Purpose: The pemetrexed/platinum agent combination represents the standard of care in first-line treatment for malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM). However, there are no established indicators of responsiveness that can be used to optimize the treatment. This retrospective study aimed to assess the role of excision repair cross-complementing group-1 (ERCC1) and thymidylate synthase (TS) in tumors, and correlate expression levels and polymorphisms of these key determinants of drug activity with the outcome of MPM patients treated with carboplatin/pemetrexed in first-line setting.Experimental design: Analysis of TS and ERCC1 polymorphisms, mRNA and protein expression was done by PCR and immunohistochemistry [with the H-score (histologic score)] in tumor specimens from 126 MPM patients, including 99 carboplatin-/pemetrexed-treated patients.Results: A significant correlation between low TS protein expression and disease control (DC) to carboplatin/pemetrexed therapy (P ¼ 0.027), longer progression-free survival (PFS; P ¼ 0.017), and longer overall survival (OS; P ¼ 0.022) was found when patients were categorized according to median H-score. However, patients with the higher tertile of TS mRNA expression correlated with higher risk of developing progressive disease (P ¼ 0.022), shorter PFS (P < 0.001), and shorter OS (P < 0.001). At multivariate analysis, the higher tertile of TS mRNA level and TS H-score confirmed their independent prognostic role for DC, PFS, and OS. No significant associations were found among ERCC1 protein expression, TS and ERCC1 polymorphisms, and clinical outcome.Conclusions: In our series of carboplatin-/pemetrexed-treated MPM patients, low TS protein and mRNA levels were significantly associated to DC, improved PFS, and OS. Prospective trials for the validation of the prognostic/predictive role of TS in MPM patients treated with pemetrexed-based regimens are warranted.
Background: Despite the survival advantage, not all metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) patients achieve a long-term benefit from immunotherapy. Moreover, the identification of prognostic biomarkers is still an unmet clinical need. Methods: This multicenter retrospective study investigated the prognostic role of peripheral-blood inflammatory indices and clinical factors to develop a novel prognostic score in mRCC patients receiving at least second-line nivolumab. The complete blood count before the first cycle of therapy was assessed by calculating neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR), derived NLR (dNLR), lymphocyte-to-monocyte ratio (LMR), platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio (PLR), systemic inflammation index (SII), and systemic inflammation response index (SIRI). Clinical factors included pre-treatment International Metastatic RCC Database Consortium (IMDC) score, line of therapy, and metastatic sites. Results: From October 2015 to November 2019, 571 mRCC patients received nivolumab as second- and further-line treatment in 69% and 31% of cases. In univariable and multivariable analyses all inflammatory indices, IMDC score, and bone metastases significantly correlated with overall survival (OS). The multivariable model with NLR, IMDC score, and bone metastases had the highest c-index (0.697) and was chosen for the developing of the score (Schneeweiss scoring system). After internal validation (bootstrap re-sampling), the final index (Meet-URO score) composed by NLR, IMDC score, and bone metastases had a c-index of 0.691. It identified five categories with distinctive OSs: group 1 (median OS – mOS = not reached), group 2 (mOS = 43.9 months), group 3 (mOS = 22.4 months), group 4 (mOS = 10.3 months), and group 5 (mOS = 3.2 months). Moreover, the Meet-URO score allowed for a fine risk-stratification across all three IMDC groups. Conclusion: The Meet-URO score allowed for the accurate stratification of pretreated mRCC patients receiving nivolumab and is easily applicable for clinical practice at no additional cost. Future steps include its external validation, the assessment of its predictivity, and its application to first-line combinations.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.