Characterization and Management of Treatment-emergent Hepatic Toxicity in Patients with Advanced Renal Cell Carcinoma Receiving First-line Pembrolizumab plus Axitinib. Results from the KEYNOTE-426 Trial

Multiorgan failure caused by pembrolizumab and axitinib in a woman affected by metastatic clear cell renal cell carcinoma: A case report and literature review

RATIONALE

Treatment with a combination of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) (pembrolizumab or nivolumab) and oral Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitors (TKI) targeting angiogenesis (axitinib, cabozantinib or lenvatinib) has shown benefits in terms of efficacy and survival in metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC), with a favorable toxicity profile. However, some rare and serious treatment-related adverse events can be difficult to manage.

PATIENT CONCERNS

Here we report the first case of an mRCC patient who, after only 2 administrations of pembrolizumab-axitinib, experienced severe multiorgan failure (MOF) with heart failure, oliguria and acute hepatitis requiring aggressive supportive treatment in intensive care unit.

DIAGNOSES

A diagnosis of severe MOF induced by pembrolizumab plus axitinib was considered.

INTERVENTIONS

The patient was treated with dobutamine, levosimendan along with high-dose steroids under continuous cardiologic monitoring.

OUTCOMES

After treatment, the patient had a full recovery and was discharged from the hospital.

LESSONS

We reviewed all the other cases of MOF reported during treatment with combined ICI-TKI in cancer patients in order to summarize incidence, clinical manifestations and management with a specific focus on the need for prompt recognition and aggressive management under multidisciplinary care.

A Score to Predict the Clinical Usefulness of Therapeutic Drug Monitoring: Application to Oral Molecular Targeted Therapies in Cancer

Therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) involves measuring and interpreting drug concentrations in biological fluids to adjust drug dosages. In onco-hematology, TDM guidelines for oral molecular targeted therapies (oMTTs) are varied. This study evaluates a quantitative approach with a score to predict the clinical usefulness of TDM for oMTTs. We identified key parameters for an oMTT's suitability for TDM from standard TDM recommendations. We gathered oMTT pharmacological data, which covered exposure variability (considering pharmacokinetic (PK) impact of food and proton pump inhibitors), technical intricacy (PK linearity and active metabolites), efficacy (exposure-response relationship), and safety (maximum tolerated dose, and exposure-safety relationship). To assess the validity and the relevance of the score and define relevant thresholds, we evaluated molecules with prospective validation or strong recommendations for TDM, both in oncology and in other fields. By September 1, 2021, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved 67 oMTTs for onco-hematological indications. Scores ranged from 15 (acalabrutinib) to 80 (sunitinib) with an average of 48.3 and a standard deviation of 15.6. Top scorers included sunitinib, sorafenib, cabozantinib, nilotinib, and abemaciclib. Based on scores, drugs were categorized into low (< 40), intermediate (≥ 40 and < 60), and high (≥ 60) relevance for TDM. Notably, negative controls generally scored around or under 40, whereas positive controls had a high score across different indications. In this work, we propose a quantitative and reproducible score to compare the potential usefulness of TDM for oMTTs. Future guidelines should prioritize the TDM for molecules with the highest score.

Molecular subtyping and characterization of clear cell renal cell carcinoma by tumor differentiation trajectories

Previous bulk RNA sequencing or whole genome sequencing on clear cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC) subtyping mainly focused on ccRCC cell origin or the complex tumor microenvironment (TME). Based on the single-cell RNA sequencing (scRNA-seq) data of 11 primary ccRCC specimens, cancer stem-cell-like subsets could be differentiated into five trajectories, whereby we further classified ccRCC cells into three groups with diverse molecular features. These three ccRCC subgroups showed significantly different outcomes and potential targets to tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) or immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs). Tumor cells in three differentiation directions exhibited distinct interactions with other subsets in the ccRCC niches. The subtyping model was examined through immunohistochemistry staining in our ccRCC cohort and validated the same classification effect as the public patients. All these findings help gain a deeper understanding about the pathogenesis of ccRCC and provide useful clues for optimizing therapeutic schemes based on the molecular subtype analysis.

Beyond the Checkpoint: Severe Axitinib-induced Liver Injury

Understanding the potential adverse effects associated with oncological treatments is crucial in the clinical care of patients with cancer. We describe the first case report delineating severe acute liver injury secondary to axitinib. This is a case of metastatic renal cell carcinoma treated with axitinib and pembrolizumab, complicated by a severe axitinib-induced liver injury, characterized by significant elevations of hepatocellular and cholestatic liver enzymes during initial treatment and rechallenge of axitinib. Remarkably, the liver chemistries normalized upon discontinuation of the medication.

Systematic surveillance of immune-related adverse events in clinical practice and impact of subsequent steroid medication on survival outcomes

BACKGROUND

Recent advances in immune-checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have highlighted the need for effective management of immune-related adverse events (irAEs). This study aimed to conduct a systematic surveillance of real-world development of irAEs for understanding their characteristics and examine the prognostic impact of steroid use for these events.

METHODS

We retrospectively investigated cancer patients treated with ICIs between 2014 and 2021 and collected information about irAEs throughout their development, management, and clinical outcomes.

RESULTS

Overall, 458 patients (45.4%) developed 670 irAEs. The prevalence of irAEs varied by cancer type, but it was increased in regimens with longer treatment durations. Severe irAEs were more common in the nivolumab + ipilimumab and pembrolizumab + axitinib regimens. Patients who received steroids for irAEs at a dosage of < 2 mg/kg had comparable prognosis to those who did not receive steroids; however, patients who received methylprednisolone pulse therapy, primarily for severe pneumonitis and hepatitis, had shorter overall survival than those who did not receive steroids (7.8 versus 23.4 months, p = 0.016). Furthermore, methylprednisolone pulse therapy for irAEs was a poor prognostic factor in multivariate analysis (hazard ratio: 2.19, 95% confidence interval: 1.34-2.86, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Steroid treatment for irAE does not affect prognosis and should thus be used promptly to control inflammation. However, pulse therapy for severe cases is a poor prognostic factor, and early detection remains the key to managing such irAEs. The irAE characteristics in each regimen should be clarified to establish and provide more sophisticated irAE management, and the current findings will be beneficial to this goal.

First-line therapy for adults with advanced renal cell carcinoma: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Since the approval of tyrosine kinase inhibitors, angiogenesis inhibitors and immune checkpoint inhibitors, the treatment landscape for advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC) has changed fundamentally. Today, combined therapies from different drug categories have a firm place in a complex first-line therapy. Due to the large number of drugs available, it is necessary to identify the most effective therapies, whilst considering their side effects and impact on quality of life (QoL).

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate and compare the benefits and harms of first-line therapies for adults with advanced RCC, and to produce a clinically relevant ranking of therapies. Secondary objectives were to maintain the currency of the evidence by conducting continuous update searches, using a living systematic review approach, and to incorporate data from clinical study reports (CSRs).

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, conference proceedings and relevant trial registries up until 9 February 2022. We searched several data platforms to identify CSRs.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating at least one targeted therapy or immunotherapy for first-line treatment of adults with advanced RCC. We excluded trials evaluating only interleukin-2 versus interferon-alpha as well as trials with an adjuvant treatment setting. We also excluded trials with adults who received prior systemic anticancer therapy if more than 10% of participants were previously treated, or if data for untreated participants were not separately extractable.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

All necessary review steps (i.e. screening and study selection, data extraction, risk of bias and certainty assessments) were conducted independently by at least two review authors. Our outcomes were overall survival (OS), QoL, serious adverse events (SAEs), progression-free survival (PFS), adverse events (AEs), the number of participants who discontinued study treatment due to an AE, and the time to initiation of first subsequent therapy. Where possible, analyses were conducted for the different risk groups (favourable, intermediate, poor) according to the International Metastatic Renal-Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium Score (IMDC) or the Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center (MSKCC) criteria. Our main comparator was sunitinib (SUN). A hazard ratio (HR) or risk ratio (RR) lower than 1.0 is in favour of the experimental arm.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 36 RCTs and 15,177 participants (11,061 males and 4116 females). Risk of bias was predominantly judged as being 'high' or 'some concerns' across most trials and outcomes. This was mainly due to a lack of information about the randomisation process, the blinding of outcome assessors, and methods for outcome measurements and analyses. Additionally, study protocols and statistical analysis plans were rarely available. Here we present the results for our primary outcomes OS, QoL, and SAEs, and for all risk groups combined for contemporary treatments: pembrolizumab + axitinib (PEM+AXI), avelumab + axitinib (AVE+AXI), nivolumab + cabozantinib (NIV+CAB), lenvatinib + pembrolizumab (LEN+PEM), nivolumab + ipilimumab (NIV+IPI), CAB, and pazopanib (PAZ). Results per risk group and results for our secondary outcomes are reported in the summary of findings tables and in the full text of this review. The evidence on other treatments and comparisons can also be found in the full text. Overall survival (OS) Across risk groups, PEM+AXI (HR 0.73, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.50 to 1.07, moderate certainty) and NIV+IPI (HR 0.69, 95% CI 0.69 to 1.00, moderate certainty) probably improve OS, compared to SUN, respectively. LEN+PEM may improve OS (HR 0.66, 95% CI 0.42 to 1.03, low certainty), compared to SUN. There is probably little or no difference in OS between PAZ and SUN (HR 0.91, 95% CI 0.64 to 1.32, moderate certainty), and we are uncertain whether CAB improves OS when compared to SUN (HR 0.84, 95% CI 0.43 to 1.64, very low certainty). The median survival is 28 months when treated with SUN. Survival may improve to 43 months with LEN+PEM, and probably improves to: 41 months with NIV+IPI, 39 months with PEM+AXI, and 31 months with PAZ. We are uncertain whether survival improves to 34 months with CAB. Comparison data were not available for AVE+AXI and NIV+CAB. Quality of life (QoL) One RCT measured QoL using FACIT-F (score range 0 to 52; higher scores mean better QoL) and reported that the mean post-score was 9.00 points higher (9.86 lower to 27.86 higher, very low certainty) with PAZ than with SUN. Comparison data were not available for PEM+AXI, AVE+AXI, NIV+CAB, LEN+PEM, NIV+IPI, and CAB. Serious adverse events (SAEs) Across risk groups, PEM+AXI probably increases slightly the risk for SAEs (RR 1.29, 95% CI 0.90 to 1.85, moderate certainty) compared to SUN. LEN+PEM (RR 1.52, 95% CI 1.06 to 2.19, moderate certainty) and NIV+IPI (RR 1.40, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.97, moderate certainty) probably increase the risk for SAEs, compared to SUN, respectively. There is probably little or no difference in the risk for SAEs between PAZ and SUN (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.75 to 1.31, moderate certainty). We are uncertain whether CAB reduces or increases the risk for SAEs (RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.60 to 1.43, very low certainty) when compared to SUN. People have a mean risk of 40% for experiencing SAEs when treated with SUN. The risk increases probably to: 61% with LEN+PEM, 57% with NIV+IPI, and 52% with PEM+AXI. It probably remains at 40% with PAZ. We are uncertain whether the risk reduces to 37% with CAB. Comparison data were not available for AVE+AXI and NIV+CAB.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Findings concerning the main treatments of interest comes from direct evidence of one trial only, thus results should be interpreted with caution. More trials are needed where these interventions and combinations are compared head-to-head, rather than just to SUN. Moreover, assessing the effect of immunotherapies and targeted therapies on different subgroups is essential and studies should focus on assessing and reporting relevant subgroup data. The evidence in this review mostly applies to advanced clear cell RCC.

Combinations of Anti-Angiogenic Agents and Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors in Renal Cell Carcinoma: Best Option?

Over the past decade, major advances have been made in the treatment of advanced and metastatic renal cell carcinomas, specifically clear cell carcinomas. For many years the optimal approach was sequential; thus, monotherapies [principally tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs)] targeting angiogenesis until toxicity or progressive disease developed. The rationale was the common mechanisms of action of the targeting agents and avoidance of the risk of overlapping toxicities. Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) are effective monotherapies, and combinations thereof with anti-angiogenic agents were thus later considered. Synergistic interactions were reported in vitro. Clinical efficacy was evident in three pivotal phase III trials with axitinib-pembrolizumab, cabozantinib-nivolumab, and lenvatinib-pembrolizumab combinations. Two other combinations showed interesting results but did not improve overall survival. However, the data aided our understanding of the new therapeutic approaches. A combination of the ICIs nivolumab and ipilimumab was the first to evidence better progression-free and overall survival compared to sunitinib in patients with intermediate or unfavourable prognoses as evaluated by the International mRCC Database Consortium (IMDC). Here we focus on the TKI-ICI combinations, emphasising the rationale of their use and the clinical results. To date, no biomarker facilitating the selection of an optimal treatment by disease and patient status has been reported.

Hypertransaminasemia in metastatic renal cell carcinoma patients receiving immune-based combinations: a meta-analysis

Aims: We performed a meta-analysis to assess the relative risk (RR) of all-grade and grade 3-4 hypertransaminasemia in studies comparing immune-based combinations with sunitinib in treatment-naive patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma. Materials & methods: Outcomes of interest included all-grade and grade 3-4 hypertransaminasemia measured as RRs and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Results: RRs for all-grade hypertransaminasemia were 1.73 (95% CI: 1.25-2.4) and 1.63 (95% CI: 1.25-2.12) in patients receiving immunocombinations and sunitinib, respectively. The pooled RRs for grade 3-4 hypertransaminasemia were 3.24 and 3.04 in patients treated with immunocombinations or sunitinib. Conclusion: Immune-based combinations were associated with higher hypertransaminasemia risk. Physicians should pay attention to these common but overlooked events. Careful monitoring of tolerability remains a crucial need.

Adverse Events of Axitinib plus Pembrolizumab Versus Lenvatinib plus Pembrolizumab: A Pharmacovigilance Study in Food and Drug Administration Adverse Event Reporting System

No head-to-head postmarket surveillance study has compared the differences in adverse events (AEs) between two combination therapies, axitinib (AXI) + pembrolizumab (PEMBRO) and lenvatinib (LEN) + PEMBRO, against metastatic renal cell carcinoma. This study aims to highlight the comprehensive differences in AEs between these two therapies based on the real-world big data from the Food and Drug Administration Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) database. In total, 28 937 records were extracted from the FAERS database, and 139 AEs grouped into the System Organ Class according to the Medical Dictionary for Regulatory Activities were analysed. Logistic regression analyses were performed, and the reporting odds ratio with a 95% confidence interval was determined. We found that the incidences of cardiac and hepatobiliary disorders for AXI + PEMBRO, and blood and lymphatic system, metabolism and nutrition, and vascular disorders for LEN + PEMBRO, all of which were associated with serious AEs, were higher than those for LEN + PEMBRO and AXI + PEMBRO, respectively. The differences in the AEs between AXI + PEMBRO and LEN + PEMBRO were not derived merely from those between AXI and LEN monotherapies. Furthermore, remarkable AE potentiation was observed for AXI + PEMBRO. As FAERS is a spontaneous reporting system comprising partially limited information, analysing more detailed relationships between AEs and patient or treatment characteristics was challenging in this study. The present study is the first to show the overall real-world postmarketing differences in AEs between AXI + PEMBRO and LEN + PEMBRO. Our novel findings will substantially improve clinical practice; we recommend comparing patients' conditions associated with the above AEs when selecting between these two therapies. PATIENT SUMMARY: Herein, we highlight the differences in adverse events (AEs) between axitinib + pembrolizumab and lenvatinib + pembrolizumab therapies using data from the real-world Food and Drug Administration Adverse Event Reporting System database aimed at patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma. We identified AEs that needed attention in each combination. We recommend the differences in AEs to be considered when selecting these two therapies.

Front-Line Therapy for Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma: A Perspective on the Current Algorithm and Future Directions

Simple Summary

The treatment landscape of metastatic renal cell carcinoma has changed dramatically over the course of the last decade. The use of doublet immunotherapy or targeted therapy/immunotherapy regimens has become the standard of care. Herein, we outline the important elements and considerations in the treatment of renal cell carcinoma and explore prospective treatment options within this setting.

Abstract

Over the last decade, the treatment paradigm of metastatic renal cell carcinoma has rapidly evolved, with notable changes in the front-line setting. Combination therapies involving the use of either doublet therapy with immune checkpoint inhibitors or combination VEGFR-directed therapies with immune checkpoint inhibitors have significantly improved clinical outcomes, including prolonged overall survival and durable response to treatment. We aim to highlight the Food and Drug Administration-approved front-line therapy options, the navigation of treatment selection, and the future directions of metastatic renal cell carcinoma therapies.

Case Study: A Japanese patient with metastatic renal cell carcinoma who achieved long‐term treatment‐free survival with pembrolizumab and axitinib in the KEYNOTE‐426 phase III trial of pembrolizumab and axitinib versus sunitinib

Introduction

Case presentation

Conclusion

Management of adverse events associated with cabozantinib plus nivolumab in renal cell carcinoma: A review

Tyrosine kinase inhibitors have been successfully developed in combination with immune checkpoint inhibitors to treat advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC), further advancing treatment. While safety profiles are generally manageable with combination regimens, overlapping adverse events (AEs) and immune-related AEs can make treatment more complex. The CheckMate 9ER study evaluated the tyrosine kinase inhibitor cabozantinib in combination with the anti-programmed cell death protein-1 antibody nivolumab in patients with previously untreated advanced RCC. Cabozantinib + nivolumab demonstrated superiority over sunitinib for progression-free survival, overall survival, and objective response rate. These outcomes supported the approval of cabozantinib + nivolumab as a first-line therapy for advanced RCC. The safety profile was manageable with prophylaxis, supportive care, dose holds and reductions for cabozantinib, and dose holds and immunosuppressive therapy for nivolumab. This review discusses the safety results of CheckMate 9ER and provides guidance on managing some of the more clinically relevant AEs with a focus on overlapping AEs, including diarrhea, elevated amylase/lipase, hepatotoxicity, dermatologic reactions, fatigue, endocrine disorders, and nephrotoxicity. We discuss AE management strategies (prophylaxis, supportive care, dose modification, and immunosuppressive therapy), and provide recommendations for identifying the causative agent of overlapping AEs and for consulting specialists about organ-specific immune-related AEs. Optimizing AE management can maintain tolerability and should be a priority with cabozantinib + nivolumab treatment.

Combination Therapy of Pembrolizumab plus Axitinib for a Patient on Hemodialysis with Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma: A Case Report

Here, we discuss the safety and management of adverse events associated with pembrolizumab plus axitinib combination therapy for metastatic renal cell carcinoma in patients on hemodialysis. A 76-year-old man was diagnosed with cT3aN0M0 renal cell carcinoma due to gross hematuria. Stereoscopic radiotherapy for metastatic lesions of the ipsilateral kidney was performed 9 years after right laparoscopic radical nephrectomy. Soon after, the patient started to receive hemodialysis due to end-stage renal disease. Further stereoscopic radiotherapy was needed for metastasis of the ipsilateral kidney and lung. Fifteen years after diagnosis, systemic therapy was necessary to control new metastases, such as in the right scapular bone. We selected pembrolizumab plus axitinib combination therapy as the first-line systemic therapy for any risk as defined by the International Metastatic RCC Database Consortium. Although we needed to pay attention to the adverse events unique to hemodialysis, he underwent this combination therapy without any difficulty for 6 months. Here, we report the practice of combination therapy in patients on hemodialysis in light of the literature.

Kinase Inhibitors' Effects on Innate Immunity in Solid Cancers

Simple Summary

In this review, we evaluate the updated data of the immunological effects of kinase inhibitors on the innate immune system and provide an in-depth analysis of the underlying mechanisms. We also discuss how this immunological effect can be harnessed to improve cancer treatment and highlight recent successes, such as the combination with anti-tumor immunotherapy. Last, we explore novel kinase targets and the incorporation of them with targeted drug delivery techniques as promising research areas.

Abstract

Innate immune cells constitute a plastic and heterogeneous cell population of the tumor microenvironment. Because of their high tumor infiltration and close interaction with resident tumor cells, they are compelling targets for anti-cancer therapy through either ablation or functionally reprogramming. Kinase inhibitors (KIs) that target aberrant signaling pathways in tumor proliferation and angiogenesis have been shown to have additional immunological effects on myeloid cells that may contribute to a protective antitumor immune response. However, in patients with malignancies, these effects are poorly described, warranting meticulous research to identify KIs’ optimal immunomodulatory effect to support developing targeted and more effective immunotherapy. As many of these KIs are currently in clinical trials awaiting approval for the treatment of several types of solid cancer, we evaluate here the information on this drug class’s immunological effects and how such mechanisms can be harnessed to improve combined treatment regimens in cancer.