Julien Taïeb, MD, PhD, of Paris Descartes University, discusses phase II results from the SAMCO-PRODIGE 54 trial, which shows the efficacy and safety of avelumab in the second-line treatment of patients with deficient DNA mismatch–repair microsatellite-instability metastatic colorectal cancer. According to Dr. Taïeb, the study indirectly suggests this population should be treated as soon as possible with an immune checkpoint inhibitor (Abstract LBA23).
Charles Swanton, PhD, of The Francis Crick Institute, discusses a newly discovered mechanism of action for air pollution–induced non–small cell lung cancer in which particles linked to climate change appear to promote cancerous changes. The finding might pave the way for new potential approaches to lung cancer prevention and treatment (Abstract LBA1).
Thomas Powles, MD, PhD, of Barts Health NHS Trust, Queen Mary University of London, and Christopher Sweeney, MBBS, of Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, discuss two important phase III studies on renal cell cancer (RCC) presented at ESMO 2022: IMmotion010, which examined the efficacy and safety of atezolizumab vs placebo as adjuvant therapy in patients with RCC at increased risk of recurrence after nephrectomy; and CheckMate 914, which compared nivolumab monotherapy or nivolumab combined with ipilimumab vs placebo in patients with localized disease who underwent radical or partial nephrectomy and who are at high risk of relapse. (Abstract LBA4 & LBA66).
Marinde J.G. Bond, PhD Candidate, of the University Medical Center, Utrecht, discusses phase III findings from the CAIRO5 study of the Dutch Colorectal Cancer Group, the first such trial in defined subgroups of patients with initially unresectable colorectal cancer liver metastases and left-sided and RAS/BRAF V600E wild-type tumor. The study compared FOLFOX/FOLFIRI plus either bevacizumab or panitumumab (Abstract LBA21).
Neal D. Shore, MD, of Carolina Urologic Research Center/Genesis Care, discusses new data from the ENACT trial, which showed that patients with prostate cancer and the RNA biomarkers PAM50 and AR-A were likely to have better outcomes with enzalutamide treatment. The results suggest that such RNA biomarkers may help to identify patients who may benefit from enzalutamide treatment compared with active surveillance (Abstract 1385P).