Background: Treatment options for penile squamous cell carcinoma (PeCa) are limited. We sought to investigate clinical outcomes and safety profiles of patients with PeCa receiving immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs). Methods: This retrospective study included patients with locally advanced or metastatic PeCa receiving ICIs during 2015-2022 across 24 centers in the United States, Europe, and Asia. Overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were estimated by the Kaplan-Meier method. Objective response rates (ORRs) were determined per RECIST 1.1 criteria. Treatment-related adverse events (trAEs) were graded per the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events v5.0. Two-sided statistical tests were used for comparisons. Results: Among 92 patients, 8 were Asian (8.7%), 6 (6.5%) were Black, and 24 (29%) were Hispanic/Latinx. Median age was 62 (inter-quartile range: 53 to 70) years. 83 (90%) had metastatic PeCa, and 74 (80%) received ≥2nd line treatment. Most patients received pembrolizumab monotherapy (n = 26, 28%), combination nivolumab/ipilimumab +/- multi-targeted tyrosine kinase inhibitors (n = 23, 25%), nivolumab (n = 16, 17%) or cemiplimab (n = 15, 16%) monotherapies. Median OS and PFS were 9.8 (95% CI: 7.7-12.8) months and 3.2 (95% CI: 2.5-4.2) months, respectively. ORR was 13% (n = 11/85) in the overall cohort and 35% (n = 7/20) in patients with lymph node-only metastases. Visceral metastases, ECOG performance status ≥1, and higher Neutrophil/Lymphocyte ratio (NLR) were associated with worse OS. TrAEs occurred in 29% (n = 27) and 9.8% (n = 9) were grade ≥3. Conclusions: ICIs are active in a subset of patients with PeCa. Future translational studies are warranted to identify patients more likely to derive clinical benefit from ICIs.

Safety and efficacy of immune checkpoint inhibitors in advanced penile cancer: report from the Global Society of Rare Genitourinary Tumors

Vincenzi, Bruno;
2023-01-01

Abstract

Background: Treatment options for penile squamous cell carcinoma (PeCa) are limited. We sought to investigate clinical outcomes and safety profiles of patients with PeCa receiving immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs). Methods: This retrospective study included patients with locally advanced or metastatic PeCa receiving ICIs during 2015-2022 across 24 centers in the United States, Europe, and Asia. Overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were estimated by the Kaplan-Meier method. Objective response rates (ORRs) were determined per RECIST 1.1 criteria. Treatment-related adverse events (trAEs) were graded per the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events v5.0. Two-sided statistical tests were used for comparisons. Results: Among 92 patients, 8 were Asian (8.7%), 6 (6.5%) were Black, and 24 (29%) were Hispanic/Latinx. Median age was 62 (inter-quartile range: 53 to 70) years. 83 (90%) had metastatic PeCa, and 74 (80%) received ≥2nd line treatment. Most patients received pembrolizumab monotherapy (n = 26, 28%), combination nivolumab/ipilimumab +/- multi-targeted tyrosine kinase inhibitors (n = 23, 25%), nivolumab (n = 16, 17%) or cemiplimab (n = 15, 16%) monotherapies. Median OS and PFS were 9.8 (95% CI: 7.7-12.8) months and 3.2 (95% CI: 2.5-4.2) months, respectively. ORR was 13% (n = 11/85) in the overall cohort and 35% (n = 7/20) in patients with lymph node-only metastases. Visceral metastases, ECOG performance status ≥1, and higher Neutrophil/Lymphocyte ratio (NLR) were associated with worse OS. TrAEs occurred in 29% (n = 27) and 9.8% (n = 9) were grade ≥3. Conclusions: ICIs are active in a subset of patients with PeCa. Future translational studies are warranted to identify patients more likely to derive clinical benefit from ICIs.
File in questo prodotto:
Non ci sono file associati a questo prodotto.

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12610/75584
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? 0
  • Scopus ND
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? ND
social impact