Explore the vast range of titles available.

Background Testosterone suppression is the standard treatment for advanced prostate cancer, and it is associated with side-effects that impair patients’ quality of life, like sexual dysfunction, osteoporosis, weight gain, and increased cardiovascular risk. We hypothesized that abiraterone acetate with prednisone (AAP) and apalutamide, alone or in combination, can be an effective hormonal therapy also possibly decreasing castration-associated side effects. Methods Phase II, open-label, randomized, efficacy trial of abiraterone acetate plus prednisone (AAP) and Androgen Deprivation Therapy (ADT) versus apalutamide versus the combination of AAP (without ADT) and apalutamide. Key eligibility criteria are confirmed prostate adenocarcinoma; biochemical relapse after definitive treatment (PSA ≥ 4 ng/ml and doubling time less than 10 months, or PSA ≥ 20 ng/ml); newly diagnosed locally advanced or metastatic prostate cancer; asymptomatic to moderately symptomatic regarding bone symptoms. Patients with other histology besides adenocarcinoma or previous use of hormonal therapy or chemotherapy were excluded. Discussion There is an urgent need to study and validate regimens such as new hormonal agents that may add benefit to castration with an acceptable safety profile. We aim to evaluate if apalutamide in monotherapy or in combination with AAP is an effective and safety hormonal treatment that can spare patients of androgen deprivation therapy. Trial registration This trial was registered in ClinicalTrials.gov on October 16, 2017, under Identifier: NCT02867020.

The Brazilian Society of Pathology Guidelines Project aims to provide recommendations for clinicians and pathologists based on the best available scientific evidence. It reviews the currently available and emerging histopathological and molecular aspects of bladder cancer that are necessary for the best patient’s management. This paper is a result of a combined effort of the Brazilian Society of Pathology, the Brazilian Society of Urology, and the Brazilian Society of Clinical Oncology to call attention to the essential pre-analytical issues, the required clinical information and specimen handling to allow proper diagnosis, grading, staging and characterization of the molecular aspects of bladder epithelial neoplasms.

Background This review addresses current issues from the daily practice of prostate and bladder diagnostic pathology. Main text In the last few years, many recommendations and clarifications were available from 2014 International Society of Urologic Pathology consensus, 2016 World Health Organization blue book and 2017 8th edition of American Joint Committee on Cancer Staging System. Conclusion We focus here on nine topics which are relevant based on their common appearance in daily practice, clinical relevance and need to improve communication between pathology reports and clinicians.

BackgroundConcomitant medications may potentially affect the outcome of cancer patients. In this sub-analysis of the ARON-2 real-world study (NCT05290038), we aimed to assess the impact of concomitant use of proton pump inhibitors (PPI), statins, or metformin on outcome of patients with metastatic urothelial cancer (mUC) receiving second-line pembrolizumab.MethodsWe collected data from the hospital medical records of patients with mUC treated with pembrolizumab as second-line therapy at 87 institutions from 22 countries. Patients were assessed for overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall response rate. We carried out a survival analysis by a Cox regression model.ResultsA total of 802 patients were eligible for this retrospective study; the median follow-up time was 15.3 months. PPI users compared to non-users showed inferior PFS (4.5 vs. 7.2 months, p = 0.002) and OS (8.7 vs. 14.1 months, p < 0.001). Concomitant PPI use remained a significant predictor of PFS and OS after multivariate Cox analysis. The use of statins or metformin was not associated with response or survival.ConclusionsOur study results suggest a significant prognostic impact of concomitant PPI use in mUC patients receiving pembrolizumab in the real-world context. The mechanism of this interaction warrants further elucidation.

BackgroundImmune checkpoint inhibitors have changed previous treatment paradigm of advanced urothelial carcinoma (UC). The ARON-2 study (NCT05290038) aimed to assess the real-world effectiveness of pembrolizumab in patients recurred or progressed after platinum-based chemotherapy.Patients and MethodsMedical records of patients with documented metastatic UC treated by pembrolizumab as second-line therapy were retrospectively collected from 88 institutions in 23 countries. Patients were assessed for overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS) and overall response rate (ORR). Cox proportional hazards models were adopted to explore the presence of prognostic factors.ResultsIn total, 836 patients were included: 544 patients (65%) received pembrolizumab after progression to first-line platinum-based chemotherapy in the metastatic setting (cohort A) and 292 (35%) after recurring within < 12 months since the completion of adjuvant or neoadjuvant chemotherapy (cohort B). The median follow-up time was 15.3 months. The median OS and the ORR were 10.5 months and 31% in the overall study population, 9.1 months and 29% in cohort A and 14.6 months and 37% in cohort B. At multivariate analysis, ECOG-PS ≥ 2, bone metastases, liver metastases and pembrolizumab setting (cohort A vs B) proved to be significantly associated with worst OS and PFS. Stratified by the presence of 0, 1–2 or 3–4 prognostic factors, the median OS was 29.4, 12.5 and 4.1 months (p < 0.001), while the median PFS was 12.2, 6.4 and 2.8 months, respectively (p < 0.001).ConclusionsOur study confirms that pembrolizumab is effective in the advanced UC real-world context, showing outcome differences between patients recurred or progressed after platinum-based chemotherapy.

PurposeThe outcome of RCC has improved considerably in the last few years, and the treatment options have increased. LACOG-GU and LARCG held a consensus meeting to develop guidelines to support the clinical decisions of physicians and other health professionals involved in the care of RCC patients.MethodsEighty questions addressing relevant advanced RCC treatments were previously formulated by a panel of experts. The voting panel comprised 26 specialists from the LACOG-GU/LARCG. Consensus was determined as 75% agreement. For questions with less than 75% agreement, a new discussion was held, and consensus was determined by the majority of votes after the second voting session.ResultsThe recommendations were based on the highest level of scientific evidence or by the opinion of the RCC experts when no relevant research data were available.ConclusionThis manuscript provides guidance for advanced RCC treatment according to the LACOG-GU/LARCG expert recommendations.

Background/Objectives: Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have revolutionized advanced melanoma treatment, yet many patients fail to achieve sustained clinical benefit. Several biomarkers, including tumor microenvironment (TME) signature, PD-1/PD-L1 expression, and IFN-γ signaling, have been proposed. However, robust predictive markers remain elusive. This study aimed to identify molecular markers of response by analyzing tumor and peripheral immune signatures. Methods: This study analyzed 21 advanced melanoma patients treated with ICIs. Formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded tumors underwent RNA-sequencing targeting 1392 immuno-oncology probes. Genes significantly associated with progression-free survival (PFS) by log-rank test underwent hierarchical clustering analysis (HCA). Differential expression and xCell analyses were then performed on the resulting clusters. Cox multivariate analysis was applied to identify independent PFS predictors. Pre-treatment peripheral blood mononuclear cells were analyzed by mass cytometry, followed by FlowSOM and UMAP clustering. Results: Fifty-five genes significantly associated with PFS identified two molecular clusters via HCA. Cluster A demonstrated prolonged PFS (59.4 vs. 2.4 months, p = 0.0004), while Cluster B was characterized by downregulated IFN-γ signaling, antigen presentation pathways, and reduced immune score. Multivariate Cox analysis confirmed molecular cluster as an independent PFS predictor (p < 0.001). Mass cytometry revealed higher frequencies of circulating PD-1+ CD4+ effector memory (EM) T subpopulations among responders. Conclusions: This study highlights the potential role of molecular and immune profiling in predicting ICI response in advanced melanoma. The identification of distinct molecular clusters underscores significant TME heterogeneity, with immune-cold tumor clusters associated with poorer outcomes. Furthermore, circulating PD-1+ T subpopulations emerged as potential markers of ICI response, suggesting their value in improving patient stratification.

Background/Objectives: Sinonasal mucosal melanoma (SNMM) is a rare and aggressive melanoma subtype with a notably poor prognosis compared to cutaneous melanoma (CM). Despite advances in molecular characterization, SNMM remains underexplored, posing a clinical challenge and highlighting the need for detailed molecular profiling. This study aimed to identify the molecular features of SNMM, elucidate its clinical behavior and prognostic implications, and provide insights for improved therapeutic strategies. Methods: This retrospective study analyzed 37 primary melanoma tumors diagnosed at the Hospital Clinic of Barcelona. Gene expression was examined using 1402 immuno-oncology-related probes through next-generation sequencing. Hierarchical clustering analysis (HCA), differentially expressed genes (DEGs), gene set enrichment analysis (GSEA), and the xCell algorithm were performed. The statistical methods comprised descriptive statistics, clinical variable associations, and survival analyses. Results: HCA revealed two primary clusters. Cluster A exclusively contained CM tumors (20/24), while cluster B included all SNMMs (13/13) and some CMs (4/24). Cluster B showed a higher average age at diagnosis (p = 0.018), higher mitotic index (p = 0.0478), fewer BRAF mutations (p = 0.0017), and poorer melanoma-specific survival (p = 0.0029). Cluster B showed 602 DEGs with cell cycle pathways enriched, immune pathways diminished, lower immune scores (p < 0.0001), and higher stromal scores (p = 0.0074). Conclusions: This study revealed distinct molecular characteristics and an altered tumor microenvironment in SNMMs and certain aggressive CMs. Identifying specific genes and pathways involved in cell cycle progression and immune evasion suggests potential prognostic markers, offering new avenues for enhancing treatment strategies and improving patient survival rates.