No abstract

The following full text is a publisher's version.For additional information about this publication click this link. https://hdl.handle.net/2066/229509Please be advised that this information was generated on 2023-04-03 and may be subject to change.T h e ne w e ngl a nd jou r na l o f m e dicine n engl j med 383;24 nejm.org

BACKGROUND Patients with renal-cell carcinoma who undergo nephrectomy have no options for adjuvant therapy to reduce the risk of recurrence that have high levels of supporting evidence. METHODS In a double-blind, phase 3 trial, we randomly assigned, in a 1:1 ratio, patients with clear-cell renal-cell carcinoma who were at high risk for recurrence after nephrectomy, with or without metastasectomy, to receive either adjuvant pembrolizumab (at a dose of 200 mg) or placebo intravenously once every 3 weeks for up to 17 cycles (approximately 1 year). The primary end point was disease-free survival according to the investigator's assessment. Overall survival was a key secondary end point. Safety was a secondary end point. RESULTS A total of 496 patients were randomly assigned to receive pembrolizumab, and 498 to receive placebo. At the prespecified interim analysis, the median time from randomization to the data-cutoff date was 24.1 months. Pembrolizumab therapy was associated with significantly longer disease-free survival than placebo (disease-free survival at 24 months, 77.3% vs. 68.1%; hazard ratio for recurrence or death, 0.68; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.53 to 0.87; P = 0.002 [two-sided]). The estimated percentage of patients who remained alive at 24 months was 96.6% in the pembrolizumab group and 93.5% in the placebo group (hazard ratio for death, 0.54; 95% CI, 0.30 to 0.96). Grade 3 or higher adverse events of any cause occurred in 32.4% of the patients who received pembrolizumab and in 17.7% of those who received placebo. No deaths related to pembrolizumab therapy occurred. CONCLUSIONS Pembrolizumab treatment led to a significant improvement in disease-free survival as compared with placebo after surgery among patients with kidney cancer who were at high risk for recurrence. (Funded by Merck Sharp and Dohme, a subsidiary of Merck; KEYNOTE-564 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03142334.).

No abstract

No abstract

Background. Malnutrition worsens health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and the prognosis of patients with advanced cancer. This study aimed to assess the clinical benefits of parenteral nutrition (PN) over oral feeding (OF) for patients with advanced cancer cachexia and without intestinal impairment. Material and Methods. In this prospective multicentric randomized controlled study, patients with advanced cancer and malnutrition were randomly assigned to optimized nutritional care with or without supplemental PN. Zelen's method was used for randomization to facilitate inclusions. Nutritional and performance status and HRQoL using the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer QLQ-C15-PAL questionnaire were evaluated at baseline and monthly until death. Primary endpoint was HRQoL deterioration-free survival (DFS) defined as a definitive deterioration of ≥10 points compared with baseline, or death.

No abstract

11 Background: Preclinical studies have shown combined anti-tumor effect through interactions between poly(adenosine diphosphate–ribose) polymerase and androgen receptor signaling pathways. A Phase II trial (NCT01972217) in pts with mCRPC unselected by homologous recombination repair (HRR) status who previously received docetaxel demonstrated improved radiographic progression-free survival (rPFS) for pts treated with ola + abi vs pbo + abi (Clarke N, 2018). The Phase III PROpel study (NCT03732820) evaluates the efficacy and safety of ola + abi in the 1L mCRPC setting. Methods: PROpel is a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled Phase III trial in pts with mCRPC undergoing 1L treatment after failure of primary androgen deprivation therapy, enrolled independent of HRR status. Pts were randomized 1:1 to receive ola (300 mg twice daily [bid]) or pbo, and abi (1000 mg once daily) + prednisone or prednisolone (5 mg bid). The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed rPFS with multiple secondary endpoints, including overall survival (OS). Results:796 pts were randomized to ola + abi (n=399) or pbo + abi (n=397).In this planned interim analysis, 1L treatment with ola + abi significantly prolonged rPFS vs pbo + abi in pts with mCRPC irrespective of HRR status (24.8 vs 16.6 months; hazard ratio [HR] 0.66, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.54–0.81; P <0.0001). Predefined subgroup analyses showed rPFS improvement across all subgroups, including pts with (HR 0.54, 95% CI 0.36–0.79) and without (HR 0.76, 95% CI 0.59–0.97) HRR mutations detected by circulating tumor DNA testing. A sensitivity analysis of rPFS by blinded independent central review was consistent with the primary analysis (HR 0.61, 95% CI 0.49–0.74; P=0.004). OS is currently immature with 228 deaths (28.6%). A trend in OS favoring ola + abi was observed (HR 0.86, 95% CI 0.66–1.12). Secondary endpoints of time to first subsequent treatment (HR 0.74, 95% CI 0.61–0.90) and time to second progression-free survival or death (HR 0.69, 95% CI 0.51–0.94) were supportive of long-term benefits. The most common grade ≥3 adverse event (AE) reported was anemia (15.1 vs 3.3%) for ola + abi vs pbo + abi; 13.8 vs 7.8% pts, respectively, discontinued ola/pbo because of an AE. The rate of AEs leading to abi discontinuation were similar in both arms (8.5 vs 8.8%). Conclusions: At interim analysis, PROpel met its primary objective, demonstrating significant improvement in rPFS for ola + abi vs pbo + abi in pts with newly detected mCRPC who had not received prior 1L therapy, irrespective of HRR status. The safety and tolerability profile of ola + abi was consistent with the known safety profiles of the individual drugs. These results demonstrate the benefit of ola + abi without the need for HRR stratification in 1L treatment of mCRPC. Pt follow-up is ongoing for the planned OS analysis. Clinical trial information: NCT03732820.