Tumor diameter response in patients with metastatic clear cell renal cell carcinoma is associated with overall survival

Systemic therapies and primary tumour downsizing in renal cell carcinoma: a real-world comparison of anti-angiogenic and immune checkpoint inhibition regimens

PURPOSE

To investigate responses in the primary tumour to different systemic treatment regimens in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC).

METHODS

A single-centre retrospective analysis of treatment-naive mRCC patients without prior nephrectomy receiving VEGF tyrosine kinase inhibitors (VEGF only), immune checkpoint inhibitors (IO only), or combinations thereof (IO + VEGF). The primary outcome was the rate of partial response in the primary tumour (primary tumour PR, ≥ 30% diameter reduction). Secondary outcomes were time to best primary tumour diameter change, overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) by Kaplan-Meier analysis. Predictors of survival outcomes were explored by Cox proportional hazards regression analysis.

RESULTS

The rate of primary tumour PR was 14% for VEGF only (4/28 patients), 22% for IO only (5/23) and 50% for IO + VEGF (7/14), with median best primary tumour diameter change of - 8.0%, + 5.1%, and - 31.1% respectively, and median time to best primary tumour diameter change of 3.2, 3.0 and 6.9 months respectively. Median OS was significantly greater with IO + VEGF compared to VEGF only (HR 0.45, p = 0.04) and non-significantly greater compared to IO only (HR 0.46, p = 0.06). In multivariable analysis, primary tumour PR was the only response variable significantly associated with both OS (adjusted HR 0.32, p = 0.01) and PFS (adjusted HR 0.29, p < 0.01).

CONCLUSION

mRCC patients without prior nephrectomy receiving first-line IO + VEGF regimens showed the greatest primary tumour responses, suggesting further prospective evaluation of this combination in the neoadjuvant and deferred cytoreductive nephrectomy settings.

Cytoreductive Nephrectomy for Patients with Metastatic Sarcomatoid and/or Rhabdoid Renal Cell Carcinoma Treated with Immune Checkpoint Therapy

BACKGROUND

Renal cell carcinoma (RCC) with sarcomatoid and/or rhabdoid (S/R) dedifferentiation is a highly aggressive tumor with a poor prognosis. Immune checkpoint therapy (ICT) has shown significant treatment efficacy in this subtype. There remains uncertainly regarding the role of cytoreductive nephrectomy (CN) for patients with metastatic RCC (mRCC) with S/R who received ICT.

OBJECTIVE

Here, we report the outcomes with ICT for patients with mRCC and S/R dedifferentiation by CN status.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

A retrospective review was conducted of 157 patients with sarcomatoid, rhabdoid, or sarcomatoid plus rhabdoid dedifferentiation who received an ICT-based regimen at two cancer centers.

INTERVENTION

CN performed at any time point; nephrectomy with curative intent was excluded.

OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS

ICT treatment duration (TD) and overall survival (OS) from ICT initiation were recorded. To address the immortal time bias, a time-dependent Cox regression model was generated that accounted for confounders identified by a directed acyclic graph as well as a time-dependent nephrectomy variable.

RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS

A total of 118 patients underwent CN, and of them, 89 underwent upfront CN. The results did not contradict the supposition that CN does not improve ICT TD (hazard ratio [HR] 0.98, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.65-1.47, p = 0.94) or OS from ICT initiation (HR 0.79, 95% CI 0.47-1.33, p = 0.37). In patients who underwent upfront CN compared with those who did not undergo CN, there was no association with ICT duration or OS (HR 0.61, 95% CI 0.35-1.06, p = 0.08). A detailed clinical summary of 49 patients with mRCC and rhabdoid dedifferentiation is provided.

CONCLUSIONS

In this multi-institutional cohort of mRCC with S/R dedifferentiation treated with ICT, CN was not significantly associated with improved TD or superior OS when accounting for the lead time bias. There appears to be a subset of patients who derive meaningful benefit from CN, so improved tools for stratification prior to CN are needed to optimize outcomes.

PATIENT SUMMARY

Immunotherapy has improved outcomes for patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) who have sarcomatoid and/or rhabdoid (S/R) dedifferentiation, which is an aggressive and uncommon feature; yet, the utility of a nephrectomy in this setting is unclear. We found that nephrectomy did not significantly improve survival or time on immunotherapy for these patients with mRCC and S/R dedifferentiation; yet, there may be a subset of patients who benefit from this surgical approach.

The Evolving Landscape of Cytoreductive Nephrectomy in Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma

The role of cytoreductive nephrectomy in metastatic renal cell carcinoma (RCC) has been studied intensively over the past few decades. Interestingly, the opinion with regard to the importance of this procedure has switched from a recommendation as a standard of care to an almost complete refutation. However, no definitive agreement on cytoreductive nephrectomy, including the pros and cons of the procedure, has been reached, and the topic remains highly controversial. With the advent of immune checkpoint inhibitors, we have experienced a paradigm shift, with immunotherapy playing a crucial role in the treatment algorithm. Nevertheless, obtaining results from prospective clinical trials on the role of cytoreductive nephrectomy requires time, and once some data have been gathered, the standards of systemic therapy may be different, and we stand again at the beginning. This review summarizes current knowledge on the topic in the light of newly evolving treatment strategies. The crucial point is to recognize who could be an appropriate candidate for immediate cytoreductive surgery that may facilitate the effect of systemic therapy through tumor debulking, or who might benefit from deferred cytoreduction in the setting of an objective response of the tumor. The role of prognostic factors in management decisions as well as the technical details associated with performing the procedure from a urological perspective are discussed. Ongoing clinical trials that may bring new evidence for transforming therapeutic paradigms are listed.

A Pathological Complete Response to the Combination of Ipilimumab and Nivolumab in a Patient with Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma

Background and Objectives: Complete pathological response after ipilimumab and nivolumab combination therapy in a patient with intermediate prognosis renal cell carcinoma is an uncommon finding. Case presentation: A 60-year-old man presented with synchronous solitary metastatic bone lesion and renal cell carcinoma and achieved a complete pathological response after surgical resection of the bone lesion, followed by ipilimumab and nivolumab combination therapy and nephrectomy. The treatment was complicated by hypophysitis and oligoarthritis more than a year after the initiation of the therapy. Conclusions: Currently, the combination therapy based on immune checkpoint inhibitors represents the treatment of choice in patients with intermediate- and poor-risk prognosis metastatic renal cell carcinoma. In the present case, preoperative therapy with ipilimumab and nivolumab resulted in a complete pathological response in the renal tumor. Vigilance concerning potential immune-related side effects is warranted throughout the course of therapy and the subsequent follow-up.