Citations

The NCCN Guidelines for Thyroid Carcinoma address the management of different types of thyroid carcinoma, including papillary, follicular, oncocytic, medullary, and anaplastic carcinoma. The NCCN Thyroid Carcinoma Panel meets at least annually to review comments from reviewers within their institutions, examine relevant new data from publications and abstracts, and reevaluate and update their recommendations. These NCCN Guidelines Insights focus on the panel’s most recent recommendations regarding systemic therapies for thyroid carcinoma as well as the supporting clinical data.

The NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology (NCCN Guidelines) for Adult Cancer Pain provide recommendations for the comprehensive management of pain in patients with cancer. This article will focus on methods for screening for pain, safe and appropriate prescription of opioid and miscellaneous analgesics, and the optimization of nonpharmacologic interventions including integrative and interventional strategies for treatment of cancer-related pain. Additionally, the NCCN Guidelines discuss methods for the safe reduction of opioids when appropriate, as well as techniques for encouraging the judicious use of opioids. The complete version of the NCCN Guidelines for Adult Cancer Pain addresses additional issues that are not covered here, including management of pain during a pain crisis, management of procedure-related pain and anxiety, pain management for cancer survivors, and the use of nonopioid and adjuvant analgesics for cancer-related pain.

The NCCN Guidelines for Survivorship include screening, evaluation, and treatment recommendations for common physical and psychosocial problems resulting from adult-onset cancer and its treatment and provide a framework for coordination of survivorship care. They also include recommendations to help cancer survivors enhance their wellness and maintain a healthy lifestyle. These NCCN Guidelines Insights summarize the panel’s current recommendations and recent updates regarding physical activity, nutrition, and weight management for cancer survivors.

Thymomas and thymic carcinomas are rare mediastinal tumors that originate in the thymus. Patients with thymoma may experience symptoms associated with autoimmune paraneoplastic diseases (such as myasthenia gravis), which typically do not occur in patients with thymic carcinoma. The NCCN Guidelines for Thymomas and Thymic Carcinomas provide guidance for the diagnosis, treatment, and surveillance of patients with thymoma and thymic carcinoma. Involvement of a multidisciplinary team with experience treating thymomas and thymic carcinomas is highly recommended.

11507 Background: Advanced uterine leiomyosarcoma (uLMS) is an aggressive malignancy with poor prognosis. Standard-of-care treatments, including trabectedin (Tb) or pazopanib (P), provide median progression-free survival (PFS) of 3-4 months (mo) and objective response rates (ORR) of ~11%. Homologous recombination deficiency (HRD) in a subset of uLMS supports the use of PARP inhibitors combined with DNA-damaging agents. Preclinical studies demonstrated synergistic activity of olaparib and temozolomide (T+O), and a prior single-arm Phase II study of T+O showed promising efficacy independent of an established biomarker, warranting further investigation in a randomized setting. Methods: Alliance A092104 is a Phase II/III trial evaluating olaparib (200 mg BID) plus temozolomide (75 mg/m² daily, days 1-7, every 21 days) versus investigator’s choice of Tb or P in patients (pts) with advanced uLMS who progressed on ≥2 prior systemic therapies. Stratification factors included ECOG (0-1 vs. 2) and prior lines (2 vs. ≥3). The Phase II (Phase III) primary endpoint was PFS (OS), with a planned suspension of accrual at the end of Phase II. A total of 70 evaluable pts (58 PFS events) were needed to detect an improvement in PFS from 4 vs. 8 mo with power of 90% and 1-sided type I error of 10%, with futility assessed after 29 PFS events. Upon meeting the Phase II futility threshold for PFS, the trial was permanently closed. Data were released from the data and safety monitoring board. Pts continue to be followed for outcomes. Results: 74 pts enrolled (Arm 1: T+O, n = 37; Arm 2: investigator’s choice, n = 37 (Tb, 18; P, 13; 6 pts did not start treatment). The arms were balanced for baseline demographics except race, with the T+O arm having a higher proportion of black/African American (29.7% vs. 16.2%). 21 pts remain on treatment. Hematologic adverse events (AEs) were more frequent in the T+O arm, with Grade 4 neutropenia (19.5%) and thrombocytopenia (8.3%) both managed by dose reductions. Non-hematologic Grade 3 AEs were higher in the investigator’s choice arm (45.2% vs. 13.9%). No Grade 5 AEs were reported. In the first 70 pts, with a median follow-up of 5.9 mo, and 39 total PFS events, the median PFS was 3.2 mo (95% CI: 2.0-NE) for T+O versus 5.6 mo (95% CI: 2.8-NE) for investigator’s choice (HR = 1.00; 95% CI: 0.60-2.17; 1-sided stratified log rank p = 0.50). Within Arm 2, the median PFS for Tb and P were respectively 5.6 (95% CI: 3.1-NE) and 3.8 (95% CI: 1.5-NE) mo. 3 pts in the T+0 arm and 1 patient in the investigator’s choice arm (Tb) had a confirmed partial response. Conclusions: The trial did not meet its primary endpoint of PFS in Phase II. This suggests that a biomarker may be needed before there is further exploration of PARP inhibitor-based regimens in uLMS. Overall survival and analysis of tissue-based biomarkers will be presented. Clinical trial information: NCT05432791 .

11506 Background: Catequentinib Hydrochloride (AL3818, Anlotinib, Catequentinib) is a novel, orally administered, small molecule tyrosine kinase inhibitor. There remains an unmet need for effective, well tolerated therapies for patients (pts) with advanced/ metastatic leiomyosarcoma (LMS). We performed a randomized, double blind trial of Catequentinib monotherapy versus placebo in advanced/metastatic LMS. Methods: Patients with a diagnosis of LMS requiring third or further line treatment were eligible. Catequentinib was administered in a 21-day cycle with 14 days on and 7 days off regimen. In this double blind phase 3 trial, patients were randomized 2:1 to Catequentinib or placebo, with the option of crossover to Catequentinib after confirmed Progression Disease (PD) on placebo. Progression-free survival (PFS) with Log Rank test was the primary endpoint and the trial was conducted at multiple sites in the US, UK and EU. Results: Total N = 111 patients were enrolled, and N = 110 were treated and evaluated, 74 randomized to Catequentinib (C), and 36 to placebo (P). In arms (C)/(P) median ages were 59.0/60.5 (range: 33-91) years respectively and 59/29 (79.7%/80.6%) were female. Median PFS by Blinded Independent Central Review (BICR) met the primary endpoint at 3.42 months (95% CI: 2.60, 6.83) for (C) and 1.41 months (95% CI: 1.35, 4.86) for (P) with a p-value of 0.0265 and a HR of 0.536 (95% CI: 0.307, 0.936). Median PFS for patients stratified at ≤ 3 prior lines was 4.86 months (95% CI: 2.04, 8.94) for (C) and 1.41 months (95% CI: 1.31, 4.86) for (P) with a p-value of 0.0046 and a HR of 0.386 (95% CI: 0.196, 0.760). The 6-month progression-free rate was 42.37% for (C) and 20.71% for (P). OS was 17.45 months (95% CI: 13.57, 19.32) for (C) and 16.33 months (95% CI: 11.27, NE) for crossover patients in the (P) arm. 30 (40.5%) of patients have experienced grade 3 treatment-related adverse events in the (C) arm compared to 3 (8.3%) of patients in the (P) arm. The most common TEAE for (C) vs (P) were diarrhea (50.0% vs 22.2%), stomatitis (31.1% vs 8.3%), fatigue (64.9% vs 41.7%), and hypertension (47.3% vs 19.4%). Conclusions: This phase 3 trial met the primary PFS endpoint and demonstrates superior PFS for Catequentinib vs placebo in metastatic/advanced LMS. This study confirms the acceptable benefit-risk profile of Catequentinib in LMS. Catequentinib is an effective and well tolerated treatment option for patients with LMS. Clinical trial information: NCT03016819 .

e17035 Background: 177 Lu-PSMA-617 was approved in March 2022 for patients with mCRPC pretreated with an androgen receptor pathway inhibitor (ARPI) and a taxane. There are limited data on the effectiveness of treatments post- 177 Lu-PSMA-617. The aim of this study was to describe prostate-specific antigen (PSA) responses among patients with mCRPC receiving a guideline-recommended therapy as the next therapy after 177 Lu-PSMA-617 treatment. Methods: This retrospective, observational study used real-world data from the PRECISION data platform, a proprietary dataset developed by Novartis, comprised of patient-level electronic health record and claims data that represent the US advanced prostate cancer population in the community, academic, urology, and medical oncology settings. Patients with mCRPC who received any guideline-recommended therapy at least 14 days after treatment with 177 Lu-PSMA-617 between March 23, 2022 and July 31, 2024 were included. Guideline-recommended therapies included abiraterone, enzalutamide, darolutamide, apalutamide, cabazitaxel, docetaxel, pembrolizumab, sipuleucel-T, niraparib, olaparib, talazoparib, rucaparib, and radium-223. Patients’ PSA values while on 177 Lu-PSMA-617 treatment were compared with their PSA values during the subsequent therapy course. Proportions of patients achieving reductions in PSA levels ≥50% (PSA50) and ≥80% (PSA80) were estimated. All analyses were descriptive. Results: A total of 152 patients receiving any subsequent guideline-recommended therapy after 177 Lu-PSMA-617 were identified. Mean age was 72.1 years. Most patients received an ARPI (n=93, 61.2%) – abiraterone (n=38), enzalutamide (n=37), darolutamide (n=10), or apalutamide (n=8) – as their subsequent therapy. Of patients who received a taxane (n=42, 27.6%), 24 received cabazitaxel and 18 received docetaxel. Median time to initiation of subsequent therapy was 206 days (interquartile range [IQR] 101–301 days) from 177 Lu-PSMA-617 initiation and 44 days (IQR 17–119 days) from 177 Lu-PSMA-617 discontinuation. Overall, among patients with sufficient information for PSA evaluation (n=30), 46.7% achieved PSA50 and 40.0% PSA80 post- 177 Lu-PSMA-617. Among patients receiving an ARPI, PSA50 was observed in 11/18 (61.1%) and PSA80 in 10/18 (55.6%). Among patients receiving a taxane, PSA50 and PSA80 were seen in 3/12 (25.0%) and 2/12 (16.7%), respectively. Conclusions: In this real-world analysis, the majority of patients who received guideline-recommended therapies after 177 Lu-PSMA-617 achieved at least a PSA50 response, suggesting that 177 Lu-PSMA-617 treatment does not preclude response to other subsequent therapies.

e17030 Background: The broad therapeutic arsenal for mCRPC, with overlapping indications, makes selecting the optimal treatment sequence challenging in clinical practice. The aim of this study was to evaluate the prostate-specific antigen (PSA) responses and overall survival (OS) among patients with mCRPC receiving 177 Lu-PSMA-617 based on prior ARPI and taxane treatment exposure. Methods: This retrospective, observational study used real-world data from the PRECISION data platform, a harmonized dataset of advanced prostate cancer patients in the US from diverse clinical settings. Patients with mCRPC who had received ≥1 dose of 177 Lu-PSMA-617 between March 23, 2022 and July 31, 2024, after prior treatment with ≥1 ARPI and ≥1 taxane, were included. To assess PSA response, the baseline PSA value obtained within 90 days before starting 177 Lu-PSMA-617 was compared with the on-treatment PSA value obtained ≥28 days after 177 Lu-PSMA-617 initiation. The number of patients achieving PSA reductions ≥50% (PSA50) and ≥80% (PSA80) were estimated, with patients classified into two cohorts based on prior ARPI and taxane exposure: (1) prompt cohort: after only 1 ARPI and 1 taxane, and (2) deferred cohort: >1 ARPI and/or >1 taxane. Patient characteristics and treatment patterns were evaluated descriptively. OS from 177 Lu-PSMA-617 initiation was estimated using Kaplan–Meier methodology. Results: A total of 431 patients were included: 177 patients in the prompt cohort and 254 patients in the deferred cohort. Of patients in the deferred cohort, 185 (72.8%) received ≥1 ARPI and 1 taxane, 32 (12.6%) received 1 ARPI and ≥1 taxane, and 37 (14.6%) received ≥1 ARPI and ≥1 taxane. Median (interquartile range) age was 73 (67–78) years and most demographic characteristics were balanced between groups. Patients in the deferred cohort had higher median PSA levels at baseline (63.1 ng/mL vs 25.2 ng/mL). PSA50 was observed in 18/33 (55%) patients in the prompt cohort vs 28/66 (42%) in the deferred cohort. PSA80 was observed in 13/33 (39%) patients in the prompt cohort vs 21/66 (31%) in the deferred cohort. Across both cohorts, median OS was 18.0 months (95% confidence interval [CI]: 15.1 months–not reached [NR]). Median OS was NR in patients in the prompt cohort vs 15.1 months in patients in the deferred cohort (95% CI: 11.6 months–NR). Conclusions: In this large real-world study, prompt initiation of 177 Lu-PSMA-617 (after only 1 ARPI and 1 taxane) showed superior clinical outcomes versus deferred initiation of 177 Lu-PSMA-617. Patients were more likely to achieve a PSA reduction ≥50% and ≥80% and had longer OS with prompt initiation of 177 Lu-PSMA-617. These results may help to guide treatment sequencing in clinical practice.