Safety and clinical activity of vascular endothelial growth factor receptor (VEGFR)-tyrosine kinase inhibitors after programmed cell death 1 inhibitor treatment in patients with metastatic clear cell renal cell carcinoma

Lymph node targeting strategy using a hydrogel sustained-release system to load effector memory T cells improves the anti-tumor efficacy of anti-PD-1

Communication between tumors and lymph nodes carries substantial significance for antitumor immunotherapy. Remodeling the immune microenvironment of tumor-draining lymph nodes (TdLN) plays a key role in enhancing the anti-tumor ability of immunotherapy. In this study, we constructed a biomimetic artificial lymph node structure composed of F127 hydrogel loading effector memory T (TEM) cells and PD-1 inhibitors (aPD-1). The biomimetic lymph nodes facilitate the delivery of TEM cells and aPD-1 to the TdLN and the tumor immune microenvironment, thus realizing effective and sustained anti-tumor immunotherapy. Exploiting their unique gel-forming and degradation properties, the cold tumors were speedily transformed into hot tumors via TEM cell supplementation. Meanwhile, the efficacy of aPD-1 was markedly elevated compared with conventional drug delivery methods. Our finding suggested that the development of F127@TEM@aPD-1 holds promising potential as a future novel clinical drug delivery technique. STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE: F127@TEM@aPD-1 show unique advantages in cancer treatment. When injected subcutaneously, F127@TEM@aPD-1 can continuously supplement TEM cells and aPD-1 to tumor draining lymph nodes (TdLN) and the tumor microenvironment, not only improving the efficacy of ICB therapy through slow release, but also exhibiting dual regulatory effects on the tumor and TdLN.

Microwave-responsive gadolinium metal-organic frameworks nanosystem for MRI-guided cancer thermotherapy and synergistic immunotherapy

The clinical application of cancer immunotherapy is unsatisfied due to low response rates and systemic immune-related adverse events. Microwave hyperthermia can be used as a synergistic immunotherapy to amplify the antitumor effect. Herein, we designed a Gd-based metal-organic framework (Gd-MOF) nanosystem for MRI-guided thermotherapy and synergistic immunotherapy, which featured high performance in drug loading and tumor tissue penetration. The PD-1 inhibitor (aPD-1) was initially loaded in the porous Gd-MOF (Gd/M) nanosystem. Then, the phase change material (PCM) and the cancer cell membrane were further sequentially modified on the surface of Gd/MP to obtain Gd-MOF@aPD-1@CM (Gd/MPC). When entering the tumor microenvironment (TME), Gd/MPC induces immunogenic death of tumor cells through microwave thermal responsiveness, improves tumor suppressive immune microenvironment and further enhances anti-tumor ability of T cells by releasing aPD-1. Meanwhile, Gd/MPC can be used for contrast-enhanced MRI. Transcriptomics data revealed that the downregulation of MSK2 in cancer cells leads to the downregulation of c-fos and c-jun, and ultimately leads to the apoptosis of cancer cells after treatment. In general, Gd/MPC nanosystem not only solves the problem of system side effect, but also achieves the controlled drug release via PCM, providing a promising theranostic nanoplatform for development of cancer combination immunotherapy.

Vascular endothelial growth factor-targeted therapy in patients with renal cell carcinoma pretreated with immune checkpoint inhibitors: A systematic literature review

INTRODUCTION

We conducted a systematic literature review to identify evidence for use of vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF)-targeted (anti-VEGF) treatment in patients with renal cell carcinoma (RCC) following prior checkpoint inhibitor (CPI)-based therapy.

METHODS

This was a PRISMA-standard systematic literature review; registered with PROSPERO (CRD42021255568). Literature searches were conducted in MEDLINE®, Embase, and the Cochrane Library (January 28, 2021; updated September 13, 2022) to identify publications reporting efficacy/effectiveness and safety/tolerability evidence for anti-VEGF treatment in patients with RCC who had received prior CPI therapy.

RESULTS

Of 2,639 publications screened, 48 were eligible and featured 2,759 patients treated in trials and 2,209 in real-world studies (RWS). Most patients with available data were treated with anti-VEGF tyrosine kinase inhibitor-based regimens (trials: 93 %; RWS: 100 %), most commonly cabozantinib, which accounted for 46 % of trial and 62 % of RWS patients in publications with available data. Collectively, there was consistent evidence of anti-VEGF treatment activity after prior CPI therapy. Activity was reported for all anti-VEGF regimens and regardless of prior CPI-based regimen. No new safety signals were detected for subsequent anti-VEGF therapy; no studies suggested increased immune-related adverse events associated with prior CPI therapy. The results were limited by data quality; study heterogeneity prohibited meta-analyses.

CONCLUSION

Based on the available data (most commonly for cabozantinib), anti-VEGF therapy appears to be a rational treatment choice in patients with RCC who have progressed despite prior CPI-based therapy. Results from ongoing trials of combination anti-VEGF plus CPI regimen post prior CPI therapy trials will contribute more definitive evidence.

PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARY

Anticancer treatments that work by reducing levels of a substance in the body called Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor are known as anti-VEGF drugs. Reducing VEGF levels helps to reduce blood supply to tumors, which can slow the speed at which the cancer grows. Some other types of anticancer drugs that help the immune system to fight cancer cells are called checkpoint inhibitors. Here, we looked at published studies that investigated how anti-VEGF drugs work, and what side effects they cause, in people who have already been treated with checkpoint inhibitors for a type of kidney cancer called renal cell carcinoma. We aimed to summarize the available evidence to help doctors decide how best to use anti-VEGF drugs in these patients. We found 48 studies that included almost 5,000 patients. The results of the studies showed that anti-VEGF drugs have anticancer effects in people with renal cell carcinoma who had already been treated with checkpoint inhibitors. All of the VEGF-targeting drugs had anticancer effects, irrespective of what checkpoint inhibitor treatment people had received before. There were different amounts of evidence available for the different anti-VEGF drugs. The anti-VEGF cabozantinib had the largest amount of evidence. Importantly, previous checkpoint inhibitor treatment did not seem to affect the number or type of side-effects associated with anti-VEGF drugs. Results from ongoing, well-designed studies will be helpful to confirm these results. Our findings may be useful for doctors considering using anti-VEGF drugs in patients with renal cell carcinoma who have received checkpoint inhibitor treatment.

Anti-Gene IGF-I Vaccines in Cancer Gene Therapy: A Review of a Case of Glioblastoma

OBJECTIVE

Vaccines for the deadliest brain tumor - glioblastoma (GBM) - are generally based on targeting growth factors or their receptors, often using antibodies. The vaccines described in the review were prepared to suppress the principal cancer growth factor - IGF-I, using anti-gene approaches either of antisense (AS) or of triple helix (TH) type. Our objective was to increase the median survival of patients treated with AS and TH cell vaccines.

METHODOLOGY

The cells were transfected in vitro by both constructed IGF-I AS and IGF-I TH expression episomal vectors; part of these cells was co-cultured with plant phytochemicals, modulating IGF-I expression. Both AS and TH approaches completely suppressed IGF-I expression and induced MHC-1 / B7 immunogenicity related to the IGF-I receptor signal.

RESULTS

This immunogenicity proved to be stronger in IGF-I TH than in IGF-I AS-prepared cell vaccines, especially in TH / phytochemical cells. The AS and TH vaccines generated an important TCD8+ and TCD8+CD11b- immune response in treated GBM patients and increased the median survival of patients up to 17-18 months, particularly using TH vaccines; in some cases, 2- and 3-year survival was reported. These clinical results were compared with those obtained in therapies targeting other growth factors.

CONCLUSION

The anti-gene IGF-I vaccines continue to be applied in current GBM personalized medicine. Technical improvements in the preparation of AS and TH vaccines to increase MHC-1 and B7 immunogenicity have, in parallel, allowed to increase in the median survival of patients.

SEOM SOGUG clinical guideline for treatment of kidney cancer (2022)

Renal cancer is the seventh most common cancer in men and the tenth in women. The aim of this article is to review the diagnosis, treatment, and follow-up of renal carcinoma accompanied by recommendations with new evidence and treatment algorithms. A new pathologic classification of RCC by the World Health Organization (WHO) was published in 2022 and this classification would be considered a "bridge" to a future molecular classification. For patients with localized disease, surgery is the treatment of choice with nephron-sparing surgery recommended when feasible. Adjuvant treatment with pembrolizumab is an option for intermediate-or high-risk cases, as well as patients after complete resection of metastatic disease. More data are needed in the future, including positive overall survival data. Clinical prognostic classification, preferably IMDC, should be used for treatment decision making in mRCC. Cytoreductive nephrectomy should not be deemed mandatory in individuals with intermediate-poor IMDC/MSKCC risk who require systemic therapy. Metastasectomy can be contemplated in selected subjects with a limited number of metastases or long metachronous disease-free interval. For the population of patients with metastatic ccRCC as a whole, the combination of pembrolizumab-axitinib, nivolumab-cabozantinib, or pembrolizumab-lenvatinib can be considered as the first option based on the benefit obtained in OS versus sunitinib. In cases that have an intermediate IMDC and poor prognosis, the combination of ipilimumab and nivolumab has demonstrated superior OS compared to sunitinib. As for individuals with advanced RCC previously treated with one or two antiangiogenic tyrosine-kinase inhibitors, nivolumab and cabozantinib are the options of choice. When there is progression following initial immunotherapy-based treatment, we recommend treatment with an antiangiogenic tyrosine-kinase inhibitor. While no clear sequence can be advocated, medical oncologists and patients should be aware of the recent advances and new strategies that improve survival and quality of life in the setting of metastatic RC.

Real-world effectiveness of nivolumab and subsequent therapy in Japanese patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (POST-NIVO study): 36-month follow-up results of a clinical chart review

OBJECTIVES

To examine the long-term effectiveness of nivolumab monotherapy and following subsequent therapies for metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) in Japanese real-world settings.

METHODS

This was a multicenter, retrospective, observational study, with a 36-month follow-up, and conducted in Japanese patients with mRCC who initiated nivolumab monotherapy between 1 Feb 2017 and 31 Oct 2017. Endpoints included overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), and objective response rate (ORR).

RESULTS

Of the 208 patients, 36.5% received nivolumab monotherapy as second-line, 30.8% as third-line, and 31.7% as fourth- or later-line therapy. By 36 months, 12.0% of patients continued nivolumab monotherapy; 88.0% discontinued, mainly because of disease progression (66.7%). The median (m) OS was not reached irrespective of treatment line, with a 36-month OS rate of 54.3% (second-line, 57.4%; third-line, 52.6%; fourth- or later-line, 52.9%). The ORR was 24.2% and five patients achieved complete response. The OS from first-line therapy was 8.9 years. In the 95 patients receiving therapy after nivolumab, 87.4% received vascular endothelial growth factor receptor-tyrosine kinase inhibitors, with mOS and mPFS of 27.4 and 8.1 months, respectively. Irrespective of treatment line, the mOS was not reached in patients with International Metastatic RCC Database Consortium (IMDC) favorable or intermediate risk at mRCC diagnosis.

CONCLUSIONS

This 36-month real-world follow-up analysis showed a survival benefit of nivolumab monotherapy for patients with mRCC. The long-term effectiveness of sequential therapy from first-line therapy to therapy after nivolumab was also demonstrated. Additionally, nivolumab monotherapy was beneficial for patients with favorable IMDC risk at the time of mRCC diagnosis.

A multicenter phase 2 single arm study of cabozantinib in patients with advanced or unresectable renal cell carcinoma pre-treated with one immune-checkpoint inhibitor: The BREAKPOINT trial (Meet-Uro trial 03)

BACKGROUND

First-line therapies based on immune-checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) significantly improved survival of metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) patients. Cabozantinib was shown to target kinases involved in immune-escape and to prolong survival in patients pre-treated with tyrosine-kinase-inhibitors (TKIs). The impact of ICIs combinations in first line on subsequent therapies is still unclear.

METHODS

This is an open label, multicenter, single arm, phase II study designed to assess activity, safety and efficacy of cabozantinib in mRCC patients progressed after an adjuvant or first line anti-Programmed Death (PD)-1/PD-Ligand (PD-L) 1-based therapy. Primary endpoint was progression free survival (PFS), secondary endpoints were overall survival (OS), objective response rate (ORR) and safety.

RESULTS

31 patients were included in the analysis. After a median (m) follow-up of 11.9 months, mPFS was 8.3 months (90%CI 3.9-17.4) and mOS was 13.8 months (95%CI 7.7-29.0). ORR was 37.9% with an additional 13 patients achieving disease stability. Grade 3-4 adverse events occurred in 47% of patients, including more frequently creatine phosphokinase (CPK) serum level elevation, neutropenia, hyponatremia, diarrhea, hand-food syndrome, oral mucositis and hypertension.

CONCLUSIONS

The BREAKPOINT trial met its primary endpoint showing that cabozantinib as second line therapy after ICIs was active in mRCC. Safety profile was manageable.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT03463681 - A Study of CaBozantinib in Patients With Advanced or Unresectable Renal cEll cArcinoma (BREAKPOINT) - https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03463681.

Identification of IRF-associated molecular subtypes in clear cell renal cell carcinoma to characterize immunological characteristics and guide therapy

Background

Recently studies have identified a critical role for interferon regulatory factor (IRF) in modulating tumour immune microenvironment (TME) infiltration and tumorigenesis.

Methods

Based on IRF1-9 expression profiles, we classified all ccRCC samples into three molecular subtypes (clusters A-C) and characterized the prognosis and immune infiltration of these clusters. IRFscore constructed by principal component analysis was performed to quantify IRF-related subtypes in individual patients.

Results

We proved that IRFscore predicted multiple patient characteristics, with high IRFscore group having poorer prognosis, suppressed TME, increased T-cell exhaustion, increased TMB and greater sensitivity to anti- PD-1/CTLA-4 therapies. Furthermore, analysis of metastatic ccRCC (mccRCC) molecular subtypes and drug sensitivity proved that low IRFscore was more sensitive to targeted therapies. Moreover, IRFscore grouping can be well matched to the immunological and molecular typing of ccRCC. qRT-PCR showed differential expression of IRFs in different cell lines.

Conclusions

Evaluating IRF-related molecular subtypes in individual ccRCC patients not only facilitates our understanding of tumour immune infiltration, but also provides more effective clinical ideas for personalised treatment.

Outcomes With Combination Pembrolizumab and Axitinib in Second and Further Line Treatment of Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma

INTRODUCTION

Combination immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) and vascular endothelial growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitors (VEGF-R-TKI), including pembrolizumab/axitinib, are approved for first-line treatment of metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). Pembrolizumab/axitinib is associated with superior progression free survival (PFS), objective response rate (ORR), and overall survival over sunitinib. However, to date, the activity and safety of pembrolizumab/axitinib in later lines of therapy has not been reported.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Clinical data of consecutive patients receiving pembrolizumab/axitinib in the second-line or beyond for mRCC at Yale-New Haven Hospital were retrospectively collected. Best objective response was assessed using RECIST 1.1 criteria. Kaplan-Meier function was used to analyze survival.

RESULTS

Thirty-eight patients were included. Median age was 64, 92.1% had clear cell mRCC, 18.4% had sarcomatoid dedifferentiation; 94.7% had prior ICI and 39.5% had prior VEGF-R-TKI. Pembrolizumab/axitinib was administered as second-line therapy in 21 (55.5%) patients, third-line in 5 (13.2%) and beyond in 12 (30.2%). Adverse events (AEs) occurred in 86.8% of patients. Grade 3-4 AEs attributed to pembrolizumab and axitinib were seen in 18.4% and 6.4% of patients, respectively. No grade 5 AEs occurred. At a median follow up of 17.1 months, median PFS was 9.7 months (95% CI, 4.1-15.3). Amongst 36 response evaluable patients, the ORR was 25.0% (all partial) and disease control rate (including stable disease for at least 6 months) was 66.6%. The most frequent treatment sequence was first-line nivolumab/ipilimumab followed by second-line pembrolizumab/axitinib (n = 17, 44.7%); among this cohort, median PFS with pembrolizumab/axitinib was 11.1 (95% CI, 8.4-13.7) months, with an ORR of 31.4%.

CONCLUSION

Combination pembrolizumab/axitinib among previously treated mRCC patients has activity, with AE rates comparable to those reported in the first line. Prospective studies evaluating ICI-VEGF-R-TKI combinations beyond first-line are warranted to identify the most beneficial treatment sequencing in mRCC.

Recurrent multiple liver metastases of clear cell renal cell carcinoma with a significant response to sunitinib after nivolumab treatment

Introduction

A case of multiple liver metastases of clear cell RCC with a significant response to sunitinib as the fifth line after nivolumab is reported.

Case presentation

The patient was a 65-year-old man who underwent open nephrectomy for RCC. After the nephrectomy, he had recurrences several times, and metastasectomy had been performed for each recurrence. At 13 years after the nephrectomy, multiple liver, and lung metastases appeared. The treatment was switched to axitinib, followed by cabozantinib, then nivolumab. The best response was PR, SD, and PD for these three drugs, and treatment duration was 14, 3, and 3 months, respectively. As the fifth line, sunitinib was administered, with significant shrinkage of the multiple liver metastases, and PR has been maintained for 34 months.

Conclusion

Sunitinib after an IO-drug showed a significant effect in spite of only slight efficacy with other VEGFR-TKIs, which may have occurred through the alteration of the immunological microenvironment.

Effectiveness and Safety of Molecular-Targeted Therapy after Nivolumab Plus Ipilimumab for Advanced or Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma: A Multicenter, Retrospective Cohort Study

Simple Summary

We evaluated the efficacy and safety of molecular-targeted therapies (MTTs) in 29 patients who discontinued the combination therapy of nivolumab plus ipilimumab (NIVO+IPI) for advanced or metastatic renal cell carcinoma as real-world outcomes. Patients receiving MTTs had a median follow-up of 8 months. The objective response rate was 44.8%, and the disease control rate was 72.4%. After NIVO+IPI, the median overall survival was 18 months, and progression-free survival (PFS) was 8 months. Patients with bone metastases had a significantly shorter median PFS when treated with MTTs after NIVO+IPI than those without bone metastases (4 vs. 12 months, p = 0.012). MTTs may be a useful secondary treatment option after the discontinuation of NIVO+IPI.

Abstract

This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of molecular-targeted therapies (MTTs) after the discontinuation of nivolumab and ipilimumab (NIVO+IPI) combination therapy in patients who had been diagnosed with advanced/metastatic renal cell carcinoma as real-world outcomes. We enrolled patients treated with MTTs following initial therapy with NIVO+IPI at nine institutions in Japan. We evaluated the objective response rate (ORR) as the primary endpoint and disease control rate (DCR), best overall response, and oncological outcomes (overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS)) as the secondary endpoints. We also evaluated factors predictive of disease progression after the administration of MTTs. Patients were followed up for a median of 8 months. The ORR was 44.8%, and the DCR was 72.4%. The median OS and PFS of MTTs after NIVO+IPI were 18 months and 8 months, respectively. A total of 31% of patients experienced grade 3/4 MTT-related adverse events. The median PFS in patients with bone metastases was significantly shorter than that in those without bone metastases (4 vs. 12 months, p = 0.012). MTTs may be a useful secondary treatment option after the discontinuation of NIVO+IPI.

Immune checkpoint inhibitors and tyrosine kinase inhibitors in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma: Does the sequence matter?

INTRODUCTION

Combination therapy with immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) and antivascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) is currently the first line treatment for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (aHCC). However, there are many patients who may not be able to receive combination therapy due to underlying comorbidities or resource limitations. For these patients, systemic treatment options include single agent tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) or ICI monotherapy. However, whether an optimal sequence of systemic therapy exists remains unknown. We aim to explore the impact of sequencing of TKI and ICI therapy in terms of response rates and to examine the safety of their use in sequential order.

METHODS

Patients with aHCC treated with both ICI and TKI between December 30, 2013 and June 13, 2018 were retrospectively identified. Patients were classified into two groups: those who received TKI in the first-line (TKI1), followed by ICI (ICI2) and those who received ICI (ICI1) in the first-line followed by TKI (TKI2). The primary objective of the study was to identify differences in objective response rate (ORR) and disease control rate (DCR), as evaluated based on response evaluation criteria in solid tumor v1.1 for TKI1, TKI2, ICI1, and ICI2. Secondary objectives included comparison of progression free survival (PFS) for each line of therapy, overall survival (OS) and adverse events (AEs).

RESULTS

Twenty-seven and 23 patients were classified into group 1 and 2, respectively. Objective response rates of TKI1 and TKI2 were 3.8% and 17.6%, respectively (p = .28); DCR to TKI1 versus TKI2 was 23.1% versus 35.3% (p = .49). ORRs of ICI1 and ICI2 were 8.7% and 14.3%, respectively (p = .66); DCR to ICI2 versus ICI1 was 56.5% versus 42.9% (p = .37). Median PFS was not significant between TKI1 and TKI2 (PFS 3.06 versus 1.61 months, p = .097) as well as between ICI2 and ICI1 (PFS 1.84 versus 2.37 month, p = .32). Median OS was also not significantly different between both groups (OS 20.63 versus 13.93 months, p = .20) on univariable and multivariable analysis (OS adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 2.07, 95% CI .83-5.18, p = .118). The proportion of patients who experienced adverse events of any grade was similar in both groups (TKI1 59.3% versus TKI2 52.2%; ICI1 78.3% versus ICI2 70.4%).

CONCLUSION

Our study suggests that the sequence of TKI versus ICI therapy in patients with aHCC may not matter, given similar efficacy and toxicity profile when either agent is received in the first or second-line setting. This finding is of value in the real-world setting, where patients may be frail or have comorbidities that render them unable to tolerate combination therapy (ICI and TKI/anti-VEGF). For these patients, sequential exposure to both classes of drugs (ICI and TKI) may be a suitable option.

Real-world effectiveness of nivolumab plus ipilimumab and second-line therapy in Japanese untreated patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma: 2-year analysis from a multicenter retrospective clinical study (J-cardinal study)

Background

Nivolumab plus ipilimumab combination therapy is one of the standard therapies for untreated renal cell carcinoma patients with an International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium intermediate/poor risk. We have previously reported the 1-year analysis results of the effectiveness and safety of nivolumab plus ipilimumab combination therapy in the real-world setting in Japan. Here, we report the effectiveness of nivolumab plus ipilimumab combination therapy and of second-line therapy, using 2-year analysis.

Methods

This retrospective observational study enrolled Japanese patients with previously untreated metastatic renal cell carcinoma who initiated nivolumab plus ipilimumab combination therapy between August 2018 and January 2019. Data were collected from patients’ medical records at baseline and at 3 months, 1 year and 2 years after the last enrollment.

Results

Of the 45 patients enrolled, 10 patients (22.2%) each had non-clear cell renal cell carcinoma and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status ≥2 at baseline. Median follow-up period was 24.0 months; objective response rate was 41.5%, with 6 patients achieving complete response; median progression-free survival was 17.8 months and 24-month progression-free survival and overall survival rates were 41.6 and 59.1%, respectively. Second-line therapy achieved an objective response rate of 20%; median progression-free survival was 9.8 months. Median progression-free survival 2 was 26.4 months.

Conclusions

The effectiveness of nivolumab plus ipilimumab combination therapy at 2-year analysis in the real-world setting in Japan was comparable to that reported in CheckMate 214. The current analysis also demonstrated the effectiveness of second-line therapy after nivolumab plus ipilimumab combination therapy.

Systemic therapy in metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC): an evidence-based recommendation of the German interdisciplinary RCC guidelines group

Purpose

The treatment landscape in metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) has evolved dramatically in recent years. Within the German guideline committee for RCC we evaluated current medical treatments and gave recommendations.

Methods

A systematic review of published evidence for medical treatment of mRCC was performed (July 2016–August 2019) to cover the duration from last guideline update in 2016. Evidence was graded according to SIGN (http://www.sign.ac.uk/pdf/sign50.pdf). Recommendations were made on the basis of a nominal group work with consensus approach and included patient advocates and shareholder of the German RCC treatment landscape. Each recommendation was graded according to its strength as strong recommendation (A) or recommendation (B). Expert statements were given, where appropriate.

Results

Strong first-line recommendations (IA) exist for axitinib + pembrolizumab (all risk categories) and ipilimumab + nivolumab (intermediate or poor risk only). Axitinib + avelumab is a recommended first-line treatment across patients with any risk category (IB). In patients who are not candidates for immune check point inhibitor (ICI) combinations, targeted agents should be offered as an alternative treatment. Subsequent treatment after ICI-based combinations remain ill-defined and no standard of care can be formulated.

Conclusion

ICI-based combinations are the first-line standard of care and should be considered accordingly. There is an unmet medical need for pivotal studies that define novel standards in patients with failure of ICI-based combinations.

Results from the INMUNOSUN-SOGUG trial: a prospective phase II study of sunitinib as a second-line therapy in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma after immune checkpoint-based combination therapy

Background

Patients and methods

Results

Conclusion

•

ICI-based combinations have become the first-line treatment for mRCC.

•

We evaluated sunitinib as a second-line treatment in patients with mRCC who progressed to first-line ICI-based treatment.

•

OR was achieved by 4/21 patients (19.0%, 95% CI 2.3% to 35.8%). Median PFS was 5.6 months (95% CI 3.1-8.0 months).

•

The toxicity profile of sunitinib was consistent with previously reported data. No new safety signals were detected.

•

Sunitinib is active and can be safely used as second-line therapy in patients with mRCC who progress to ICI-based regimens.

Subgroup analysis of the AFTER I-O study: a retrospective study on the efficacy and safety of subsequent molecular targeted therapy after immune-oncology therapy in Japanese patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma

Background

We performed subgroup analyses of the AFTER I-O study to clarify the association of time-to-treatment failure (TTF) and discontinuation reason of prior immune-oncology (I-O) therapy, and molecular targeted therapy (TT) regimen with the outcomes of TT after I-O.

Methods

The data of Japanese metastatic renal cell carcinoma patients treated with TT after nivolumab (NIVO) (CheckMate 025) or NIVO + ipilimumab (IPI) (CheckMate 214) were retrospectively analyzed. The objective response rates (ORRs), progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) of TT after I-O were analyzed by subgroups: TTF (<6 or ≥6 months) and discontinuation reason of prior I-O (progression or adverse events), and TT regimen (sunitinib or axitinib). We also analyzed PFS2 of prior I-O and OS from first-line therapy.

Results

The ORR and median PFS of TT after NIVO and NIVO+IPI among the subgroups was 17–36% and 20–44%, and 7.1–11.6 months and 16.3-not reached (NR), respectively. The median OS of TT after NIVO was longer in patients with longer TTF of NIVO and treated with axitinib. Conversely, median OS of TT after NIVO+IPI was similar among subgroups. The median PFS2 of NIVO and NIVO+IPI was 36.7 and 32.0 months, respectively. The median OS from first-line therapy was 70.5 months for patients treated with NIVO and NR with NIVO+IPI. The safety profile of each TT after each I-O was similar to previous reports.

Conclusions

The efficacy of TT after NIVO or NIVO+IPI was favorable regardless of the TTF and discontinuation reason of prior I-O, and TT regimen.

Second-line tyrosine kinase inhibitor-therapy after immunotherapy-failure

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Most contemporary metastatic renal-cell carcinoma patients receive first-line immunotherapy and tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) combination or immunotherapy-immunotherapy combination, as first-line standards of care. However, second-line therapy choices are less well established. To address this void, we examined existing evidence supporting second and subsequent-line treatment options after immunotherapy-based combination therapy.

RECENT FINDINGS

Evidence regarding efficacy of second-line therapy after immunotherapy-based combination is mainly retrospective, except for axitinib, which is the only TKI with prospective efficacy data in this setting. Cabozantinib demonstrated excellent second-line progression-free survival (PFS) that remained in third or later line use, albeit based on small numbers of observations. Moreover, pazopanib demonstrated excellent PFS, but showed wider variability in PFS rates. Sunitinib's PFS rates appeared lower than for axitinib, cabozantinib or pazopanib. Finally, inhibitors of the mammalian target of rapamycin pathway appeared to offer even lower efficacy than any TKI after immunotherapy-based therapy combinations.

SUMMARY

All available contemporary evidence about TKI efficacy after immunotherapy-based therapy combinations is based on institutional studies. No major differences in efficacy for the examined TKIs after immunotherapy-based combination therapies were recorded. In general, these showed similar efficacy to their efficacy data recorded in first-line.

Efficacy and safety of subsequent molecular targeted therapy after immuno-checkpoint therapy, retrospective study of Japanese patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (AFTER I-O study)

Objectives

Guidelines for treatment of mRCC recommend nivolumab monotherapy (NIVO) for treated patients, and nivolumab plus ipilimumab combination therapy (NIVO+IPI) for untreated IMDC intermediate and poor-risk mRCC patients. Although molecular-targeted therapies (TTs) such as VEGFR-TKIs and mTORi are recommended as subsequent therapy after NIVO or NIVO+IPI, their efficacy and safety remain unclear.

Methods

Outcome of Japanese patients with mRCC who received TT after NIVO (CheckMate 025) or NIVO+IPI (CheckMate 214) were retrospectively analyzed. Primary endpoints were investigator-assessed ORR of the first TT after either NIVO or NIVO+IPI. Secondary endpoints included TFS, PFS, OS and safety of TTs.

Results

Twenty six patients in CheckMate 025 and 19 patients in CheckMate 214 from 20 centers in Japan were analyzed. As the first subsequent TT after NIVO or NIVO+IPI, axitinib was the most frequently treated regimen for both CheckMate 025 (54%) and CheckMate 214 (47%) patients. The ORRs of TT after NIVO and NIVO+IPI were 27 and 32% (all risks), and median PFSs were 8.9 and 16.3 months, respectively. During the treatment of first TT after either NIVO or NIVO+IPI, 98% of patients experienced treatment-related adverse events, including grade 3–4 events in 51% of patients, and no treatment-related deaths occurred.

Conclusions

TTs have favorable antitumor activity in patients with mRCC after ICI, possibly via changing the mechanism of action. Safety signals of TTs after ICI were similar to previous reports. These results indicate that sequential TTs after ICI may contribute for long survival benefit.

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

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

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

RECENT FINDINGS

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

SUMMARY

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

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

OBJECTIVE

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Clinical Outcomes of Metastatic Renal Carcinoma Following Disease Progression to Programmed Death (PD)-1 or PD-L1 Inhibitors (IO): A Meet-URO Group Real World Study (Meet-Uro 7)

OBJECTIVES

The aim of our study was to collect data about of the outcome of metastatic renal cell carcinoma patients who progressed after immune checkpoint inhibitors in order to enhance data about efficacy and safety of treatment beyond immune-oncology (IO).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A total of 162 eligible patients, progressing to IO, were enrolled from 16 Italian referral centers adhering to the Meet-Uro association. Baseline characteristics, outcome data and toxicities were retrospectively collected. Descriptive analysis was made using median values and ranges. Kaplan-Meier method and Mantel-Haenszel log-rank test were performed to compare differences between groups.

RESULTS

A total of 111 patients (68.5%) were treated after IO progression. In all, 51 patients (31.5%) did not receive further treatment for clinical deterioration. Median IO progression free survival (PFS) was 4 months (95% confidence interval [CI]: 3.1-4.8). IO-PFS tends to be longer in patients reporting adverse events (AE) of any grade (5.03 [95% CI: 3.8-6.1] vs. 2.99 [95% CI: 2.4-3.5] months P=0.004). Subsequent therapies included cabozantinib (n=79, 48%), everolimus (n=11, 6.7%), and others (n=21, 12.9%).Median PFS post-IO was 6.5 months (95% CI: 5.1-7.8). Cabozantinib showed longer PFS compared with everolimus (7.6 mo [95% CI: 5.2-10.1] vs. 3.2 mo [95% CI: 1.8-4.5]) (hazard ratio: 0.2; 95% CI: 0.1026-0.7968) and other drugs (4.3 mo [95% CI: 1.3-7.4]) (hazard ratio: 0.6; 95% CI: 0.35-1.23). All grade AE were reported in 83 patients (74%) and G3 to G4 AE in 39 patients (35%). Target therapies post-IO showed median overall survival of 14.7 months (95% CI: 0.3-21.4).

CONCLUSIONS

In our real world experience after progression to IO, vascular endotelial groth factor-tyrosine kinase inhibitors, given to patients, proved to be active and safe choices. Cabozantinib was associated with a better outcome in terms of median PFS.

Clinical Effectiveness of Second-line Sunitinib Following Immuno-oncology Therapy in Patients with Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma: A Real-world Study

BACKGROUND

Limited data exist on the clinical effectiveness of second-line (2L) vascular endothelial growth factor (receptor) targeted inhibitor (VEGF(R)i) sunitinib after first-line (1L) immuno-oncology (IO) therapy for patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) in real-world settings.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study among adult patients with mRCC treated with 2L sunitinib following 1L IO was conducted from select International mRCC Database Consortium (IMDC) centers. All analyses were performed overall and by 1L ipilimumab + nivolumab (IPI+NIVO) or 1L IO+VEGF(R)i. Median overall survival (mOS) and time-to-treatment discontinuation (mTTD) in 2L were estimated using Kaplan-Meier analysis. The 2L objective response rate (ORR) (complete/partial response) was reported.

RESULTS

Among 102 patients on 2L sunitinib, mean age was 61.3 years. IMDC risk scores at 2L initiation was available for 83 patients: 8 (9.6%) were favorable, 45 (54.2%) were intermediate, and 30 (36.1%) were poor risk. The 1L consisted of IPI+NIVO in 62 (60.8%), IO+VEGF(R)i therapy in 27 (26.5%), and IO monotherapy in 13 (12.7%) patients. Among all patients, mOS was 15.6 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 9.8-21.7), with a 1-year OS rate of 57.5% (95% CI, 45.2-68.0). mTTD was 5.4 months (95% CI, 4.2-7.2) and ORR was 22.5%.

CONCLUSION

Despite availability of effective 1L therapies in recent years, 2L sunitinib continues to have clinical activity after failure of 1L IO. Further studies on optimal treatment sequencing after 1L IO progression are needed.

Efficacy of Axitinib After Nivolumab Failure in Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma

BACKGROUND/AIM

Whether molecular-targeted therapy, particularly axitinib, is effective after failure of immune checkpoint inhibitors in metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) remains unclear. Here, we evaluated the therapeutic effect of axitinib as a third-line therapy following second-line nivolumab monotherapy for mRCC.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Data from patients treated with axitinib as a third-line therapy after failure of first-line tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) and second-line nivolumab monotherapy were reviewed. The progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and objective response rate during axitinib therapy were retrospectively evaluated. Tumor responses were assessed according to the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1.

RESULTS

Seventeen patients were treated with third-line axitinib after failure of prior TKI and nivolumab. During a median follow-up of 8.15 months, eight (47.1%) and three (17.6%) patients showed disease progression and died, respectively. The median PFS was 12.8 months [95% confidence interval=(CI)4.08-21.7], the 1-year PFS rate was 51.3%, and the 1-year OS rate was 71.6%. The median magnitude of maximum changes of targeted lesions from baseline was -11.9% (95%CI=-36.1-0.44%). The objective response rate and disease control rates were 29.4% (n=5) and 94.1% (n=16), respectively. Univariate analysis for PFS showed a shorter PFS in patients with non-clear cell histopathological types or those with liver metastases (p-Value<0.0001 for both).

CONCLUSION

Axitinib as a third-line therapy showed reasonable therapeutic efficacy after the failure of first-line TKI and second-line nivolumab monotherapy for mRCC. Further studies are needed to confirm our findings.

The need for new algorithms of treatment sequencing in clear-cell metastatic renal cell carcinoma

Introduction: In recent years, the systemic treatment of patients with metastatic renal-cell carcinoma (mRCC) has undergone profound innovations, offering the availability of new drugs, and raising the bar of the survival expectation in this, previously, almost-always, incurable disease. The likeliness of reaching durable response and long-term survival is still closely linked to good clinical management and smart treatment sequencing, rather than to a single systemic treatment choice.Areas covered: We review all systemic therapeutic options currently available, describe the evidence behind the current options available for mRCC patient treatment, and provide our personal cues to support clinical decisions.Expert opinion: The IMDC classification is still the only widely validated tool for the choice of primary therapy. Other elements should then be considered for selecting patients who can still receive TKI monotherapy (good-risk patients) or who deserve an 'all-at-once' approach with TKI plus ICI (poor-risk patients with the high metastatic burden and poor-prognosis organ involvement, likely not able to achieve a second chance), identifying these two 'extreme' situations and setting all the other treatment choices on the basis of several nuances. In the second- and further-line settings, ad-hoc prospective trials are awaited.

Consensus paper: current state of first- and second-line therapy in advanced clear-cell renal cell carcinoma

The therapy of advanced (clear-cell) renal cell carcinoma (RCC) has recently experienced tremendous changes. Several new treatments have been developed, with PD-1 immune-checkpoint inhibition being the backbone of therapy. Diverse immunotherapy combinations change current first-line standards. These changes also require new approaches in subsequent lines of therapy. In an expert panel, we discussed the new treatment options and how they change clinical practice. While first-line immunotherapies introduce a new level of response rates, data on second-line therapies remains poor. This scenario poses a challenge for clinicians as guideline recommendations are based on historical patient cohorts and agents may lack the appropriate label for their in guidelines recommended use. Here, we summarize relevant clinical data and consider appropriate treatment strategies.

Combination drug regimens for metastatic clear cell renal cell carcinoma

Renal cell carcinomas (RCC) make up about 90% of kidney cancers, of which 80% are of the clear cell subtype. About 20% of patients are already metastatic at the time of diagnosis. Initial treatment is often cytoreductive nephrectomy, but systemic therapy is required for advanced RCC. Single agent targeted therapies are moderately toxic and only somewhat effective, leading to development of immunotherapies and combination therapies. This review identifies limitations of monotherapies for metastatic renal cell carcinoma, discusses recent advances in combination therapies, and highlights therapeutic options under development. The goal behind combining various modalities of systemic therapy is to potentiate a synergistic antitumor effect. However, combining targeted therapies may cause increased toxicity. The initial attempts to create therapeutic combinations based on inhibition of the vascular endothelial growth factor or mammalian target of rapamycin pathways were largely unsuccessful in achieving a profile of increased synergy without increased toxicity. To date, five combination therapies have been approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, with the most recently approved therapies being a combination of checkpoint inhibition plus targeted therapy. Several other combination therapies are under development, including some in the phase 3 stage. The new wave of combination therapies for metastatic RCC has the potential to increase response rates and improve survival outcomes while maintaining tolerable side effect profiles.

PD-1/PD-L1 axis importance and tumor microenvironment immune cells

Triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) is heterogeneous cancer with poor prognosis among the other breast tumors. Rapid recurrence and increased progression rate could be reasons for the poor prognosis of this type of breast cancer. Recently, because of the lack of specific targets in multiple cancer treatment, immune checkpoint blockade therapies with targeting PD-1/PD-L1 axis have displayed significant advances and improved survival. Among different types of breast cancers, TNBC is considered more immunogenic with high T-cell and other immune cells infiltration compared to other breast cancer subtypes. This immunogenic characteristic of TNBC is a beneficial marker in the immunotherapy of these tumors. Clinical studies with a focus on immune checkpoint therapy have demonstrated promising results in TNBC treatment. In this review, we summarize clinical trials with the immunotherapy-based treatment of different cancers and also discuss the interaction between infiltrating immune cells and breast tumor microenvironment. In addition, we focus on the signaling pathway that controls PD-L1 expression and continues with CAR T-cell therapy and siRNA as novel strategies and potential tools in targeted therapy.

Treating metastatic clear-cell renal cell carcinoma: beyond immunotherapy

First-line treatment for metastatic clear-cell renal cell carcinoma patients with intermediate and poor-risk features consists of a combination of immune checkpoint inhibitors (e.g., nivolumab + ipilimumab) or immunotherapy with an anti-vascular endothelial growth factor receptor (VEGFR) drug (e.g., axitinib). The subsequent line of therapy should be determined on the basis of previous treatments and approved drugs available, based on the results of randomized clinical trials. Unfortunately, no phase 3 trial has compared the safety and efficacy of drugs after immunotherapy; thus, drug choice is more empirical than evidence-based. As the tumor may still be anti-VEGFR drug-naïve, a tyrosine kinase inhibitor approved for first line treatment (e.g., sunitinib or pazopanib) may be beneficial. Because this is a second-line treatment, patients could also receive axitinib, cabozantinib, or a combination of lenvatinib and everolimus. The treating physician should choose an appropriate treatment according to the patient's age, comorbidities, and tolerability of previous checkpoint inhibitors, among other considerations. Cases of patients with renal cell carcinoma refractory to checkpoint inhibitor treatment are growing, warranting a review of the activity and safety of target therapies after immunotherapy.

[A CASE OF RENAL CELL CARCINOMA THAT ONCE NIVOLUMAB HAD BEEN EFFECTIVE IN METASTATIC LESION AND MADE PRIMARY TUMOR RESECTABLE]

A 70-year-old woman, with an 8 cm tumor in the left kidney and multiple lung tumor and was diagnosed with Renal Cell Carcinoma (cT3aN0M1). The kidney tumor were unresectable and we started treatment with Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitors (sunitinib, pazopanib, axitinib, temsirolimus), but they failed because of disease progression or adverse events. We used nivolumab for 5^th line treatment; then, interstitial pneumonia was observed. The renal tumor shrunk and pulmonary metastatic foci revealed prominent disappearance. The renal tumor became resectable and we tried nephrectomy. Pathological findings were clear cell carcinoma with marked necrosis, hyperplasia and internal bleeding.

Cabozantinib After a Previous Immune Checkpoint Inhibitor in Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma: A Retrospective Multi-Institutional Analysis

BACKGROUND

Angiogenesis has been recognized as the most important factor for tumor invasion, proliferation, and progression in metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). However, few clinical data are available regarding the efficacy of cabozantinib following immunotherapy.

OBJECTIVE

To describe the outcome of cabozantinib in patients previously treated with immunotherapy.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients with mRCC who received cabozantinib immediately after nivolumab were included. The primary endpoint was to assess the outcome in terms of efficacy and activity.

RESULTS

Eighty-four mRCC patients met the criteria to be included in the final analysis. After a median follow-up of 9.4 months, median overall survival was 17.3 months. According to the IMDC criteria, the rates of patients alive at 12 months in the good, intermediate, and poor prognostic groups were 100%, 74%, and 33%, respectively (p < 0.001). The median progression-free survival (PFS) was 11.5 months (95% CI 8.3-14.7); no difference was found based on duration of previous first-line therapy or nivolumab PFS. The overall response rate was 52%, stable disease was found as the best response in 25.3% and progressive disease in 22.7% of patients. Among the 35 patients with progressive disease on nivolumab, 26 (74.3%) patients showed complete/partial response or stable disease with cabozantinib as best response after nivolumab. The major limitations of this study are the retrospective nature and the short follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

Cabozantinib was shown to be effective and active in patients previously receiving immune checkpoint inhibitors. Therefore, cabozantinib can be considered a valid therapeutic option for previously treated mRCC patients, irrespective of the type and duration of prior therapies.

Systemic therapy for advanced clear cell renal cell carcinoma after discontinuation of immune-oncology and VEGF targeted therapy combinations

BACKGROUND

Several phase 3 studies reported positive results for combinations of Immune-Oncology (IO) and Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor (VEGF) targeted therapies in patients with metastatic clear cell Renal Cell Carcinoma (ccRCC). However, there are limited data on outcomes to systemic therapy after IO-VEGF combinations.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis was performed on patients with metastatic ccRCC treated at the Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center and Cleveland Clinic who initiated systemic therapy post IO-VEGF including combinations with VEGF receptor (VEGFR) tyrosine kinase inhibitors (IO-TKI) and combinations with the anti-VEGF monoclonal antibody bevacizumab (IO-Bev). The study objectives were to evaluate the objective response rate (ORR), progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) on systemic therapy post IO-VEGF. RECIST v1.1 criteria were used to determine radiological responses and progression. Survival estimates were evaluated with the Kaplan-Meier methods and the log-rank test from the start of systemic therapy post IO-VEGF to the event of interest.

RESULTS

A total of fifty-nine patients were treated post discontinuation of IO-VEGF regimens which included IO-Bev (n = 35; 59%) and IO-TKI (n = 24; 41%). Fifty-eight patients (98%) received IO-VEGF regimens as part of a clinical trial. Subsequent therapies included cabozantinib (n = 22; 37%), axitinib (n = 18; 31%), pazopanib (n = 4; 7%), lenvatinib and everolimus (n = 4; 7%), mTOR inhibitor monotherapy (n = 3; 5%), axitinib and dalantercept (n = 2; 3%), sunitinib (n = 1; 2%), sorafenib (n = 1; 2%), and treatment with agents on unreported clinical trials (n = 4; 7%). Patients treated on unreported clinical trials were excluded from the efficacy analysis. Post IO-VEGF, the ORR was 25% and median PFS was 12.0 months (95% CI, 8.2-24.5). Median OS was 24.5 months (95% CI, 12-NE) and 12 months OS rate was 63.3% (95% CI, 48.6-74.9). We observed no differences post IO-VEGF OS when comparing IO- TKI vs IO-Bev (Log-rank p = 0.73).

CONCLUSIONS

Post IO-VEGF, most patients received VEGFR-TKIs. In this setting, VEGFR-TKIs demonstrated clinical activity and remain a viable option for salvage therapy after progression on IO-VEGF.

Activity of cabozantinib after immune checkpoint blockade in metastatic clear-cell renal cell carcinoma

BACKGROUND

Cabozantinib is approved for the first and subsequent line treatment of metastatic clear-cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC) based on trials in which most patients were immune checkpoint blockade (ICB) naive. With an expanding role of ICB in earlier lines of therapy, we assessed activity of cabozantinib in patients with metastatic ccRCC after progressing on anti-PD-1/PD-L1-based ICBs.

METHODS

We retrospectively analysed the clinical outcomes of 86 patients from 2 academic centres who received cabozantinib after progression on ICB alone, ICB in combination with vascular endothelial growth factor inhibitors (VEGFis) or ICB in combination with other therapies. Overall response rate (ORR, investigator assessed), time to treatment failure (TTF), overall survival (OS) and toxicities leading to dose reductions or cessation were evaluated.

RESULTS

Eighty-six patients were included in the analysis; the median age was 63 years (range 33-84) and the median number of prior therapies was 2 (range 1-10). The type of prior ICB therapy was ICBs alone (64%), an ICB in combination with a VEGFi (29%) or ICBs in combination with other therapies (7%). At the time of cabozantinib treatment, 71% of patients were in the International Metastatic RCC Database Consortium good- or intermediate-risk groups. Approximately half of patients (52%) were started on cabozantinib at the full 60 mg daily dose. The ORR was 36% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 26-47%) with no complete response and 43% achieving stable disease; 21% had primary progressive disease. The median TTF was 6.5 months (95% CI = 5.3-8.5.). The median OS was 13.1 months (95% CI = 8.7-NR) with 55% (95% CI = 41-66%) OS rate at 12 months. Most common reasons for dose reductions were fatigue (27%), palmar-plantar erythrodysesthesia (16%) and diarrhoea (10%).

CONCLUSIONS

Cabozantinib is active in patients treated with prior ICB-based therapies, with no new safety signals. This study supports the use of cabozantinib after ICB-based therapies.

Clinical outcomes of second-line treatment following prior targeted therapy in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma: a comparison of axitinib and nivolumab

BACKGROUND

Sequential treatment starting with target therapy is still the standard care for metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC), even in the era of immune checkpoint inhibitors. Our objective was to compare the clinical outcomes between axitinib and nivolumab as second-line therapy following prior targeted therapy in mRCC patients.

METHODS

We identified 41 patients treated with axitinib and 39 patients treated with nivolumab as a second-line regimen after targeted therapy, and retrospectively compared the treatment efficacy and safety in these patients.

RESULTS

The clinical benefit rate of axitinib was significantly higher than that of nivolumab (82.9% versus 56.4%; p = 0.014) and patients who received axitinib tended to show longer progression-free survival (PFS) than those who received nivolumab (10.3 months versus 7.3 months; p = 0.067). There was no difference in the overall survival (OS) of the two groups (both not reached; p = 0.581). The incidence of grade ≥ 3 adverse events (AEs) was similar between the two groups, but one patient in the nivolumab group died due to an immune-related AE. In addition, a Cox proportional hazards model showed that the pre-treatment KPS, the baseline neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR), and an objective response in second-line therapy were significantly associated with PFS, while the pre-treatment KPS, the number of metastatic organs, and an objective response in second-line therapy significantly contributed to the predicted OS.

CONCLUSIONS

Although the prognosis did not differ markedly between the two groups, axitinib resulted in a better tumor response rate. Further randomized prospective studies are needed for the ideal order of this sequential treatment.

Real-world Experience With Sunitinib Treatment in Patients With Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma: Clinical Outcome According to Risk Score

BACKGROUND

ADONIS is an ongoing observational study in 9 European countries, designed to evaluate treatment patterns/outcomes in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) treated with first-line sunitinib and/or second-line axitinib post sunitinib. We present an evaluation of sunitinib efficacy by risk group, in the real-world setting examined in ADONIS.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients were enrolled at the start of first-line sunitinib treatment or second-line axitinib post sunitinib treatment. Evaluation of sunitinib efficacy was assessed by International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium (IMDC) and Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center risk criteria.

RESULTS

For all patients in this analysis (N = 467), the median progression-free survival was 23.8 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 16.5-28.5 months), 11.8 months (95% CI, 8.1-17.4 months), and 4.6 months (95% CI, 2.5-7.7 months) for IMDC favorable-, intermediate-, and poor-risk groups, respectively. The median overall survival was 97.1 months (95% CI, 46.3 months-not evaluable [NE]), 33.5 months (95% CI, 20.5-46.6 months), and 10.0 months (95% CI, 4.5-19.8 months) for the respective risk groups. Data on individual risk factors were available for a subgroup of patients, allowing analysis by intermediate risk by 1 versus 2 risk factors. When including this subgroup (n = 120), the median overall survival for IMDC favorable-, intermediate-1, and intermediate-2 risk factors was 21.6 months (95% CI, 16.3 months-NE), 20.5 months (15.5 months-NE), and 15.1 months (4.1 months-NE), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

For patients overall and by risk-group stratification, survival estimates were aligned with previously published data. In patients with intermediate-1 risk, overall survival was very similar to patients with favorable risk. However, further exploration of outcome data from different sources is needed to confirm these observations.

Recent advancements in the treatment of metastatic clear cell renal cell carcinoma: A review of the evidence using second-generation p-values

The therapeutic options for advanced or metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) have drastically evolved over the past 20 years. High-dose interleukin-2 (HD IL-2), which led to durable complete responses in a small fraction of patients by activating the interleukin-2 (IL-2) pathway, faded in popularity with the advent of oral tyrosine kinase inhibitors directed against the VEGF pathway (VEGFR-TKI) showing better tolerability, wider applicability, higher objective response rates, and longer progression-free survival than HD IL-2. More recently, new insights on how to more efficiently harness the immune system led to the development of immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) therapies, which rapidly became an integral component of mRCC treatment. The recently approved regimen combining the PD-1 inhibitor, nivolumab, and the CTLA-4 inhibitor, ipilimumab, and the recently approved regimens combining the oral VEGFR-TKI, axitinib, with the PD-1 inhibitor, pembrolizumab, or the PD-L1 inhibitor, avelumab, were shown to yield improved outcomes compared with sunitinib, the VEGFR-TKI that was used as a comparator. The present review discusses the evidence behind the treatment approvals for mRCC and provides an overview of the current therapeutic landscape. We evaluated the results of randomized clinical trials for mRCC based on the effect size differences between treatments on relative scales and used second-generation p-values as a descriptive summary of the statistical evidence.

Biomarkers of Prognosis and Efficacy of Anti-angiogenic Therapy in Metastatic Clear Cell Renal Cancer

In the last decades, the prognosis of metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) has remarkably improved following the advent of the "targeted therapy" era. The expanding knowledge on the prominent role played by angiogenesis in RCC pathogenesis has led to approval of multiple anti-angiogenic agents such as sunitinib, pazopanib, axitinib, cabozantinib, sorafenib, and bevacizumab. These agents can induce radiological responses and delay cancer progression for months or years before onset of resistance, with a clinically meaningful activity. The need for markers of prognosis and efficacy of anti-angiogenic agents has become more compelling as novel systemic immunotherapy agents have also been approved in RCC and can be administered as an alternative to angiogenesis inhibitors. Anti PD-1 monoclonal antibody nivolumab has been approved in the second-line setting after tyrosine kinase inhibitors failure, while combination of nivolumab plus anti CTLA-4 monoclonal antibody ipilimumab has been approved as first-line therapy of RCC patients at intermediate or poor prognosis. In this review article, biomarkers of prognosis and efficacy of antiangiogenic therapies are summarized with a focus on those that have the potential to affect treatment decision-making in RCC. Biomarkers predictive of toxicity of anti-angiogenic agents have also been discussed.

The Tumor Vessel Targeting Strategy: A Double-Edged Sword in Tumor Metastasis

Tumor vessels provide essential paths for tumor cells to escape from the primary tumor and form metastatic foci in distant organs. The vessel targeting strategy has been widely used as an important clinical cancer chemotherapeutic strategy for patients with metastatic tumors. Our review introduces the contribution of angiogenesis to tumor metastasis and summarizes the application of Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved vessel targeting drugs for metastatic tumors. We recommend the application and mechanisms of vascular targeting drugs for inhibiting tumor metastasis and discuss the risk and corresponding countermeasures after vessel targeting treatment.

Outcomes of Patients with Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Treated with Targeted Therapy After Immuno-oncology Checkpoint Inhibitors

BACKGROUND

Immuno-oncology (IO) therapies have changed the treatment standards of metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). However, the effectiveness of targeted therapy following discontinuation of IO therapy in real-world settings has not been well studied.

OBJECTIVE

To describe treatment sequence and assess clinical effectiveness of targeted therapy for mRCC patients who received prior IO therapy.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

A retrospective, longitudinal cohort study using data from eight international cancer centers was conducted. Patients with mRCC were ≥18yr old, received IO therapy in any line, and initiated targeted therapy following IO therapy discontinuation.

INTERVENTION

Patients were treated with vascular endothelial growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitors (VEGFR-TKIs) or mammalian target of rapamycin inhibitors (mTORIs).

OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS

Outcomes were time to treatment discontinuation (TTD), overall survival (OS), and objective response rate (ORR). Crude and adjusted hazard ratios (aHRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were estimated using Cox proportional hazard models. Models were adjusted for age, sex, therapy line, and International Metastatic RCC Database Consortium risk group.

RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS

Among 314 patients, 276 (87.9%) and 38 (12.1%) were treated with VEGFR-TKI and mTORI therapy, respectively. The most common tyrosine kinase inhibitor treatments were axitinib, cabozantinib, and sunitinib following IO therapy. In adjusted models, patients treated with VEGFR-TKI versus mTORI therapy had lower hazard of TTD after IO treatment (aHR=0.46; 95% CI: 0.30-0.71; p < 0.01). One-year OS probability (65% vs 47%, p < 0.01) and proportion of ORR (29.8% vs 3.6%, p < 0.01) were significantly greater for patients treated with VEGFR-TKIs versus those treated with mTORIs.

CONCLUSIONS

Targeted therapy has clinical activity following IO treatment. Patients who received VEGFR-TKIs versus mTORIs following IO therapy had improved clinical outcomes. These findings may help inform treatment guidelines and clinical practice for patients post-IO therapy.

PATIENT SUMMARY

Patients may continue to experience clinical benefits from targeted therapies after progression on immuno-oncology treatment.

Cabozantinib for the treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma

Introduction: The randomized, placebo-controlled, phase III CELESTIAL trial demonstrated statistically and clinically significant improvement in overall survival with cabozantinib in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) previously treated with sorafenib. Most frequently reported adverse events included palmar-plantar erythrodysesthesia, hypertension, increased aspartate aminotransferase, fatigue, and diarrhea. Areas covered: In this review we analyze and discuss preclinical and clinical data of cabozantinib. We summarize efficacy and safety results of phase II and III trials of cabozantinib in the treatment of patients with advanced HCC and we present ongoing trials of cabozantinib in combination with checkpoint inhibitors. Expert opinion: Cabozantinib is a new second-line and the only third-line treatment for patients with advanced HCC, nevertheless some data are still missing to better inform clinical decisions on how to treat specific patient populations. Next trials designs will have to incorporate heavy efforts in terms of translational research to maximize the benefits of such treatments.

Individualised axitinib regimen for patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma after treatment with checkpoint inhibitors: a multicentre, single-arm, phase 2 study

BACKGROUND

Checkpoint inhibitor therapy is a standard of care for patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma. Treatment options after checkpoint inhibitor therapy include vascular endothelial growth factor receptor (VEGF-R) tyrosine kinase inhibitors, although no prospective data regarding their use in this setting exist. Axitinib is a VEGF-R inhibitor with clinical data supporting increased activity with dose titration. We aimed to investigate the activity of dose titrated axitinib in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma who were previously treated with checkpoint inhibitor.

METHODS

We did a multicentre, phase 2 trial of axitinib given on an individualised dosing algorithm. Patients at least 18 years of age with histologically or cytologically confirmed locally recurrent or metastatic renal cell carcinoma with clear cell histology, a Karnofsky Performance Status of 70% or more, and measurable disease who received checkpoint inhibitor therapy as the most recent treatment were eligible. There was no limit on number of previous therapies received. Patients received oral axitinib at a starting dose of 5 mg twice daily with dose titration every 14 days in 1 mg increments (ie, 5 mg twice daily to 6 mg twice daily, up to 10 mg twice daily maximum dose) if there was no axitinib-related grade 2 or higher mucositis, diarrhoea, hand-foot syndrome, or fatigue. If one or more of these grade 2 adverse events occurred, axitinib was withheld for 3 days before the same dose was resumed. Dose reductions were made if recurrent grade 2 adverse events despite treatment breaks or grade 3-4 adverse events occurred. The primary outcome was progression-free survival. Analyses were done per protocol in all patients who received at least one dose of axitinib. Recruitment has been completed and the trial is ongoing. This trial is registered with ClincalTrials.gov, number NCT02579811.

FINDINGS

Between Jan 5, 2016 and Feb 21, 2018, 40 patients were enrolled and received at least one dose of study treatment. With a median follow-up of 8·7 months (IQR 3·7-14·2), the median progression-free survival was 8·8 months (95% CI 5·7-16·6). Fatigue (83%) and hypertension (75%) were the most common all-grade adverse events. The most common grade 3 adverse event was hypertension (24 patients [60%]). There was one (3%) grade 4 adverse event (elevated lipase) and no treatment-related deaths occurred. Serious adverse events that were likely related to therapy occurred in eight (20%) patients; the most common were dehydration (n=4) and diarrhoea (n=2).

INTERPRETATION

Individualised axitinib dosing in patients with metastatic renal cell inoma previously treated with checkpoint inhibitors did not meet the prespecified threshold for progression free survival, but these data show that this individualised titration scheme is feasible and has robust clinical activity. These prospective results warrant consideration of axitinib in this setting.

FUNDING

Pfizer.

Sunitinib rechallenge in advanced renal cell carcinoma: outcomes of a multicenter retrospective study

PURPOSE

The aim of this multicenter study was to evaluate the clinical outcomes of patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) who received sunitinib retreatment.

METHODS

Clinical data from patients treated with sunitinib rechallenge in nine Spanish centers were retrospectively analyzed. All patients received first-line sunitinib until progression or intolerance, followed by one or more successive drugs and rechallenge with sunitinib thereafter.

RESULTS

Thirty-seven patients were included. At first-line treatment, objective response rate (ORR) was 69.4% and median progression-free survival (PFS) was 19.4 months. At rechallenge, ORR was 27.2% and 39.4% of patients obtained stabilization of disease. Median PFS was 6.2 months. Clinical benefit was obtained by 21 patients (75%) with > 6-month interval between sunitinib treatments and by 1 patient (20%) among those with ≤ 6-month interval (P = 0.016). Hemoglobin levels ≥ lower level of normal were associated with clinical benefit (P = 0.019) and with PFS (P = 0.004). Median overall survival from start of first-line sunitinib was 52.7 months. No new adverse events were observed at rechallenge.

CONCLUSIONS

Sunitinib rechallenge is a feasible treatment option for selected patients with mRCC.

Can Combined Therapy Benefit Immune Checkpoint Blockade Response in Hepatocellular Carcinoma?

Background:

Hepatocellular Carcinoma (HCC) is one of the most common cancers with high mortality rate. The effects of most therapies are limited. The Immune Checkpoint Blockade (ICB) improves the prognosis in multiple malignancies. The application of immune checkpoint blockade to hepatocellular carcinoma patients has recently started. Early phase clinical trials have shown some benefits to cancer patients.

Methods/Results:

This review focuses on the immune system of liver and clinical trials of ICB. In particular, we analyze the mechanisms by which immune checkpoint blockade therapies can be used for the treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma patients, then examine the factors in cancer resistance to the therapies and finally suggest possible combination therapies for the treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma patients.

Conclusion:

ICB is a promising therapy for advanced HCC patients. Combined therapy exhibits a great potential to enhance ICB response in these patients. The better understanding of the factors influencing the sensitivity of ICB and more clinical trials will consolidate the efficiency and minimize the adverse effects of ICB.

Outcomes of patients with metastatic clear-cell renal cell carcinoma treated with second-line VEGFR-TKI after first-line immune checkpoint inhibitors

BACKGROUND

Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) are being increasingly utilised in the front-line (1L) setting of metastatic clear-cell renal cell carcinoma (mccRCC). Limited data exist on responses and survival on second-line (2L) vascular endothelial growth factor-receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitor (VEGFR-TKI) therapy after 1L ICI therapy.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This is a retrospective study of mccRCC patients treated with 2L VEGFR-TKI after progressive disease (PD) with 1L ICI. Patients were treated at MD Anderson Cancer Center or Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center between December 2015 and February 2018. Objective response was assessed by blinded radiologists' review using Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours v1.1. Descriptive statistics and Kaplan-Meier method were used.

RESULTS

Seventy patients were included in the analysis. Median age at mccRCC diagnosis was 59 years; 8 patients (11%) had international metastatic database consortium favourable-risk disease, 48 (69%) had intermediate-risk disease and 14 (20%) had poor-risk disease. As 1L therapy, 12 patients (17%) received anti-programmed death ligand-1 (PD-(L)1) monotherapy with nivolumab or atezolizumab, 33 (47%) received nivolumab plus ipilimumab and 25 (36%) received combination anti-PD-(L)1 plus bevacizumab. 2L TKI therapies included pazopanib, sunitinib, axitinib and cabozantinib. On 2L TKI therapy, one patient (1.5%) achieved a complete response, 27 patients (39.7%) a partial response and 36 patients (52.9%) stable disease. Median progression-free survival (mPFS) was 13.2 months (95% confidence interval: 10.1, NA). Forty-five percent of subjects required a dose reduction, and twenty-seven percent of patients discontinued treatment because of toxicity.

CONCLUSIONS

In this retrospective study of patients with mccRCC receiving 2L TKI monotherapy after 1L ICI, we observed 2L antitumour activity and tolerance comparable to historical data for 1L TKI.

Efficacy and Safety of Chemotherapy Following Anti-PD-1 Antibody Therapy for Gastric Cancer: A Case of Sclerosing Cholangitis

Immunotherapy targeting programmed cell death-1 (PD-1) signaling is becoming the standard of care for advanced gastric cancer. We herein report a patient with gastric adenocarcinoma with peritoneal dissemination who was treated with nab-paclitaxel and ramucirumab following nivolumab and developed sclerosing cholangitis. Endoscopic retrograde cholangiography showed irregular narrowing and widening of the entire intrahepatic biliary system. Intriguingly, the patient receiving second-line chemotherapy with nab-paclitaxel plus ramucirumab prior to being administered nivolumab, however, he had experienced progressive disease. Thereafter, the administration of fourth-line chemotherapy with nab-paclitaxel and ramucirumab following nivolumab resulted in a clinical response. Nivolumab may enhance the efficacy of the subsequent chemotherapy regimens but also induce sclerosing cholangitis.