Background Labelled with lutetium-177, the urea-based small molecules PSMA I&T and PSMA-617 are the two agents most frequently used for radioligand therapy (RLT) in patients with advanced metastatic castration-resistant and prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) expressing prostate cancer (mCRPC). In this matched-pair analysis, we aimed to compare the toxicity and efficacy of both agents for PSMA-directed RLT. Materials and methods A total of 110 mCRPC patients from two centres were accrued, 55 individuals treated with [\(^{177}\)Lu]Lu-PSMA I&T, and a matched cohort of 55 patients treated with [\(^{177}\)Lu]Lu-PSMA-617. Matching criteria included age at the first cycle, Gleason score, prostate-specific antigen (PSA) values, and previous taxane-based chemotherapy. Using common terminology criteria for adverse events (CTCAE v. 5.0), toxicity profiles were investigated (including bone marrow and renal toxicity). Overall survival (OS) between both groups was compared. Results Toxicity assessment revealed grade III anaemia in a single patient (1.8%) for [\(^{177}\)Lu]Lu-PSMA I&T and five (9.1%) for [\(^{177}\)Lu]Lu-PSMA-617. In addition, one (1.9%) grade III thrombopenia for [\(^{177}\)Lu]Lu-PSMA-617 was recorded. Apart from that, no other grade III/IV toxicities were present. A median OS of 12 months for patients treated with [\(^{177}\)Lu]Lu-PSMA I&T did not differ significantly when compared to patients treated with [\(^{177}\)Lu]Lu-PSMA-617 (median OS, 13 months; P = 0.89). Conclusion In this matched-pair analysis of patients receiving one of the two agents most frequently applied for PSMA RLT, the rate of clinically relevant toxicities was low for both compounds. In addition, no relevant differences for OS were observed.

Die Gesellschaft altert und es erhalten vermehrt geriatrische Patienten radikale urologische Eingriffe. Alte Patienten haben im Rahmen derartiger Operationen ein erhöhtes Risiko sowohl für Komplikation, verschlechtertes funktionelles Outcome und Mortalität. Da alte Patienten dennoch von den Operationen profitieren können und diese auch weitgehend sicher bei diesen durchgeführt werden können, gilt es das geriatrische Patientenklientel in Bezug auf ihre Konstitution präoperativ genauer zu evaluieren. Die Erlanger Pilotstudie, an die sich vorliegende Arbeit anlehnt, hat dazu einen Index für Patienten ≥ 70 Jahre mit geplanter Prostatektomie, Nephrektomie und Zystektomie entwickelt, der sowohl das postoperative funktionelle Outcome nach 30 bzw. 180 Tagen, wie auch die Mortalität, nicht aber Komplikationen signifikant korrekt vorhersagen konnte. Ziel vorliegender Arbeit war es, die Prädiktivität des Erlangen Index hinsichtlich dieser vier Endpunkte in einer prospektiv angelegten Studie mit n=46 Patienten ≥ 65 Jahre am Universitätsklinikum Würzburg zu validieren. Es sollte dabei im Speziellen die in der Erlanger Pilotstudie erfasste gute Prädiktivität des Erlangen Index für das funktionelle Outcome nach 180 Tagen überprüft werden. In dieser Arbeit zeigte sich der Erlangen Index prädiktiv für das funktionelle Outcome nach 180 Tagen. Für die anderen Endpunkte konnte keine Prädiktivität des Erlangen Index festgestellt werden. Durch vorliegende Studie konnte die schlechte Prädiktion der Komplikationen durch den EI bestätigt werden. Anders als in der Pilotstudie war der Erlangen Index in vorliegender Studie zur Vorhersage des funktionellen Outcome nach 30 Tagen und der Mortalität nicht geeignet. Bei Betrachtung der Untergruppen nach Art der Operation zeigte der EI starke Korrelationen für die Prädiktion des funktionellen Outcome nach 180 Tagen in den Gruppen der Patienten nach Prostata- und Harnblasenoperation. Die Ergebnisse decken sich somit nur teilweise mit den Ergebnissen aus der Pilotstudie in Erlangen, in der der Erlangen Index bzgl. des funktionellen Outcome nach 180 Tagen die größte Korrelation in der Untergruppe der Patienten nach Nephrektomie zeigte. Der Index erwies sich als schnell durchführbares Assessment, das wenig Personal erfordert. Es ist weiter zu prüfen, ob sich durch Anwendung dieses Assessment tatsächlich Änderungen im klinischen Therapieregime ergeben bzw. ob sich die Modifizierungen der Therapie auch in einem verbesserten Outcome der Patienten auswirken.

Background Radioligand therapy (RLT) with \(^{177}\)Lu-labeled prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) ligands is associated with prolonged overall survival (OS) in patients with advanced, metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). A substantial number of patients, however, are prone to treatment failure. We aimed to determine clinical baseline characteristics to predict OS in patients receiving [\(^{177}\)Lu]Lu-PSMA I&T RLT in a long-term follow-up. Materials and methods Ninety-two mCRPC patients treated with [\(^{177}\)Lu]Lu-PSMA I&T with a follow-up of at least 18 months were retrospectively identified. Multivariable Cox regression analyses were performed for various baseline characteristics, including laboratory values, Gleason score, age, prior therapies, and time interval between initial diagnosis and first treatment cycle (interval\(_{Diagnosis-RLT}\), per 12 months). Cutoff values for significant predictors were determined using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis. ROC-derived thresholds were then applied to Kaplan–Meier analyses. Results Baseline C-reactive protein (CRP; hazard ratio [HR], 1.10, 95% CI 1.02–1.18; P = 0.01), lactate dehydrogenase (LDH; HR, 1.07, 95% CI 1.01–1.11; P = 0.01), aspartate aminotransferase (AST; HR, 1.16, 95% CI 1.06–1.26; P = 0.001), and interval\(_{Diagnosis-RLT}\) (HR, 0.95, 95% CI 0.91–0.99; P = 0.02) were identified as independent prognostic factors for OS. The following respective ROC-based thresholds were determined: CRP, 0.98 mg/dl (area under the curve [AUC], 0.80); LDH, 276.5 U/l (AUC, 0.83); AST, 26.95 U/l (AUC, 0.73); and interval\(_{Diagnosis-RLT}\), 43.5 months (AUC, 0.68; P < 0.01, respectively). Respective Kaplan–Meier analyses demonstrated a significantly longer median OS of patients with lower CRP, lower LDH, and lower AST, as well as prolonged interval\(_{Diagnosis-RLT}\) (P ≤ 0.01, respectively). Conclusion In mCRPC patients treated with [\(^{177}\)Lu]Lu-PSMA I&T, baseline CRP, LDH, AST, and time interval until RLT initiation (thereby reflecting a possible indicator for tumor aggressiveness) are independently associated with survival. Our findings are in line with previous findings on [\(^{177}\)Lu]Lu-PSMA-617, and we believe that these clinical baseline characteristics may support the nuclear medicine specialist to identify long-term survivors.

(1) Background: Clear cell renal cell carcinoma extending into the inferior vena cava (ccRCC\(^{IVC}\)) represents a clinical high-risk setting. However, there is substantial heterogeneity within this patient subgroup regarding survival outcomes. Previously, members of our group developed a microRNA(miR)-based risk classifier — containing miR-21-5p, miR-126-3p and miR-221-3p expression — which significantly predicted the cancer-specific survival (CSS) of ccRCC\(^{IVC}\) patients. (2) Methods: Examining a single-center cohort of tumor tissue from n = 56 patients with ccRCC\(^{IVC}\), we measured the expression levels of miR-21, miR-126, and miR-221 using qRT-PCR. The prognostic impact of clinicopathological parameters and miR expression were investigated via single-variable and multivariable Cox regression. Referring to the previously established risk classifier, we performed Kaplan–Meier analyses for single miR expression levels and the combined risk classifier. Cut-off values and weights within the risk classifier were taken from the previous study. (3) Results: miR-21 and miR-126 expression were significantly associated with lymphonodal status at the time of surgery, the development of metastasis during follow-up, and cancer-related death. In Kaplan–Meier analyses, miR-21 and miR-126 significantly impacted CSS in our cohort. Moreover, applying the miR-based risk classifier significantly stratified ccRCC\(^{IVC}\) according to CSS. (4) Conclusions: In our retrospective analysis, we successfully validated the miR-based risk classifier within an independent ccRCC\(^{IVC}\) cohort.

At the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, patients with primary and secondary immune disorders — including patients suffering from cancer — were generally regarded as a high-risk population in terms of COVID-19 disease severity and mortality. By now, scientific evidence indicates that there is substantial heterogeneity regarding the vulnerability towards COVID-19 in patients with immune disorders. In this review, we aimed to summarize the current knowledge about the effect of coexistent immune disorders on COVID-19 disease severity and vaccination response. In this context, we also regarded cancer as a secondary immune disorder. While patients with hematological malignancies displayed lower seroconversion rates after vaccination in some studies, a majority of cancer patients’ risk factors for severe COVID-19 disease were either inherent (such as metastatic or progressive disease) or comparable to the general population (age, male gender and comorbidities such as kidney or liver disease). A deeper understanding is needed to better define patient subgroups at a higher risk for severe COVID-19 disease courses. At the same time, immune disorders as functional disease models offer further insights into the role of specific immune cells and cytokines when orchestrating the immune response towards SARS-CoV-2 infection. Longitudinal serological studies are urgently needed to determine the extent and the duration of SARS-CoV-2 immunity in the general population, as well as immune-compromised and oncological patients.