Explore the vast range of titles available.

Background Nowadays, different therapeutic options are available for the first-line treatment of metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). Immuno-combinations are the standard first-line therapy in all mRCC patients regardless of the International Metastatic RCC Database Consortium (IMDC) risk category, even though TKI monotherapy is still a therapeutic option in selected patients. However, comparisons between the different first-line treatment strategies are lacking and few real-world data are available in this setting. For this reason, the regimen choice represents an important issue in clinical practice and the optimal treatment sequence remains unclear. Methods The REGAL study is a multicentric prospective observational study enrolling mRCC patients treated with first-line systemic therapy according to clinical practice in a real-world setting. A retrospective cohort of mRCC patients who received first-line systemic therapy from the 1st of January 2021 will also be included. The primary objective is to identify potential prognostic and predictive factors that could help guide the treatment choice; secondary objectives included the assessment of the prognostic performance of the novel prognostic Meet-URO score (IMDC score + neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio + bone metastases) compared with the IMDC score and the comparison between treatment strategies according to response and survival outcomes and toxicity profile. Discussion Considering the high number of therapeutic first-line strategies available for mRCC, the identification of clinical prognostic and predictive factors to candidate patients to a preferable systemic therapy is still an unmet clinical need. The Meet-URO 33 study aims to provide a large-scale real-world database on mRCC patients, to identify the clinical predictive and prognostic factors and the different performances between the ICI-based combinations according to response, survival and toxicity. Trial Registration CESC IOV 2023-78.

Background The prognostic value of the Geriatric 8 (G8) screening score in metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) patients receiving first-line immunotherapy remains unclear. This study aimed to evaluate the prognostic role of G8 within the context of the Meet-URO classification in mRCC patients treated with first-line ipilimumab-nivolumab. Methods This retrospective multicentre study analysed 106 mRCC patients treated with first-line ipilimumab-nivolumab. G8 and Meet-URO scores were calculated before treatment initiation. Primary endpoint was overall survival (OS), defined as duration from first administration of Nivolumab to death. OS was analysed in relation to age groups, G8 scores, and Meet-URO score categories, with data censored for patients still alive at the last follow-up. The secondary endpoint, progression-free survival (PFS), was measured from initiating Nivolumab to the earliest instance of disease progression or death. OS and PFS were assessed using Kaplan-Meier methods and Cox regression analyses. The reporting of this study conforms to the REMARK guidelines. Results Patients with G8 > 14 had more favorable IMDC and Meet-URO risk classifications and lower neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratios. While PFS did not differ significantly between G8 ≤ 14 and >14 groups (1-year 29.3% vs 46.2%, p = 0.2), OS was significantly longer in G8 > 14 group (1-year 76.1% vs 58.6%, p = 0.006). In multivariable analysis, G8 ≤ 14 was independently associated with worse OS (HR 2.36, 95% CI 1.06-5.08, p = 0.03) but not PFS. The Meet-URO score was prognostic for both PFS and OS. In patients ≥70 years, G8 lost its prognostic value, while Meet-URO remained prognostic for OS. Conclusions The G8 score is an independent prognostic factor for OS but not PFS in mRCC patients receiving first-line ipilimumab-nivolumab. The Meet-URO score shows consistent prognostic ability for PFS and OS across age groups. These findings suggest that while G8 may be useful for individual patient-level OS prediction, the Meet-URO score may be superior for guiding treatment decisions in clinical practice.

Purpose To evaluate adherence to abiraterone or enzalutamide for the treatment of metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). Methods In an observational prospective cohort study, we monitored patients with mCRPC for their adherence to abiraterone or enzalutamide in the pre- or post-chemotherapy setting. Results Fifty-eight patients with median age of 76 years (range 56–94), age-adjusted Charlson comorbidity score of 10 (range, 4–15), and geriatric G8 score of 14 (range, 6–17) were enrolled. Twenty-two (38%) patients were treated with abiraterone and 36 (62%) with enzalutamide, while forty-two (72%) were in the pre-chemotherapy setting. Forty-seven patients (81%) had a caregiver. Based on the pill counting, a non-adherence rate of 4.8% and 6.2% was observed for the whole period and the first 3 months, respectively, without a statistically significant difference between abiraterone and enzalutamide cohorts. A lower non-adherence rate (1.3%) was reported by patients during the whole period, mainly due to a misperception (77%) and forgetfulness (19%). Non-adherence rate to the fulfilling of the clinical diary was 38% for the whole period. Non-adherence in the whole period was related to the radiological response ( p  = 0.03) and geriatric G8 score ( p  = 0.005). By the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve based on the radiological response, non-adherence cut-off was 1.87% ( p  = 0.04). By this non-adherence cut-off, the G8 cut-off was 14.75 ( p  = 0.0003). Conclusion Non-adherence to abiraterone or enzalutamide for mCRPC may have an impact on disease response and be related to patients’ frailty, suggesting their geriatric assessment and clinical interventions to monitor and increase their adherence.

Background In advanced urothelial carcinoma (UC), the prognostic impact of metastatic site and burden during avelumab maintenance therapy remains poorly defined. Methods We performed a sub-analysis of the Italian multicenter retrospective–prospective observational study Meet-URO 25, including patients with advanced UC who received avelumab maintenance after disease control with first-line platinum-based chemotherapy. We assessed the association between metastatic site and number of metastatic sites at the start of avelumab and clinical outcomes, including objective response rate (ORR), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS). Results A total of 243 patients were included. Lymph nodes (79.0%), lungs (32.1%), and bones (27.2%) were the most common metastatic sites. The median number of metastatic sites at the start of avelumab maintenance was 1. ORR and disease control rate (DCR) were higher in patients with nodal-only disease (ORR 28.9%, DCR 69.4%) and significantly lower in those with bone metastases (ORR 9.8%, DCR 50.8%). Median PFS and OS were 7.4 and 24.1 months, respectively, in the overall cohort. Bone metastases were associated with markedly shorter PFS (3.7 vs. 8.2 months; HR 1.92, p  < 0.001) and OS (11.3 vs. 27.6 months; HR 2.44, p  < 0.001), especially when present as a single metastatic site. Increasing number of metastatic sites was also associated with poorer outcomes (OS: 35.5 months with one site vs. 11.9 months with ≥ 3 sites; p  < 0.001). Conclusions In this real-world cohort, both metastatic site and burden strongly influenced response and survival of avelumab. Bone metastases were independently associated with poor prognosis, while nodal-only disease identified a favorable subgroup. These findings support risk-based treatment stratification in the maintenance setting.

Background Immune checkpoint inhibitor doublet (ICI-ICI) and ICI plus tyrosine kinase inhibitor (ICI-TKI) regimens are the cornerstone of treatment for metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC), although no head-to-head comparisons are currently available. This study aimed to compare the real-world effectiveness of ICI-ICI versus ICI-TKI combinations in patients with intermediate- and poor-risk mRCC according to International Metastatic RCC Database Consortium (IMDC). Methods The Meet-URO 33 study is a multicentre retrospective-prospective registry collecting real-world data on patients with mRCC. Multivariable logistic and Cox models were built for objective response rate (ORR), PFS and OS, with a propensity score (PS) adjustment for baseline imbalances. Results Among 1497 patients, 755 were intermediate-risk (199 ICI-ICI, 556 ICI-TKI) and 312 poor-risk (77 ICI-ICI, 212 ICI-TKI). Median follow-up was 14.2 months (8.0 months and 14.5 months in poor- and intermediate-risk subgroups, respectively). In poor-risk patients, median OS was 20.3 versus 12.9 months (HR 0.87, 95% CI 0.59–1.28, p  = 0.49), and median PFS was 6.7 versus 8.7 months (HR 1.10, 95% CI 0.79–1.54, p  = 0.53), for ICI-ICI versus ICI–TKI, respectively. In the intermediate-risk patients treated with ICI-ICI versus ICI-TKI, median OS was 37.8 versus 35.5 months (HR 1.08; 95% CI 0.77–1.50; p  = 0.65), and median PFS was 17.8 versus 18.6 months (HR 1.29, 95% CI 1.00–1.66, p  = 0.050). ORR was 42.9% versus 45.8% in poor-risk patients (OR 0.72, 95% CI 0.39–1.34, p  = 0.303) and 48.1% versus 54.3% in intermediate-risk patients (OR 0.71, 95% CI 0.48–1.04, p  = 0.075). Conclusions No statistically significant differences in survival or response were observed between ICI-ICI and ICI-TKI combinations in patients with IMDC intermediate- and poor-risk mRCC.

Instrumental activities of daily living (IADL) are significant health indicators closely related to executive functions and able to detect mild cognitive impairment. A decline in IADL usually precedes ADL limitation, including taking medications, and may therefore predict a cognitive decline. We aimed to investigate the association of patients’ IADL score with other clinical factors, with a particular focus on the presence of a caregiver, and the impact on adherence to androgen receptor pathway inhibitors (ARPIs) and survival outcomes within the Meet-URO 5—ADHERE study. It was a large prospective multicentre observational cohort study monitoring adherence to ARPIs in 234 metastatic castrate-resistant PC (mCRPC) patients aged ≥ 70. We observed an association between impaired IADL and lower geriatric G8 scores (p < 0.01), and lower adherence to ARPIs whether assessed by pill counting (p = 0.01) or self-reported by the patient himself (p = 0.03). The combination of an IADL < 6 and the absence of a caregiver resulted in a significantly high risk of non-adherence to the ARPIs at the multivariable analysis (HR 9.23, 95% confidence interval 2.28–37.43, p = 0.01). IADL alongside the geriatric G8 scales represent essential tools to identify frail and less auto-sufficient patients who are extremely vulnerable particularly if not supported by a caregiver and have the highest risk of nonadherence to ARPIs.

Background: Although the relationship between androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) for prostate cancer (PC) and the biological mechanisms of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection remains unequivocally unclear, it is possible that exposure to the virus may influence PC evolution by altering TMPRSS2 expression. This study aims to evaluate the long-term oncological outcomes of patients with metastatic PC who were undergoing medical therapy at the time of contracting SARS-CoV-2 and who resumed/continued anticancer treatment after recovery. Methods: We retrospectively evaluated a consecutive series of 151 metastatic PC patients who developed SARS-CoV-2 infection while receiving one active systemic anticancer therapy (125 metastatic castration-resistant PC (mCRPC) patients and 26 metastatic hormone-sensitive PC (mHSPC) patients). We evaluated variables that influence the ability to maintain or resume the ongoing therapy. For the maintained/resumed therapies, we calculated the post-infection overall survival (piOS) and the overall survival (OS). Results: Of the patients, 12.6% died due to SARS-CoV-2 infection, 10.6% recovered from the infection but failed to maintain/resume the ongoing anticancer treatment, and the remaining 76.8% maintained/resumed the treatment after recovery. Hospitalization, duration of infection, and the type of ongoing anticancer agent influenced these treatment changes. In the cohort of mCRPC patients, the median piOS was 32 months, and the median OS was 67.8 months. The median piOS was not achieved in the cohort of mHSPC patients, while the median OS was 122 months. The outcomes of single anticancer agents were in line with those of pivotal trials. Conclusions: Although observed in a highly selected population of PC patients who survived SARS-CoV-2 infection and were able to resume/maintain anticancer therapy, the survival outcomes of this study appear to be in line with those reported in pivotal studies, and SARS-CoV-2 infection does not seem to have adversely affected long-term oncological outcomes.

Background Severe immune-related Adverse Events (irAEs) develop in 10–27% of patients treated with Immune-Oncology (IO) [Powles (Lancet 391:748–757, 2018); Galsky (Lancet 395:1547–1557, 2020); Haanen (Ann Oncol 28:119–142, 2017)]. The aim of our study was to evaluate efficacy and clinical outcome of metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) patients who stopped Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors (ICIs) due to early Grade (G) 3-G4 irAEs. Methods We retrospectively collected data from 204 mRCC patients treated with ICIs in 6 Italian referral centers adhering to the Meet-Uro group, between February 2017 and January 2020. To properly weight the results, patients who did not report early G3–G4 toxicities have been included as control group. Primary endpoint was to evaluate 6 months Progression Free Survival (PFS) after early treatment interruption for Grade (G) 3–4 toxicities compared to the control group. Secondary endpoints were to evaluate Time to treatment failure (TTF) and overall survival (OS) in both groups. All statistical analyses were performed using SPSS software (version 19.00, SPSS, Chicago). Results 18/204 (8.8%) patients had early treatment interruption for serious (G3-G4) irAEs. Early was defined as interruption of IO after only one or two administrations. Immune related nephritis and pancreatitis were the most common irAE that lead to treatment interruption. 6/18 patients received IO-IO combination whereas 12/18 patients antiPD1. In the study group, 12/18 (66.6%) were free from progression at 6 months since IO interruption, TTF was 1.6 months (95% CI 1.6–2.1), mPFS was 7.4 months (95% CI 3.16–11.6) and mOS was 15.5 months (5.1–25.8). In the control group 111/184 (60.3%) patients were free from progression at 6 months, TTF was 4.6 months (95% CI 3.5–5.6), mPFS was 4.6 months (95% CI 3.5–5.6) and mOS was 19.6 months (95% CI 15.1–24.0). In the overall population, mPFS was 5.0 months (95% CI 4.0–5.9) and mOS was 19.6 months (95% CI 15.1–24.0). Conclusions ICIs seem to maintain efficacy even after early interruption due to severe irAE.

Background: The treatment of heavily pretreated patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) represents an unmet medical need and is still challenging. Objectives: The primary objective was to assess the effectiveness of the lenvatinib plus everolimus combination and the secondary objective was the toxicity profile of this combination. Design: We conducted a longitudinal retrospective study examining mRCC patients pre-treated with one or more lines of therapy among different cancer centers in Italy. Methods: The study included patients who received the combination of lenvatinib plus everolimus as either a second-line treatment or beyond. We assessed progression-free survival (PFS), time to treatment failure (TTF), overall survival (OS), response rate (RR), and toxicity profile. In addition, we explored the potential relationship between treatment effectiveness and clinical and laboratory parameters. Results: In all, 33 patients were assessed, the median age was 60 years, 57% had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 1–2 and. 63% received ⩾ 3 prior lines of therapy. 62% were ‘intermediate risk’ according to the International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium and 30% were ‘poor risk’. The RR was 42% (no complete response), 18% stable disease. Median OS was 11.2 months (95% CI 6.8–19.9), median PFS was 6.7 months (95% CI 0.6–30.8), and median TTF was 6.7 months (95% CI 4.8–16.6). A shorter OS was significantly associated with lymph node metastases (p = 0.043, 95% CI), neutrophils/ lymphocytes ratio (NLR) ⩾ 3 (p = 0.007), hemoglobin/red cell distribution width ratio cutoff value <0.7 was significant (p = 0.03) while a shorter PFS was associated with lung (p = 0.048) and brain metastases (p = 0.023). The most frequent G1 toxicity was diarrhea (24%), G2 was fatigue (30%), and hypertension and skin toxicity (6%) for G3. Conclusion: Our findings suggest a clinically relevant effectiveness of lenvatinib plus everolimus combination with an acceptable toxicity profile for heavily pretreated patients with mRCC.

BackgroundCancer-related pain, usually associated with bone metastases, is a frequent and debilitating morbidity in patients with prostate cancer. To date there are only limited data regarding the prognostic role of pain in men with metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer (mCSPC). The objective of our analysis was to assess if the presence of pain can be considered an independent prognostic factor in mCSPC patients.MethodsA retrospective analysis was performed on patients with mCSPC referring to six oncology centers in Italy. Clinical and pathological features were recorded. Patients were considered to have pain if this was reported within the patient’s file or in case of a chronic analgesic therapy was found among the concomitant medications. Survivals were estimated by the Kaplan–Meier method, and compared across groups using the log-rank test. Cox proportional hazard models, stratified according to the baseline characteristics, were used to estimate hazard ratios for overall survival (OS). All the variables were significant if p < 0.05.ResultsData about pain were available for 365 cases and pain was present in 34.8% of patients. Pain was mainly associated with high value of prostate-specific antigen, metastatic bone extension regardless of the site, and lymph node involvement. mCSPC patients with pain had in most of the cases high-volume or Hr disease, and significant shorter OS (27.0 vs. 58.2 months, p < 0.001) and PFS (10.1 vs. 17.4 months, p < 0.001) compared to those without pain. The negative impact of pain on OS remained significant even if adjusted for CHAARTED or LATITUDE classification, and other significant baseline prognostic factors.ConclusionsThis analysis supports the poor prognostic role of cancer-related pain in the setting of mCSPC patients. A prospective validation is required.