti-PD1. The aim of this trial was to investigate the safety and efficacy of adding a single dose of systemic anti-PD1 to isolated limb perfusion (ILP) for patients with melanoma in-transit metastases (ITM). Methods: In this placebo controlled double-blind phase Ib/II trial, patients with melanoma ITM were randomized 1:1 to either a single systemic dose of nivolumab or placebo one day prior to ILP. The primary endpoint was complete response (CR) rate at three months, and safety in terms of incidence and severity of adverse events (AEs). Results: A total of 20 patients were included. AEs of any grade occurred in 90% of patients in the nivolumab arm and in 80% in the placebo arm within three months after ILP. Grade 3 AEs were reported in 40% and 30% respectively, most commonly related to wound infection, wound dehiscence, or skin necrosis. There were no grade 4 or 5 AEs reported. The CR rate was 75% in the nivolumab arm and 60% in the placebo arm. The 1-year local progression-free rate was 86% in the nivolumab arm and 67% in the placebo arm. The 1-year OS was 100% in both arms. Conclusion: For patients with melanoma ITM, the addition of a single systemic dose of nivolumab the day before ILP is considered safe and feasible with promising efficacy. Accrual will continue in a phase 2 trial.</p

Indications and Outcomes for Deferred Cytoreductive Nephrectomy Following Immune Checkpoint Inhibitor Combination Therapy: Can Systemic Therapy be Withdrawn in Patients with No Evidence of Disease?

Background: Upfront cytoreductive nephrectomy (CN) is no longer the standard of care for patients with metastastic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) with intermediate or poor prognosis according to the International mRCC Database Consortium categories. Objective: To investigate indications for CN following first-line ipilimumab-nivolumab, and assess management and outcomes for patients achieving no evidence of disease (NED) after CN. Design, setting, and participants: This was a retrospective cohort study among 125 patients with synchronous mRCC who received ipilimumab-nivolumab treatment between March 2019 and June 2022 at four European centres. At one of the four centres, nivolumab was stopped following NED. Outcome measurements and statistical analysis: We measured complete response of metastases (mCR) according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours 1.1; near-complete response of mestastases (mnCR) was defined as a >80% reduction in cumulative metastatic volume. Treatment-free survival (TFS), disease-free survival (DFS), progression-free survival (PFS), and cancer-specific survival (CSS) were determined. Results and limitations: At median follow-up of 25 mo, 23/125 patients (18%) had undergone deferred CN. Of 26 patients (21%) with mCR or mnCR, 19 (73%) underwent CN to achieve NED, of whom 11 (58%) discontinued nivolumab, with median TFS of 21 mo. For patients who continued (n = 8, 42%) versus discontinued nivolumab following NED, 2-yr DFS was 83% versus 60% (p = 0.675) and 3-yr CSS was 100% versus 70% (p = 0.325). Four patients underwent CN because of a dissociated response of the primary tumour and were still alive at median follow-up of 5 mo. Conclusions: CN can result in NED, durable DFS, and substantial time off systemic therapy. More collaborative data are required to ascertain the benefits of treatment discontinuation versus oncologic safety. Patient summary: In our study using real-world data, 18% of patients treated with immunotherapy underwent deferred kidney surgery. The majority were free of disease after 3 years. Half of the patients who stopped immunotherapy after surgery have been off therapy for 21 months or longer. Larger studies are needed to investigate the effect of kidney surgery and discontinuation of immunotherapy on survival