Treating metastatic clear-cell renal cell carcinoma: beyond immunotherapy

Successful apatinib treatment for advanced clear cell renal carcinoma as a first-line palliative treatment: A case report

BACKGROUND

Apatinib is an orally bioavailable small-molecule receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitor. In December 2014, the China Food and Drug Administration made it the first anti-angiogenic therapy to be approved for treating metastatic gastric cancer. It was specifically designated as a third-line or later treatment for metastatic gastric cancer.

CASE SUMMARY

Here, we present a case of advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC) with multiple metastases (Stage IV) in a 48-year-old male with an extremely poor general status (Karnofsky 30%). He was initially given pazopanib as a targeted therapeutic. However, he experienced severe adverse reactions within two weeks, including grade IV oral mucositis. We, thus, tried switching his targeted treatment to an apatinib dose of 250 mg once daily since April 2018. The patient demonstrated striking benefits from this switch to the apatinib palliative treatment. Nearly one month later, his pain and other associated symptoms were alleviated. The patient was able to move freely and had an excellent general status (Karnofsky 90%). His progress has been followed up with regularly, allowing for a documented progression-free survival interval of approximately 32 mo.

CONCLUSION

This case suggests that, like other multi-target drugs, apatinib may be a useful first-line therapeutic drug for advanced RCC. It may be a particularly helpful curative option when patients are found to be intolerant of other targeted drugs.

Antiangiogenic Properties of Axitinib versus Sorafenib Following Sunitinib Resistance in Human Endothelial Cells-A View towards Second Line Renal Cell Carcinoma Treatment

Tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) and immune checkpoint inhibitors predominate as first-line therapy options for renal cell carcinoma. When first-line TKI therapy fails due to resistance development, an optimal second-line therapy has not yet been established. The present investigation is directed towards comparing the anti-angiogenic properties of the TKIs, sorafenib and axitinib on human endothelial cells (HUVECs) with acquired resistance towards the TKI sunitinib. HUVECs were driven to resistance by continuously exposing them to sunitinib for six weeks. They were then switched to a 24 h or further six weeks treatment with sorafenib or axitinib. HUVEC growth, as well as angiogenesis (tube formation and scratch wound assay), were evaluated. Cell cycle proteins of the CDK-cyclin axis (CDK1 and 2, total and phosphorylated, cyclin A and B) and the mTOR pathway (AKT, total and phosphorylated) were also assessed. Axitinib (but not sorafenib) significantly suppressed growth of sunitinib-resistant HUVECs when they were exposed for six weeks. This axinitib-associated growth reduction was accompanied by a cell cycle block at the G0/G1-phase. Both axitinib and sorafenib reduced HUVEC tube length and prevented wound closure (sorafenib > axitinib) when applied to sunitinib-resistant HUVECs for six weeks. Protein analysis revealed diminished phosphorylation of CDK1, CDK2 and pAKT, accompanied by a suppression of cyclin A and B. Both drugs modulated CDK-cyclin and AKT-dependent signaling, associated either with both HUVEC growth and angiogenesis (axitinib) or angiogenesis alone (sorafenib). Axitinib and sorafenib may be equally applicable as second line treatment options, following sunitinib resistance.

What is next in second- and later-line treatment of metastatic renal cell carcinoma? review of the recent literature

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The current treatment landscape of metastatic renal cell carcinoma has changed dramatically from the dominance of single-agent tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) therapy to immune-checkpoint inhibitor (ICI)-based combinations in recent years. However, the optimal subsequent therapy remains ill-defined owing to the novelty of this approach.

RECENT FINDINGS

Treatment with TKIs after failure of single or dual ICI therapies may result in robust clinical efficacy. Nonetheless, there is a trend toward lower efficacy of TKIs after previous ICI-TKI combination therapy. Currently, tivozanib is the only drug whose third- and later-line use after failure of TKI and ICI is supported by evidence, with significantly longer progression-free survival and higher objective response rates than sorafenib. Data from retrospective studies highlight the safety and clinical activity of ICI rechallenge.

SUMMARY

Overall, the level of evidence remains low. Treatment after failure of dual ICI therapy is not well defined and may consist of any available TKI. Although first-line use of TKI is less common, strong evidence suggests cabozantinib or nivolumab as standard options in that setting. The recommendations after first-line TKI-ICI therapy failure mirror this recommendation, although the data are less robust.

Treatment outcomes of molecular targeted therapy following nivolumab in metastatic renal cell carcinoma

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to assess the therapeutic efficacy of molecular targeted therapies following nivolumab in metastatic renal cell carcinoma and to examine the relationship between therapeutic efficacy and the specific molecular targeted therapy used.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of 115 metastatic renal cell carcinoma patients who were treated with nivolumab at our institution and five affiliated hospitals. Among them, 52 patients who received subsequent molecular targeted therapy following nivolumab were selected to survey treatment outcomes. Progression-free survival and overall survival were estimated with Kaplan-Meier curves, and differences were analyzed by the log-rank test.

RESULTS

Among the 52 eligible patients, 40 (76.9%) were treated with tyrosine kinase inhibitors and 12 (23.1%) were treated with mammalian target of rapamycin inhibitor. The median time to treatment failure and progression-free survival of subsequent molecular targeted therapy were 5.6 and 8.0 months, respectively. The median overall survival from the initiation of first-line therapy was not reached. The disease control rate of subsequent molecular targeted therapy was 69.2% (partial response: 25.0%, stable disease: 44.2%). The median progression-free survival of subsequent tyrosine kinase inhibitor and mammalian target of rapamycin inhibitor were 9.2 and 8.0 months, respectively (P = 0.37). The progression-free survival of patients whose best response to prior nivolumab was either progressive disease or stable disease/partial response were 6.3 and 11.3 months, respectively (P = 0.36).

CONCLUSIONS

Molecular targeted therapies following nivolumab had comparatively better therapeutic efficacy, which was confirmed regardless of the type of molecular targeted agent used.

Is there any place for novel agents in treating biliary tract cancer?

Biliary tract cancer is an uncommon cancer in developed countries. In localized stages, surgery is the cornerstone of treatment with curative purpose. Conversely in advanced stages, chemotherapy with platinum-gemcitabine combination is the standard of care. Biliary tract cancers are a biologically heterogeneous group of malignancies, which perhaps explains the failure of targeted therapies in unselected patient populations to demonstrate benefit in advanced disease, although there are promises in selected populations (e.g. PD1/PD-L1 positive, BRAF^V600E-mutated or IDH1-mutant). In view of the limited benefit of second line therapies in metastatic biliary tract cancer, various targeted agents have been tested in progressive disease. Furthermore, several ongoing trials are using next-generation sequencing of multiple genes to identify molecular abnormalities in the tumors of patients with refractory cancers that may potentially be used in pretreated disease (e.g. FGFR or IDH genes). Immunotherapy with immune checkpoint inhibitors may be interesting for patients whose tumors have programmed cell death 1 ligand 1 (PD-L1) overexpression. Ongoing and future trials will further advance our knowledge toward the optimal treatment strategy for the management of biliary tract cancer in its different stages, starting from metastatic and then reaching early stages of disease. We here provided an overview of these novel treatment strategies for advanced biliary tract cancers not amenable of curative treatment modalities.