BACKGROUND: QL1701 is a proposed biosimilar to the reference trastuzumab (Herceptin®). This trial compared the efficacy and safety of QL1701 with the reference trastuzumab in first-line treatment of human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-positive metastatic breast cancer.
METHODS: This randomized, double-blinded, parallel-controlled, phase III equivalence trial was conducted in 73 centers in China. Eligible patients with histologically or cytologically diagnosed HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer were randomly assigned (1 : 1) to receive either QL1701 or reference trastuzumab in combination with docetaxel (every 3 weeks) for eight cycles as the first-line treatment. Then, in patients with objective responses or stable disease, the QL1701 or reference trastuzumab with or without docetaxel was maintained for totally up to 12 months if tolerated. The primary endpoint was 24-week objective response rate (ORR) assessed by an independent review committee (IRC). The equivalence margin was 0.80-1.25 with a 90% confidence interval (CI) for the ORR ratio (QL1701 to reference trastuzumab).
RESULTS: Between 29 April 2020 and 15 March 2022, 474 patients were randomized, and 473 received either QL1701 (n = 236) or reference trastuzumab (n = 237). The risk ratio for 24-week ORR was 1.07 (90% CI 0.94-1.21). The 90% CI fell within the pre-specified equivalence margin of 0.80-1.25. The 24-week ORR assessed by IRC was 59.7% (95% CI 53.2% to 66.1%) versus 56.1% (95% CI 49.5% to 62.5%) in QL1701 and the reference trastuzumab, respectively. As of 12 April 2023, there were no notable differences in progression-free survival (median: 8.3 versus 8.4 months) and overall survival (1-year rate: 95.1% versus 93.3%) between the two groups. Safety, pharmacokinetic (PK), and immunogenicity profiles were similar between the two groups.
CONCLUSIONS: QL1701 demonstrated equivalent efficacy and similar safety to the reference trastuzumab when combined with docetaxel in the first-line treatment of patients with HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer, with similar PK and immunogenicity profiles.

暂无摘要。

BACKGROUND: Platinum-based chemotherapy (ChT) has been the standard first-line treatment for metastatic urothelial carcinoma (mUC). The purpose of this study was to evaluate the use of induction avelumab followed by avelumab in combination with carboplatin-gemcitabine (carbo/gem) followed by avelumab maintenance. We tested the hypothesis that induction immunotherapy (IO) could enhance the response to ChT and prevent its detrimental effect on immune cells.
METHODS: INDUCOMAIN is a multicenter, randomized, investigator-initiated, open-label phase II study evaluating the safety and efficacy of induction avelumab before carboplatin-gemcitabine-avelumab, followed by avelumab maintenance (arm A), compared to carbo/gem (arm B). Eligibility criteria included patients with mUC, no prior systemic therapy, and ineligibility for cisplatin by Galsky criteria. Patients were stratified by the presence/absence of visceral metastasis and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0-1 versus 2. The primary endpoint was objective response rate (ORR). Secondary endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and safety.
RESULTS: Eighty-five patients were included and randomized to arm A (n = 42) and arm B (n = 43), respectively. ORR was similar between treatment arms: 59.5% in arm A and 53.5% in arm B (P = 0.57). Fourteen patients (33%) in arm A early progressed/died before or at first response assessment, compared to three patients (7%) in arm B. Median OS was 11.1 months in arm A and 13.2 months in arm B [hazard ratio (HR) 0.91, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.57-1.46, P = 0.69]. Median PFS was 6.9 months in arm A versus 7.4 months in arm B (HR 0.99, 95% CI 0.61-1.60, P = 0.95). Treatment-related adverse events of grade 3-4 occurred in 70.7% of patients in arm A and in 72.1% in arm B. No predictive role of programmed death-ligand 1 expression was found.
CONCLUSIONS: The hypothesis that induction avelumab could enhance the efficacy of subsequent ChT was not proven. Administering IO alone as induction before ChT is not an adequate strategy.

OBJECTIVE: Adjuvant pembrolizumab significantly improved overall survival (OS) in renal cell carcinoma (RCC), but real-world data on sequential treatment are scarce. We sought to evaluate the clinical outcomes of first-line (1L) systemic therapy following adjuvant immune oncology (IO)-based regimens.
METHODS: A retrospective study including patients with recurrent RCC following adjuvant IO across 29 international institutions was conducted. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS) on 1L systemic therapy estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Preplanned subanalyses of clinical outcomes by type of 1L systemic therapy, recurrence timing, and International Metastatic RCC Database Consortium (IMDC) risk groups were performed. Treatment-related adverse events leading to treatment discontinuation, dose reduction, or corticosteroid use were assessed.
UNASSIGNED: A total of 94 patients were included. Most received adjuvant pembrolizumab (n = 37, 39%), atezolizumab (n = 28, 30%), or nivolumab + ipilimumab (n = 15, 16%). The cohort included 49 (52%) patients who had recurrence within 3 mo of the last adjuvant IO dose, whereas 45 (48%) recurred beyond 3 mo. Bone metastases were significantly higher in tumors recurring at <3 mo (10/49, 20%) than those recurring at >3 mo (1/45, 2.2%; p = 0.008). Most patients received 1L vascular endothelial growth factor-targeted therapy (VEGF-TT; n = 37, 39%), IO + VEGF-TT (n = 26, 28%), or IO + IO (n = 12, 13%). The remaining underwent local therapy. The median follow-up for the 1L systemic therapy cohort was 15 mo. The 18-mo PFS and OS rates were 45% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 34-60) and 85% (95% CI: 75-95), respectively. Treatment-related adverse events occurred in 32 (42%) patients and included skin toxicity (n = 7, 9.2%), fatigue (n = 6, 7.9%), and diarrhea/colitis (n = 4, 5.3%). Limitations included selecting patients from large academic centers and the short follow-up period.
CONCLUSIONS: A subset of patients with recurrent RCC following adjuvant IO respond to systemic therapies, including VEGF-TT and IO-based regimens. Notably, patients with favorable-risk disease may derive more benefit from VEGF-TT than from IO therapies in this setting. Future approaches utilizing radiographic tools and biomarker-based liquid biopsies are warranted to detect occult metastatic disease and identify candidate patients for adjuvant IO therapy.
RESULTS: Adjuvant pembrolizumab significantly improved overall survival in renal cell carcinoma (RCC). There are limited data on clinical outcomes after the recurrence of RCC tumors following adjuvant immunotherapy. In this study, we find that patients respond to subsequent systemic therapies across different treatment options.

UNASSIGNED: Recently, a sum of trials of programmed cell death-1 (PD-1) inhibitors combined with chemotherapy have shown excellent efficacy compared to chemotherapy alone in patients with previously untreated, advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC). However, there is no head-to-head comparison and consensus on which immunotherapy regimen results in better survival outcomes. This study aimed to evaluate the survival efficacy of various PD-1 inhibitor-based therapies in the first-line treatments for patients with advanced ESCC.
UNASSIGNED: Data collected prior to 31 July 2023 were searched in the PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, Medline, and Web of Science databases. Overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival curves were pooled using the MetaSurv package. Survival data were compared by reconstructed individual patient data.
UNASSIGNED: A total of 4,162 patients and seven randomized controlled trials were included. After synthesizing, PD-1 inhibitors prolonged median OS from 11.3 months (95% CI (confidence interval) 10.7-11.7) to 15.6 months (95% CI 14.7-16.3). Based on reconstructed patient-level data, the toripalimab, tislelizumab, and sintilimab group achieved the longest OS, whereas the sintilimab and tislelizumab group had the lowest risk of recurrence than other treatments. In patients with a combined positive score of ≥10, sintilimab had better OS efficacy than pembrolizumab (HR: 0.71, 95% CI: 0.52-0.96). In terms of tumor proportion score of ≥1%, camrelizumab, nivolumab, and toripalimab showed proximate survival benefits in both OS and progression-free survival.
UNASSIGNED: PD-1 inhibitor combined with chemotherapy significantly improved the survival time of patients with advanced ESCC. Toripalimab, tislelizumab, and sintilimab plus chemotherapy showed the best OS benefit. Longer progression-free benefits might be generated from adding tislelizumab and sintilimab to chemotherapy. Sintilimab was strongly recommended for patients with high programmed cell death-ligand 1 abundance.
UNASSIGNED: [https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/], identifier [CRD42024501086].

First-line systemic therapy for patients with advanced or metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) has rapidly evolved over the past two decades. First, molecularly targeted therapy for a growing number of gain-of-function molecular targets has been shown to improve progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) with favorable toxicity profiles compared to platinum-containing chemotherapy and can be given as first-line systemic therapy in ~25% of patients with NSCLC. Actionable genetic alterations include EGFR, BRAF V600E, and MET exon 14 splicing site-sensitizing mutations, as well as ALK-, ROS1-, RET-, and NTRK-gene fusions. Secondly, inhibitors of programmed cell death protein 1 or its ligand 1 (PD-1/L1) such as pembrolizumab, atezolizumab, or cemiplimab monotherapy have become a standard of care for ~25% of patients with NSCLC whose tumors have high PD-L1 expression (total proportion score (TPS) ≥50%) and no sensitizing EGFR/ALK alterations. Lastly, for the remaining ~50% of patients who are fit and whose tumors have no or low PD-L1 expression (TPS of 0-49%) and no sensitizing EGFR/ALK aberrations, platinum-containing chemotherapy with the addition of a PD-1/L1 inhibitor alone or in combination of a cytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated protein 4 (CTLA-4) inhibitor improves PFS and OS compared to chemotherapy alone. The objectives of this review are to summarize the current data and perspectives on first-line systemic treatment in patients with unresectable NSCLC and propose a practical algorithm for implementing precision biomarker testing at diagnosis.

UNASSIGNED: The RESORCE-III trial demonstrated that advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patients who progressed on sorafenib and had second-line therapy with regorafenib improved overall survival compared with placebo. Later, immunotherapy with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) combined with antiangiogenetic antibodies has evolved as the preferred first-line treatment for fit patients. We aimed to explore the efficacy and safety of regorafenib as a first-line agent alone or in combination with ICIs in patients with advanced HCC.
UNASSIGNED: We identified 50 patients with advanced HCC treated with regorafenib as a first-line agent. Two patients were lost to follow-up and excluded. Baseline factors, dosing, concomitant use of ICIs, toxicity and outcome of treatment were recorded from electronic medical records.
UNASSIGNED: Twenty-six patients received regorafenib as monotherapy and twenty-two received regorafenib + ICI in combination. In the total cohort, the median progression-free survival (mPFS) was 7.7 months and the median overall survival (mOS) was 16.7 months (P=0.02). Objective response rate (ORR) and disease control rate (DCR) assessed by the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) version 1.1 were 21% and 73%. In the regorafenib monotherapy group, mPFS was 5.9 months, and mOS was 13.9 months; in the combination group, mPFS was 7.8 months, and mOS was 23.6 months. ORR and DCR were 15% and 65% in the monotherapy group, and 27% and 82% in the combined treatment group, respectively.
UNASSIGNED: Regorafenib used in combination with ICIs had a mild safety profile and resulted in improved response and an almost doubling of mOS compared to monotherapy, warranting further prospective evaluation in a randomized study.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy of rituximab (RTX)-containing therapy as first-line as well as rescue treatment for giant cell hepatitis with autoimmune hemolytic anemia (GCH-AHA).
METHODS: This retrospective study recruited patients diagnosed with GCH-AHA and treated with conventional immunosuppressor regimens consisting of prednisone or RTX-containing regimes consisting of RTX and prednisone, with or without another immunosuppressor. The primary outcomes were the complete remission (CR) rate and time-period required for CR. The secondary outcomes included relapses and adverse events.
RESULTS: Twenty patients (8 females and 12 males; age range 1-26 months), 15 receiving conventional regimens and 5 receiving RTX-containing regimens, were included. The CR rates were 73.3 % (11/15) and 100 % (5/5) in the conventional and RTX-containing groups, respectively. The time-period required for CR was significantly shorter in the RTX-containing group than in the conventional group (6 (3-8) versus 14 (5-25) months, P = 0.015). Relapses occurred in 30.8 % (4/13) of patients in the conventional group; all achieved CR after adding RTX. Relapses occurred in 40.0 % (2/5) of patients in the RTX-containing group; both achieved CR after adding intravenous immune globulins or tacrolimus. Transient low immunoglobulin and infections were recorded in both groups. Treatment withdrawal was achieved in 73.3 % (11/15) and 60.0 % (3/5) of patients receiving conventional and RTX-containing regimens after 36 (2-101) and 22 (4-41) months, respectively. Two patients in conventional group died of disease progression and infection.
CONCLUSIONS: RTX-containing first-line therapy achieves CR of GCH-AHA more quickly than the conventional therapy. RTX is efficacious when added to rescue therapy.

The treatment landscape for metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) has undergone significant transformations in recent years. The introduction of novel combination therapies involving tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKI) and immune checkpoint inhibitors has resulted in improved oncological outcomes compared to traditional TKI monotherapy. In this evolving paradigm, the pivotal role of the multidisciplinary tumor board is underscored, particularly in shaping the therapeutic trajectory for patients eligible for locoregional interventions like cytoreductive nephrectomy and metastasectomy. In cases where systemic treatment is deemed appropriate, the absence of direct comparisons among the various combination therapies complicates the selection of a first-line approach. The clinician is faced with the challenge of making decisions based on patient-specific factors such as performance status, risk classification according to the International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium, comorbidities, and disease characteristics, including the number and location of metastases and tumor histology. Considering these concerns, we propose, as a member of a Tuscany Interdisciplinary Uro-Oncologic Group, an algorithm to streamline the decision-making process for mRCC patients, offering guidance to clinicians in their day-to-day clinical practice.

BACKGROUND: The aim was to compare treatment outcomes of clear cell metastatic renal cell carcinoma (ccmRCC) versus non-ccmRCC (nccmRCC) patients who received first-line immune combination therapies.
METHODS: Within our retrospective multi-institutional consecutive database of eight tertiary-care centers, we identified mRCC patients treated with first-line immune combination therapies between 11/2017 and 12/2022. Using log-rank analysis and multivariable Cox regression, we tested for differences in overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) of nccmRCC versus ccmRCC patients. Covariables consisted of age at diagnosis, sex, International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium risk groups, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group status, and sarcomatoid feature.
RESULTS: Of 289 study patients, 39 (13%) patients harbored nccmRCC. Median OS was 37 months versus not reached for ccmRCC versus nccmRCC patients (P = .6). Median PFS was 13 versus 15 months (P = .9). Multivariable Cox regression models did not identify nccmRCC as an independent predictor of higher overall mortality in mRCC patients (hazard ratio [HR]: 1.23; P = .6) or a higher progression rate (HR: 1.0; P = 1.0).
CONCLUSIONS: In our real-world multi-institutional study, no differences in OS and PFS between ccmRCC and nccmRCC patients receiving first-line immune combination treatment were observed, even after adjustment for important patient and tumor characteristics. More prospective trials in nccmRCC patients are needed.