Association of the combined parameters including the frequency of primary cilia, PD-L1, Smoothened protein, membranous β-catenin and cytoplasmic β-catenin expression with the outcome of patients with clear cell renal cell carcinoma

AIMS

The objective of this study was to investigate the association and combined prognostic significance of the PD-L1, Smoothened protein and β-catenin expressions in patients with clear cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC).

METHODS

The PD-L1, Smoothened protein and β-catenin expression were evaluated in 104 ccRCC patients. All studied tumor samples were acquired from nephrectomy specimens of primary tumors and not from biopsies or metastases. An indirect immunohistochemistry using polyclonal rabbit anti-Smoothened antibody, monoclonal mouse anti-human β-catenin-1 antibody, immunohistochemical assay PD-L1 28-8 pharmDx using monoclonal rabbit anti-PD-L1 antibody and anti-VHL (C- terminal) rabbit antibody was used. Immunohistochemistry was scored semiquantitavely.

RESULTS

Median overall survival (OS) was significantly better in patients with lower PD-L1 expression (≤5%), Smoothened protein (SMO) expression (<5%) or cytoplasmic β-catenin expression (≤75%) than in patients with higher expressions of these biomarkers (P<0.001, P=0.047, and P<0.001, respectively). Membranous β-catenin showed an opposite effect with its lower expression (≤75%) being associated with longer OS (P=0.020). There was significant association between PD-1 and PD-L1 expression (P=0.007) and significant association of tumor grade (WHO 2016) with membranous β-catenin (P<0.001), cytoplasmic β-catenin (P=0.005), pVHL (P=0.042), PD-L1 (P=0.049) and PD-1 (P=0.028) expression.

CONCLUSION

The present study provides the first data on the potential association and combined prognostic significance of frequency of primary cilia, PD-L1, Smoothened protein and β-catenin expression with the outcome in clear cell renal cell carcinoma.

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.

SLC17A9-PTHLH-EMT axis promotes proliferation and invasion of clear renal cell carcinoma

SLC17A9 is a vesicular ATP transport protein that plays an important role in determining cell functions and the onset and progression of different diseases. In this study, SLC17A9 was initially identified as a potential diagnostic and prognostic risk biomarker for clear cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC). Then, the aberrant expression levels of SLC17A9 were confirmed in both the cell lines and clinical tissues. Mechanistically, SLC17A9 could upregulate the expression of PTHLH, thus promoting epithelial-mesenchymal transition (EMT) in ccRCC. Functionally, SLC17A9 knockdown inhibited the proliferation, migration, and invasion activity of renal cancer cells, whereas its overexpression led to stronger cell viability and more malignant phenotype in vitro. The overexpression of SLC17A9 in vivo could significantly contribute to the growth of tumors. Finally, we found that SLC17A9 might be related to the drug resistance of vorinostat. Cumulatively, this study demonstrated that the SLC17A9-PTHLH-EMT axis could promote the progression of ccRCC.

Mechanistic Target of Rapamycin (mTOR) Inhibitors

Mechanistic target of rapamycin (mTOR) inhibitors are macrocyclic lactone antibiotics derived from Streptomyces hygroscopicus that prevent T lymphocyte activation and B cell differentiation. Unlike calcineurin inhibitors (CNIs) that inhibit cytokine production, mTOR inhibitors block the cytokine signal transduction to arrest cells in the G1 to S phase. This class of drugs is commonly used for post-transplantation and cancer management because of its immunosuppressive and antiproliferative properties, respectively. The potential uses of mTOR inhibitors are heavily explored because of their impact on cell growth and proliferation. However, mTOR inhibitors have a broad range of effects that can result in adverse reactions, but side effects can occur with other immunosuppressive agents as well. Thus, the performance of mTOR inhibitors is compared to the outcomes and adverse effects of other immunosuppressive drugs or the combination of other immunosuppressants and mTOR inhibitors. Because mTOR regulates many downstream pathways, mTOR inhibitors can affect these pathways to manage various diseases. Sirolimus (rapamycin) is approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to treat post-renal transplantation and lymphangioleiomyomatosis (LAM). Everolimus is approved by the FDA to treat postmenopausal advanced hormone receptor-positive, HER2-negative breast cancer in women, progressive neuroendocrine tumors of pancreatic origin (PNET), advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC), renal angiomyolipoma (AML) and tuberous sclerosis complex (TSC), and subependymal giant cell astrocytoma (SEGA) associated with TSC as well as renal and liver transplantation. Temsirolimus is approved by the FDA to treat advanced RCC. Opportunities to use mTOR inhibitors as therapy for other transplantation, metabolic disease, and cancer management are being researched. mTOR inhibitors are often called proliferation signal inhibitors (PSIs) because of their effects on proliferation pathways.

Playing the Devil's Advocate: Should We Give a Second Chance to mTOR Inhibition in Renal Clear Cell Carcinoma? - ie Strategies to Revert Resistance to mTOR Inhibitors

In the last decade, the inhibition of the mechanistic target of Rapamycin (mTOR) in renal clear cell carcinoma (RCC) has disappointed the clinician's expectations. Many clinical trials highlighted the low efficacy and unmanageable safety profile of first-generation mTOR inhibitors (Rapalogs), thus limiting their use in the clinical practice only to those patients who already failed several therapy lines. In this review, we analyze the major resistance mechanisms that undermine the efficacy of this class of drugs. Moreover, we describe some of the possible strategies to overcome the mechanisms of resistance and their clinical experimentation, with particular focus on novel mTOR inhibitors and the combinations of mTOR inhibitors and other anti-cancer drugs.

Gene Expression Signature Correlates with Outcomes in Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Patients Treated with Everolimus Alone or with a Vascular Disrupting Agent

Everolimus monotherapy use for metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) has diminished due to recent approvals of immune checkpoint and VEGF inhibitors. We hypothesized that gene expression associated with everolimus benefit may provide rationale to select appropriate patients. To address this hypothesis, tumors from a phase I/II trial that compared everolimus alone or with BNC105P, a vascular disrupting agent, were profiled using Nanostring as a discovery cohort. A phase III trial (CheckMate 025) was used for validation. Clinical benefit (CB) was defined as response or stable disease for ≥6 months. A propensity score covariate adjustment was used, and model discrimination performance was assessed using the area under the ROC curve (AUC). In a discovery cohort of 82 patients, 35 (43%) were treated with everolimus alone and 47 (57%) received everolimus + BNC105P. Median PFS (mPFS) was 4.9 (95% CI, 2.8-6.2) months. A four-gene signature (ASXL1, DUSP6, ERCC2, and HSPA6) correlated with CB with everolimus ± BNC105P [AUC, 86.9% (95% CI, 79.2-94.7)]. This was validated in 130 patients from CheckMate 025 treated with everolimus [AUC, 60.2% (95% CI, 49.7-70.7)]. Among 43 patients (52.4%) with low expression of an 18-gene signature, everolimus + BNC105P was associated with significantly longer mPFS compared with everolimus alone (10.4 vs. 6.9 months; HR, 0.49; 95% CI, 0.24-1.002; P = 0.047). These signatures warrant further validation to select patients who may benefit from everolimus alone or with a vascular disrupting agent.

Pembrolizumab plus axitinib for the treatment of advanced renal cell carcinoma

Introduction: The dominant paradigm of sequential therapy of metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) with single agents has recently been challenged by improved outcomes obtained with combined regimens with immune checkpoint inhibitors. These combined regimens include the combination of pembrolizumab plus axitinib.Areas covered: Here, we provide a brief overview of the current clinical data on the pembrolizumab plus axitinib combination including mechanism of action, pharmacokinetics, efficacy and safety profile.Expert opinion: Both agents targeting the vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) pathway and immune checkpoint inhibitors are active as single agents in mRCC. Improved outcomes have been demonstrated in phase 3 trials in comparison with sunitinib for the combinations of axitinib plus pembrolizumab, axitinib plus avelumab, bevacizumab plus atezolizumab, and ipilimumab plus nivolumab. Among these combinations, an OS benefit has, so far, demonstrated only for the combinations of axitinib with pembrolizumab and ipilimumab with nivolumab. Although there are currently no prospective data comparing the combination of ipilimumab and nivolumab with the combination of immune checkpoint inhibitors and VEGF inhibitors, currently available retrospective analyses indicate that these two approaches achieve comparable outcomes.

On the Shoulders of Giants: The Evolution of Renal Cell Carcinoma Treatment-Cytokines, Targeted Therapy, and Immunotherapy

The treatment of advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC) has evolved dramatically over the past 30 years, as has a better understanding of the biology of the disease, knowledge of multiple subtypes with distinct molecular abnormalities, and improved comprehension of the perturbed pathways that lead to the development and growth of RCC. This is no longer a monolithic disease, although the majority of tumors are of the clear cell subtype. However, progress is being made in other subtypes as well, as molecular profiles are better understood and as new agents show activity. Immunotherapies remain a major category of treatment, from cytokines to checkpoint inhibitors to ex vivo activated cellular therapy. Antiangiogenesis tyrosine kinase inhibitors are also an important part of the armamentarium. Because these approaches have evolved, we are now in the era of combination therapy using agents of differing mechanisms to try to achieve synergy to increase response rates and create durable responses leading to prolonged survival. Renal cell carcinoma as a tumor is unique in that there has always been a subset of patients who achieve complete responses that last for many years without subsequent treatment. Thus, the goal of further development is to enlarge this subset using new therapeutic approaches and to achieve further durable responses and treatment-free survival.

Combination therapy in metastatic renal cell carcinoma: Back to the future?

The treatment landscape of metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC), a chemotherapy-resistant disease, has dramatically changed in the last decade after the introduction of small molecule inhibitors targeting the vascular endothelial growth factor receptor and mammalian target of rapamycin kinases. The CheckMate 025 phase III trial in second line mRCC also introduced immunotherapy with immune-checkpoint inhibitors as an option in the management of mRCC. Both small molecules and immunotherapy are used as single agents and they are associated with different toxicities. Recent data demonstrated that the combination of 2 immunotherapies, nivolumab and ipilimumab, is more effective than tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKI) monotherapy as first line treatment in intermediate and poor risk mRCC. Furthermore, combination of immunotherapies and TKI has been tested in several trials to evaluate if the combo with agents presenting a different mechanism of action is more effective than monotherapy with TKI. During the past several years, combined therapy of cytokines doublets or cytokines and bevacizumab doublets demonstrated little improvement in clinical outcomes and a relevant toxicity profile. Conversely, the combination of new agents has been recently shown to improve survival in patients with metastatic disease, thus changing the treatment landscape of mRCC. This comprehensive review aims at summarizing the recent advances in the treatment of mRCC.

Targeted therapy for metastatic renal cell carcinoma

BACKGROUND

Several comparative randomised controlled trials (RCTs) have been performed including combinations of tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) and immune checkpoint inhibitors since the publication of a Cochrane Review on targeted therapy for metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) in 2008. This review represents an update of that original review.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of targeted therapies for clear cell mRCC in patients naïve to systemic therapy.

SEARCH METHODS

We performed a comprehensive search with no restrictions on language or publication status. The date of the latest search was 18 June 2020.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials, recruiting patients with clear cell mRCC naïve to previous systemic treatment. The index intervention was any TKI-based targeted therapy.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed the included studies and extracted data for the primary outcomes: progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS) and serious adverse events (SAEs); and the secondary outcomes: health-related quality of life (QoL), response rate and minor adverse events (AEs). We performed statistical analyses using a random-effects model and rated the certainty of evidence according to the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 18 RCTs reporting on 11,590 participants randomised across 18 comparisons. This abstract focuses on the primary outcomes of select comparisons. 1. Pazopanib versus sunitinib Pazopanib may result in little to no difference in PFS as compared to sunitinib (hazard ratio (HR) 1.05, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.90 to 1.23; 1 study, 1110 participants; low-certainty evidence). Based on the control event risk of 420 per 1000 in this trial at 12 months, this corresponds to 18 fewer participants experiencing PFS (95% CI 76 fewer to 38 more) per 1000 participants. Pazopanib may result in little to no difference in OS compared to sunitinib (HR 0.92, 95% CI 0.80 to 1.06; 1 study, 1110 participants; low-certainty evidence). Based on the control event risk of 550 per 1000 in this trial at 12 months, this corresponds to 27 more OSs (95% CI 19 fewer to 70 more) per 1000 participants. Pazopanib may result in little to no difference in SAEs as compared to sunitinib (risk ratio (RR) 1.01, 95% CI 0.94 to 1.09; 1 study, 1102 participants; low-certainty evidence). Based on the control event risk of 734 per 1000 in this trial, this corresponds to 7 more participants experiencing SAEs (95% CI 44 fewer to 66 more) per 1000 participants. 2. Sunitinib versus avelumab and axitinib Sunitinib probably reduces PFS as compared to avelumab plus axitinib (HR 1.45, 95% CI 1.17 to 1.80; 1 study, 886 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Based on the control event risk of 550 per 1000 in this trial at 12 months, this corresponds to 130 fewer participants experiencing PFS (95% CI 209 fewer to 53 fewer) per 1000 participants. Sunitinib may result in little to no difference in OS (HR 1.28, 95% CI 0.92 to 1.79; 1 study, 886 participants; low-certainty evidence). Based on the control event risk of 890 per 1000 in this trial at 12 months, this would result in 29 fewer OSs (95% CI 78 fewer to 8 more) per 1000 participants. Sunitinib may result in little to no difference in SAEs (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.93 to 1.10; 1 study, 873 participants; low-certainty evidence). Based on the control event risk of 705 per 1000 in this trial, this corresponds to 7 more SAEs (95% CI 49 fewer to 71 more) per 1000 participants.  3. Sunitinib versus pembrolizumab and axitinib Sunitinib probably reduces PFS as compared to pembrolizumab plus axitinib (HR 1.45, 95% CI 1.19 to 1.76; 1 study, 861 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Based on the control event risk of 590 per 1000 in this trial at 12 months, this corresponds to 125 fewer participants experiencing PFS (95% CI 195 fewer to 56 fewer) per 1000 participants. Sunitinib probably reduces OS (HR 1.90, 95% CI 1.36 to 2.65; 1 study, 861 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Based on the control event risk of 880 per 1000 in this trial at 12 months, this would result in 96 fewer OSs (95% CI 167 fewer to 40 fewer) per 1000 participants. Sunitinib may reduce SAEs as compared to pembrolizumab plus axitinib (RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.81 to 1.02; 1 study, 854 participants; low-certainty evidence) although the CI includes the possibility of no effect. Based on the control event risk of 604 per 1000 in this trial, this corresponds to 60 fewer SAEs (95% CI 115 fewer to 12 more) per 1000 participants.  4. Sunitinib versus nivolumab and ipilimumab Sunitinib may reduce PFS as compared to nivolumab plus ipilimumab (HR 1.30, 95% CI 1.11 to 1.52; 1 study, 847 participants; low-certainty evidence). Based on the control event risk of 280 per 1000 in this trial at 30 months' follow-up, this corresponds to 89 fewer PFSs (95% CI 136 fewer to 37 fewer) per 1000 participants. Sunitinib reduces OS (HR 1.52, 95% CI 1.23 to 1.89; 1 study, 847 participants; high-certainty evidence). Based on the control event risk 600 per 1000 in this trial at 30 months, this would result in 140 fewer OSs (95% CI 219 fewer to 67 fewer) per 1000 participants. Sunitinib probably increases SAEs (RR 1.37, 95% CI 1.22 to 1.53; 1 study, 1082 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Based on the control event risk of 457 per 1000 in this trial, this corresponds to 169 more SAEs (95% CI 101 more to 242 more) per 1000 participants.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Based on the low to high certainty of evidence, several combinations of immune checkpoint inhibitors appear to be superior to single-agent targeted therapy in terms of PFS and OS, and with a favourable AE profile. Some single-agent targeted therapies demonstrated a similar or improved oncological outcome compared to others; minor differences were observed for AE within this group. The certainty of evidence was variable ranging from high to very low and all comparisons were based on single trials.

Precision medicine in medical oncology: hope, disappointment and reality

During the past 20 years, targeted therapy based on the understanding of tumor biology has been complementing or even replacing cytotoxic agents that have dominated pharmacotherapy of cancer since the conception of medical oncology. Unfortunately, the fact that targeted therapies with potential to induce cure or at least substantially prolong survival are still not available for many common solid tumors results in skepticism or even nihilism. On the one hand, biomarker research is not keeping pace with the introduction of new agents, while on the other hand, effective drugs are still not available for many potential molecular targets associated with malignant transformation and tumor progression. However, targeted therapies have already transformed the natural history and clinical outcomes not only in patients with rare malignancies like gastrointestinal stromal tumor but also with many common tumors, e.g. breast cancer, malignant melanoma, non-small cell lung cancer or renal cell carcinoma. For further advances, a multidisciplinary effort is indispensible that should, above all, involve the collaboration of medical oncology and laboratory medicine.

What is the optimum systemic treatment for advanced/metastatic renal cell carcinoma of favourable, intermediate and poor risk, respectively? A systematic review and network meta-analysis

PURPOSE

The optimum systemic therapies for advanced/metastatic renal cell carcinoma (RCC) of favourable, intermediate and poor risk have not been established. We aimed to compare and rank the effects associated with systemic therapies in the first-line setting.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, Cochrane databases, Web of Science and ClinicalTrials.gov for randomised controlled trials (RCT) published up to February 2020 of all available treatments for advanced/metastatic RCC. Analysis was done on a Bayesian framework.

RESULTS

15 unique RCTs including 8995 patients were identified. For advanced/metastatic RCC of favourable risk, avelumab plus axitinib was associated with a significantly higher improvement in progression-free survival (PFS) than sunitinib (HR 0.57, 95% CI 0.34 to 0.96). For intermediate-risk patients, cabozantinib, nivolumab plus ipilimumab, pembrolizumab plus axitinib and avelumab plus axitinib were associated with significantly higher improvement in PFS than sunitinib (HR 0.63, 95% CI 0.44 to 0.97; HR 0.66, 95% CI 0.53 to 0.81; HR 0.58, 95% CI 0.44 to 0.80; HR 0.62, 95% CI 0.47 to 0.83, respectively); pembrolizumab plus axitinib and nivolumab plus ipilimumab were associated with significantly higher improvement in overall survival (OS) than sunitinib (HR 0.53, 95% CI 0.34 to 0.81; HR 0.66, 95% CI 0.50 to 0.87, respectively). For poor-risk patients, nivolumab plus ipilimumab and pembrolizumab plus axitinib were associated with significantly higher improvement in PFS than sunitinib (HR 0.57, 95% CI 0.43 to 0.76; HR 0.48, 95% CI 0.30 to 0.82, respectively); nivolumab plus ipilimumab and pembrolizumab plus axitinib were significantly more efficacious for OS than sunitinib (HR 0.57, 95% CI 0.39 to 0.883; HR 0.43, 95% CI 0.23 to 0.80, respectively). For OS, there were 81% and 78% probabilities that pembrolizumab plus axitinib was the best option for intermediate-risk and poor-risk patients, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Avelumab plus axitinib might be the optimum treatment for advanced/metastatic RCC of favourable risk. Pembrolizumab plus axitinib might be the optimum treatment for intermediate-risk and poor-risk patients.

Potential utilization of neopterin measurements in the assessment of pyrexia in metastatic melanoma treated with combined targeted therapy: a case report

In patients with metastatic melanoma the advent of targeted therapy and immune checkpoint inhibitors has transformed the management of advanced and metastatic disease, resulting in improved outcomes. Neopterin is a biomarker of immune activation increased in cancer as well as in other conditions associated with immune activation. We present a case of a patient with advanced metastatic melanoma responding to the combination targeted therapy with dabrafenib and trametinib. The treatment was complicated by a fever that was accompanied by a marked rise in serum and urinary neopterin concentrations. Present case report illustrates not only the efficacy of combined targeted therapy, but also the utilization of neopterin measurements in the diagnosis and monitoring of pyrexia in patients with metastatic malignant melanoma.

Molecular Aspects and Future Perspectives of Cytokine-Based Anti-cancer Immunotherapy

Cytokine-based immunotherapy is a promising field in the cancer treatment, since cytokines, as proteins of the immune system, are able to modulate the host immune response toward cancer cell, as well as directly induce tumor cell death. Since a low dose monotherapy with some cytokines has no significant therapeutic results and a high dose treatment leads to a number of side effects caused by the pleiotropic effect of cytokines, the problem of understanding the influence of cytokines on the immune cells involved in the pro- and anti-tumor immune response remains a pressing one. Immune system cells carry CD makers on their surface which can be used to identify various populations of cells of the immune system that play different roles in pro- and anti-tumor immune responses. This review discusses the functions and specific CD markers of various immune cell populations which are reported to participate in the regulation of the immune response against the tumor. The results of research studies and clinical trials investigating the effect of cytokine therapy on the regulation of immune cell populations and their surface markers are also discussed. Current trends in the development of cancer immunotherapy, as well as the role of cytokines in combination with other therapeutic agents, are also discussed.

Activity of lenvatinib plus everolimus combination in a heavily pretreated patient with papillary renal cell carcinoma: a case report

BACKGROUND

Papillary renal cell carcinoma (pRCC) represents the second most common histologic subtype of renal cell carcinoma and comprises 2 subtypes. Prognosis for type 2 is associated with poor clinical outcome. Current guidelines are based on phase II trials, phase III trials in patients with clear cell histology, or retrospective data.

CASE DESCRIPTION

To our knowledge, we describe for the first time a case of a patient with heavily pretreated metastatic pRCC who benefited from the combination of lenvatinib plus everolimus for more than 2 years.

CONCLUSION

According to immunohistologic and biological findings in our patient both on primary tumor and liver metastasis, we hypothesize that selected patients with metastatic pRCC, progressed to standard/available treatments (including angiogenic drugs, mTOR inhibitors, and immunotherapy) and dissociated response to everolimus, could benefit from adding lenvatinib to everolimus.

Outcomes According to MSKCC Risk Score with Focus on the Intermediate-Risk Group in Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Patients Treated with First-Line Sunitinib: A Retrospective Analysis of 2390 Patients

Background: The Memorial Sloan–Kettering Cancer Center (MSKCC) prognostic model has been widely used for the prediction of the outcome of metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) patients treated with systemic therapies, however, data from large studies are limited. This study aimed at the evaluation of the impact of the MSKCC score on the outcomes in mRCC patients treated with first-line sunitinib, with a focus on the intermediate-risk group. Methods: Clinical data from 2390 mRCC patients were analysed retrospectively. Progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and objective response rate (ORR) were analysed according to the MSKCC risk score. Results: ORR, median PFS, and OS for patients with one risk factor were 26.7%, 10.1, and 28.2 months versus 18.7%, 6.2, and 16.2 months, respectively, for those with two risk factors (ORR: p = 0.001, PFS: p < 0.001, OS: p < 0.001). ORR, median PFS, and OS were 33.0%, 17.0, and 44.7 months versus 24.1%, 9.0, and 24.1 months versus 13.4%, 4.5, and 9.5 months in the favourable-, intermediate-, and poor-risk groups, respectively (ORR: p < 0.001, PFS: p < 0.001, OS: p < 0.001). Conclusions: The results of the present retrospective study demonstrate the suitability of the MSKCC model in mRCC patients treated with first-line sunitinib and suggest different outcomes between patients with one or two risk factors.

Role of immune checkpoint inhibitor-based therapies for metastatic renal cell carcinoma in the first-line setting: A Bayesian network analysis

BACKGROUND

Several novel immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI)-based treatments exhibited promising survival benefits for metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC), yet there is no current guidance regarding the optimum first-line regimen. We performed this network analysis to compare the efficacy and safety of all available treatments for mRCC.

METHODS

A systematic search of literature was conducted up to April 30, 2019, and the analysis was done on a Bayesian fixed-effect model.

FINDINGS

Twenty-five randomized clinical trials (RCTs) involving 13,010 patients were included in this study. The results showed that for overall survival, pembrolizumab plus axitinib (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.53; 95% credible interval [CrI]: 0.38-0.73) and nivolumab plus ipilimumab (HR: 0.63; 95% CrI: 0.50-0.79) were significantly more effective than sunitinib, and pembrolizumab plus axitinib was probably (68%) to be the best choice. For progression-free survival, cabozantinib (HR: 0.66; 95% CrI: 0.46-0.94), pembrolizumab plus axitinib (HR: 0.69; 95% CrI: 0.57-0.84), avelumab plus axitinib (HR: 0.69; 95% CrI: 0.56-0.85), nivolumab plus ipilimumab (HR: 0.82; 95% CrI: 0.68-0.99), and atezolizumab plus bevacizumab (HR: 0.86; 95% CrI: 0.74-0.99) were statistically superior to sunitinib, and cabozantinib was likely (43%) to be the preferred options. Nivolumab plus ipilimumab (OR: 0.50; 95% CrI: 0.28-0.84), and atezolizumab plus bevacizumab (OR: 0.56; 95% CrI: 0.36-0.83) were associated with significantly lower rate of high-grade adverse events than sunitinib.

INTERPRETATION

Our findings demonstrate that pembrolizumab plus axitinib might be the best treatment for mRCC, while nivolumab plus ipilimumab has the most favorable balance between efficacy and acceptability, and may provide new guidance to make treatment decisions. FUND: This research was supported by the Henan Provincial Scientific and Technological Research Project (Grant No. 192102310036).

Co-delivery of everolimus and vinorelbine via a tumor-targeted liposomal formulation inhibits tumor growth and metastasis in RCC

Background

Renal cell carcinoma (RCC) is notorious for its resistance towards chemotherapy and radiation therapy in general. Combination therapy is often helpful in alleviating the resistance mechanisms by targeting multiple signaling pathways but is usually more toxic than monotherapy. Co-encapsulation of multiple therapeutic agents in a tumor-targeted drug delivery platform is a promising strategy to mitigate these limitations.

Methods

A tumor-targeted liposomal formulation was prepared using phospholipids, cholesterol, DSPE-(PEG)₂₀₀₀-OMe and a proprietary tumor-targeting-peptide (TTP)-conjugated lipopeptide. An efficient method was optimized to encapsulate everolimus and vinorelbine in this liposomal formulation. Single drug-loaded liposomes were also prepared for comparison. Finally, the drug-loaded liposomes were tested in vitro and in vivo in two different RCC cell lines.

Results

The tumor-targeted liposomal formulation demonstrated excellent tumor-specific uptake. The dual drug-loaded liposomes exhibited significantly higher growth inhibition in vitro compared to the single drug-loaded liposomes in two different RCC cell lines. Similarly, the dual drug-loaded liposomes demonstrated significantly higher suppression of tumor growth compared to the single drug-loaded liposomes in two different subcutaneous RCC xenografts. In addition, the dual drug-loaded liposomes instigated significant reduction in lung metastasis in those experiments.

Conclusion

Taken together, this study demonstrates that co-delivery of everolimus and vinorelbine with a tumor-targeted liposomal formulation is an effective approach to achieve improved therapeutic outcome in RCC.

Lenvantinib: A Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitor of VEGFR 1-3, FGFR 1-4, PDGFRα, KIT and RET

Lenvatinib is an oral receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) with activity against vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) receptors 1-3, fibroblast growth factor receptors (FGFR) 1-4, platelet-derived growth factor receptor-alpha (PDGFRα), and RET and KIT proto-oncogenes. Lenvatinib is approved for the treatment of radioiodine-refractory differentiated thyroid cancer and in combination with everolimus for the treatment of advanced renal cell carcinoma following anti-VEGF treatment. In hepatocellular carcinoma lenvatinib was non inferior to sorafenib in first line with an improved progression-free survival and approval in this indication is expected. Lenvatinib is currently investigated for further indications as single agent and in combinations. Side effects include typical TKI induced toxicities such as hypertension, diarrhea, hypothyroidism, and fatigue.

Everolimus

Everolimus (RAD001) is an oral protein kinase inhibitor of the mTOR (mammalian target of rapamycin) serine/threonine kinase signal transduction pathway. The mTOR pathway regulates cell growth, proliferation and survival, and is frequently deregulated in cancer.The EMA has approved Everolimus as Afinitor^® for the treatment of hormone receptor-positive, HER2/neu-negative advanced breast cancer, in combination with exemestane, in postmenopausal women without symptomatic visceral disease after recurrence or progression following a nonsteroidal aromatase inhibitor, for the treatment of unresectable or metastatic, well- or moderately differentiated neuroendocrine tumors of pancreatic origin in adults with progressive disease, and for the treatment of unresectable or metastatic, well-differentiated (Grade 1 or Grade 2) nonfunctional neuroendocrine tumors of gastrointestinal or lung origin in adults with progressive disease, and for the treatment of patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma, whose disease has progressed on or after treatment with VEGF-targeted therapy And as Votubia^® for the treatment of adult patients with renal angiomyolipoma associated with tuberous sclerosis complex (TSC), who are at risk of complications (based on factors such as tumor size or presence of aneurysm, or presence of multiple or bilateral tumors) but who do not require immediate surgery, and for the treatment of patients with subependymal giant cell astrocytoma (SEGA) associated with TSC who require therapeutic intervention but are not amenable to surgery, and as an add-on treatment in patients from 2 years of age with seizures related to TSC that have not responded to other treatments ( https://www.novartis.com/news/media-releases/novartis-drug-votubiar-receives-eu-approval-treat-refractory-partial-onset ). The FDA has approved Everolimus as Afinitor^® for the treatment of postmenopausal women with advanced hormone receptor-positive, HER2-negative breast cancer in combination with exemestane, after the failure of treatment with letrozole or anastrozole, for the treatment of adult patients with progressive neuroendocrine tumors of pancreatic origin (PNET) with unresectable, locally advanced or metastatic disease, for the treatment of adult patients with advanced RCC after failure of treatment with sunitinib or sorafenib, for the treatment of adult patients with renal angiomyolipoma and tuberous sclerosis complex (TSC), not requiring immediate surgery. for the treatment of adult and pediatric patients, 3 years of age or older, with SEGA associated with TSC who require therapeutic intervention but are not candidates for curative surgical resection. Everolimus shows promising clinical activity in additional indications. Multiple Phase II and Phase III trials of everolimus alone or in combination and will help to further elucidate the role of mTOR in oncology. For a review on everolimus as immunosuppressant, please consult other sources.

The combination of bevacizumab/temsirolimus after first-line anti-VEGF therapy in advanced renal-cell carcinoma: a clinical and biomarker study

BACKGROUND

Vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) targeting represents the standard first-line therapy for metastatic renal-cell carcinoma (mRCC), while blocking the mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) is effective in relapsed disease. Since continuing blockade of VEGF may be of value, we studied the combination of bevacizumab with temsirolimus in mRCC patients relapsing after first-line treatment.

METHODS

A prospective, phase II study of the combination of bevacizumab (10 mg/kg, every 2 weeks) with temsirolimus (25 mg weekly) in patients with mRCC who failed first-line anti-VEGF treatment. 6-month progression-free survival (PFS) rate was the primary end point. The association of VEGFa, VEGFR2, fibroblast growth factor (FGF) b, platelet-derived growth factor receptor (PDGFR) a and PDGFRb with prognostic factors and outcomes were also studied.

RESULTS

39 patients were enrolled. First-line therapy included: sunitinib (n = 16), bevacizumab/interferon (n = 12), pazopanib (n = 10), sorafenib (n = 1). After a median follow-up of 37 months, 6-month PFS rate was 50.9% [95% confidence interval (CI) 33.8-65.7], median time to progression 6.8 months (95% CI 5.5-9.2) and median overall survival (OS) 18.2 months (95% CI 12.9-27.2). Objective response rate was 27%. The most common AEs were metabolic (33%), renal (8%) and gastrointestinal (GI) (7%). The most common grade 3-5 AEs were GI (18%), infections (14%) and metabolic (25%). Toxicity was the most frequent cause of treatment discontinuation (40%). FGFb levels were associated with OS.

CONCLUSIONS

In concert with recent data, our study confirms the efficacy of anti-VEGF/anti-mTOR combination in mRCC relapsing after anti-VEGF therapy. Toxicity was considerable leading to high rate of treatment discontinuations.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01264341.

Oral stomatitis and mTOR inhibitors: A review of current evidence in 20,915 patients

BACKGROUND

Traditional treatment of malignancies with chemotherapeutic agents is often affected by the damage inflicted on non-cancerous cells. Toxicities of the oral cavity, such as mucositis and stomatitis, are some of the most significant and unavoidable toxicities associated with anti-cancer therapies. For such reason, in the last decades, newer targeted agents have been developed aiming to decrease the rates of side effects on healthy cells. Unfortunately, targeted anti-cancer therapies also showed significant rate of toxicity on healthy tissues. mTOR inhibitors showed some adverse events, such as hyperglycemia, hyperlipidemia, hypophosphatemia, hematologic toxicities, and mucocutaneous eruption, but the most important are still stomatitis and skin rash, often reported as dose-limiting side effects.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A search of the literature was performed by authors on the PubMed online database using the following key words: "sirolimus" OR "everolimus" OR "temsirolimus" OR "deforolimus" OR "ridaforolimus" combined with the Boolean operator AND with the terms: "stomatitis" OR "mucositis" OR "oral pain." Titles and abstracts of 382 potentially relevant studies were screened; of these, 114 studies were excluded because they did not report the inclusion criteria. In the second round, 268 studies were read full-text, but only 135 reported the inclusion criteria and were included for data extraction. Of the included studies, 95 referred to everolimus use, 16 to ridaforolimus, and 26 to temsirolimus (two studies referred to both everolimus and temsirolimus).

RESULTS

The incidence rate of stomatitis according to the agent used was 25.07% (3,959/15,787) for everolimus, 27.02% (724/2,679) for temsirolimus, and 54.76% (598/1,092) for ridaforolimus. All the three agents analyzed showed high rates of low-grade stomatitis (G1-G2), while the onset of severe stomatitis (G3-G4) was rare.

CONCLUSIONS

Analysis of the reports with patients treated with everolimus, temsirolimus, and ridaforolimus showed a clear prevalence of stomatitis grade 1 or 2. These data differ from that of patients treated with conventional chemotherapy in which mucositis is predominantly of grade 3 or 4.

Concomitant Radioembolization and Immune Checkpoint Inhibition in Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma

This case represents the challenge and creativity necessary when treating patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma who have been exposed to multiple lines of therapy. At present, treatment with immune checkpoint inhibition has stabilized and improved the metastatic disease of this patient with the exception of hepatic lesions. This isolated progression within the liver led the employment of radioembolization, which successfully treated those metastases. This is the first documented case of metastatic renal cell carcinoma controlled with concurrent use of immune checkpoint inhibition and radioembolization for both extrahepatic and hepatic metastases, respectively. This case can be construed as a potential example of the abscopal effect and may provide the basis for understanding this type of response in select patients.

Lenvatinib for the treatment of kidney cancer

INTRODUCTION

Sequential administration of single targeted agents has evolved as the dominant paradigm in advanced RCC treatment. Lenvatinib plus everolimus is the first combination therapy in advanced RCC to show improvement in efficacy compared to monotherapy in advanced RCC while maintaining manageable toxicity profile. Areas covered: This review gives a brief overview of the contemporary clinical data on lenvatinib including its mechanism of action, pharmacokinetics, efficacy and safety profile in combination with everolimus. The clinical applications of lenvatinib in combination with everolimus are addressed within the context of the current competitive therapeutic landscape of RCC. Expert commentary: Lenvatinib is a new VEGF receptor-targeted tyrosine kinase inhibitor approved in combination with everolimus for second-line therapy in patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma progressing on a first-line VEGF receptor-targeted tyrosine kinase inhibitor. The combination of lenvatinib with everolimus significantly improved progression-free survival compared with everolimus with a hazard ratio of 0.40 and increased objective response to 43%. Optimal sequence of therapy targeting the tumor and the immune system remains a challenge and further investigation is warranted.

A randomized phase II trial of interleukin-2 and interferon-α plus bevacizumab versus interleukin-2 and interferon-α in metastatic renal-cell carcinoma (mRCC): results from the Danish Renal Cancer Group (DaRenCa) study-1

BACKGROUND

Interleukin-2 (IL2)-based immunotherapy is curative for a small subset of patients with metastatic renal-cell carcinoma (mRCC). Preclinical data suggests that bevacizumab (BEV), a humanized anti-VEGF monoclonal antibody, has potential immunomodulatory effects by permitting efficient natural killer (NK) cell-mediated killing and by reverting immune suppression.

PATIENT AND METHODS

We performed a randomized phase II study comparing IL2/IFN (interferon)/BEV with IL2/IFN in favourable/intermediate-risk mRCC patients. One hundred and eighteen patients received IFN 3 MIU subcutaneously (sc) daily and IL2 2.4 MIU/m² sc twice daily, 5 days per week for two consecutive weeks every 28-day-cycle, for 9 months; or supplemented with BEV 10 mg/kg, every 2 weeks intravenously (iv) until progression, unacceptable toxicity, or 1 year following no evidence of disease (NED). Primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS).

RESULTS

Baseline characteristics were well-balanced between the two arms; metastasis-free interval <1 year (75 versus 76%); prior nephrectomy (85 versus 86%); MSKCC favourable/intermediate-risk group (51/49 versus 52%/48%); three or more disease sites (41 versus 44%), respectively. The median PFS was 8.0 mo (95% CI, 4.2-11.9) with IL2/IFN/BEV and 8.1 mo (95% CI, 5.1-11.0) with IL2/IFN, p = .73. There was no difference in secondary endpoints, IL2/IFN/BEV versus IL2/IFN; median time-to-treatment failure (7.4 versus 5.6 mo, p = .54), response rate (44.1 versus 28.8%, p = .13), surgery of residual disease (17.0 versus 17.0%, p = 1.0), patients achieving NED (3.4 versus 8.5%, p = .44), and median overall survival (30.3 versus 34.1 mo, p = .39), respectively. TKI post progression was well-balanced (85 versus 78%). No new/unexpected toxicity was observed. Most common Grade 3/4 adverse events for IL2/IFN/BEV and IL2/IFN were fatigue (64 versus 61%), flu-like symptoms (37 versus 41%) and thrombosis (6.8 versus 18.6%, p = .01), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The addition of BEV to IL-2/IFN did not add efficacy in mRCC. (ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01274273.).

Advances in treatment of metastatic renal cell carcinoma

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Multiple agents, including vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) inhibitors and mammalian target of rapamycin inhibitors have been approved over the past decade for the treatment of metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). Here, we focus on nivolumab, cabozantinib, and lenvatinib plus everolimus, agents that have recently emerged with positive clinical data leading to 'Food and Drug Administration approval or pending approval in mRCC. We also review the development of novel agents of interest showing promise in mRCC as part of combination therapy'.

RECENT FINDINGS

Nivolumab and cabozantinib both offer improved survival over everolimus in the second-line treatment of mRCC. Lenvatinib plus everolimus has similarly shown encouraging survival benefits in a phase II trial for the second-line setting. Novel combinations in mRCC, including dual immune checkpoint blockade, VEGF and programmed death 1 inhibition, VEGF and vaccine therapy, dual angiogenic blockade, and VEGF-directed therapy with nanoparticle-containing camptothecin have shown promising activity in early-phase trials.

SUMMARY

Multiple promising agents are available in the treatment of mRCC. The appropriate sequencing of agents in the treatment of mRCC may become further elucidated by future studies that prospectively analyze potential biomarkers to identify patients who will derive the greatest benefit from VEGF, mammalian target of rapamycin, or checkpoint inhibitors.

Lenvatinib in the management of metastatic renal cell carcinoma: a promising combination therapy?

INTRODUCTION

To date, results of combination therapy studies have shown no meaningful clinical benefit over monotherapy and an unacceptably high degree of toxicity in the treatment of metastatic renal cell carcinoma (RCC), with the exception of a combination of immune-checkpoint inhibitors and the association of lenvatinib with everolimus. Lenvatinib is a potent multi-targeted tyrosine kinase inhibitor that targets VEGFR pathways. Everolimus inhibits primarily mTORC1 complex, a downstream effecter of the intracellular PI3K/AKT/mTOR pathway. The association of these two drugs was demonstrated to enhance the inhibitory activity against VEGF and FGF-induced angiogenesis by a vertical inhibition of angiogenic signaling pathways, suggesting a synergistic activity. Areas covered: In this review we summarize the lenvatinib pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, characteristics and the main clinical trial that showed lenvatinib activity in advanced RCC. Expert opinion: Lenvatinib plus everolimus showed promising results in a phase II trial, leading to FDA approval of this combination. Their synergic action on inhibiting the VEGF/VEGFR, FGF (a compensatory mechanism to VEGFR inhibition) and mTOR pathway could be a potential mechanism to overcome treatment resistance. Given that the activity of lenvatinib as an immune-regulator in tumor microenvironment has been demonstrated in cell lines, novel combinations, in particular with immune-checkpoint inhibitors, are under development.

Drug discovery targeting the mTOR pathway

Mechanistic target of rapamycin (mTOR) is the kinase subunit of two structurally and functionally distinct large multiprotein complexes, referred to as mTOR complex 1 (mTORC1) and mTORC2. mTORC1 and mTORC2 play key physiological roles as they control anabolic and catabolic processes in response to external cues in a variety of tissues and organs. However, mTORC1 and mTORC2 activities are deregulated in widespread human diseases, including cancer. Cancer cells take advantage of mTOR oncogenic signaling to drive their proliferation, survival, metabolic transformation, and metastatic potential. Therefore, mTOR lends itself very well as a therapeutic target for innovative cancer treatment. mTOR was initially identified as the target of the antibiotic rapamycin that displayed remarkable antitumor activity in vitro Promising preclinical studies using rapamycin and its derivatives (rapalogs) demonstrated efficacy in many human cancer types, hence supporting the launch of numerous clinical trials aimed to evaluate the real effectiveness of mTOR-targeted therapies. However, rapamycin and rapalogs have shown very limited activity in most clinical contexts, also when combined with other drugs. Thus, novel classes of mTOR inhibitors with a stronger antineoplastic potency have been developed. Nevertheless, emerging clinical data suggest that also these novel mTOR-targeting drugs may have a weak antitumor activity. Here, we summarize the current status of available mTOR inhibitors and highlight the most relevant results from both preclinical and clinical studies that have provided valuable insights into both their efficacy and failure.

Resistance to Targeted Therapies in Renal Cancer: The Importance of Changing the Mechanism of Action

Renal cell carcinoma (RCC) is a complex disease characterized by mutations in several genes. Loss of function of the von Hippel-Lindau (VHL) tumour suppressor gene is a very common finding in RCC and leads to up-regulation of hypoxia-inducible factor (HIF)-responsive genes accountable for angiogenesis and cell growth, such as platelet-derived growth factor (PDGF) and vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF). Binding of these proteins to their cognate tyrosine kinase receptors on endothelial cells promotes angiogenesis. Promotion of angiogenesis is in part due to the activation of the phosphatidylinositol-3-kinase (PI3K)/AKT/mechanistic target of rapamycin (mTOR) pathway. Inhibition of this pathway decreases protein translation and inhibits both angiogenesis and tumour cell proliferation. Although tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) stand as the main first-line treatment option for advanced RCC, eventually all patients will become resistant to TKIs. Resistance can be overcome by using second-line treatments with different mechanisms of action, such as inhibitors of mTOR, c-MET, programmed death 1 (PD-1) receptor, or the combination of an mTOR inhibitor (mTORi) with a TKI. In this article, we briefly review current evidence regarding mechanisms of resistance in RCC and treatment strategies to overcome resistance with a special focus on the PI3K/AKT/mTOR pathway.

Chronic active Epstein-Barr virus infection as the initial symptom in a Janus kinase 3 deficiency child: Case report and literature review

RATIONALE

With the progress of sequencing technology, an increasing number of atypical primary immunodeficiency (PID) patients have been discovered, including Janus kinase 3 (JAK3) gene deficiency.

PATIENT CONCERNS

We report a patient who presented with chronic active Epstein-Barr virus (CAEBV) infection but responded poorly to treatment with ganciclovir.

DIAGNOSES

Next-generation sequencing (NGS) was performed, including all known PID genes, after which Sanger sequencing was performed to verify the results. Genetic analysis revealed that our patient had 2 novel compound heterozygous mutations of JAK3, a gene previously reported to cause a rare form of autosomal recessive severe combined immunodeficiency with recurrent infections. The p.H27Q mutation came from his father, while p. R222H from his mother. Thus, his diagnosis was corrected for JAK3-deficiency PID and CAEBV.

INTERVENTIONS

Maintenance treatment of subcutaneous injection of recombinant human interferon α-2a was given to our patient with 2 MU, 3 times a week.

OUTCOMES

Interferon alpha was applied and the EBV infection was gradually controlled and his symptoms ameliorated remarkably. Our patient is in good health now and did not have relapses.

LESSONS

The diagnoses of PID should be taken into consideration when CAEBV patients respond poorly to conventional treatments. Good results of our patient indicate that interferon α-2a may be an alternative treatment for those who are unwilling to accept hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) like our patient. Literature review identified 59 additional cases of JAK3 deficiency with various infections.

Genitourinary tumours in the targeted therapies era: new advances in clinical practice and future perspectives

Genitourinary cancers represent a heterogeneous group of malignancies arising from genitourinary tract, and are responsible for almost 359 000 newly diagnosed cases and 58 420 related deaths in USA. Continuous advances in cancer genetics and genomics have contributed towards changing the management paradigms of these neoplasms. Neoangiogenesis, through the activation of the tyrosine-kinase receptors signalling pathways, represents the key mediator event in promoting tumour proliferation, differentiation, invasiveness and motility. In the last decade, several treatments have been developed with the specific aim of targeting different cell pathways that have been recognized to drive tumour progression. The following review attempts to provide a comprehensive overview of the literature, focusing on new advances in targeted therapies for genitourinary tumours. Furthermore, the promising results of the latest clinical trials and future perspectives will be discussed.

Clinical use of lenvatinib in combination with everolimus for the treatment of advanced renal cell carcinoma

INTRODUCTION

Renal cell carcinoma (RCC) represents 2%-3% of all cancers in adults, and its pathogenesis is mainly related to altered cellular response to hypoxia. Lenvatinib, a novel multitarget tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI), represents a therapeutic option, in combination with mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) inhibitor everolimus, for the treatment of metastatic RCC (mRCC).

AIM

The objective of this article is to review the evidence about the treatment of mRCC with combination of lenvatinib plus everolimus.

EVIDENCE REVIEW

Phase I studies supported clinical activity of lenvatinib in mRCC. A randomized, Phase II, open-label, multicenter trial demonstrated the clinical efficacy of combination treatment with lenvatinib plus everolimus in patients with progressive mRCC after prior therapy with TKI. Median progression-free survival was improved by 9 months with the combination therapy compared to the single-agent everolimus, with an overall response rate of 43% for the experimental regimen. Lenvatinib plus everolimus appeared to be slightly less toxic than single-agent lenvatinib and more toxic than single-agent everolimus; grade 3-4 adverse events occurred in 71% of patients. Currently, lenvatinib plus everolimus has US Food and Drug Administration approval for its use in mRCC after failure of previous treatment with TKI.

CONCLUSION

The combination therapy with lenvatinib plus everolimus might be a promising choice for second-line treatment of mRCC patients. Based on the results of the Phase II trial, it is possible to speculate that the combination therapy could be appropriate for patients with high disease burden or strongly symptomatic patients.

Immunotherapy for metastatic renal cell carcinoma

BACKGROUND

Since the mid-2000s, the field of metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) has experienced a paradigm shift from non-specific therapy with broad-acting cytokines to specific regimens, which directly target the cancer, the tumour microenvironment, or both.Current guidelines recommend targeted therapies with agents such as sunitinib, pazopanib or temsirolimus (for people with poor prognosis) as the standard of care for first-line treatment of people with mRCC and mention non-specific cytokines as an alternative option for selected patients.In November 2015, nivolumab, a checkpoint inhibitor directed against programmed death-1 (PD-1), was approved as the first specific immunotherapeutic agent as second-line therapy in previously treated mRCC patients.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of immunotherapies either alone or in combination with standard targeted therapies for the treatment of metastatic renal cell carcinoma and their efficacy to maximize patient benefit.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE (Ovid), Embase (Ovid), ISI Web of Science and registers of ongoing clinical trials in November 2016 without language restrictions. We scanned reference lists and contacted experts in the field to obtain further information.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs with or without blinding involving people with mRCC.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We collected and analyzed studies according to the published protocol. Summary statistics for the primary endpoints were risk ratios (RRs) and mean differences (MD) with their 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We rated the quality of evidence using GRADE methodology and summarized the quality and magnitude of relative and absolute effects for each primary outcome in our 'Summary of findings' tables.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified eight studies with 4732 eligible participants and an additional 13 ongoing studies. We categorized studies into comparisons, all against standard therapy accordingly as first-line (five comparisons) or second-line therapy (one comparison) for mRCC.Interferon (IFN)-α monotherapy probably increases one-year overall mortality compared to standard targeted therapies with temsirolimus or sunitinib (RR 1.30, 95% CI 1.13 to 1.51; 2 studies; 1166 participants; moderate-quality evidence), may lead to similar quality of life (QoL) (e.g. MD -5.58 points, 95% CI -7.25 to -3.91 for Functional Assessment of Cancer - General (FACT-G); 1 study; 730 participants; low-quality evidence) and may slightly increase the incidence of adverse events (AEs) grade 3 or greater (RR 1.17, 95% CI 1.03 to 1.32; 1 study; 408 participants; low-quality evidence).There is probably no difference between IFN-α plus temsirolimus and temsirolimus alone for one-year overall mortality (RR 1.13, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.34; 1 study; 419 participants; moderate-quality evidence), but the incidence of AEs of 3 or greater may be increased (RR 1.30, 95% CI 1.17 to 1.45; 1 study; 416 participants; low-quality evidence). There was no information on QoL.IFN-α alone may slightly increase one-year overall mortality compared to IFN-α plus bevacizumab (RR 1.17, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.36; 2 studies; 1381 participants; low-quality evidence). This effect is probably accompanied by a lower incidence of AEs of grade 3 or greater (RR 0.77, 95% CI 0.71 to 0.84; 2 studies; 1350 participants; moderate-quality evidence). QoL could not be evaluated due to insufficient data.Treatment with IFN-α plus bevacizumab or standard targeted therapy (sunitinib) may lead to similar one-year overall mortality (RR 0.37, 95% CI 0.13 to 1.08; 1 study; 83 participants; low-quality evidence) and AEs of grade 3 or greater (RR 1.18, 95% CI 0.85 to 1.62; 1 study; 82 participants; low-quality evidence). QoL could not be evaluated due to insufficient data.Treatment with vaccines (e.g. MVA-5T4 or IMA901) or standard therapy may lead to similar one-year overall mortality (RR 1.10, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.32; low-quality evidence) and AEs of grade 3 or greater (RR 1.16, 95% CI 0.97 to 1.39; 2 studies; 1065 participants; low-quality evidence). QoL could not be evaluated due to insufficient data.In previously treated patients, targeted immunotherapy (nivolumab) probably reduces one-year overall mortality compared to standard targeted therapy with everolimus (RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.56 to 0.87; 1 study; 821 participants; moderate-quality evidence), probably improves QoL (e.g. RR 1.51, 95% CI 1.28 to 1.78 for clinically relevant improvement of the FACT-Kidney Symptom Index Disease Related Symptoms (FKSI-DRS); 1 study, 704 participants; moderate-quality evidence) and probably reduces the incidence of AEs grade 3 or greater (RR 0.51, 95% CI 0.40 to 0.65; 1 study; 803 participants; moderate-quality evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Evidence of moderate quality demonstrates that IFN-α monotherapy increases mortality compared to standard targeted therapies alone, whereas there is no difference if IFN is combined with standard targeted therapies. Evidence of low quality demonstrates that QoL is worse with IFN alone and that severe AEs are increased with IFN alone or in combination. There is low-quality evidence that IFN-α alone increases mortality but moderate-quality evidence on decreased AEs compared to IFN-α plus bevacizumab. Low-quality evidence shows no difference for IFN-α plus bevacizumab compared to sunitinib with respect to mortality and severe AEs. Low-quality evidence demonstrates no difference of vaccine treatment compared to standard targeted therapies in mortality and AEs, whereas there is moderate-quality evidence that targeted immunotherapies reduce mortality and AEs and improve QoL.

New treatment options for metastatic renal cell carcinoma

During the last decade, the treatment of advanced or metastatic renal cell carcinoma (RCC) was revolutionised with the advent of antiangiogenic drugs and tyrosine-kinase inhibitors. Several agents targeting the vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) pathway (sunitinib, bevacizumab, pazopanib, axitinib) or the mammalian target of rapamycin pathway (temsirolimus, everolimus) were since then progressively approved for first-line or later-line use in the treatment of patients with advanced RCC and became the new standard of care. As a result, the survival of patients with advanced RCC has significantly improved from a median overall survival of approximately 12 months in the cytokines era to more than 26 months with first-line VEGF inhibitors. During the two last years, the treatment of advanced RCC has witnessed a second revolution with the advent of immune checkpoint inhibitors, especially agents targeting the programmed cell death-1 receptor, as well as with the advent of new generation tyrosine-kinase receptor inhibitors. This article will review the new therapeutic options available for the treatment of advanced RCC, as well as the future potential molecular targets that are currently being investigated.

Immunotherapy for Renal Cancer: Sequencing and Combinations

CONTEXT

Current therapy for renal cell carcinoma (RCC) generally consists of the sequential administration of single agent therapy. Given the advent of T-cell checkpoint inhibitors, the role of combinations including these agents is being intensely interrogated.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate ongoing trials of combinations including immunotherapy and sequencing of agents to treat RCC.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

Recent data and ongoing trials were analyzed to evaluate the direction of research in this arena.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

The favorable therapeutic index of programmed cell death 1/programmed death-ligand 1 inhibitors enable combinations of these agents. Multiple ongoing phase 3 trials are evaluating the first-line therapy of RCC using a combination of programmed cell death 1/programmed death-ligand 1 inhibitors with vascular endothelial growth factor inhibitors or cytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated protein 4 inhibitors. The role of sequencing using single agent sunitinib and avelumab will be evaluated in a randomized phase 2 trial. The role of vaccine therapy remains unproven. The role of predictive biomarkers to select appropriate therapy requires a greater focus, given the multitude of possible therapies.

CONCLUSIONS

Therapy for RCC should be tailored based on both patient and tumor characteristics. Combination therapy and sequencing of single agents may both play roles and are currently undergoing clinical trial evaluation.

PATIENT SUMMARY

Combinations of immunotherapy with angiogenesis inhibitors are undergoing vigorous clinical trial evaluations. Sequencing of immunotherapy and antiangiogenic therapy is also undergoing investigation. Clinical trial participation is critically important to develop new drugs and combinations, and biomarkers to select therapy.

Recent advances in genitourinary tumors: A review focused on biology and systemic treatment

Updated information published up to 2016 regarding major advances in renal cancer, bladder cancer, and prostate cancer is here presented. Based on an ever better understanding of the genetic and molecular alterations that govern the initial pathogenic mechanisms of tumor oncogenesis, an improvement in the characterization and treatment of urologic tumors has been achieved in the past year. According to the Cancer Genome Atlas (ATLAS) project, alterations in the MET pathway are characteristics of type 1 papillary renal cell carcinomas, and activation of NRF2-ARE pathway is associated with the biologically distinct type 2. While sunitinib and pazopanib continue to be the standard first-line treatment in metastatic renal cell carcinoma of clear cell histology, nivolumab and cabozantinib are now the agents of choice in the second-line setting. In relation to urothelial bladder carcinoma, new potential molecular targets such as FGFR3, PI3K/AKT, RTK/RAS, CDKN2A, ARIDIA, ERBB2 have been identified. Response to adjuvant cisplatin-based chemotherapy appears to be related to basal, luminal, and p53-like intrinsic subtypes. A phase II study with eribulin and a maintenance phase II trial with vinflunine have shown promising results. Similarly, the use of the check point inhibitors in advanced disease is likely to revolutionize the management of patients who have progressed after cisplatin-based chemotherapy. In prostate cancer, seven mutually exclusive molecular subtypes have been identified by the TCGA project. Chemotherapy has been consolidated as a key treatment for castration-sensitive metastatic prostate cancer, and abiraterone, enzalutamide, cabazitaxel, and radium-223 remain standard therapeutic options for men with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer. All this progress will undoubtedly contribute to the development of new treatments and therapeutic strategies that will improve the survival and quality of life of our patients.

The Role of High Dose Interleukin-2 in the Era of Targeted Therapy

PURPOSE

We assessed survival outcomes following high dose interleukin-2 in a contemporary cohort of patients during the era of targeted agents.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed the records of patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma treated with high dose interleukin-2 between July 2007 and September 2014. Clinicopathological data were abstracted and patient response to therapy was based on RECIST (Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors), version 1.1 criteria. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to estimate progression-free and overall survival in the entire cohort, the response to high dose interleukin-2 in regard to previous targeted agent therapy and the response to the targeted agent in relation to the response to high dose interleukin-2.

RESULTS

We identified 92 patients, of whom 87 had documentation of a response to high dose interleukin-2. Median overall survival was 34.4 months from the initiation of high dose interleukin-2 therapy in the entire cohort. Patients who received targeted therapy before high dose interleukin-2 had overall survival (median 34.4 and 30.0 months, p = 0.88) and progression-free survival (median 1.5 and 1.7 months, p = 0.8) similar to those in patients who received no prior therapy, respectively. Additionally, patients with a complete or partial response to high dose interleukin-2 had similar outcomes for subsequent targeted agents compared to patients whose best response was stable or progressive disease (median overall survival 30.1 vs 25.4 months, p = 0.4).

CONCLUSIONS

Our data demonstrate that patient responses to high dose interleukin-2 and to targeted agents before and after receiving high dose interleukin-2 are independent. As such, carefully selected patients should be offered high dose interleukin-2 for the possibility of a complete and durable response without the fear of limiting the treatment benefit of targeted agents.

Lenvatinib for use in combination with everolimus for the treatment of patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma following one prior anti-angiogenic therapy

INTRODUCTION

In patients with mRCC options for second line therapies, following progression on anti-angiogenic agents, that demonstrate a survival advantage in clinical trials have been limited. Recently a number of agents have demonstrated efficacy in this setting. Here in we profile one such therapy, the combination of lenvatinib and everolimus, and discuss the expanded options for therapy available in this setting. Areas covered: In this review, we discuss current algorithms for treatment of mRCC in both the first-line and second-line setting. We discuss the recent addition of cabozantinib and nivolumab, in the second line setting, to the market. Lenvatinib's pharmacology, clinical efficacy and toxicity profile is discussed. A comprehensive literature review was performed using PUBMED. Expert commentary: The current treatment algorithms for mRCC will likely see significant change in the coming years. The addition of immunotherapy to our treatment options in mRCC is of particular importance. Future trials examining the use of immunotherapy, both as monotherapy and in combination with VEGF targeted therapy, will likely be a dominant influence in the therapeutic landscape of mRCC. Progress in terms of the rapid expansion of available active therapies in mRCC needs to be balanced with current deficiencies in terms of predictive biomarkers.

Stomatitis Associated With Use of mTOR Inhibitors: Implications for Patients With Invasive Breast Cancer

BACKGROUND

The mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) inhibitor everolimus is approved (in combination with exemestane) for the treatment of postmenopausal women with advanced hormone receptor-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative breast cancer resistant to endocrine therapy. Stomatitis is among the most frequently reported dose-limiting adverse events associated with everolimus use, often requiring treatment interruption or dose reduction.

OBJECTIVES

This article aims to educate nurses on the identification and management of stomatitis associated with mTOR inhibitors in hormone receptor-positive advanced breast cancer and to assist nurses with additional management techniques to improve patient outcomes.

METHODS

An evaluation of the literature highlighting the incidence, identification, and management of stomatitis in cancer was performed with a particular focus on breast cancer. In addition, the experiences of the authors' cancer center on managing stomatitis are described.

FINDINGS

A growing body of clinical evidence shows the benefits of adding steroid-based mouth rinses to the treatment plan. Clinical experience provides additional insight into stomatitis preventive and management strategies for patients with breast cancer receiving treatment with everolimus.

The Evolution of Systemic Therapy in Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma

The treatment landscape for renal cell carcinoma (RCC) is a dynamic process that has seen considerable change in recent years. We have seen a rebirth of original breakthroughs with immune checkpoint inhibitors showing promise in patients with treatment-refractory disease. The optimal sequencing of treatments and incorporation of novel therapeutics are actively being investigated and have yet to be determined. The clinical challenges of this evolving treatment paradigm can be attributed to cost considerations, toxicity, and defining endpoints in the management of advanced RCC. As novel therapeutics emerge, finding the optimal treatment regimen for patients will have an increasing focus on patient-centered outcomes and improvement in quality of life in addition to improving survival.

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NCT) plus targeted agents versus NCT alone in colorectal liver metastases patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Purpose

To assess the efficacy of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NCT) plus targeted agents versus NCT alone for the treatment of colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) patients.

Methods

Trials published between 1994 and 2015 were identified by an electronic search of public databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane library). All clinical studies were independently identified by two authors for inclusion. Demographic data, treatment regimens, objective response rate (ORR), hepatic resection and R0 hepatic resection rate were extracted and analyzed using Comprehensive MetaAnalysis software (Version 2.0).

Results

A total of 40 cohorts with 2099 CRLM patients were included: 962 patients were treated with NCT alone, 602 with NCT plus anti-epidermal growth-factor receptor (EGFR)-monoclonal antibodies (MoAbs) and 535 with NCT plus bevacizumab. Pooled ORR was significantly higher for NCT plus bevacizumab or anti-EGFR-MoAbs than NCT alone [relative risk (RR) 1.53, 95% CI 1.30–1.80; p < 0.001; RR 1.53, 95% CI: 1.27–1.83, p < 0.001; respectively]. NCT plus bevacizumab significantly improved R0 hepatic resection rate (RR 1.61, 95% CI: 1.27–2.04, p < 0.001), but not for overall hepatic resection rate (RR 1.26, 95% CI: 0.81–1.94, p = 0.30). While hepatic resection and R0 hepatic resection rate was comparable between NCT plus anti-EGFR-MoAbs and NCT alone (p = 0.42 and p = 0.37, respectively).

Conclusions

In comparison with NCT alone, NCT plus bevacizumab significantly improve ORR and R0 hepatic resection rate but not for hepatic resection rate. Our findings support the need to compare NCT plus bevacizumab with NCT alone in the neoadjuvant setting in large prospective trials due to its higher hepatic resection rate and R0 hepatic resection rate in CRLM patients.

Lenvatinib therapy for the treatment of patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma

Despite advances in metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) treatments, patients eventually progress and develop resistance to therapies targeting a single pathway. Lenvatinib inhibits VEGFR1–3, FGFR1–4, PDGFRβ, RET and KIT proto-oncogenes. In a randomized, Phase II trial evaluating patients with mRCC who had progressed after one prior VEGF-targeted therapy, progression-free survival was significantly improved with lenvatinib alone or in combination with everolimus versus everolimus alone. This review summarizes the clinical development of lenvatinib in mRCC, and how simultaneous targeting of multiple pathways involved in carcinogenesis and/or therapeutic resistance may improve patient outcomes. Lenvatinib plus everolimus may be a promising second-line treatment in patients with mRCC.

Everolimus in the management of metastatic renal cell carcinoma: an evidence-based review of its place in therapy

Introduction

Renal cell carcinoma (RCC) is the most common type of kidney cancer in adults, and its pathogenesis is strictly related to altered cellular response to hypoxia, in which mTOR signaling pathway is implicated. Everolimus, an mTOR serine/threonine kinase inhibitor, represents a therapeutic option for the treatment of advanced RCC.

Aim

The objective of this article is to review the evidence for the treatment of metastatic RCC with everolimus.

Evidence review

Everolimus was approved for second- and third-line therapy in patients with advanced RCC according to the results of a Phase III pivotal trial that demonstrated a benefit in median progression-free survival of ~2 months compared to placebo after failure of previous lines of therapy, of which at least one was an anti-VEGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI). The role of this drug in first-line setting has been investigated in Phase II trials, with no significant clinical benefit, even in combination with bevacizumab. Everolimus activity in non-clear cell RCC is supported by two randomized Phase II trials that confirmed the benefit in second-line setting but not in first line. Recently, two randomized Phase III trials (METEOR and CheckMate 025) demonstrated the inferiority of everolimus in second-line setting compared to the TKI cabozantinib and to the immune checkpoint inhibitor nivolumab, respectively. Moreover, a recent Phase II study demonstrated a significant benefit for the second-line combination treatment with everolimus plus lenvatinib (a novel TKI) in terms of progression-free survival and overall survival compared to the single-agent everolimus. Basing on preclinical data, the main downstream effectors of mTOR cascade, S6RP and its phosphorylated form, could be good predictive biomarkers of response to everolimus. The safety profile of the drug is favorable, with a good cost-effectiveness compared to second-line sorafenib or axitinib, and no significant impact on the quality of life of treated patients has been found.

Conclusion

Everolimus still represents a current standard of treatment for RCC progressive to previous treatment lines with VEGFR-TKI. The evidence about two new molecules, cabozantinib and nivolumab, successfully tested head-to-head with everolimus in recently published Phase III trials, will determine the shift of everolimus to the third-line setting and subsequent lines of treatment.