Immunosenescence is a progressive remodeling of immune functions associated with a decreased ability of the immune system to set up an efficient immune response, both innate and adaptive, with an i...

This study will address the prevalence of pre-therapeutic sarcopenia (PS) and its clinical impact during cancer treatment among adult cancer patients ≥ 18 years of age. A meta-analysis (MA) with random-effect models was performed via a MEDLINE systematic review, according to the PRISMA statement, focusing on articles published before February 2022 that reported observational studies and clinical trials on the prevalence of PS and the following outcomes: overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), post-operative complications (POC), toxicities (TOX), and nosocomial infections (NI). A total of 65,936 patients (mean age: 45.7–85 y) with various cancer sites and extensions and various treatment modes were included. Mainly defined by CT scan-based loss of muscle mass only, the pooled prevalence of PS was 38.0%. The pooled relative risks were 1.97, 1.76, 2.70, 1.47, and 1.76 for OS, PFS, POC, TOX, and NI, respectively (moderate-to-high heterogeneity, I²: 58–85%). Consensus-based algorithm definitions of sarcopenia, integrating low muscle mass and low levels of muscular strength and/or physical performance, lowered the prevalence (22%) and heterogeneity (I² < 50%). They also increased the predictive values with RRs ranging from 2.31 (OS) to 3.52 (POC). PS among cancer patients is prevalent and strongly associated with poor outcomes during cancer treatment, especially when considering a consensus-based algorithm approach.

PURPOSE: We report phase I trial results for pasritamig, a first-in-class, T-cell–engaging bispecific antibody targeting human kallikrein 2 (KLK2) expressed on the surface of prostate cancer (PC) cells. METHODS: Participants had metastatic castration-resistant PC and ≥1 prior therapy. Pasritamig was escalated from 0.5 mg to 2,000 mg for subcutaneous administration and from 150 mg to 900 mg for intravenous (IV) administration at dosing frequencies ranging from once every week to once every 6 weeks with different step-up dosing schedules. The primary objectives were to determine safety and the recommended phase II dose (RP2D) of pasritamig. Secondary objectives included preliminary assessment of antitumor activity. RESULTS: One hundred seventy-four participants received pasritamig, with a median of 4 prior lines of systemic therapy. Treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) occurred in 144 of 174 (82.8%) participants, with 17 of 174 (9.8%) experiencing grade ≥3 TRAEs. The RP2D was determined to be 3.5 mg (day 1), 18 mg (day 8), 300 mg (day 15), and then 300 mg IV once every 6 weeks. In the RP2D safety population (n = 45), infusion-related reactions (11/45, 24.4%), fatigue (7/45, 15.6%), cytokine release syndrome (CRS; 4/45, 8.9%, all grade 1), and lipase increase (4/45, 8.9%) were the most frequent TRAEs; all were grade 1 or 2. In the RP2D efficacy population (n = 33), median radiographic progression-free survival was 7.85 (95% CI, 2.89 to not estimable) months, and 14 of 33 (42.4%) participants achieved a ≥50% decrease from baseline in prostate-specific antigen. CONCLUSION: Pasritamig demonstrated a favorable safety profile with very low rates of CRS and could be safely administered in an outpatient setting. Preliminary antitumor activity demonstrated proof of concept for KLK2 as a target in PC, warranting further development of pasritamig.