NUTMEG: A randomized phase II study of nivolumab and temozolomide versus temozolomide alone in newly diagnosed older patients with glioblastoma.

BACKGROUND: There is an immunologic rationale to evaluate immunotherapy in the older glioblastoma population, who have been underrepresented in prior trials. The NUTMEG study evaluated the combination of nivolumab and temozolomide in patients with glioblastoma aged 65 years and older. METHODS: NUTMEG was a multicenter 2:1 randomized phase II trial for patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma aged 65 years and older. The experimental arm consisted of hypofractionated chemoradiation with temozolomide, then adjuvant nivolumab and temozolomide. The standard arm consisted of hypofractionated chemoradiation with temozolomide, then adjuvant temozolomide. The primary objective was to improve overall survival (OS) in the experimental arm. RESULTS: A total of 103 participants were randomized, with 69 in the experimental arm and 34 in the standard arm. The median (range) age was 73 (65-88) years. After 37 months of follow-up, the median OS was 11.6 months (95% CI, 9.7-13.4) in the experimental arm and 11.8 months (95% CI, 8.3-14.8) in the standard arm. For the experimental arm relative to the standard arm, the OS hazard ratio was 0.85 (95% CI, 0.54-1.33). In the experimental arm, there were three grade 3 immune-related adverse events which resolved, with no unexpected serious adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: Due to insufficient evidence of benefit with nivolumab, the decision was made not to transition to a phase III trial. No new safety signals were identified with nivolumab. This complements the existing series of immunotherapy trials. Research is needed to identify biomarkers and new strategies including combinations

Synchronous breast cancer and lymphoma: A case series and review of the literature

Four patients with synchronous breast cancer and lymphoma are described. In all cases, the lymphoma was an unexpected finding in the histopathology of the axillary lymph-node dissection. The diagnosis of synchronous malignancies poses challenges for both the diagnosing pathologist and the treating clinicican

NeoAdjuvant pembrolizumab and STEreotactic radiotherapy prior to nephrectomy for renal cell carcinoma (NAPSTER): A phase II randomised clinical trial

Background: Surgery remains the standard of care for localised renal cell carcinoma (RCC). Nevertheless, nearly 50% of patients with high-risk disease experience relapse after surgery, with distant sites being common. Considering improved outcomes in terms of disease-free survival with adjuvant immunotherapy with pembrolizumab, we hypothesise that neoadjuvant SABR with or without the addition of pembrolizumab before nephrectomy will lead to improved disease outcomes by evoking better immune response in the presence of an extensive reserve of tumor-associated antigens. Methods and analysis: This prospective, open-label, phase II, randomised, non-comparative, clinical trial will investigate the use of neoadjuvant stereotactic ablative body radiotherapy (SABR) with or without pembrolizumab prior to nephrectomy. The trial will be conducted at two centres in Australia that are well established for delivering SABR to primary RCC patients. Twenty-six patients with biopsy-proven clear cell RCC will be recruited over two years. Patients will be randomised to either SABR or SABR/pembrolizumab. Patients in both arms will undergo surgery at 9 weeks after completion of experimental treatment. The primary objectives are to describe major pathological response and changes in tumour-responsive T-cells from baseline pre-treatment biopsy in each arm. Patients will be followed for sixty days post-surgery. Outcomes and significance: We hypothesize that SABR alone or SABR plus pembrolizumab will induce significant tumor-specific immune response and major pathological response. In that case, either one or both arms could justifiably be used as a neoadjuvant treatment approach in future randomized trials in the high-risk patient population

Implementing a nurse-enabled, integrated, shared-care model involving specialists and general practitioners in breast cancer post-treatment follow-up: a study protocol for a phase II randomised controlled trial (the EMINENT trial)

Background: Due to advances in early detection and cancer treatment, 5-year relative survival rates for early breast cancer surpass 90% in developed nations. There is increasing focus on promotion of wellness in survivorship and active approaches to reducing morbidity related to treatment; however, current models of follow-up care are heavily reliant on hospital-based specialist-led care. This study aims to test the feasibility of the EMINENT intervention for implementing an integrated, shared-care model involving both cancer centre specialists and community-based general practitioners for early breast cancer post-treatment follow-up. Methods: We describe a protocol for a phase II, randomised controlled trial with two parallel arms and 1:1 allocation. A total of 60 patients with early-stage breast cancer will be randomised to usual, specialist-led, follow-up care (as determined by the treating surgeons, medical oncologists, and radiation oncologists) or shared follow-up care intervention (i.e. EMINENT). EMINENT is a nurse-enabled, pre-specified shared-care pathway with follow-up responsibilities divided between cancer centre specialists (i.e. surgeons and oncologists) and general practitioners. The primary outcome is health-related quality of life as measured by the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy—Breast Cancer. Secondary outcomes include patient experience, acceptance, and satisfaction of care; dietary, physical activity, and sedentary behaviours; financial toxicity; adherence; health resource utilisation; and adverse events. Discussion: The trial is designed to identify the barriers to implementing a shared-care model for breast cancer survivors following treatment. Results of this study will inform a definitive trial testing the effects of shared-care model on health-related quality of life of breast cancer survivors, as well as its ability to alleviate the growing demands on the healthcare system. Trial registration: Australia and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ACTRN12619001594112. Registered on 19 November 201

Outcomes based on age in the phase III METEOR trial of cabozantinib versus everolimus in patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma

Background: Cabozantinib improved progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS) and objective response rate (ORR) compared with everolimus in patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC) after prior antiangiogenic therapy in the phase III METEOR trial (NCT01865747). Limited data are available on the use of targeted therapies in older patients with advanced RCC. Methods: Efficacy and safety in METEOR were retrospectively analysed for three age subgroups: <65 (n = 394), 65–74 (n = 201) and ≥75 years (n = 63). Results: PFS, OS and ORR were improved with cabozantinib compared with everolimus in all age subgroups. The PFS hazard ratios (HRs) were 0.53 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.41–0.68), 0.53 (95% CI: 0.37–0.77) and 0.38 (95% CI: 0.18–0.79) for <65, 65–74 and ≥75 years, respectively, and the OS HRs were 0.72 (95% CI: 0.54–0.95), 0.66 (95% CI: 0.44–0.99) and 0.57 (95% CI: 0.28–1.14). The ORR for cabozantinib versus everolimus was 15% vs 5%, 21% vs 2% and 19% vs 0%, respectively. No significant differences were observed in PFS or OS with age as a categorical or continuous variable. Grade III/IV adverse events (AEs) were generally consistent across subgroups, although fatigue, hypertension and hyponatraemia occurred more frequently in older patients treated with cabozantinib. Dose reductions to manage AEs were more frequent in patients receiving cabozantinib than in those receiving everolimus. Dose reductions and treatment discontinuation due to AEs were more frequent in older patients in both treatment groups. Conclusions: Cabozantinib improved PFS, OS and ORR compared with everolimus in previously treated patients with advanced RCC, irrespective of age group, supporting use in all age categories. Proactive dose modification and supportive care may help to mitigate AEs in older patients while maintaining efficacy.SCOPUS: ar.jinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishe

NUTMEG: A randomized phase II study of nivolumab and temozolomide versus temozolomide alone in newly diagnosed older patients with glioblastoma

BackgroundThere is an immunologic rationale to evaluate immunotherapy in the older glioblastoma population, who have been underrepresented in prior trials. The NUTMEG study evaluated the combination of nivolumab and temozolomide in patients with glioblastoma aged 65 years and older.MethodsNUTMEG was a multicenter 2:1 randomized phase II trial for patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma aged 65 years and older. The experimental arm consisted of hypofractionated chemoradiation with temozolomide, then adjuvant nivolumab and temozolomide. The standard arm consisted of hypofractionated chemoradiation with temozolomide, then adjuvant temozolomide. The primary objective was to improve overall survival (OS) in the experimental arm.ResultsA total of 103 participants were randomized, with 69 in the experimental arm and 34 in the standard arm. The median (range) age was 73 (65-88) years. After 37 months of follow-up, the median OS was 11.6 months (95% CI, 9.7-13.4) in the experimental arm and 11.8 months (95% CI, 8.3-14.8) in the standard arm. For the experimental arm relative to the standard arm, the OS hazard ratio was 0.85 (95% CI, 0.54-1.33). In the experimental arm, there were three grade 3 immune-related adverse events which resolved, with no unexpected serious adverse events.ConclusionsDue to insufficient evidence of benefit with nivolumab, the decision was made not to transition to a phase III trial. No new safety signals were identified with nivolumab. This complements the existing series of immunotherapy trials. Research is needed to identify biomarkers and new strategies including combinations

Endocytosis Inhibition in Humans to Improve Responses to ADCC-Mediating Antibodies

A safe and controlled manipulation of endocytosis in vivo may have disruptive therapeutic potential. Here, we demonstrate that the anti-emetic/anti-psychotic prochlorperazine can be repurposed to reversibly inhibit the in vivo endocytosis of membrane proteins targeted by therapeutic monoclonal antibodies, as directly demonstrated by our human tumor ex vivo assay. Temporary endocytosis inhibition results in enhanced target availability and improved efficiency of natural killer cell-mediated antibody-dependent cellular cytotoxicity (ADCC), a mediator of clinical responses induced by IgG1 antibodies, demonstrated here for cetuximab, trastuzumab, and avelumab. Extensive analysis of downstream signaling pathways ruled out on-target toxicities. By overcoming the heterogeneity of drug target availability that frequently characterizes poorly responsive or resistant tumors, clinical application of reversible endocytosis inhibition may considerably improve the clinical benefit of ADCC-mediating therapeutic antibodies.Endocytosis inhibitors, such as prochlorperazine, can be used to move tumor cell antigens that are the targets of therapeutic monoclonal antibodies but hiding inside the cell to the cell surface for improved therapeutic antibody binding and tumor cell destruction by NK cells