Immune Biomarkers Predictive for Disease-Free Survival with Adjuvant Sunitinib in High-Risk Locoregional Renal Cell Carcinoma: From Randomized Phase III S-TRAC Study

Purpose: Adjuvant sunitinib therapy compared with placebo prolonged disease-free survival (DFS) in patients with locoregional high-risk renal cell carcinoma (RCC) in the S-TRAC trial (ClinicalTrials.gov number NCT00375674). A prospectively designed exploratory analysis of tissue biomarkers was conducted to identify predictors of treatment benefit.Experimental Design: Tissue blocks were used for immunohistochemistry (IHC) staining of programmed cell death ligand 1 (PD-L1), CD4, CD8, and CD68. DFS was compared between < versus ≥ median IHC parameter using the Kaplan-Meier method. For biomarkers with predictive potential, receiver operating characteristics curves were generated.Results: Baseline characteristics were similar in patients with (n = 191) and without (n = 419) IHC analysis. Among patients with IHC, longer DFS was observed in patients with tumor CD8⁺ T-cell density ≥ versus < median [median (95% CI), not reached (6.83-not reached) versus 3.47 years (1.73-not reached); hazard ratio (HR) 0.40 (95% CI, 0.20-0.81); P = 0.009] treated with sunitinib (n = 101), but not with placebo (n = 90). The sensitivity and specificity for CD8⁺ T-cell density in predicting DFS were 0.604 and 0.658, respectively. Shorter DFS was observed in placebo-treated patients with PD-L1⁺ versus PD-L1^- tumors (HR 1.75; P = 0.103). Among all patients with PD-L1⁺ tumors, DFS was numerically longer with sunitinib versus placebo (HR 0.58; P = 0.175).Conclusions: Greater CD8⁺ T-cell density in tumor tissue was associated with longer DFS with sunitinib but not placebo, suggesting predictive treatment effect utility. Further independent cohort validation studies are warranted. The prognostic value of PD-L1 expression in primary tumors from patients with high-risk nonmetastatic RCC should also be further explored. Clin Cancer Res; 24(7); 1554-61. ©2018 AACR.

Pooled analysis of stereotactic ablative radiotherapy for primary renal cell carcinoma: A report from the International Radiosurgery Oncology Consortium for Kidney (IROCK)

BACKGROUND

Stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR) is an emerging therapy for primary renal cell carcinoma. The authors assessed safety, efficacy, and survival in a multi-institutional setting. Outcomes between single-fraction and multifraction SABR were compared.

METHODS

Individual patient data sets from 9 International Radiosurgery Oncology Consortium for Kidney institutions across Germany, Australia, the United States, Canada, and Japan were pooled. Toxicities were recorded using Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events, version 4.0. Patient, tumor, and treatment characteristics were stratified according to the number of radiotherapy fractions (single vs multiple). Survival outcomes were examined using Kaplan-Meier estimates and Cox proportional-hazards regression.

RESULTS

Of 223 patients, 118 received single-fraction SABR, and 105 received multifraction SABR. The mean patient age was 72 years, and 69.5% of patients were men. There were 83 patients with grade 1 and 2 toxicity (35.6%) and 3 with grade 3 and 4 toxicities (1.3%). The rates of local control, cancer-specific survival, and progression-free survival were 97.8%, 95.7%, and 77.4%, respectively, at 2 years; and they were 97.8%, 91.9%, and 65.4%, respectively, at 4 years. On multivariable analysis, tumors with a larger maximum dimension and the receipt of multifraction SABR were associated with poorer progression-free survival (hazard ratio, 1.16 [P < .01] and 1.13 [P = .02], respectively) and poorer cancer-specific survival (hazard ratio, 1.28 [P < .01] and 1.33 [P = .01], respectively). There were no differences in local failure between the single-fraction cohort (n = 1) and the multifraction cohort (n = 2; P = .60). The mean ( ± standard deviation) estimated glomerular filtration rate at baseline was 59.9 ± 21.9 mL per minute, and it decreased by 5.5 ± 13.3 mL per minute (P < .01).

CONCLUSIONS

SABR is well tolerated and locally effective for treating patients who have primary renal cell carcinoma and has an acceptable impact on renal function. An interesting observation is that patients who receive single-fraction SABR appear to be less likely to progress distantly or to die of cancer. Cancer 2018;124:934-42. © 2017 American Cancer Society.

Updated European Association of Urology Guidelines: Recommendations for the Treatment of First-line Metastatic Clear Cell Renal Cancer

The randomised phase III clinical trial Checkmate-214 showed a survival superiority for the combination of ipilimumab and nivolumab when compared with the previous standard of care in first-line metastatic/advanced clear cell renal cell carcinoma (RCC) (Escudier B, Tannir NM, McDermott DF, et al. CheckMate 214: efficacy and safety of nivolumab plus ipilimumab vs sunitinib for treatment-naïve advanced or metastatic renal cell carcinoma, including IMDC risk and PD-L1 expression subgroups. LBA5, ESMO 2017, 2017). These results change the frontline standard of care for this disease and have implications for the selection of subsequent therapies. For this reason the European Association of Urology RCC guidelines have been updated. PATIENT SUMMARY: The European Association of Urology guidelines will be updated based on the results of the phase III Checkmate-214 clinical trial. The trial showed superior survival for a combination of ipilimumab and nivolumab (IN), compared with the previous standard of care, in intermediate- and poor-risk patients with metastatic clear cell renal cell carcinoma. When IN is not safe or feasible, alternative agents such as sunitinib, pazopanib, and cabozantinib should be considered. Furthermore, at present, the data from the trial are immature in favourable-risk patients. Therefore, sunitinib or pazopanib remains the favoured agent for this subgroup of patients.

Recommendations on managing lenvatinib and everolimus in patients with advanced or metastatic renal cell carcinoma

INTRODUCTION

There are several second-line treatment options for patients with renal cell carcinoma after first-line failure of a tyrosine kinase inhibitor, especially with the recent approvals of cabozantinib, nivolumab, and the lenvatinib plus everolimus combination. A lack of reliable biomarkers and an overall lack of prospective head-to-head comparisons make it a challenge to choose a second-line treatment in the clinic. Areas covered: In this review/meta-opinion, we describe the safety profile of the lenvatinib plus everolimus combination in renal cell carcinoma. The combination of lenvatinib plus everolimus has achieved the highest rates of objective responses and the longest progression free and overall survival in cross-comparison trials. At the same time, the safety profile of this combination, including the rate of total and severe adverse events, the percentage of dose reductions required, and the rate of treatment discontinuation, was less favorable compared with available monotherapy options, suggesting that better management could help to maximize the activity of this combination while protecting patients from undue harm. Expert opinion: Herein, we aim to postulate multidisciplinary recommendations on the advice to offer to patients and caregivers before starting treatment and how to manage the combination from the perspective of daily clinical practice.

Adjuvant Sunitinib for High-risk Renal Cell Carcinoma After Nephrectomy: Subgroup Analyses and Updated Overall Survival Results

BACKGROUND

Adjuvant sunitinib significantly improved disease-free survival (DFS) versus placebo in patients with locoregional renal cell carcinoma (RCC) at high risk of recurrence after nephrectomy (hazard ratio [HR] 0.76, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.59-0.98; p=0.03).

OBJECTIVE

To report the relationship between baseline factors and DFS, pattern of recurrence, and updated overall survival (OS).

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

Data for 615 patients randomized to sunitinib (n=309) or placebo (n=306) in the S-TRAC trial.

OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS

Subgroup DFS analyses by baseline risk factors were conducted using a Cox proportional hazards model. Baseline risk factors included: modified University of California Los Angeles integrated staging system criteria, age, gender, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (ECOG PS), weight, neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR), and Fuhrman grade.

RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS

Of 615 patients, 97 and 122 in the sunitinib and placebo arms developed metastatic disease, with the most common sites of distant recurrence being lung (40 and 49), lymph node (21 and 26), and liver (11 and 14), respectively. A benefit of adjuvant sunitinib over placebo was observed across subgroups, including: higher risk (T3, no or undetermined nodal involvement, Fuhrman grade ≥2, ECOG PS ≥1, T4 and/or nodal involvement; hazard ratio [HR] 0.74, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.55-0.99; p=0.04), NLR ≤3 (HR 0.72, 95% CI 0.54-0.95; p=0.02), and Fuhrman grade 3/4 (HR 0.73, 95% CI 0.55-0.98; p=0.04). All subgroup analyses were exploratory, and no adjustments for multiplicity were made. Median OS was not reached in either arm (HR 0.92, 95% CI 0.66-1.28; p=0.6); 67 and 74 patients died in the sunitinib and placebo arms, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

A benefit of adjuvant sunitinib over placebo was observed across subgroups. The results are consistent with the primary analysis, which showed a benefit for adjuvant sunitinib in patients at high risk of recurrent RCC after nephrectomy.

PATIENT SUMMARY

Most subgroups of patients at high risk of recurrent renal cell carcinoma after nephrectomy experienced a clinical benefit with adjuvant sunitinib.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00375674.

Adjuvant Weekly Girentuximab Following Nephrectomy for High-Risk Renal Cell Carcinoma: The ARISER Randomized Clinical Trial

Importance

Girentuximab is a chimeric monoclonal antibody that binds carbonic anhydrase IX, a cell surface glycoprotein ubiquitously expressed in clear cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC). Its safety and activity in phase 2 studies prompted investigation into its use as adjuvant monotherapy in participants with high-risk ccRCC.

Objective

To evaluate the safety and efficacy of adjuvant girentuximab on disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) in patients with localized completely resected high-risk ccRCC.

Design, Setting, and Participants

The ARISER trial (Adjuvant Rencarex Immunotherapy Phase 3 Trial to Study Efficacy in Nonmetastatic RCC) was a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 3 clinical trial that took place between June 10, 2004, and April 2, 2013, at 142 academic medical centers in 15 countries in North and South America and Europe. Eligible adult patients had undergone partial or radical nephrectomy for histologically confirmed ccRCC and fell into 1 of the following high-risk groups: pT3/pT4Nx/N0M0 or pTanyN+M0 or pT1b/pT2Nx/N0M0 with nuclear grade 3 or greater. Patients were assigned via central computerized double-blind 1:1 randomization to receive either a single loading dose of girentuximab, 50 mg (week 1), followed by weekly intravenous infusions of girentuximab, 20 mg (weeks 2-24), or placebo, stratified by risk group and region. The data were analyzed from March 31, 2012, to April 2, 2013.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Co-primary end points were DFS and OS, based on imaging studies assessed by independent radiological review committee. Secondary end points included safety, assessed as the rate and grade of adverse events.

Results

A total of 864 patients (66% male; median [interquartile range] age, 58 [51-65] years) were randomized to girentuximab (n = 433) or placebo (n = 431). Compared with placebo, participants treated with girentuximab had no statistically significant DFS (hazard ratio, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.79-1.18) or OS advantage (hazard ratio, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.74-1.32). Median DFS was 71.4 months (interquartile range, 3 months to not reached) for girentuximab and never reached for placebo group. Median OS was never reached regardless of treatment. Drug-related adverse events occurred in 185 patients (21.6%), reported comparably between arms. Serious adverse events occurred in 72 patients (8.4%), reported comparably between arms. One drug-related serious adverse event occurred in a patient receiving placebo.

Conclusions and Relevance

Girentuximab had no clinical benefit as adjuvant treatment for patients with high-risk ccRCC. The surprisingly long DFS and OS in these patients represent a challenge to adjuvant ccRCC drug development.

Trial Registration

clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00087022.

Abstract 1771: Phase 3 trial of adjuvant sunitinib in patients with high-risk renal cell carcinoma: exploratory molecular analysis of tumor biomarkers

Background: Adjuvant therapy with sunitinib (SU) compared with placebo (PBO) prolonged disease-free survival (DFS) in patients (pts) with loco-regional high-risk renal cell carcinoma (HR=0.76, 95% CI: 0.59-0.98; P=0.03; median[m] DFS, 6.8 vs 5.6 years). Here, we report the results of a retrospective exploratory molecular biomarker analysis using nephrectomy biospecimens from the S-TRAC trial.

Materials and Methods: Formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded tumor tissue blocks from patients who provided informed consent were used for immunohistochemistry (IHC) staining of PD-L1, CD4, CD8, and CD68. Biomarker quantification was done by automated image analysis of the regions of interest (ROI). The analysis algorithm utilized an immunoscore approach applied to ROI, reflecting assessment of both the center and invasive margin of tumors (for PD-L1 and CD8 staining). DFS was compared between biomarker stratum by &lt; median vs ≥ median values of a particular IHC parameter using Kaplan-Meier (K-M) analysis. Receiver Operating Characteristics (ROC) curves were generated to further assess the potential clinical utility of biomarkers for which significant (P &lt; 0.05) results were obtained in K-M analysis.

Results: In total, 191/615 (101, SU and 90, PBO) pts in the intent-to-treat population were included for IHC analysis. Baseline characteristics were similar in the subpopulations with and without IHC data. Shorter DFS was observed in the PBO group for pts with PD-L1+ vs PD-L1- tumors, although not statistically significant (HR=1.75; 95% CI: 0.89-3.46; P=0.103). In pts with PD-L1+ tumors, DFS was numerically longer for SU vs PBO (mDFS=6.17 vs 2.67 years) (HR=0.58; 95% CI: 0.26-1.29; P=0.175). In the SU group, pts with CD8+ T-cell density ≥ median (cutoff=269.5 CD8+ cells/mm2) had longer DFS (mDFS=not reached [NR]; 95% CI: 6.83-NR) than pts with CD8+ T-cell density &lt; median (mDFS=3.47 years; 95% CI: 1.73-NR), and the difference was statistically significant (HR=0.40, 95% CI: 0.20-0.81; P=0.009), while CD8+ T-cell density showed no significant difference in DFS for PBO pts (HR=0.80, 95% CI: 0.42-1.50; P=0.484). The sensitivity and specificity for CD8+ T-cell density in predicting DFS were 0.604 and 0.658, respectively, and the optimal cutoff was 222.22 cells/mm2 with an area under ROC curve of 0.622.

Conclusions: Increased density of CD8+ T-cells in tumor tissue was associated with longer DFS in SU-randomized pts but not PBO, suggesting this may be predictive of treatment effect. Further validation in an independent cohort is warranted. The prognostic value of PD-L1 expression in primary tumors from patients with high-risk non-metastatic RCC should be further explored.

Citation Format: Daniel J. George, Jean-Francois Martini, Yen-Hwa Chang, Michael Staehler, Jan Breza, Jean-Jacques Patard, Robert J. Motzer, Ahmed Magheli, Bernard Escudier, Giacomo Carteni, Paola Gerletti, Sherry Li, Michelle Casey, Brigitte Laguerre, Hardev S. Pandha, Allan J. Pantuck, Anup Patel, Maria Lechuga, Alain Ravaud. Phase 3 trial of adjuvant sunitinib in patients with high-risk renal cell carcinoma: exploratory molecular analysis of tumor biomarkers [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2017; 2017 Apr 1-5; Washington, DC. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2017;77(13 Suppl):Abstract nr 1771. doi:10.1158/1538-7445.AM2017-1771

Characterization of histological subtypes of clear cell renal cell carcinoma using contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS)

INTRODUCTION

The aim of this study was to analyze the histological subtypes of clear cell renal cell carcinoma (RCC) examined by means of contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) and a second generation blood pool agent (SonoVue®, Bracco, Milan, Italy) during the pre-operative phase.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

29 patients with histologically proven subtypes of clear cell RCC were examined. A total of three patients were diagnosed with highly differentiated clear cell RCC, 21 out of 29 cases with moderately differentiated clear cell RCC and five out of 29 patients had insufficiently differentiated clear cell RCC. An experienced radiologist examined the patients with CEUS. The following parameters were analyzed: maximum signal intensity (PEAK), time elapsed until PEAK is reached (MTT), local blood flow (RBF), area under the time intensity curve (AUC) and the signal intensity (SI) during the course of time. For the groups all comparisons are made based on healthy renal parenchyma.

RESULTS

In the clear cell RCC significant differences (significance level p < 0.05) between cancerous tissue and the healthy renal parenchyma were noticed in all four parameters. Therefore, the clear cell RCC stands out due to its reduced blood volume. However, it reached the PEAK reading relatively rapidly and its signal intensity was always lower than that of the healthy renal parenchyma. In the arterial phase retarded absorption of the contrast agent was observed, followed by fast washing out of the contrast agent bubbles.In all three histological subgroups no significant differences were noticed in PEAK and SI. However, the diagrams showed the possible bias, that the group of the insufficiently differentiated clear cell RCC had the highest PEAK-value and the highest signal intensity when compared with highly and moderately differentiated clear cell RCC.

CONCLUSION

Our study suggests that CEUS may be an additional tool for non-invasive characterisation and differentiation of the three histological subtypes of clear cell RCC. Furthermore, it seems to have an additional diagnostic value in daily clinical.

Parametric imaging of clear cell and papillary renal cell carcinoma using contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS)

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to analyse clear cell and papillary renal cell carcinoma (RCC) examined with contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) and a second generation blood pool agent (SonoVue®, Bracco, Milan, Italy) before clinical intervention.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A total of 41 patients with histologically proven subtypes of RCC were examined. 29 patients had a clear cell RCC and 12 patients showed a papillary RCC. Average size in the clear cell RCC group was 6.07 cm and 1.88 cm in the papillary RCC group. An experienced radiologist examined all patients with CEUS. The following parameters were analysed: maximum signal intensity (PEAK), time elapsed until PEAK is reached (MTT), local blood flow (RBF), area under the time intensity curve (AUC) and the signal intensity (SI) during the course of time. For both groups all comparisons were made based on healthy renal parenchyma.

RESULTS

In the clear cell RCC significant differences (significance level p < 0.05) between cancerous tissue and the healthy renal parenchyma were noticed in all four parameters. The clear cell RCC showed a significant reduced blood volume. It reached the PEAK reading relatively rapidly and its signal intensity was always lower than that of the healthy renal parenchyma. In the arterial phase retarded absorption of the contrast agent was observed, followed by fast washing out of the contrast agent bubbles.In the papillary RCC group, significant findings as to PEAK and RBF as well as a slightly significant difference as to AUC were recorded. The papillary RCC had a lower blood supply and reached its PEAK reading later. Its signal intensity was also reduced. The signal intensity of papillary NCC was significantly lower compared with clear cell RCC; absorption and washing out of the contrast agent was delayed.

CONCLUSION

CEUS seems to be an useful additional method to clinically differentiate between clear cell and papillary RCC. In daily clinical use, patients with contraindication for other imaging methods, especially the magnetic resonance imaging, might particularly benefit from this method.

Updated European Association of Urology Guidelines Regarding Adjuvant Therapy for Renal Cell Carcinoma

The European Association of Urology Renal Cell Carcinoma (RCC) guidelines panel updated their recommendation on adjuvant therapy in unfavourable, clinically nonmetastatic RCC following the recently reported results of a second randomised controlled phase 3 trial comparing 1-yr sunitinib to placebo for high-risk RCC after nephrectomy (S-TRAC). On the basis of conflicting results from the two available studies, the panel rated the quality of the evidence, the harm-to-benefit ratio, patient preferences, and costs. Finally, the panel, including representatives from a patient advocate group (International Kidney Cancer Coalition) voted and reached a consensus to not recommend adjuvant therapy with sunitinib for patients with high-risk RCC after nephrectomy.

PATIENT SUMMARY

In two studies, sunitinib was given for 1 yr and compared to no active treatment (placebo) in patients who had their kidney tumour removed and who had a high risk of cancer coming back after surgery. Although one study demonstrated that 1 yr of sunitinib therapy resulted in a 1.2-yr longer time before the disease recurred, the other study did not show a benefit and it has not been shown that patients live longer. Despite having been diagnosed with high-risk disease, many patients remain without recurrence, and the side effects of sunitinib are high. Therefore, the panel members, including patient representatives, do not recommend sunitinib after tumour removal in these patients.

Adjuvant Sunitinib in High-Risk Renal-Cell Carcinoma after Nephrectomy

BACKGROUND

Sunitinib, a vascular endothelial growth factor pathway inhibitor, is an effective treatment for metastatic renal-cell carcinoma. We sought to determine the efficacy and safety of sunitinib in patients with locoregional renal-cell carcinoma at high risk for tumor recurrence after nephrectomy.

METHODS

In this randomized, double-blind, phase 3 trial, we assigned 615 patients with locoregional, high-risk clear-cell renal-cell carcinoma to receive either sunitinib (50 mg per day) or placebo on a 4-weeks-on, 2-weeks-off schedule for 1 year or until disease recurrence, unacceptable toxicity, or consent withdrawal. The primary end point was disease-free survival, according to blinded independent central review. Secondary end points included investigator-assessed disease-free survival, overall survival, and safety.

RESULTS

The median duration of disease-free survival was 6.8 years (95% confidence interval [CI], 5.8 to not reached) in the sunitinib group and 5.6 years (95% CI, 3.8 to 6.6) in the placebo group (hazard ratio, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.59 to 0.98; P=0.03). Overall survival data were not mature at the time of data cutoff. Dose reductions because of adverse events were more frequent in the sunitinib group than in the placebo group (34.3% vs. 2%), as were dose interruptions (46.4% vs. 13.2%) and discontinuations (28.1% vs. 5.6%). Grade 3 or 4 adverse events were more frequent in the sunitinib group (48.4% for grade 3 events and 12.1% for grade 4 events) than in the placebo group (15.8% and 3.6%, respectively). There was a similar incidence of serious adverse events in the two groups (21.9% for sunitinib vs. 17.1% for placebo); no deaths were attributed to toxic effects.

CONCLUSIONS

Among patients with locoregional clear-cell renal-cell carcinoma at high risk for tumor recurrence after nephrectomy, the median duration of disease-free survival was significantly longer in the sunitinib group than in the placebo group, at a cost of a higher rate of toxic events. (Funded by Pfizer; S-TRAC ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00375674 .).

Dual energy CT allows for improved characterization of response to antiangiogenic treatment in patients with metastatic renal cell cancer

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the potential role of dual energy CT (DECT) to visualize antiangiogenic treatment effects in patients with metastatic renal cell cancer (mRCC) while treated with tyrosine-kinase inhibitors (TKI).

METHODS

26 patients with mRCC underwent baseline and follow-up single-phase abdominal contrast enhanced DECT scans. Scans were performed immediately before and 10 weeks after start of treatment with TKI. Virtual non-enhanced (VNE) and colour coded iodine images were generated. 44 metastases were measured at the two time points. Hounsfield unit (HU) values for VNE and iodine density (ID) as well as iodine content (IC) in mg/ml of tissue were derived. These values were compared to the venous phase DECT density (CTD) of the lesions. Values before and after treatment were compared using a paired Student's t test.

RESULTS

Between baseline and follow up, mean CTD and DECT-derived ID both showed a significant reduction (p < 0.005). The relative reduction measured in percent was significantly greater for ID than for CTD (49.8 ± 36,3 % vs. 29.5 ± 20.8 %, p < 0.005). IC was also significantly reduced under antiangiogenic treatment (p < 0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

Dual energy CT-based quantification of iodine content of mRCC metastases allows for significantly more sensitive and reproducible detection of antiangiogenic treatment effects.

KEY POINTS

• A sign of tumour response to antiangiogenic treatment is reduced tumour perfusion. • DECT allows visualizing iodine uptake, which serves as a marker for vascularization. • More sensitive detection of antiangiogenic treatment effects in mRCC is possible.