Citations

The NCCN Guidelines for Prostate Cancer provide a framework on which to base decisions regarding the workup of patients with prostate cancer, risk stratification and management of localized disease, post-treatment monitoring, and treatment of recurrence and advanced disease. The Guidelines sections included in this article focus on the management of metastatic castration-sensitive disease, nonmetastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC), and metastatic CRPC (mCRPC). Androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) with treatment intensification is strongly recommended for patients with metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer. For patients with nonmetastatic CRPC, ADT is continued with or without the addition of certain secondary hormone therapies depending on prostate-specific antigen doubling time. In the mCRPC setting, ADT is continued with the sequential addition of certain secondary hormone therapies, chemotherapies, immunotherapies, radiopharmaceuticals, and/or targeted therapies. The NCCN Prostate Cancer Panel emphasizes a shared decision-making approach in all disease settings based on patient preferences, prior treatment exposures, the presence or absence of visceral disease, symptoms, and potential side effects.

Background Brexucabtagene autoleucel (brexu-cel) is an autologous anti-CD19 chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy approved in the USA for adults with relapsed or refractory (R/R) B-cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia (B-ALL) and in the European Union for patients ≥26 years with R/R B-ALL. After 2 years of follow-up in ZUMA-3, the overall complete remission (CR) rate (CR+CR with incomplete hematological recovery (CRi)) was 73%, and the median overall survival (OS) was 25.4 months in 78 Phase 1 and 2 patients with R/R B-ALL who received the pivotal dose of brexu-cel. Outcomes by prior therapies and subsequent allogeneic stem cell transplantation (alloSCT) are reported. Methods Eligible adults had R/R B-ALL and received one infusion of brexu-cel (1×10⁶ CAR T cells/kg) following conditioning chemotherapy. The primary endpoint was the CR/CRi rate per central review. Post hoc subgroup analyses were exploratory with descriptive statistics provided. Results Phase 1 and 2 patients (N=78) were included with median follow-up of 29.7 months (range, 20.7–58.3). High CR/CRi rates were observed across all prior therapy subgroups examined: 1 prior line of therapy (87%, n=15) and ≥2 prior lines (70%, n=63); prior blinatumomab (63%, n=38) and no prior blinatumomab (83%, n=40); prior inotuzumab (59%, n=17) and no prior inotuzumab (77%, n=61); and prior alloSCT (76%, n=29) and no prior alloSCT (71%, n=49). The frequency of Grade ≥3 cytokine release syndrome, neurological events, and treatment-related Grade 5 adverse events were largely similar among prior therapy subgroups. Median duration of remission (DOR) in responders with (n=14) and without (n=43) subsequent alloSCT was 44.2 (95% CI, 8.1 to not estimable (NE)) and 18.6 months (95% CI, 9.4 to NE); median OS was 47.0 months (95% CI, 10.2 to NE) and not reached (95% CI, 23.2 to NE), respectively. Median DOR and OS were not reached in responders without prior or subsequent alloSCT (n=22). Conclusions In ZUMA-3, adults with R/R B-ALL benefited from brexu-cel, regardless of prior therapies and subsequent alloSCT status, though survival appeared better in patients without certain prior therapies and in earlier lines of therapy. Additional studies are needed to determine the impact prior therapies and subsequent alloSCT have on outcomes of patients who receive brexu-cel.

Abstract Modern histologic imaging platforms coupled with machine learning methods have provided new opportunities to map the spatial distribution of immune cells in the tumor microenvironment. However, there exists no standardized method for describing or analyzing spatial immune cell data, and most reported spatial analyses are rudimentary. In this review, we provide an overview of two approaches for reporting and analyzing spatial data (raster versus vector‐based). We then provide a compendium of spatial immune cell metrics that have been reported in the literature, summarizing prognostic associations in the context of a variety of cancers. We conclude by discussing two well‐described clinical biomarkers, the breast cancer stromal tumor infiltrating lymphocytes score and the colon cancer Immunoscore, and describe investigative opportunities to improve clinical utility of these spatial biomarkers. © 2023 The Pathological Society of Great Britain and Ireland.

AbstractThe clinical significance of the tumor‐immune interaction in breast cancer is now established, and tumor‐infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs) have emerged as predictive and prognostic biomarkers for patients with triple‐negative (estrogen receptor, progesterone receptor, and HER2‐negative) breast cancer and HER2‐positive breast cancer. How computational assessments of TILs might complement manual TIL assessment in trial and daily practices is currently debated. Recent efforts to use machine learning (ML) to automatically evaluate TILs have shown promising results. We review state‐of‐the‐art approaches and identify pitfalls and challenges of automated TIL evaluation by studying the root cause of ML discordances in comparison to manual TIL quantification. We categorize our findings into four main topics: (1) technical slide issues, (2) ML and image analysis aspects, (3) data challenges, and (4) validation issues. The main reason for discordant assessments is the inclusion of false‐positive areas or cells identified by performance on certain tissue patterns or design choices in the computational implementation. To aid the adoption of ML for TIL assessment, we provide an in‐depth discussion of ML and image analysis, including validation issues that need to be considered before reliable computational reporting of TILs can be incorporated into the trial and routine clinical management of patients with triple‐negative breast cancer. © 2023 The Authors. The Journal of Pathology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of The Pathological Society of Great Britain and Ireland.

Background: HER2 amplification (HER2+) occurs in approximately 3% of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). Despite the recent addition of HER2-directed therapies to treatment recommendations in the NCCN Guidelines, until more recently there were no FDA-approved treatments. This study examined real-world treatment patterns in patients with HER2+ mCRC in the United States before and after the emerging awareness of HER2-directed therapies in 2018. Methods: This was a retrospective observational study of patients with HER2+ mCRC from the GuardantINFORM database, which contains claims data for patients with Guardant360 genomic testing results. Patients were aged ≥18 years, were diagnosed with mCRC between January 2014 and September 2020, and had confirmed ERBB2 amplification via the blood-based Guardant360 test. Treatment patterns and real-world time to next treatment (rwTTNT) were evaluated. Results: This study included 142 patients with a median age of 59 years; 31 (21.8%) patients with ERBB2 amplifications also had ERBB2 mutations. Treatment patterns were heterogeneous and evolved over time; before 2018, the most common regimen prescribed after detection of ERBB2 amplification was anti-VEGF therapy with or without chemotherapy (31.6%; n=25), and after 2018, HER2-directed therapies were the most commonly prescribed (36.5%; n=23). Median rwTTNT among the overall cohort was 8.4 months (95% CI, 6.5–10.0); rwTTNT was numerically longer in patients who received HER2-directed therapy compared with those who received non–HER2-directed therapies (11.0 months [95% CI, 6.3–12.3] vs 7.2 months [95% CI, 5.8–9.6]). Conclusions: This real-world study of the largest clinically annotated dataset of patients with HER2+ mCRC showed that many patients do not receive HER2-directed therapy despite its inclusion in NCCN Guidelines, with heterogeneous treatment patterns suggesting that standard of care remains undefined and targeted therapy remains underutilized. Greater awareness of the unmet need in this patient population, together with new effective therapies, will facilitate strategies for improved, targeted treatment approaches.

Objective: This study aims at establishing benchmark values for best achievable outcomes following open major anatomic hepatectomy for liver tumors of all dignities. Background: Outcomes after open major hepatectomies vary widely lacking reference values for comparisons among centers, indications, types of resections, and minimally invasive procedures. Methods: A standard benchmark methodology was used covering consecutive patients, who underwent open major anatomic hepatectomy from 44 high-volume liver centers from 5 continents over a 5-year period (2016–2020). Benchmark cases were low-risk non-cirrhotic patients without significant comorbidities treated in high-volume centers (≥30 major liver resections/year). Benchmark values were set at the 75th percentile of median values of all centers. Minimum follow-up period was 1 year in each patient. Results: Of 8044 patients, 2908 (36%) qualified as benchmark (low-risk) cases. Benchmark cutoffs for all indications include R0 resection ≥78%; liver failure (grade B/C) ≤10%; bile leak (grade B/C) ≤18%; complications ≥grade 3 and CCI ® ≤46% and ≤9 at 3 months, respectively. Benchmark values differed significantly between malignant and benign conditions so that reference values must be adjusted accordingly. Extended right hepatectomy (H1, 4-8 or H4-8) disclosed a higher cutoff for liver failure, while extended left (H1-5,8 or H2-5,8) were associated with higher cutoffs for bile leaks, but had superior oncologic outcomes, when compared to formal left hepatectomy (H1-4 or H2-4). The minimal follow-up for a conclusive outcome evaluation following open anatomic major resection must be 3 months. Conclusion: These new benchmark cutoffs for open major hepatectomy provide a powerful tool to convincingly evaluate other approaches including parenchymal-sparing procedures, laparoscopic/robotic approaches, and alternative treatments, such as ablation therapy, irradiation, or novel chemotherapy regimens.

Background Hereditary and acquired thrombophilia are risk factors for venous thromboembolism (VTE). Whether testing helps guide management decisions is controversial. Objective These evidence-based guidelines from the American Society of Hematology (ASH) intend to support decision making about thrombophilia testing. Methods ASH formed a multidisciplinary guideline panel covering clinical and methodological expertise and minimizing bias from conflicts of interest. The McMaster University GRADE Centre provided logistical support, performed systematic reviews, and created evidence profiles and evidence-to-decision tables. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach (GRADE) was used. Recommendations were subject to public comment. Results The panel agreed on 23 recommendations regarding thrombophilia testing and associated management. Nearly all recommendations are based on very low certainty in the evidence due to modeling assumptions. Conclusions The panel issued a strong recommendation against testing the general population before starting combined oral contraceptives (COCs) and conditional recommendations for thrombophilia testing in the following scenarios: (a) patients with VTE associated with nonsurgical major transient or hormonal risk factors; (b) patients with cerebral or splanchnic venous thrombosis, in settings where anticoagulation would otherwise be discontinued; (c) individuals with a family history of antithrombin, protein C, or protein S deficiency when considering thromboprophylaxis for minor provoking risk factors and for guidance to avoid COCs/hormone replacement therapy; (d) pregnant women with a family history of high-risk thrombophilia types; and (e) patients with cancer at low or intermediate risk of thrombosis and with a family history of VTE. For all other questions, the panel provided conditional recommendations against testing for thrombophilia.

Abstract Purpose: Men with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) frequently develop resistance to androgen receptor signaling inhibitor (ARSI) treatment; therefore, new therapies are needed. Trophoblastic cell-surface antigen (TROP-2) is a transmembrane protein identified in prostate cancer and overexpressed in multiple malignancies. TROP-2 is a therapeutic target for antibody–drug conjugates (ADC). Experimental Design: TROP-2 gene (TACSTD2) expression and markers of treatment resistance from prostate biopsies were analyzed using data from four previously curated cohorts of mCRPC (n = 634) and the PROMOTE study (dbGaP accession phs001141.v1.p1, n = 88). EPCAM or TROP-2–positive circulating tumor cells (CTC) were captured from peripheral blood for comparison of protein (n = 15) and gene expression signatures of treatment resistance (n = 40). We assessed the efficacy of TROP-2–targeting agents in a mouse xenograft model generated from prostate cancer cell lines. Results: We demonstrated that TACSTD2 is expressed in mCRPC from luminal and basal tumors but at lower levels in patients with neuroendocrine prostate cancer. Patients previously treated with ARSI showed no significant difference in TACSTD2 expression, whereas patients with detectable AR-V7 expression showed increased expression. We observed that TROP-2 can serve as a cell surface target for isolating CTCs, which may serve as a predictive biomarker for ADCs. We also demonstrated that prostate cancer cell line xenografts can be targeted specifically by labeled anti–TROP-2 agents in vivo. Conclusions: These results support further studies on TROP-2 as a therapeutic and diagnostic target for mCRPC.

144 Background: Kinase inhibitors have been ineffective in prostate cancer and have no known role in androgen biosynthesis. Inheritance of the adrenal-permissive HSD3B1(1245C) allele encodes a 3βHSD1 enzyme missense that up-regulates the rate-limiting step of androgen biosynthesis from non-gonadal precursor steroids and confers poor clinical outcomes in castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC). About half of all men with prostate cancer inherit the adrenal-permissive HSD3B1 allele. Multiple clinical studies demonstrate that adrenal-permissive HSD3B1 allele inheritance confers more rapid progression on ADT and others also suggest worse CRPC outcomes even after treatment with abiraterone or enzalutamide. However, there is no known method to clinically block 3βHSD1. Furthermore, 3βHSD1 is not known to be phosphorylated. Methods: Mass spectrometry was used to identify protein phosphorylation sites and steroid metabolites, genetic and pharmacologic methods were used to identify the kinase required for 3βHSD1 phosphorylation and mouse xenograft studies were performed with BMX inhibition. The identified mechanism was used to design and launch a multicenter phase 2 study of the BMX inhibitor abivertinib in combination with abiraterone in men with metastatic CRPC. Results: 3βHSD1 enzyme activity requires tyrosine phosphorylation at Y344 by the BMX kinase. Androgen biosynthesis is blocked by a phosphorylation-defective 3βHSD1 344F, or BMX genetic knockdown, or BMX pharmacologic inhibition. BMX inhibition using zanubrutinib suppresses CRPC growth in the C4-2 and VCaP xenograft models by blocking intratumoral androgen synthesis and tumor androgen receptor (AR) signaling. Discovery of this mechanism provides the rationale for the phase 2 Maverick trial of abivertinib, a BMX inhibitor, combined with abiraterone, in men with CRPC with adrenal-permissive HSD3B1 allele inheritance (NCT05361915). Eligibility includes 1) presence of metastatic CRPC, 2) measurable and/or non-measurable disease, and 3) confirmed positivity of adrenal-permissive HSD3B1(1245C) allele inheritance via central testing (cap heterozygosity at 50%). Patients will be enrolled in 2 arms: 1) abiraterone naïve (n=45) and 2) abiraterone progressing (n=55). All patients will receive treatment with abivertinib 200mg twice daily with abiraterone 1000mg daily and prednisone 5mg by mouth twice daily. The primary outcome is 6-month radiographic progression-free survival. On-treatment biopsies will be used to inform mechanisms of response and resistance in patients. Conclusions: BMX is required for 3βHSD1 phosphorylation, androgen biosynthesis and CRPC progression with the adrenal-permissive HSD3B1(1245C) allele. The Maverick trial will test clinical proof-of-concept of BMX inhibition in men with adrenal-permissive HSD3B1(1245C) inheritance. Clinical trial information: NCT05361915 .

Abstract Background In the 5 years that have passed since the publication of the 2018 International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis (ICAR‐Allergic Rhinitis 2018), the literature has expanded substantially. The ICAR‐Allergic Rhinitis 2023 update presents 144 individual topics on allergic rhinitis (AR), expanded by over 40 topics from the 2018 document. Originally presented topics from 2018 have also been reviewed and updated. The executive summary highlights key evidence‐based findings and recommendation from the full document. Methods ICAR‐Allergic Rhinitis 2023 employed established evidence‐based review with recommendation (EBRR) methodology to individually evaluate each topic. Stepwise iterative peer review and consensus was performed for each topic. The final document was then collated and includes the results of this work. Results ICAR‐Allergic Rhinitis 2023 includes 10 major content areas and 144 individual topics related to AR. For a substantial proportion of topics included, an aggregate grade of evidence is presented, which is determined by collating the levels of evidence for each available study identified in the literature. For topics in which a diagnostic or therapeutic intervention is considered, a recommendation summary is presented, which considers the aggregate grade of evidence, benefit, harm, and cost. Conclusion The ICAR‐Allergic Rhinitis 2023 update provides a comprehensive evaluation of AR and the currently available evidence. It is this evidence that contributes to our current knowledge base and recommendations for patient evaluation and treatment.