No abstract

IMPORTANCE Dual blockade of programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) and cytotoxic T-lymphocyte associated protein 4 (CTLA-4) may overcome immune checkpoint inhibition. It is unknown whether dual blockade can potentiate antitumor activity without compromising safety in patients with recurrent or metastatic head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (R/M HNSCC) and low or no PD-L1 tumor cell expression. OBJECTIVE To assess safety and objective response rate of durvalumab combined with tremelimumab. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS The CONDOR study was a phase 2, randomized, open-label study of Durvalumab, Tremelimumab, and Durvalumab in Combination With Tremelimumab in Patients With R/M HNSCC. Eligibility criteria included PD-L1-low/negative disease that had progressed after 1 platinum-containing regimen in the R/M setting. Patients were randomized (N = 267) from April 15, 2015, to March 16, 2016, at 127 sites in North America, Europe, and Asia Pacific. INTERVENTIONS Durvalumab (20 mg/kg every 4 weeks) + tremelimumab (1 mg/kg every 4 weeks) for 4 cycles, followed by durvalumab (10 mg/kg every 2 weeks), or durvalumab (10 mg/kg every 2 weeks) monotherapy, or tremelimumab (10 mg/kg every 4 weeks for 7 doses then every 12 weeks for 2 doses) monotherapy. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES Safety and tolerability and efficacy measured by objective response rate. RESULTS Among the 267 patients (220 men [82.4%]), median age (range) of patients was 61.0 (23-82) years. Grade 3/4 treatment-related adverse events occurred in 21 patients (15.8%) treated with durvalumab + tremelimumab, 8 (12.3%) treated with durvalumab, and 11 (16.9%) treated with tremelimumab. Grade 3/4 immune-mediated adverse events occurred in 8 patients (6.0%) in the combination arm only. Objective response rate (95% CI) was 7.8% (3.78%-13.79%) in the combination arm (n = 129), 9.2% (3.46%-19.02%) for durvalumab monotherapy (n = 65), and 1.6% (0.04%-8.53%) for tremelimumab monotherapy (n = 63); median overall survival (95% CI) for all patients treated was 7.6 (4.9-10.6), 6.0 (4.0-11.3), and 5.5 (3.9-7.0) months, respectively. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE In patients with R/M HNSCC and low or no PD-L1 tumor cell expression, all 3 regimens exhibited a manageable toxicity profile. Durvalumab and durvalumab + tremelimumab resulted in clinical benefit, with minimal observed difference between the two. A phase 3 study is under way. TRIAL REGISTRATION clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT02319044

Approximately 2-5 % of patients with breast cancer (BC) develop leptomeningeal metastasis (LM). 103 consecutive patients with BC were diagnosed with LM and initially treated with intra-CSF liposomal cytarabine from 2007 to 2011 at a single institution. Correlations were determined with respect to patient characteristics and BC subtype with regard to overall survival (OS). At LM diagnosis, 61 % of patients had a 0-2 performance status (PS), the remaining 39 % were severely neurologically impaired. Regardless of PS, all patients received intra-cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) liposomal cytarabine as first-line treatment. Systemic treatment and radiotherapy were also given in 58 and 17 % of patients respectively as clinically appropriate. Second- (intra-CSF thiotepa) and third-line (intra-CSF methotrexate) treatment was administered in 24 and 6 patients respectively. Median OS was 3.8 months (range 1 day-2.8 years). In multivariate analysis, an initial combined treatment, a second-line treatment with intra-CSF thiotepa, an initial clinical response, and a non-'ER/PR/HER2 negative' BC were significantly associated with a better OS. Median OS in this heterogeneous retrospective case series was similar to that of previously observed BC patients treated with intra-CSF methotrexate suggesting intra-CSF liposomal cytarabine is a reasonable first choice therapy of BC-related LM.

Brain metastases are the most common central nervous system tumors in adults, and incidence of brain metastases is increasing due to both improved diagnostic techniques (e.g. magnetic resonance imaging) and increased cancer patient survival through advanced systemic treatments. Outcomes of patients remain disappointing and treatment options are limited, usually involving multimodality approaches. Brain metastases represent an unmet medical need in solid tumor care, especially in breast cancer, where brain metastases are frequent and result in impaired quality of life and death. Challenges in the management of brain metastases have been highlighted in this review. Innovative research and treatment strategies, including prevention approaches and emerging systemic treatment options for brain metastases of breast cancer, are further discussed.

BackgroundAntibodies targeting programmed death-1 (PD-1) or programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) have shown clinical activity in the treatment of metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). This phase Ib cohort of the JAVELIN Solid Tumor trial assessed the efficacy and safety of avelumab (anti–PD-L1) monotherapy in patients with mRCC as either first-line (1 L) or second-line (2 L) treatment.MethodsPatients with mRCC with a clear-cell component who were treatment naive (1 L subgroup) or had disease progression after one prior line of therapy (2 L subgroup) received avelumab 10 mg/kg intravenous infusion every 2 weeks. Endpoints included confirmed best overall response, duration of response (DOR), progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), PD-L1 expression, and safety.ResultsA total of 62 patients were enrolled in the 1 L subgroup, and 20 patients were enrolled in the 2 L subgroup. In the 1 L and 2 L subgroups, confirmed objective response rates were 16.1 and 10.0%, median DOR was 9.9 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 2.8–not evaluable) and not evaluable (95% CI, 6.9–not evaluable), median PFS was 8.3 months (95% CI, 5.5–9.5) and 5.6 months (95% CI, 2.3–9.6), and median OS was not evaluable (95% CI, not evaluable) and 16.9 months (95% CI, 8.3–not evaluable), respectively. Treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) of any grade occurred in 51 patients in the 1 L subgroup (82.3%) and 14 patients in the 2 L subgroup (70.0%). Grade ≥ 3 TRAEs occurred in eight patients in the 1 L subgroup (12.9%) and one patient in the 2 L subgroup (5.0%). No treatment-related deaths occurred.ConclusionAvelumab showed clinical activity and a manageable safety profile in both the 1 L and 2 L treatment setting in patients with mRCC. These data support the use of avelumab in combination with other agents in mRCC.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01772004; registered 21 January, 2013.

No abstract

HER2-positive disease is an aggressive subtype of breast cancer that has been revolutionized by anti-HER2 directed therapies. Multiple drugs have been developed and are currently in clinical use, including trastuzumab, lapatinib, pertuzumab, T-DM1, and neratinib, alone or combined in 'dual HER2-blockade' regimens. Areas covered: A comprehensive literature review was performed regarding the current state and the future of combination regimens containing anti-HER2 agents, focusing on their efficacy, toxicity, and cost-effectiveness. Expert commentary: The combination of trastuzumab/pertuzumab is approved in all disease settings, while trastuzumab/neratinib is approved in the adjuvant setting and trastuzumab/lapatinib in metastatic disease. Meanwhile, as breast cancer biology and resistance mechanisms become clearer, combinations with drugs like PI3K/Akt/mTOR inhibitors, CDK4/6 inhibitors, anti-PD(L)1 antibodies, endocrine therapy, and new anti-HER2 agents (panHER and HER2 tyrosine kinase inhibitors, bispecific antibodies, anti-HER3 antibodies, and antibody-drug conjugates) are being extensively tested in clinical trials. More specific strategies for the 'triple-positive' (estrogen receptor-positive/HER2-positive) disease are also being explored. However, there is an urgent need for the development of predictive biomarkers for a better tailoring of anti-HER2 directed therapy. This is the only way to further improve clinical outcomes and quality of life and to decrease costs and toxicities of unnecessary treatments.

Background There are limited data regarding the impact of body mass index (BMI) on outcomes in advanced breast cancer, especially in patients treated with endocrine therapy (ET) + cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 inhibitors. Methods A pooled analysis of individual patient-level data from MONARCH 2 and 3 trials was performed. Patients were classified according to baseline BMI into underweight (<18.5 kg/m2), normal (18.5-24.9 kg/m2), overweight (25-29.9 kg/m2), and obese (≥30 kg/m2) and divided into 2 treatment groups: abemaciclib + ET vs placebo + ET. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS) according to BMI in each treatment group. Secondary endpoints were response rate, adverse events according to BMI, and loss of weight (≥5% from baseline) during treatment. Results This analysis included 1138 patients (757 received abemaciclib + ET and 381 placebo + ET). There was no difference in PFS between BMI categories in either group, although normal-weight patients presented a numerically higher benefit with abemaciclib + ET (Pinteraction = .07). Normal and/or underweight patients presented higher overall response rate in the abemaciclib + ET group compared with overweight and/or obese patients (49.4% vs 41.6%, odds ratio = 0.73, 95% confidence interval = 0.54 to 0.99) as well as higher neutropenia frequency (51.0% vs 40.4%, P = .004). Weight loss was more frequent in the abemaciclib + ET group (odds ratio = 3.23, 95% confidence interval = 2.09 to 5.01). Conclusions Adding abemaciclib to ET prolongs PFS regardless of BMI, showing that overweight or obese patients also benefit from this regimen. Our results elicit the possibility of a better effect of abemaciclib in normal and/or underweight patients compared with overweight and/or obese patients. More studies analyzing body composition parameters in patients under treatment with cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 inhibitors may further clarify this hypothesis.