Purpose: Erdafitinib is the only FDA-approved targeted therapy for FGFR2/3-altered metastatic urothelial cancer. We characterized the genetic landscape of FGFR-altered urothelial carcinoma and real-world clinical outcomes with erdafitinib, including on-treatment genomic evolution. Experimental Design: Prospectively collected clinical data were integrated with institutional genomic data to define the landscape of FGFR2/3-altered urothelial carcinoma. To identify mechanisms of erdafitinib resistance, a subset of patients underwent prospective cell-free (cf) DNA assessment. Results: FGFR3 alterations predictive of erdafitinib sensitivity were identified in 39% (199/504) of patients with non-muscle invasive, 14% (75/526) with muscle-invasive, 43% (81/187) with localized upper tract, and 26% (59/228) with metastatic specimens. One patient had a potentially sensitizing FGFR2 fusion. Among 27 FGFR3-altered cases with a primary tumor and metachronous metastasis, 7 paired specimens (26%) displayed discordant FGFR3 status. Erdafitinib achieved a response rate of 40% but median progression-free and overall survival of only 2.8 and 6.6 months, respectively (n = 32). Dose reductions (38%, 12/32) and interruptions (50%, 16/32) were common. Putative resistance mutations detected in cfDNA involved TP53 (n = 5), AKT1 (n = 1), and second-site FGFR3 mutations (n = 2). Conclusions: FGFR3 mutations are common in urothelial carcinoma, whereas FGFR2 alterations are rare. Discordance of FGFR3 mutational status between primary and metastatic tumors occurs frequently and raises concern over sequencing archival primary tumors to guide patient selection for erdafitinib therapy. Erdafitinib responses were typically brief and dosing was limited by toxicity. FGFR3, AKT1, and TP53 mutations detected in cfDNA represent putative mechanisms of acquired erdafitinib resistance.

Immune-modulating drugs have recently been introduced to the second-line setting of advanced bladder cancer. Pembrolizumab increases overall survival and is associated with less toxicity compared with chemotherapy in this setting based on the Keynote 045 study. The high cost of immunotherapy necessitates an assessment of its value by considering both efficacy and cost. To estimate the cost-effectiveness of pembrolizumab for the second-line treatment of advanced bladder cancer from the perspective of payers in multiple countries. We developed a Markov model to compare the cost and effectiveness of pembrolizumab with those of chemotherapy in the second-line treatment of advanced bladder cancer based on the Keynote 045 study. Drug costs were acquired for the United States (US), United Kingdom (UK), Canada, and Australia. All costs were converted from local currency to US dollars at the exchange rates in September 2017. Health outcomes were measured in quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). Pembrolizumab generated a gain of 0.36-0.37 QALYs compared with chemotherapy. Our analysis established the following incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) for pembrolizumab versus chemotherapy in second-line advanced bladder cancer treatment: US $122 557/QALY; UK $91 995/QALY; Canada $90 099/QALY; and Australia $99 966/QALY. The willingness-to-pay (WTP) thresholds per QALY are considered to be around 100 000-150 000 US dollars for the US, 20 000-50 000 pounds for the UK (US$25 000-65 000), 20 000-100 000 CAD for Canada (US$16 000-80 000), and 40 000-75 000 AUD for Australia (US$32 000-60 000). Cost-effectiveness and WTP thresholds vary between countries. Compared with the other countries examined, US drug prices were found to be the highest, leading to the highest ICER. With standard WTP thresholds, pembrolizumab may be considered cost-effective in the US but not in the other countries examined. This article assessed the cost-effectiveness of pembrolizumab for the treatment of patients with metastatic bladder cancer who had previously failed one treatment regimen. It would cost $122 557 in the United States, $91 995 in the United Kingdom, $90 099 in Canada, and $99 966 in Australia to gain one quality-adjusted life-year with pembrolizumab versus chemotherapy in these patients, which may be considered cost-effective only in the United States because of the differences in willingness-to-pay thresholds.

Stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) is an emerging modality for definitive treatment of Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). This retrospective study included all early stage HCC patients who were not candidates for primary resection and/or local therapy, treated with SBRT between 11/2011 and 1/2016. Twenty-three patients were included. The median age was 62 years; 70% males; 30% females; 70% viral hepatitis carriers; 100% cirrhotic; 13 Child Pugh [CP]-A and 10 [CP]-B. The median tumor volume was 12.7cm3 (range, 2.2–53.6 cm3). Treatment was well tolerated. With the exception of one patient who developed RILD, no other patient had significant changes in 12 weeks of laboratory follow-up. SBRT was a bridge to transplantation in 16 patients and 11 were transplanted.. No surgical difficulties or complications were reported following SBRT, and none of the transplanted patients had local progression before transplantation. The median prescribed dose to the tumor was 54Gy (range, 30-54Gy), the median dose to the uninvolved liver was 6.0Gy(range, 1.6–12.6Gy). With a median follow-up time of 12 months, the median overall-survival for the 11 transplanted patients was not reached (range, 2.0–53.7+ months) and was 23 months for the 12 non-transplanted patients. The median progression-free survival for the transplanted patients was not reached (54+ months) and was 14.0 months for the non-transplanted patients. There was no SBRT-related mortality. Liver explant post SBRT revealed pathological complete response in 3(27.3%), pathological partial response in 6(54.5%), and pathological stable disease in 2(18.2%) tumors. SBRT is safe and effective and can be used as a bridge to transplantation without comprising the surgical procedure.

Our objective was to describe a group of ALS patients who underwent percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) insertion, with emphasis on the respiratory function, by comparing patients with forced vital capacity (FVC) > 30% versus FVC ≤ 30%, and the effect of respiratory dysfunction on the perioperative complication rate and survival. Thirty consecutive ALS patients in whom FVC status was known underwent PEG insertion at our centre. Twenty of them had FVC > 30% (50.1% ± 20) at the time of the procedure, and 10 had FVC ≤ 30% (20.1% ± 7). Demographic and clinical data were reviewed in each patient. Results showed that all patients had successful PEG insertion without any complications. There was no statistically significant difference between the two FVC groups regarding survival after the date of PEG insertion. In conclusion, in this relatively small patient sample there was no difference in complication rate and survival after PEG insertion between patients with poor respiratory function (FVC ≤ 30%) at the time of the procedure and patients with better respiratory function (FVC > 30%). Therefore, according to our data, PEG insertion may be regarded as safe even in patients with low FVC and should be offered even to patients with respiratory dysfunction.

Background: The treatment paradigm of advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC) has changed rapidly in recent years. In first-line treatment of intermediate- to poor-risk patients, the CheckMate 214 study demonstrated a significant survival advantage for nivolumab and ipilimumab versus sunitinib. The high cost of combined immune-modulating agents warrants an understanding of the combination's value by considering both efficacy and cost. The objective of this study was to estimate the cost-effectiveness of nivolumab and ipilimumab compared with sunitinib for first-line treatment of intermediate- to poor-risk advanced RCC from the U.S. payer perspective.Materials and Methods: A Markov model was developed to compare the costs and effectiveness of nivolumab and ipilimumab with those of sunitinib in the first-line treatment of intermediate- to poor-risk advanced RCC. Health outcomes were measured in life-years and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). Drug costs were based on Medicare reimbursement rates in 2017. We extrapolated survival beyond the trial closure using Weibull distribution. Model robustness was addressed in univariable and probabilistic sensitivity analyses.Results: The total mean cost per-patient of nivolumab and ipilimumab versus sunitinib was $292,308 and $169,287, respectfully. Nivolumab and ipilimumab generated a gain of 0.978 QALYs over sunitinib. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) for nivolumab and ipilimumab was $125,739/QALY versus sunitinib.Conclusion: Our analysis established that the base case ICER in the model for nivolumab and ipilimumab versus sunitinib is below what some would consider the upper limit of the theoretical willingness-to-pay threshold in the U.S. ($150,000/QALY) and is thus estimated to be cost-effective.Implications for Practice: This article assessed the cost-effectiveness of nivolumab and ipilimumab versus sunitinib for treatment of patients with intermediate- to poor-risk metastatic kidney cancer, from the U.S. payer perspective. It would cost $125,739 to gain 1 quality-adjusted life-year with nivolumab and ipilimumab versus sunitinib in these patients.