UNASSIGNED: Platinum-free interval (PFI) is the period from the end of platinum-based chemotherapy to the date of recurrence. If the PFI is > 6 months, a platinum-based chemotherapy rechallenge is considered; however, its efficacy after poly adenosine 5\'-diphosphate-ribose polymerase (PARP) inhibitor maintenance therapy is unknown. This study aimed to examine the efficacy of a platinum-based chemotherapy rechallenge after PARP inhibitor therapy.
UNASSIGNED: We retrospectively evaluated patients with ovarian cancer with a PFI≥6 months with PARP inhibitor maintenance therapy, receiving platinum-based chemotherapy. Duration of PARP inhibitor therapy, best response to subsequent platinum chemotherapy rechallenge, and clinical characteristics were collected from medical records. Tumor response was assessed according to RECIST 1.1. Correlations were calculated using Spearman\'s correlation coefficients.
UNASSIGNED: Among the 10 included patients, seven (70 %) received PARP inhibitors after primary chemotherapy, and three (30 %) received chemotherapy for platinum-sensitive relapse. One and five patients harbored a germline BRCA1 and BRCA wild-type mutations, respectively, and two had homologous recombination proficiency. The median PFI was 303.5 (182-602) days, and PARP inhibitor therapy duration was 249 (147-570) days. Platinum chemotherapy rechallenge efficacy was complete and partial response and stable disease in one (10 %), six (60 %), and three (30 %) patients, respectively. The longer the duration of PARP inhibitor treatment, better the response to platinum agents (Spearman correlation coefficient 0.284, p = 0.0288).
UNASSIGNED: Platinum-based chemotherapy rechallenge is reasonable for patients with platinum-sensitive disease, using the traditional PFI cutoff of 6 months, even when the PFI is obtained with a maintenance PARP inhibitor.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the safety and outcome of rechallenge [177Lu]Lu-PSMA-I&T in newly progressed mCRPC patients after response to initial [177Lu]Lu-PSMA radioligand therapy (PRLT).
METHODS: We retrospectively included 18 patients who underwent rechallenge with [177Lu]Lu-PSMA-I&T. All patients presented with (i) newly progressed disease after response to initial PRLT; (ii) a [68Ga]Ga-PSMA-11 PET/CT confirming the presence of PSMA-positive metastases; iii) ECOG performance status 0-1. Adverse events were graded according to CTCAE v5.0. Response was assessed by PSA and classified according to PCWG3 recommendations. For patients who underwent restaging with [68Ga]Ga-PSMA-11 PET/CT, imaging response was categorised according to adapted PERCIST v1.0. In patients with discordant [68Ga]Ga-PSMA-11 PET/CT and PSA, other available imaging modalities were evaluated to confirm disease status. Overall survival (OS) was calculated from the first cycle of initial PRLT and rechallenge PRLT, respectively, until last patient contact or death.
RESULTS: Patients were initially treated with a median of 5 cycles (range 4-7) and were rechallenged after a median of 9 months (range 3-13). Each patient received a median of 4 (range 2-7) rechallenge cycles (median cumulative activity 26.1 GBq). None of the patients experienced life-threatening G4 adverse events during either treatment period. Grade 3 adverse events included one case of anaemia, one case of thrombocytopenia, and one case of renal failure. In 8/18 patients long-term toxicities were evaluated. Serious toxicities (≥ Grade 3) occurred in 3/8 patients (n = 1 G4 thrombocytopenia, n = 1 G4 renal failure and n = 1 pancytopenia and G4 renal failure). Best PSA50%-response was observed in 44% of patients and PSA-disease control was confirmed in 56% of patients at the last cycle. Of the 12/18 patients restaged by imaging, 6/12 (50%) patients had disease control (partial response/stable disease), 1/12 had a mixed response, and 5/12 had progression. After a median follow-up time of 25 months (range 14-44), 10 patients had died, 7 were still alive, and one patient was lost at follow-up. The median OS was 29 months (95%CI, 14.3-43.7 months) for the initial treatment and 11 months (95%CI, 8.1-13.8 months) for the first rechallenge course.
CONCLUSIONS: More than half of patients benefit from rechallenge PRLT. Our analysis suggests that rechallenge may prolong survival in selected patients, with an acceptable safety profile.

Several predictive factors of immune checkpoint inhibitor response have been reported, but there has not been sufficient exploration of which patients benefit from immune checkpoint inhibitor rechallenge. We report the case of a patient with non-small cell lung cancer who had 6 years of complete response with initial nivolumab treatment. After relapse, however, rechallenge with nivolumab did not result in tumour shrinkage or long-term response. Even in patients who had an exceptional response to the initial immune checkpoint inhibitor, long-term efficacy may not be achieved by immune checkpoint inhibitor rechallenge. Thorough investigation of biomarkers that predict efficacy of immune checkpoint inhibitor rechallenge is warranted.

BACKGROUND: The optimal subsequent treatment strategy for locally advanced non-small cell lung cancer (LA-NSCLC) after chemoradiotherapy (CRT) and consolidative durvalumab therapy remains unknown. We aimed to determine the optimal subsequent treatment strategy for this clinical population.
METHODS: We retrospectively enrolled 523 consecutive patients with LA-NSCLC treated with CRT and analyzed the treatment outcomes of subsequent therapy after progression following CRT and consolidative durvalumab therapy. Patients who received tyrosine kinase inhibitors as subsequent therapy were excluded.
RESULTS: Out of 122 patients who received subsequent chemotherapy, 55% underwent platinum-based, 25% non-platinum-based, and 20% immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI)-containing therapies. In the platinum-based group, patients with a durvalumab-progression-free survival (Dur-PFS) ≥ 1 year had a significantly longer median subsequent therapy-PFS (SubTx-PFS) than those with Dur-PFS < 1 year (13.2 months vs. 4.7 months; hazard ratio, 0.45; 95% confidence interval, 0.21-0.97; P = .04). Furthermore, among patients receiving non-platinum-based chemotherapy, the median SubTx-PFS was longer in the combined with angiogenesis inhibitor group than in the without group, although the difference was not statistically significant. No significant difference of SubTx-PFS was observed between the reason for durvalumab discontinuation and the outcomes of ICI-containing therapy.
CONCLUSIONS: In clinical practice, platinum-based chemotherapy rechallenge is frequently employed following progression subsequent to CRT and consolidative durvalumab therapy for LA-NSCLC. Optimal treatment strategies may consider Dur-PFS and angiogenesis inhibitor feasibility. Further research is warranted to identify clinical biomarkers that can help identify patients who would benefit from ICI rechallenge.

Combined therapy with venetoclax and hypomethylating agents has significantly improved the outcome of unfit patients ineligible for intensive chemotherapy. A recently published exploratory analysis of the VIALE-A trial reported that up to 51% of patients achieving remission survived more than 2 years. These data along with those from reallife settings, lead to questioning how long it is appropriate to continue treatment in long-term survivors. Accordingly, recent retrospective studies suggested the feasibility of suspending therapy in selected patients while maintaining prolonged responses. Also, these studies showed that retreatment may induce a second remission in almost a third of patients. We report the case of a patient who received salvage therapy with venetoclax and azacytidine, that was discontinued few cycles after blasts clearance because of severe hematological toxicity. Despite suspension, he maintained a sustained response lasting almost one year and was successfully retreated with the same combination when a second relapse occurred.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) RAS mutant (MT) incidence before salvage-line treatment and the clinicopathological features and molecular biological factors associated with the efficacy of anti-epithelial growth factor receptor (EGFR) monoclonal antibody (mAb) rechallenge for tissue RAS/BRAF wild type (WT) metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC).
METHODS: This multi-institutional retrospective observational study included 74 patients with mCRC with tissue RAS/BRAF WT refractory to first-line chemotherapy containing anti-EGFR mAb. ctDNA RAS status was assessed using the OncoBEAM™ RAS CRC Kit. We explored the clinicopathological features associated with ctDNA RAS status and the factors related to anti-EGFR mAb rechallenge efficacy in multivariate Cox proportional hazard regression.
RESULTS: The incidence of RAS MT in ctDNA was 40.5% (30/74), which was associated with primary tumor resection (P = 0.016), liver metastasis (P < 0.001), and high tumor marker levels (P < 0.001). Among the 39 patients treated with anti-EGFR mAb rechallenge, those with ctDNA RAS WT showed significantly longer progression-free survival (PFS) than those with ctDNA RAS MT (median 4.1 vs. 2.7 months, hazard ratio [HR] = 0.39, P = 0.045). Patients who responded to first-line anti-EGFR mAb showed significantly longer PFS (HR = 0.21, P = 0.0026) and overall survival (OS) (HR = 0.23, P = 0.026) than those with stable disease.
CONCLUSIONS: The incidence of ctDNA RAS MT mCRC was 40.5%, which was associated with liver metastases and high tumor volumes. Anti-EGFR mAb rechallenge may be effective for patients with mCRC who responded to first-line chemotherapy containing anti-EGFR mAb. No patients with RAS MT in ctDNA responded to anti-EGFR mAb rechallenge.

We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the efficacy of EGFR-tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKI) retreatment in advanced/metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients. We systematically searched PubMed, Embase, Cochrane databases, ASCO, and ESMO websites for studies evaluating EGFR-TKI retreatment in advanced/metastatic NSCLC patients. All analyses were performed using R software (v.4.2.2). We included 19 studies (9 CTs and 10 retrospective cohorts) with a total of 886 patients. In a pooled analysis of all patients during retreatment with TKI, median OS was 11.7 months (95% confidence interval [CI] 10.2-13.4 months) and PFS was 3.2 months (95% CI 2.5-3.9 months). ORR was 15% (95% CI 10-21%) and DCR was 61% (95% CI 53-67%). The subanalysis by generation of TKI in the rechallenge period revealed a slightly better ORR for patients on 3rd generation TKI (p = 0.05). Some limitations include the high heterogeneity of some of the analyses and inability to perform certain subanalyses. Our results unequivocally support the benefit of EGFR-TKI rechallenge in EGFR-mutated NSCLC patients progressing on TKI treatment after a TKI-free interval. These findings may be especially valuable in areas where access to novel therapeutic drugs and clinical trials is limited.

BACKGROUND: Immunotherapy is effective for patients with advanced thymic carcinoma (TC). However, the effectiveness of rechallenge immunotherapy in patients who are resistant to immunotherapy has not been investigated.
METHODS: Thirty-five patients with advanced TC using immunotherapy between 2016 and 2023 at Zhejiang Cancer Hospital, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Nanchang University, and Fujian Cancer Hospital were evaluated in this study. Tumor response was evaluated according to the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1. Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method.
RESULTS: A total of 35 patients were included in this study. The median PFS (mPFS) for all patients was 5.43 months and the median OS (mOS) was 16 months. After rechallenge immunotherapy, only three patients achieved partial response, resulting in an overall response rate of 16.7%, and nine patients attained stable disease, resulting in a disease control rate of 66.7%. Patients who underwent rechallenge immunotherapy had shorter mPFS compared to chemotherapy (3.53 months vs. 6.00 months, P = 0.041). In addition, the incidence of Grade 3-4 treatment-related adverse events in these patients was 22.2%.
CONCLUSIONS: Rechallenge immunotherapy has poor efficacy in immunotolerant TC patients.

Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) present clinicians with the challenge of managing immune-related adverse events (irAEs), which can range from mild to severe due to immune system activation 1. While guidelines recommend discontinuing ICIs for grade 3 partial and all grade 4 irAEs, there is growing interest in rechallenging patients based on oncological outcomes, particularly for cardiovascular and neurological irAEs where data remains scarce 1,2. We retrospectively evaluated the safety of ICI rechallenge following grade 3-4 irAEs, specifically focusing on cardiovascular and neurological events, in patients discussed at our multidisciplinary immunotoxicity assessment board between 2019 and 2021. Fifteen patients were included, with a median time to severe irAE onset of 49 days. Among them, five patients experienced neurological adverse events (NAEs): aseptic meningitis (3), inflammatory polyradiculoneuropathy (1), and ophthalmoplegia (1), while one patient presented with myocarditis. Of the 15 patients retreated with ICIs after initial severe irAEs, 11 (73%) remained free of subsequent irAEs, two (13%) experienced recurrence of the initial irAE, and two (13%) developed new irAEs distinct from the initial event. The median time to event recurrence was 69 days, occurring no earlier than the initial severe irAE. In the subset analysis focusing on severe cardiovascular and neurological irAEs, rechallenge with ICIs was generally well tolerated. However, one patient treated with anti-PD1 experienced a relapse of grade 2 aseptic meningitis. Overall, our findings suggest that rechallenging with ICIs after severe irAEs, including those affecting the cardiovascular and neurological systems, may be safe, particularly after irAE regression and corticosteroid withdrawal.

OBJECTIVE: Rechallenge of [177Lu]Lu-PSMA-617 radioligand therapy (RLT) was proposed for patients who initially responded to PSMA-RLT experiencing partial remission, but relapsed into progression after a certain period of remission. However, only limited data is available regarding this approach. In this study, we analyzed the efficacy and safety profile of one or more series of [177Lu]Lu-PSMA-617 RLT rechallenge in patients from a prospective registry (REALITY Study, NCT04833517) after they initially benefited from PSMA-RLT.
METHODS: Forty-seven patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) who had biochemical response to initial [177Lu]Lu-PSMA-617 RLT followed by disease progression received at least one (up to three) series of [177Lu]Lu-PSMA-617 RLT rechallenge. Biochemical response rates based on prostate-specific antigen (PSA) serum value, PSA-based progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were calculated. Adverse events of the treatment were assessed according to \'common terminology criteria for adverse events\' (CTCAE).
RESULTS: After one series of RLT rechallenge, a PSA decline of at least 50% was achieved in 27/47 patients (57.4%). The median PFS of all patients was 8.7 mo and the median OS was 22.7 mo, each calculated from the administration of the first rechallenge series. Patients who responded (PSA decline > 50%) to the rechallenge showed a median OS of 27.3 mo. Regarding PFS, a significant correlation (r = 0.4128, p = 0.0323) was found for these patients comparing initial and rechallenge RLT. Ten patients received a second and 3 patients received a third rechallenge series with 8/10 and 3/3 patients responding to repeated RLT rechallenge. No severe deterioration of adverse events rated by CTCAE criteria was observed.
CONCLUSIONS: [177Lu]Lu-PSMA-617 RLT rechallenge is associated with significant PSA response and encouraging survival outcome as well as a very favourable safety profile and should therefore be considered as a straight-forward treatment option in mCRPC patients, who previously benefited from PSMA-RLT.