No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

Background: Surufatinib, a kinase inhibitor targeting vascular endothelial growth factor receptors, fibroblast growth factor receptor 1 and colony stimulating factor-1 receptor, has demonstrated superior efficacy in extra-pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (NETs) in a prior phase III study (ESMO 2019 Abs. LBA76). Here we report results from a parallel study of surufatinib in pancreatic NETs (pNETs). Methods: The study evaluated the efficacy and safety of S in Pts with well-differentiated (pathological grade 1 or 2), progressive, unresectable or metastatic pNETs. Pts were randomized in a 2:1 ratio to receive S or P, 300 mg, orally, once daily, until disease progression or intolerable adverse events. Crossover at disease progression was allowed. The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed progression-free survival (PFS). Results: By the cutoff date on 11 November 2019 for the pre-planned interim analysis, 172 Pts were randomized, 113 pts to S and 59 to P. Baseline characteristics were well balanced. The study met the primary endpoint; investigator-assessed median PFS was 10.9 vs. 3.7 months in S and P arms, respectively, with hazard ratio (HR)¼0.491; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.319e0.755; p¼0.0011. Analysis by a blinded independent radiology committee confirmed PFS improvement (13.9 vs. 4.6 months; HR¼0.339; 95% CI: 0.209e0.549; p<0.0001). The investigator-assessed objective response rate was 19.2% with S and 1.9% with P (p¼0.0021). Most common (5% in either arm) grade 3 treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were hypertension (38.9% in S arm vs. 8.5% in P arm), proteinuria (9.7% vs. 1.7%), hypertriglyceridaemia (7.1% vs. 0), alanine aminotransferase increased and gamma-glutamyltransferase increased (both 2.7% vs. 5.1%). TEAEs leading to drug discontinuation occurred in 10.6% pts vs. 6.8% pts in S and P arm respectively. Conclusions: Surufatinib significantly improved the PFS in Pts with progressive, welldifferentiated advanced pNETs. The safety profile was manageable and consistent with observations in prior studies. Surufatinib represents a promising treatment option in the armamentarium against pNETs. Clinical trial identification: NCT02589821.

No abstract

5012 Background: Cisplatin-based neoadjuvant chemotherapy (CT) followed by radical cystectomy (RC) is a standard treatment for MIBC. PD-1/L1 inhibitors as single agent induce pathological complete responses (pCR) in this setting. Predictors of response are still ill defined. DUTRENEO trial aimed to prospectively explore the activity of anti-PDL1 + anti-CTLA4 vs CT in pts selected according to a tumor pro-inflammatory IFN-gamma signature (tumor immune score, TIS). Methods: Cisplatin-eligible pts with urothelial MIBC (cT2-T4a, N≤1, M0) candidates to RC were classified as “hot” or “cold” according to a tumor TIS determined by Nanostring technology. Patients with "hot" tumors were randomized to DU 1500 mg + TRE 75 mg every 4 weeks x 3 cycles or standard cisplatin-based CT (GEMCIS or MVACdd). Pts in the “cold” arm received standard CT. Primary endpoint was to achieve ≥8 pCR in the DU+TRE arm. PDL1 expression was assessed using immunohistochemistry. Results: 61 pts were recruited in 10 sites between oct-2018 and dec-2019. Pts randomized in the “hot” arms received standard CT (n = 22) or DU+TRE (n = 23) and had a pCR rate of 8/22 pts (36.4%) vs 8/23 pts (34.8%), respectively [OR = 0.923 (0.26 – 3.24)]. In the “cold” arm, 16 pts received CT obtaining a pCR rate of 68.8% (11/16 pts). There were more PDL1 low tumors in the "cold" TIS arm (10/12, 83.3%). pCR rate by PDL1 status is shown in the table. One pt in the DU+TRE arm refused RC. Full treatment was delivered to 81.3% of CT "cold" vs 59.1% of CT "hot" vs 73.9% in the DU+TRE arm pts. Grade 3-4 toxicities were more frequent in the CT arms. Conclusions: The combination of DU+TRE is safe and active in MIBC patients in the neoadjuvant setting. Nevertheless prospective stratification by a pro-inflammatory IFN-gamma signature failed to select patients more likely to benefit from IO vs CT in this context. Further studies are required to guide treatment selection. Clinical trial information: NCT03472274 . [Table: see text]

Immune checkpoint inhibitors have revolutionized cancer treatment due to their undeniable efficacy, but a range of new adverse events (AE) has emerged. In particular, cardiac toxicity is a potentially fatal AE, and introduces new challenges regarding its underlying molecular mechanisms of occurrence, optimal treatment and follow up, and prevention. We present a clinical case of a patient with advanced kidney cancer treated with nivolumab as a third line treatment. After four cycles, the patient developed nonspecific symptoms and was hospitalized, identifying a set of clinical, analytical and electrocardiographic alterations compatible with myocarditis. Despite the intensive support, the patient died and a necropsy study was performed. We present a detailed description of the clinical case including the pathological and molecular findings, and we conduct a review of the available evidence related to immune-mediated cardiac toxicity to offer some new highlights in the management of this AE.

269 Background: In pts with advanced RCC, second-line treatment with LEN + EVE prolonged progression-free survival (PFS) compared with EVE alone. LEN + PEMBRO, also showed preliminary efficacious evidence in a phase 1/2 RCC study. Here, we describe the investigational study results of first-line LEN + PEMBRO or LEN + EVE versus SUN in pts with advanced RCC. Methods: Pts were randomized (1:1:1) to receive LEN 20 mg orally once daily + PEMBRO 200 mg IV every 3 weeks (wks); or LEN 18 mg + EVE 5 mg orally once daily; or SUN 50 mg orally once daily (4 wks on/2 wks off). Eligible pts had advanced RCC with no prior systemic therapy. Randomization was stratified by geographic region and MSKCC prognostic group. The primary endpoint was PFS by Independent Review Committee per RECIST v1.1. Secondary endpoints included overall survival (OS), objective response rate (ORR) and safety. A sequential approach was used to test PFS first, then OS and ORR. PFS and OS were compared across arms by a stratified log-rank test; hazard ratios (HRs) were estimated by a stratified Cox regression model. Results: 1069 pts were randomized (Table). After a median follow-up of 27 months (data cutoff August 28, 2020), PFS was significantly improved with LEN + PEMBRO (median 24 months [mos]) vs SUN (median 9 mos; HR 0.39, 95% CI 0.32–0.49) and LEN + EVE (median 15 mos) vs SUN (HR 0.65, 95% CI 0.53–0.80). OS was significantly longer with LEN + PEMBRO vs SUN (HR 0.66, 95% CI 0.49–0.88), whereas OS with LEN + EVE vs SUN was not statistically different (HR 1.15, 95% CI 0.88–1.50). ORR was significantly greater with LEN + PEMBRO (ORR 71%; complete response [CR] 16%) vs SUN (ORR 36%; CR 4%; odds ratio 4.35, 95% CI 3.16–5.97) and LEN + EVE (ORR 54%; CR 10%) vs SUN (odds ratio 2.15, 95% CI 1.57–2.93). Grade ≥3 treatment-related adverse events occurred in 72% of pts in the LEN + PEMBRO arm and 73% of pts in the LEN + EVE arm compared with 59% of pts in the SUN arm. Conclusions: LEN + PEMBRO demonstrated significant improvements in PFS, OS and ORR vs SUN. LEN + EVE demonstrated significant improvements in PFS and ORR vs SUN. Safety was manageable and consistent with the known single-agent profiles. Clinical trial information: NCT02811861 . [Table: see text]