Radiotherapy for renal-cell carcinoma

"Hit the primary": A paradigm shift in the treatment of metastatic prostate cancer?

Patients with metastatic prostate cancer (PC) represent a heterogeneous group with survival rates varying between 13 and 75 months. The current standard treatment in this setting is hormonal therapy, with or without docetaxel-based chemotherapy. In the era of individualized medicine, however, maximizing treatment options, especially in long-term surviving patients with limited disease burden, is of capital importance. Emerging data, mainly from retrospective surgical series, show survival benefits in men diagnosed with metastatic PC following definitive therapy for the prostate. Whether the irradiation of primary tumor in a metastatic disease might improve the therapeutic ratio in association with systemic treatments remains investigational. In this scenario, modern radiation therapy (RT) can play a significant role owing to its intrinsic capability to act as a more general immune response modifier, as well as to the potentially better toxicity profile compared to surgery. Preclinical data, clinical experience, and challenges in local treatment in de novo metastatic PC are reviewed and discussed.

Stereotactic body radiotherapy for the treatment of medically inoperable primary renal cell carcinoma: Current evidence and future directions

The incidence of renal cell carcinoma (RCC) is steadily rising due to an aging population and more frequent imaging of the abdomen for other medical conditions. While surgery remains the standard of care treatment for localized disease, many patients are unfit due to their advanced age and medical comorbidities. In these patients, an active surveillance strategy or ablative therapies, including radiofrequency/microwave ablation or cryotherapy, can be offered. Such options have limitations particularly with fast growing, or larger tumors. A promising ablative therapy option to consider is stereo-tactic body radiotherapy (SBRT). SBRT refers to high dose, focally ablative radiation delivered in a short time (3-5 fractions), and is safe and effective in many other cancer sites, including lung, liver and spine. SBRT offers potential advantages in the primary kidney cancer setting due to its ablative dosing (overcoming the notion of "radio-resistance"), short treatment duration (important in an elderly population), low toxicity profile (enabling SBRT to treat larger RCCs than other ablative modalities), and non-invasiveness. To date, there is limited long-term prospective data on the outcomes of SBRT in primary RCC. However, early evidence is intriguing with respect to excellent local control and low toxicity; however, most studies vary in terms of technique and radiation dosing used. Well-designed prospective cohort studies with clearly defined and standardized techniques, dosing, follow-up, and integration of quality of life outcomes will be essential to further establish the role of SBRT in management of inoperable, localized RCC.

Radiation therapy following targeted therapy in oligometastatic renal cell carcinoma

Up to 40% of patients with renal cell carcinoma (RCC) with initially localized disease eventually develop metastasis following nephrectomy. The current standard of care for metastatic RCC (mRCC) is targeted therapy. However, complete response remains rare. A state of oligometastatic disease may exist, in which metastases are present in a limited number of locations; such cases may benefit from metastasis-directed local therapy, based on the evidence supporting resection of limited-volume metastases, allowing for improved disease control. We retrospectively analyzed 7 cases of response of RCC metastases, in patients treated with targeted therapies followed by radiation therapy (RT) of residual metastatic lesions in Paoli-Calmettes Institute (Marseille, France). We analyzed disease response rates, response to sequential strategy, relapse at the irradiated locations and disease evolution. The median follow-up was 34.1 months (range, 19.2-54.5 months). No progression at the irradiated sites was observed. A total of 5 patients had stable disease at the irradiated locations at the last follow-up; 3 remained in complete remission at the assessment, and 2 were stable. Excellent local response and clinical benefit may be achieved without added toxicity. In conclusion, sequential therapeutic strategies with RT following systemic treatment using sunitinib appear to be highly effective in patients with progressive mRCC and prompt the conduction of further confirmatory trials.

Whole-brain radiation therapy for brain metastases: detrimental or beneficial?

Stereotactic radiosurgery is frequently used, either alone or together with whole-brain radiation therapy to treat brain metastases from solid tumors. Certain experts and radiation oncology groups have proposed replacing whole-brain radiation therapy with stereotactic radiosurgery alone for the management of brain metastases. Although randomized trials have favored adding whole-brain radiation therapy to stereotactic radiosurgery for most end points, a recent meta-analysis demonstrated a survival disadvantage for patients treated with whole-brain radiation therapy and stereotactic radiosurgery compared with patients treated with stereotactic radiosurgery alone. However the apparent detrimental effect of adding whole-brain radiation therapy to stereotactic radiosurgery reported in this meta-analysis may be the result of inhomogeneous distribution of the patients with respect to tumor histologies, molecular histologic subtypes, and extracranial tumor stages between the groups rather than a real effect. Unfortunately, soon after this meta-analysis was published, even as an abstract, use of whole-brain radiation therapy in managing brain metastases has become controversial among radiation oncologists. The American Society of Radiation Oncology recently recommended, in their "Choose Wisely" campaign, against routinely adding whole-brain radiation therapy to stereotactic radiosurgery to treat brain metastases. However, this situation creates conflict for radiation oncologists who believe that there are enough high level of evidence for the effectiveness of whole-brain radiation therapy in the treatment of brain metastases.

Local control rates of metastatic renal cell carcinoma (RCC) to the bone using stereotactic body radiation therapy: Is RCC truly radioresistant?

PURPOSE

We report the radiographic and clinical response rate of stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) compared with conventional fractionated external beam radiation therapy (CF-EBRT) for renal cell carcinoma (RCC) bone lesions treated at our institution.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Forty-six consecutive patients were included in the study, with 95 total lesions treated (50 SBRT, 45 CF-EBRT). We included patients who had histologic confirmation of primary RCC and radiographic evidence of metastatic bone lesions. The most common SBRT regimen used was 27 Gy in 3 fractions.

RESULTS

Median follow-up was 10 months (range, 1-64 months). Median time to symptom control between SBRT and CF-EBRT were 2 (range, 0-6 weeks) and 4 weeks (range, 0-7 weeks), respectively. Symptom control rates with SBRT and CF-EBRT were significantly different (P = .020) with control rates at 10, 12, and 24 months of 74.9% versus 44.1%, 74.9% versus 39.9%, and 74.9% versus 35.7%, respectively. The median time to radiographic failure and unadjusted pain progression was 7 months in both groups. When controlling for gross tumor volume, dose per fraction, smoking, and the use of systemic therapy, biologically effective dose ≥80 Gy was significant for clinical response (hazard ratio [HR], 0.204; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.043-0.963; P = .046) and radiographic (HR, 0.075; 95% CI, 0.013-0.430; P = .004). When controlling for gross tumor volume and total dose, biologically effective dose ≥80 Gy was again predictive of clinical local control (HR, 0.140; 95% CI, 0.025-0.787; P = .026). Toxicity rates were low and equivalent in both groups, with no grade 4 or 5 toxicity reported.

CONCLUSIONS

SBRT is both safe and effective for treating RCC bone metastases, with rapid improvement in symptoms after treatment and more durable clinical and radiographic response rate. Future prospective trials are needed to further define efficacy and toxicity of treatment, especially in the setting of targeted agents.

The potential of radiotherapy to enhance the efficacy of renal cell carcinoma therapy

Renal cell carcinoma (RCC) is an immunogenic tumor, but uses several immune-suppressive mechanisms to shift the balance from tumor immune response toward tumor growth. Although RCC has traditionally been considered to be radiation resistant, recent evidence suggests that hypofractionated radiotherapy contributes to systemic antitumor immunity. Because the efficacy of antitumor immune responses depends on the complex balance between diverse immune cells and progressing tumor cells, radiotherapy alone is unlikely to induce persistent antitumor immunity. Therefore, the combination of radiotherapy with drugs having synergistic immunomodulatory properties holds great promise with the optimal timing and sequence of modalities depending on the agent used. We highlight the immunomodulatory properties of targeted therapies, such as tyrosine kinase inhibitors, mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) inhibitors and vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) neutralizing antibodies, and will suggest a combination schedule with radiotherapy based on the available literature. We also address the combination of radiotherapy with innovative treatments in the field of immunotherapy.

Stereotactic radiation therapy of renal cancer inferior vena cava tumor thrombus

Renal Cell Carcinoma (RCC) is a common malignancy world-wide that is rising in incidence. Up to 10% of RCC patients present with inferior vena cava (IVC) tumor thrombus (IVC-TT). Although surgery is the only treatment with proven efficacy for IVC-TT, the surgical management of advanced (level III and IV) IVC-TT is difficult with high morbidity and mortality, and offers a poor survival outcome. Currently, there are no treatment options in the setting of recurrent or unresectable RCC IVC-TT. Even though RCC may be resistant to conventionally fractionated radiation therapy, hypofractionated radiation has shown excellent control rates for both primary and metastatic RCC. We report our experience treating 2 RCC patients with Level IV IVC-TT -one recurrent and the other unresectable-with stereotactic ablative radiation therapy (SABR). The first patient is a 75-year-old gentleman with a level IV RCC IVC-TT who presented 9 months after his radical nephrectomy and thrombectomy with a growing level IV IVC-TT that became refractory to 4 targeted agents. He received SABR of 50Gy in 5 fractions and at 2-year follow-up is doing well with a significant decrease in the enhancement and size of the IVC-TT. The second patient is an 83-year-old gentleman who presented with metastatic RCC and level IV IVC-TT but was not a surgical candidate. After progression on temsirolimus, he received SABR of 36Gy in 4 fractions to his IVC-TT and survived 18 months post-SABR. Both patients improved symptomatically and did not experience any acute or late treatment-related toxicity. Their survival of 24 months and 18 months are comparable to the reported median survival of 20 months in patients with level IV IVC-TT that underwent surgical resection. Therefore, SABR can be a potentially safe treatment option in the unresectable setting for RCC patients with IVC-TT and should be further evaluated in prospective trials.

Is Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy (SBRT) in lymph node oligometastatic patients feasible and effective?

OBJECTIVES

To review the available data about stereotactic body-radiotherapy (SBRT) for oligometastatic lymph node cancer recurrence.

METHODS

The inclusion criteria for this study were as follows: Medline search for the (1) English language (2) full paper (abstracts were excluded) on (3) adult oligometastatic solid cancer recurrence limited to lymph node that underwent SBRT (4) outcome data available and (5) published up to the 30th April 2014.

RESULTS

38 papers fulfilling the inclusion criteria have been found: 7 review articles and 31 patient series (20 and 11 retrospective and prospective studies, respectively) including between 1 and 69 patients (636 lymph nodes). Twelve articles reported only lymph node SBRT while in 19 - all types of SBRT including lymph node SBRT were presented. Two-year local control, 4-year progression free survival and overall survival was of up to 100%, 30% and 50%, respectively. The progression was mainly out-field (10-30% of patients had a recurrence in another lymph node/nodes). The toxicity was low with mainly mild acute events and single grade 3-4 late events. When compared to SBRT for any oligometastatic cancer, SBRT for lymph node recurrence carried better prognosis and showed lower toxicity.

CONCLUSIONS

SBRT is a feasible approach for oligometastatic lymph node recurrence, offering excellent in-field tumor control with low toxicity profile. The potential abscopal effect has been hypothesized as a basis of these findings. Future studies are warranted to identify the patients that benefit most from this treatment. The optimal combination with systemic treatment should also be defined.

miR149 rs71428439 polymorphism and risk of clear cell renal cell carcinoma: a case-control study

Clear cell renal cell carcinoma (CCRCC) is the most common subtype of renal cell cancer and accounts for 70 % of renal cell cancer. CCRCC remains an enigmatic tumor type, as the molecular genetic mechanisms are still unclear. MicroRNA (miR) 149 functions as a tumor suppressor and plays an important role in the carcinogenesis of renal cells. In this study, we enrolled 1,000 CCRCC patients and 1,000 cancer-free controls to evaluate the association of miR149 rs71428439 with the risk of CCRCC by a case-control study to determine the effects on CCRCC risk. miR149 rs71428439 was significantly associated with increased CCRCC risk (odds ratio (OR) for trend = 1.53, P for trend = 4.04 × 10(-11)), with ORs (95 % confidence intervals (CIs)) of 1.42 (1.17-1.72) associated with AG genotype and 2.27 (1.76-2.94) associated with GG genotype, compared with subjects with AA genotype. The expression levels of miR149 in cancer tissues were significantly lower than those in adjacent normal tissues (P = 0.005), and per G allele has significantly lower miR149 levels in both tumor tissues and adjacent normal tissues. Our data suggest that the GG genotypes of miR149 rs71428439 predispose their carriers to CCRCC, and miR149 rs71428439 may be a new biomarker for predicting the risk of CCRCC.