Quality of life (QoL) is a relevant end point and a topic of growing interest by both scientific community and regulatory authorities. Our aim was to review QoL prevalence as an end point in cancer phase III trials published in major journals and to evaluate QoL reporting deficiencies in terms of under-reporting and delay of publication. All issues published between 2012 and 2016 by 11 major journals were hand-searched for primary publications of phase III trials in adult patients with solid tumors. Information about end points was derived from paper and study protocol, when available. Secondary QoL publications were searched in PubMed. In total, 446 publications were eligible. In 210 (47.1%), QoL was not included among end points. QoL was not an end point in 40.1% of trials in the advanced/metastatic setting, 39.7% of profit trials and 53.6% of non-profit trials. Out of 231 primary publications of trials with QoL as secondary or exploratory end point, QoL results were available in 143 (61.9%). QoL results were absent in 37.6% of publications in the advanced/metastatic setting, in 37.1% of profit trials and 39.3% of non-profit trials. Proportion of trials not including QoL as end point or with missing QoL results was relevant in all tumor types and for all treatment types. Overall, 70 secondary QoL publications were found: for trials without QoL results in the primary publication, probability of secondary publication was 12.5%, 30.9% and 40.3% at 1, 2 and 3 years, respectively. Proportion of trials not reporting QoL results was similar in trials with positive results (36.5%) and with negative results (39.4%), but the probability of secondary publication was higher in positive trials. QoL is not included among end points in a relevant proportion of recently published phase III trials in solid tumors. In addition, QoL results are subject to significant under-reporting and delay in publication.

Background Improved outcome in tobacco smoking patients with non‐small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) following immunotherapy has previously been reported. However, little is known regarding this association during first‐line immunotherapy in patients with high PD‐L1 expression. In this study we compared clinical outcomes according to the smoking status of two large multicenter cohorts. Methods We compared clinical outcomes according to the smoking status (never smokers vs. current/former smokers) of two retrospective multicenter cohorts of metastatic NSCLC patients, treated with first‐line pembrolizumab and platinum‐based chemotherapy. Results A total of 962 NSCLC patients with PD‐L1 expression ≥50% who received first‐line pembrolizumab and 462 NSCLC patients who received first‐line platinum‐based chemotherapy were included in the study. Never smokers were confirmed to have a significantly higher risk of disease progression (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.49 [95% CI: 1.15–1.92], p = 0.0022) and death (HR = 1.38 [95% CI: 1.02–1.87], p = 0.0348) within the pembrolizumab cohort. On the contrary, a nonsignificant trend towards a reduced risk of disease progression (HR = 0.74 [95% CI: 0.52–1.05], p = 0.1003) and death (HR = 0.67 [95% CI: 0.45–1.01], p = 0.0593) were reported for never smokers within the chemotherapy cohort. After a random case–control matching, 424 patients from both cohorts were paired. Within the matched pembrolizumab cohort, never smokers had a significantly shorter progression‐free survival (PFS) (HR = 1.68 [95% CI: 1.17–2.40], p = 0.0045) and a nonsignificant trend towards a shortened overall survival (OS) (HR = 1.32 [95% CI: 0.84–2.07], p = 0.2205). On the contrary, never smokers had a significantly longer PFS (HR = 0.68 [95% CI: 0.49–0.95], p = 0.0255) and OS (HR = 0.66 [95% CI: 0.45–0.97], p = 0,0356) compared to current/former smoker patients within the matched chemotherapy cohort. On pooled multivariable analysis, the interaction term between smoking status and treatment modality was concordantly statistically significant with respect to ORR (p = 0.0074), PFS (p = 0.0001) and OS (p = 0.0020), confirming the significantly different impact of smoking status across the two cohorts. Conclusions Among metastatic NSCLC patients with PD‐L1 expression ≥50% receiving first‐line pembrolizumab, current/former smokers experienced improved PFS and OS. On the contrary, worse outcomes were reported among current/former smokers receiving first‐line chemotherapy.

In this study, our aim was to describe QoL prevalence and heterogeneity in QoL reporting in colorectal cancer phase III trials. We included all phase III trials evaluating anticancer drugs in colorectal cancer patients published between 2012 and 2018 by 11 major journals. Out of the 67 publications identified, in 41 (61.2%) QoL was not listed among endpoints. Out of 26 primary publications of trials including QoL among endpoints, QoL results were not reported in 10 (38.5%). Overall, no QoL data were available in 51/67 (76.1%) primary publications. In particular, in the metastatic setting, QoL data were not available in 12/18 (66.7%) trials with primary endpoint overall survival, and in 20/29 (69.0%) trials with other primary endpoints. QoL was absent in a high proportion of recently published phase III trials in colorectal cancer, even in trials of second or further lines, where attention to QoL should be particularly high.Indeed, among 32 trials with positive results, all the 12 trials including QoL among study endpoints (37.5%) reported QoL results in the primary publication: 5 trials reported a positive QoL result, while 7 trials reported negative QoL results.On the contrary, among 35 trials with negative results, despite 14 of these trials included QoL among endpoints, only 4 (11.4%) include QoL results in the primary publication: all these trials reported a negative QoL result. In 5 cases we have only a secondary publication: also in this case, all trials reported negative QoL results. In the remaining 5 trials including QoL as an endpoint, results have not been published. These data are summarized in the graph below (that we report for Reviewer only):

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

Antiandrogen withdrawal syndrome is an unpredictable event diagnosed in patients with hormone-sensitive prostate cancer treated with combined androgen blockade therapy. It is defined by prostate-specific antigen value reduction, occasionally associated with a radiological response, that occurs 4-6 weeks after first-generation antiandrogen therapy discontinuation. New-generation hormonal therapies, such as enzalutamide and abiraterone acetate, improved the overall survival in patients with metastatic castrationresistant prostate cancer, and recent trials have also shown the efficacy of abiraterone in hormone-sensitive disease. In the last few years, several case reports and retrospective studies suggested that the withdrawal syndrome may also occur with these new drugs. This review summarizes literature data and hypothesis about the biological rationale underlying the syndrome and its potential clinical relevance, focusing mainly on newgeneration hormonal therapies. Several in vitro studies suggest that androgen receptor gain-of-function mutations are involved in this syndrome, shifting the antiandrogen activity from antagonist to agonist. Several different drug-specific point mutations have been reported. The association of the withdrawal syndrome for enzalutamide and abiraterone needs confirmation by additional investigations. However, new-generation hormonal therapies being increasingly used in all stages of disease, more patients may experience the syndrome when stopping the treatment at the time of disease progression, although the clinical relevance of this phenomenon in the management of metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer remains to be defined.

No abstract