International Journal of Clinical Oncology最新文献

Background: Vepdegestrant (ARV-471) is an oral PROteolysis TArgeting Chimera (PROTAC) estrogen receptor (ER) degrader.

Methods: This phase 1 study (NCT05463952) investigated safety, pharmacokinetics, and antitumor activity of vepdegestrant in Japanese patients with ER-positive (ER+)/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (HER2-) advanced breast cancer at the 200-mg once daily (QD) recommended phase 3 dose. Eligible patients had ER+/HER2- advanced breast cancer resistant to standard therapy, with no standard therapy available, or had received two or more prior endocrine therapies in any setting. The primary endpoint was dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) in cycle 1; secondary endpoints included safety, pharmacokinetics, and antitumor activity.

Results: Six female patients (median age, 58 [range: 47-62] years) were treated. For advanced disease, three (50.0%) patients received three or more prior regimens and five (83.3%) patients received prior cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 inhibitors. At data cutoff, median treatment duration was 9.8 (range: 6-28) weeks; two patients remained on treatment. No DLTs were observed. Four (66.7%) patients experienced adverse events; none led to dose reduction or discontinuation. Four (66.7%) patients had treatment-related adverse events; all were grade 1 except anemia (grade 2). Geometric mean maximum plasma concentration and 24-h area under the plasma concentration-time curve of vepdegestrant were 630.9 ng/mL and 10,400 ng∙hr/mL after a single dose and 1056 ng/mL and 18,310 ng∙hr/mL after multiple doses. Two (33.3%) patients demonstrated stable disease at week 24.

Conclusion: Vepdegestrant 200 mg QD was well tolerated in Japanese patients with ER+/HER2- advanced breast cancer with no notable differences in pharmacokinetics from Western patients.

Clinical trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT05463952 (date of registration: July 19, 2022).

Background: Chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) is a rare form of lymphoma in Japan. This study aimed to explore hematologists' motivations and considerations in making treatment decisions for CLL.

Methods: Responses from hematologists treating CLL, obtained through an online survey, were descriptively analyzed. Subgroup analyses by preferred first-line (1L) treatment, years of clinical experience, and level of interest in CLL were conducted.

Results: Out of 107 hematologists surveyed, 82.2% identified Bruton tyrosine kinase inhibitors (BTKi) as their primary choice for 1L treatment; the reasons included established clinical evidence (61.4%) and oral administration convenience (56.8%). Key factors influencing 1L treatment selection among those favoring BTKi included the presence of 17p deletion, TP53 mutation, and patient's fitness status. BTKi was favored by 92.6% of hematologists with < 10 years of clinical experience and by 78.8% with more experience. The main reasons for choosing BTKi included safety (50.0%) and tolerance (46.7%) among hematologists who stated they had a specific interest in CLL and the oral administration route (62.1%) among hematologists with lower interest. When BTKi was used as 1L therapy, venetoclax-based regimens were preferred for second-line treatment. The most common concern about BTKi was substantial out-of-pocket costs.

Conclusion: Although many Japanese hematologists select their treatment based on clinical evidence, variations exist in treatment strategies, possibly associated with hematologists' experience and interest in CLL. These findings underscore the importance of further promoting evidence-based treatments to ensure that all physicians can make informed decisions. Future research should explore additional factors that influence CLL treatment decisions.

Improved cancer treatment outcomes have increased the demand for medical care that considers the quality of life of patients with cancer. Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) help assess the quality of life because they involve direct evaluation of the patients. Recently, electronic PROs (ePROs) have been used in clinical cancer care settings in Europe and the United States. Electronic PROs positively affected communication between patients with cancer and healthcare providers, enhanced education, optimized self-management, contributed to healthcare economics, assisted in monitoring adverse events, and improved prognosis. However, challenges such as adherence, burden on healthcare providers, lack of personalized formats, low digital literacy, and implementation costs remain. Therefore, carefully selecting the items to be recorded by ePROs in alignment with specific objectives is essential. Additionally, developing systems using lifelogs-digital records of daily activities-and creating mechanisms that automatically encourage patient behavioral changes based on the reported data are crucial. This review delineates the advantages and challenges of ePROs according to their history and proposes the prospects of ePRO.

Background: The association between aspirin and hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) has been reported to prevent carcinogenesis caused by hepatitis B or C virus infection. The objective of this study was to investigate the prognostic impact of aspirin in patients who underwent liver resection for HCC.

Methods: Data for 1032 patients who underwent primary resection for HCC between 2000 and 2019 were reviewed. There were 87 patients (8.4%) who took aspirin (aspirin group) and 945 (91.6%) who did not (non-aspirin group). Short-term outcomes, recurrence-free survival (RFS), and overall survival (OS) were compared between two groups in the matched cohort using propensity-score matching.

Results: The median patient follow-up was 42.6 months (95% confidence interval 3.12-136.8 months). There was no significant difference in short-term outcomes, including bleeding events. RFS and OS after liver resection in the aspirin group were significantly better than those in the non-aspirin group in the unmatched cohort [5-year RFS rate: 50.3% vs 31.4%, hazard ratio (HR) 0.55, P = 0.0002; 5-year OS rate: 82.9% vs 70.2%, HR 0.46, P = 0.002]. In the matched cohort, RFS and OS after liver resection in the aspirin group were also significantly better than those in the non-aspirin group (5-year RFS rate: 50.3% vs 32.0%, HR 0.60, P = 0.003; 5-year OS rate: 82.9% vs 74.6%, HR 0.56, P = 0.03).

Conclusion: Use of aspirin was associated with better prognosis for patients who underwent primary resection for HCC.

Background: To assess the predictive factors of immediate urinary continence after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy.

Methods: This study included 282 patients who underwent conventional robot-assisted radical prostatectomy at our institution from April 2019 to March 2024. The primary outcome was immediate urinary continence, defined as the absence of urine leakage immediately after urinary catheter removal on postoperative day 6 or 7. In addition, the immediate urine loss rate, defined as the 24-h urine loss volume divided by the total urine volume after catheter removal, was calculated. The multivariable logistic model was used to assess the possible predictive factors of immediate continence (urine loss rate of 0%). The factors included age, body mass index, Charlson Comorbidity Index, pre-existing lower urinary tract symptoms, presence of an inguinal hernia, prostate volume, membranous urethral length, stratified cancer risk, surgeon's experience, and nerve-sparing procedure. In addition, a multiple linear regression model was established to investigate the associations of the same predictors with immediate urine loss rate (%). We also presented our techniques to achieve immediate continence.

Results: The patients' median age was 70 (interquartile range: 63.0-73.0) years. Approximately 39% (n = 111) of patients presented with immediate continence. Age, inguinal hernia, membranous urethral length, and low risk for prostate cancer were associated with immediate continence. These were also statistically significant predictors of immediate urine loss rate.

Conclusion: Our study identified factors predicting immediate urinary continence after conventional robot-assisted radical prostatectomy. This information is potentially valuable for preoperative counseling in patients undergoing robot-assisted radical prostatectomy.

Background: Avelumab + axitinib was approved for advanced renal cell carcinoma (aRCC) in Japan in December 2019. We report long-term real-world outcomes with first-line avelumab + axitinib from the J-DART2 study in Japan.

Methods: J-DART2 was a multicenter, noninterventional, retrospective study examining clinical data from patients with curatively unresectable locally advanced or metastatic RCC who started treatment with first-line avelumab + axitinib in Japan between December 2019 and October 2022. Endpoints included patient characteristics, treatment patterns, and outcomes.

Results: Data from 150 patients across 19 sites were analyzed; median follow-up was 18.7 months (95% CI, 16.3-20.6 months). Median age was 70.5 years; 26.0% of patients were aged ≤64 years, 42.7% were aged 65-74 years, and 31.3% were aged ≥75 years. International Metastatic RCC Database Consortium risk was favorable in 26.0%, intermediate in 54.7% (1 risk factor in 30.7%; 2 risk factors in 24.0%), and poor in 19.3% of patients. Median progression-free survival (PFS) was 17.1 months, with 1- and 2-year PFS rates of 57.7% and 37.5%, respectively. Median overall survival (OS) was not reached, with 1- and 2-year OS rates of 90.6% and 84.7%, respectively. Objective response rate was 53.3%; disease control rate was 88.9%. Outcomes were similar across age groups, including patients aged ≥75 years.

Conclusions: J-DART2 is the largest retrospective study to report long-term real-world outcomes in patients with aRCC treated with avelumab + axitinib in Japan. Findings were similar to those observed in previous studies and support the benefit of avelumab + axitinib in clinical practice in Japan.

Background: To improve the outcome in newly diagnosed glioblastoma patients with maximal resection, we aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of implantation of carmustine wafers (CWs), radiation concomitant with temozolomide and bevacizumab, and maintenance chemotherapy with six cycles of temozolomide and bevacizumab.

Method: This prospective phase II study enrolled glioblastoma patients considered candidates for complete resection (> 90%) of a contrast-enhanced lesion. The CWs were intraoperatively implanted into the resection cavity after achieving maximal resection. Patients without a measurable contrast-enhanced lesion on magnetic resonance imaging within 48 h after resection received concomitant radiotherapy and chemotherapy with temozolomide and bevacizumab, followed by maintenance treatment with up to six cycles of temozolomide and bevacizumab. The primary endpoint was the 2-year overall survival rate in glioblastoma patients with protocol treatment.

Results: From October 2015 to April 2018, we obtained consent for the first registration from 70 patients across 17 institutions in Japan, and 49 patients were treated according to the protocol. We evaluated the safety in 49 patients who were part of the second registration and the efficacy in 45 glioblastoma patients treated according to the protocol. The profile of hematological and most of the non-hematological adverse effects was similar to that in previous studies, but stroke occurred in 12% of cases (6/49 patients). The estimated 2-year overall survival rate was 51.3%.

Conclusion: Implantation of CWs, followed by concomitant radiation, temozolomide, and bevacizumab, and six cycles of temozolomide and bevacizumab may offer some benefit to survival in Japanese glioblastoma patients with maximal resection.

Trial id: jRCTs021180007.

Background: In Japan, the authorized period (2-4 h) between oral administration of 5-aminolevulinic acid hydrochloride (5-ALA) and transurethral resection for non-muscle invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC) may restrict photodynamic diagnosis (PDD) usage. Therefore, this prospective, single-arm, phase III study aimed to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy and safety of PDD at an extended administration period (4-8 h).

Methods: From January 2022 to May 2023, 161 patients with NMIBC were enrolled from eight hospitals. The primary endpoint was the blue light (BL) sensitivity of pathologically positive biopsies. The secondary endpoints were a comparison of the specificity and positive and negative prediction rates under BL and white light (WL) conditions.

Results: A total of 1242 specimens comprising 337 histological NMIBC specimens were analyzed. BL-sensitivity was 95.3%. Its lower limit of 95% confidence interval (92.4-97.3%) exceeded the threshold (70%) of non-inferiority to authorized usage. Sensitivity and specificity were significantly higher and lower for BL than those for WL (95.3% vs. 61.1%, P < 0.001; 52.7% vs. 95.2%, P < 0.001), respectively. The positive and negative predictive rates were significantly lower and higher for BL than those for WL (42.9% vs. 82.7%, P < 0.001; 96.8% vs. 86.8%, P < 0.001), respectively. Of the 145 patients receiving 5-ALA, 136 (93.8%) and 75 (51.7%) experienced 377 adverse events and 95 adverse reactions, respectively, most of which were grade 1 or 2.

Conclusion: For extended period, the efficacy of PDD for NMIBC was similar to that of authorized period, in terms of higher sensitivity and lower specificity compared with WL, and the safety was acceptable.

Background: Olanzapine is an atypical antipsychotic drug used for chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting. It is particularly effective in preventing delayed nausea and vomiting induced by highly emetogenic chemotherapy (HEC). However, it has side effects, such as hyperglycemia and somnolence, the efficacy and safety of adding olanzapine to triplet antiemetic therapy (5-HT₃ receptor antagonist, NK₁ receptor antagonist, and dexamethasone) must be verified.

Methods: We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to compare the effectiveness of olanzapine combined with triplet antiemetic therapy and triplet antiemetic therapy in preventing nausea and vomiting for HEC. We set five items (hyperglycemia, prevention of vomiting, prevention of nausea, adverse events, and cost (drug costs)) as outcomes and conducted a systematic review.

Results: Five randomized controlled trials was extracted and they showed that the addition of olanzapine was effective in control of nausea and vomiting, especially in the delayed phase. Complete response of acute and delayed phase were significantly higher in the olanzapine group. Risk difference was - 0.14 [95% CI - 0.26, - 0.03; p = 0.02] and - 0.14 [95% CI - 0.19, -0.09; p < 0.00001], respectively. Additionally, we evaluated hyperglycemia and somnolence, which are typical side effects of olanzapine. However, the incidence of grade ≥ 2 was low in both events, and there was no significant difference between olanzapine and control groups.

Conclusions: Adding olanzapine to triplet antiemetic therapy is useful in preventing nausea and vomiting induced by HEC and there would be minimal adverse effects from the combination use.