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)

Effectiveness and Safety of Second-line Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitors After Discontinuation of First-line Immune-oncology Combination Therapy Because of Adverse Events in the Patients With Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma

INTRODUCTION

Effectiveness and safety of second-line tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) for whom first-line immuno-oncology (I-O) combination therapy was discontinued because of adverse events (AEs) remain to be determined.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Clinicopathological data were retrospectively collected from 34 institutions between August 2018 and January 2022 for 243 patients with mRCC who received second-line TKIs after first-line I-O combination therapy. Two patients who requested discontinuation of first-line I-O combination therapy were excluded. Oncological outcomes and safety were compared between patients who discontinued first-line I-O combination therapy because of progressive disease (Group PD) and AEs (Group AE). First- and second-line overall survival (OS) were defined as the time from the start of first- and second-line therapy to death, respectively. Propensity score matching was applied to adjust prognostic factors between the 2 groups.

RESULTS

There were 179 patients in Group PD and 62 patients in Group AE. Objective response rate and disease control rate were similar between the 2 groups. Progression-free survival (PFS), second-line OS, and first-line OS were significantly longer in Group AE than in Group PD (median 13.6 months vs. 8.5 months, P = 0.005; median not reached [NR] vs. 19.5 months, P = .005; median NR vs. 30.8 months, P = .012, respectively). After propensity score matching, PFS and second-line OS were still significantly longer and first-line OS tended to be longer in Group AE than in Group PD. There were no significant differences in the occurrence of AEs of any grade, including severe grades of 3 or greater, between the 2 groups.

CONCLUSION

Second-line TKIs are safe and at least as effective in patients with mRCC who discontinued first-line I-O combination therapy because of AEs as they are in patients who discontinued because of PD.

Impact of Estimated Glomerular Filtration Rate and Serum C-Reactive Protein Level to Overall Survival After Second-Line Targeted Therapy Following Immuno-Oncology Combination Therapy for Advanced Renal Cell Carcinoma

OBJECTIVES

Immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI)-based combination therapies are first-line treatments for locally advanced or metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). However, second-line treatment efficacy remains uncertain due to limited large randomized trials. This study evaluated real-world oncological outcomes after second-line treatments in patients who received combination ICIs as first-line treatment.

METHODS

Among 467 patients who received ICI combination therapy as first-line treatment for mRCC between January 2018 and January 2024, those who received cabozantinib (Cabo) or axitinib (Axi) as second-line treatment were included in this study. The patient characteristics at the initiation of second-line treatment, progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS) were compared between the two groups. Prognostic factors associated with OS after the initiation of second-line treatment were evaluated.

RESULTS

The Cabo and Axi groups included 87 and 45 patients, respectively. Median OS and PFS after the initiation of secondary treatment were 32 and 9 months in the Cabo group (p = 0.269), and 33 and 12 months in the Axi group (p = 0.399). Multivariable analysis identified serum C-reactive protein (CRP) ≥ 0.6 mg/dL and estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) < 40 mL/min/1.73 m2 at the start of secondary treatment as independent predictors of OS. Stratification by these factors revealed a significant OS difference (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Oncological outcomes after the initiation of secondary treatment did not differ significantly between the Cabo and Axi groups. An eGFR < 40 mL/min/1.73 m2 and CRP ≥ 0.6 mg/dL at the start of Cabo or Axi treatment were independent OS predictors after secondary treatment.

Primary resistance to nivolumab plus ipilimumab therapy affects second-line treatment outcomes in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma

Nivolumab plus ipilimumab (NIVO+IPI) has a long-term response rate of 30% for patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). However, 20% of patients develop primary resistant disease (PRD) to NIVO+IPI and show poor survival outcomes. In this study, we aimed to evaluate the effect of PRD as a second-line treatment in patients with mRCC. The data used in this multi-institutional, retrospective cohort were collected between August 2015 and January 2023. In total, 189 patients with mRCC were treated with NIVO+IPI and then with a vascular endothelial growth factor receptor-tyrosine kinase inhibitor. Associations between PRD and progression-free survival of second-line treatment (PFS), progression-free survival 2 (PFS2), and overall survival (OS) were analyzed. The median age at NIVO+IPI initiation was 67 years in the male-dominant population (n = 140, 74.1%), and most patients had clear cell histology (n = 140, 74.1%). PRD was recorded in 42 (22.2%) of 189 patients during NIVO+IPI therapy. Patients who experienced PRD showed poor PFS (hazard ratio [HR], 1.788; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.176-2.718; p = 0.007), PFS2 (HR, 4.127; 95% CI, 2.649-6.431; p < 0.001), and OS (HR, 3.330; 95% CI, 2.040-5.437; p < 0.001). Before starting second-line therapy, patients with PRD tended to have a poor performance status compared with non-PRD patients and a higher IMDC risk. Second-line drug therapy was not associated with treatment outcomes in patients with PRD. PRD in patients with mRCC receiving NIVO+IPI as first-line treatment was associated with poor clinical course, even with second-line therapy.

Therapeutic outcome of combination therapy using immune-checkpoint inhibitors and tyrosine kinase inhibitors for metastatic non-clear-cell renal cell carcinoma

INTRODUCTION

We aimed to clarify the therapeutic outcome of combination therapy using immune-checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) and/or tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) for meta-static non-clear-cell renal cell carcinoma (nccRCC).

METHODS

We have been retrospectively investigating the therapeutic efficacy and prognosis in 36 patients with metastatic nccRCC undergoing combination therapy using two ICIs, ipilimumab plus nivolumab (ICI-ICI), and ICI plus TKI (ICI-TKI), at Kobe University and affiliated institutions since 2018. Progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), objective response rate (ORR), and adverse event (AE) were compared.

RESULTS

The first-line regimen was ICI-ICI in 26 cases and ICI-TKI in 10 cases. The ORRs in the ICI-ICI and ICI-TKI groups were 34.6 and 30.0%, respectively (p=0.9433). The 50% PFS for the ICI-TKI group was 9.7 months, significantly longer than that for the ICI-ICI group (4.6 months, p=0.0499), and there was no significant difference in OS between groups (p=0.3984). There was no significant difference in the occurrence rate of AE for below grade 2 (p=0.8535), nor above grade 3 (p=0.3786) between the ICI-ICI and ICI-TKI groups.

CONCLUSIONS

From our analysis of real-world data, a better outcome of PFS was expected in the ICI-TKI group compared with that in the ICI-ICI group, while there was no significant difference in OS or ORR.

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.

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.

Contemporary Drug Therapy for Renal Cell Carcinoma- Evidence Accumulation and Histological Implications in Treatment Strategy

Renal cell carcinoma (RCC) is a heterogeneous disease comprising a variety of histological subtypes. Approximately 70-80% of RCC cases are clear cell carcinoma (ccRCC), while the remaining subtypes constitute non-clear cell carcinoma (nccRCC). The medical treatment of RCC has greatly changed in recent years through advances in molecularly targeted therapies and immunotherapies. Most of the novel systemic therapies currently available have been approved based on ccRCC clinical trial data. nccRCC can be subdivided into more than 40 histological subtypes that have distinct clinical, histomorphological, immunohistochemical, and molecular features. These entities are listed as emerging in the 2022 World Health Organization classification. The diagnosis of nccRCC and treatments based on cancer histology and biology remain challenging due to the disease's rarity. We reviewed clinical trials focused on recent discoveries regarding clinicopathological features.

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.

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.

Outcomes of nivolumab monotherapy for previously treated metastatic renal cell carcinoma: a real-world multi-institution data with a minimum of 2 years of follow-up

OBJECTIVES

To investigate the long-term follow-up outcomes of nivolumab monotherapy for previously treated metastatic renal cell carcinoma, using real-world data.

METHODS

A total of 121 patients were treated with nivolumab monotherapy as subsequent therapy after the failure of prior tyrosine kinase inhibitor therapy between January 2013 and December 2021 at four affiliated institutions. To evaluate the outcome after 2 years or more, we selected patients in whom nivolumab therapy was started in December 2019 or earlier because data collection was performed until the end of December 2021.

RESULTS

Seventy-four patients were evaluated. During the median follow-up period of 25.8 months, 62 (84%) and 40 (54%) patients had disease progression and died, respectively. Nivolumab was administered as second-line therapy in 43 patients (58%). The median progression-free survival and overall survival were 5.52 and 31.1 months, respectively, and objective response rate was 36%. There was no difference in progression-free survival or overall survival based on the treatment line of nivolumab (P = 0.915, P = 0.559). The magnitude of tumor response and development of immune-related adverse events were significantly associated with progression-free survival (P < 0.0001, P < 0.0001, respectively) and overall survival (P < 0.0001, P = 0.0002, respectively). Treatment-related adverse events developed in 38 patients (51%), including 33 (45%) who had immune-related adverse events. Steroid administration was needed in nine patients (12%).

CONCLUSIONS

The present real-world multi-institution study with long-term follow-up data demonstrates that nivolumab monotherapy is effective for previously treated metastatic renal cell carcinoma, prolonging survival, improving tumor response and has a manageable safety profile.

Evolution of surgical treatment of metastatic spine tumors

PURPOSE

The treatment of cancer has transformed over the past 40 years, with medical oncologists, radiation oncologists and surgeons working together to prolong survival times and minimize treatment related morbidity. With each advancement, the risk-benefit scale has been calibrated to provide an accurate assessment of surgical hazard. The goal of this review is to look back at how the role of surgery has evolved with each new medical advance, and to explore the role of surgeons in the future of cancer care.

METHODS

A literature review was conducted, highlighting the key papers guiding surgical management of spinal metastatic lesions.

CONCLUSION

The roles of surgery, medical therapy, and radiation have evolved over the past 40 years, with new advances requiring complex multidisciplinary care.

Salvage nivolumab and ipilimumab after prior anti-PD-1/PD-L1 therapy in metastatic renal cell carcinoma: A meta-analysis

Background

Salvage nivolumab and ipilimumab after prior anti‐PD‐1/PD‐L1 therapy is frequently used off‐label for clear cell metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). However, limited data are available to guide such therapy. We performed a meta‐analysis to characterize further the safety and efficacy of salvage nivolumab and ipilimumab.

Methods

We conducted a systematic review in accordance with PRISMA. Studies of salvage nivolumab and ipilimumab in patients with mRCC published in English before June 1, 2021 were included. We also included patients treated at the Ohio State University from 2012 to 2020 through a retrospective chart review. The included studies were further stratified into adaptive and standard groups based on their designs. We calculated objective response rate (ORR) and adverse events (AEs) via pooled data and quantitative synthesis using the Stata metaprop procedure. A conservative random effect model was used to combine values.

Results

A total of 7 studies and 310 patients were included. Salvage nivolumab and ipilimumab had an ORR of 14% (95% CI, 0.09–0.21) and median progression‐free survival ranged between 3.7 and 5.5 months. Four out of the seven studies were standard design, whereas the other three studies were adaptive. The ORR was numerically higher in the standard group compared with the adaptive group (21% and 9–10%, respectively). The responses to salvage nivolumab and ipilimumab did not correlate with the initial anti‐PD‐1/PD‐L1 responses (odds ratio = 1.45; p = 0.5). Grade ≥3 AEs occurred in 26% of the patients (95% CI, 0.19–0.33). There were no new safety signals observed in this study.

Conclusion

Salvage nivolumab and ipilimumab demonstrated moderate antitumor activity and a manageable safety profile in patients with mRCC who had prior anti‐PD‐1/PD‐L1 therapy.

Implication for Practice

Patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma have limited treatment options after progressive disease on anti‐PD‐1/PD‐L1 therapy. The role of salvage nivolumab and ipilimumab in this patient population is poorly defined. The studies on this highly important and clinically relevant topic are limited by small sample sizes. The results from our meta‐analysis suggest that nivolumab and ipilimumab are feasible in the salvage setting with moderate efficacy and acceptable toxicity profile. The response rates differ with different treatment designs. This information will be beneficial to guide clinical decision‐making and accurately estimating toxicity.

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.