Comparative Efficacy of First-Line Immune-Based Combination Therapies in Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis

Real-world clinical outcomes of patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma receiving pembrolizumab + axitinib vs. ipilimumab + nivolumab

BACKGROUND

Immune-Oncology (IO) therapies have changed first-line (1L) treatment paradigm for metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) in last few years with robust clinical trial data. We examined clinical outcomes among clear cell mRCC (mccRCC) patients who received pembrolizumab + axitinib (pembro-axi) or ipilimumab + nivolumab (ipi-nivo) in the US community oncology setting.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study utilized data from electronic health records and chart review within The US Oncology Network to identify adult patients with mccRCC initiating 1L pembro-axi or ipi-nivo from January 01, 2019 to December 31, 2020 and followed through March 31, 2021. Physician-recorded response (real-world overall response rate [rwORR] and real-world disease control rate [rwDCR]) was assessed descriptively. Real-world progression-free survival (rwPFS), real-world time to next treatment (rwTTNT) and time on treatment (rwToT) were estimated using Kaplan-Meier analysis. Association of 1L systemic treatment with time-to-event outcomes was examined using multivariable cox proportional hazards models.

RESULTS

Study included 331 mccRCC patients (pembro-axi:44%, ipi-nivo:56%). Median age was 65 years, 75.5% were male, and 82.5% had intermediate/poor (I/P) IMDC risk score. RwORR and rwDCR were 71.0% and 80.0% for pembro-axi and 45.2% and 58.6% for ipi-nivo. In multivariable analysis, pembro-axi was associated with longer rwToT (aHR, 0.53 [95% CI, 0.40, 0.71]), rwTTNT (aHR, 0.60 [95% CI, 0.42, 0.87]), and rwPFS (aHR, 0.70 [95% CI, 0.49, 0.99]) compared to ipi-nivo (P < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

Our study provides insight into newer mccRCC treatment tolerability and effectiveness in the real-world US community setting. Our real-world results were comparable to data from clinical trials, which is encouraging for mccRCC patients.

Challenges in conducting fractional polynomial and standard parametric network meta-analyses of immune checkpoint inhibitors for first-line advanced renal cell carcinoma

Aim: Network meta-analyses (NMAs) increasingly feature time-varying hazards to account for non-proportional hazards between different drug classes. This paper outlines an algorithm for selecting clinically plausible fractional polynomial NMA models. Methods: The NMA of four immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) + tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) and one TKI therapy for renal cell carcinoma (RCC) served as case study. Overall survival (OS) and progression free survival (PFS) data were reconstructed from the literature, 46 models were fitted. The algorithm entailed a-priori face validity criteria for survival and hazards, based on clinical expert input, and predictive accuracy against trial data. Selected models were compared with statistically best-fitting models. Results: Three valid PFS and two OS models were identified. All models overestimated PFS, the OS model featured crossing ICI + TKI versus TKI curves as per expert opinion. Conventionally selected models showed implausible survival. Conclusion: The selection algorithm considering face validity, predictive accuracy, and expert opinion improved the clinical plausibility of first-line RCC survival models.

A Comparison of Alternative Network Meta-Analysis Methods in the Presence of Nonproportional Hazards: A Case Study in First-Line Advanced or Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma

OBJECTIVES

Network meta-analysis (NMA) of time-to-event outcomes based on constant hazard ratios can result in biased findings when the proportional hazards (PHs) assumption does not hold in a subset of trials. We aimed to summarize the published non-PH NMA methods for time-to-event outcomes, demonstrate their application, and compare their results.

METHODS

The following non-PH NMA methods were compared through an illustrative case study in oncology of 4 randomized controlled trials in terms of progression-free survival and overall survival: (1) 1-step or (2) 2-step multivariate NMAs based on traditional survival distributions or fractional polynomials, (3) NMAs with restricted cubic splines for baseline hazard, and (4) restricted mean survival NMA.

RESULTS

For progression-free survival, the PH assumption did not hold across trials and non-PH NMA methods better reflected the relative treatment effects over time. The most flexible models (fractional polynomials and restricted cubic splines) fit better to the data than the other approaches. Estimated hazard ratios obtained with different non-PH NMA methods were similar at 5 years of follow-up but differed thereafter in the extrapolations. Although there was no strong evidence of PH violation for overall survival, non-PH NMA methods captured this uncertainty in the relative treatment effects over time.

CONCLUSIONS

When the PH assumption is questionable in a subset of the randomized controlled trials, we recommend assessing alternative non-PH NMA methods to estimate relative treatment effects for time-to-event outcomes. We propose a transparent and explicit stepwise model selection process considering model fit, external constraints, and clinical validity. Given inherent uncertainty, sensitivity analyses are suggested.

Real-world Treatment Patterns and Clinical Outcomes for Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma in the Current Treatment Era

Background

Immuno-oncology (IO) agents and tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) have revolutionized the treatment paradigm for metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). Data on real-world usage and outcomes are limited.

Objective

To examine real-world treatment patterns and clinical outcomes for mRCC.

Design setting and participants

This retrospective cohort study included 1538 patients with mRCC who received first-line treatment with pembrolizumab + axitinib (P + A; n = 279, 18%), ipilimumab + nivolumab (I + N; n = 618, 40%), or TKI monotherapy (TKIm; cabozantinib, sunitinib, pazopanib, or axitinib; n = 641, 42%) between January 1, 2018 and September 30, 2020 in US Oncology Network/non-network practices.

Outcome measurements and statistical analysis

The relationship with outcomes, time on treatment (ToT), time to next treatment (TTNT), and overall survival (OS) was analyzed using multivariable Cox proportional-hazards models.

Results and limitations

The median age of the cohort was 67 yr (interquartile range 59.5-74.4), 70% were male, 79% had clear cell RCC, and 87% had an intermediate or poor International mRCC Database Consortium risk score. The median ToT was 13.6 for P + A versus 5.8 for I + N versus 3.4 mo for TKIm (p < 0.001) and the median TTNT was 16.4 for P + A versus 8.3 for I + N versus 8.4 mo for TKIm (p < 0.001) . Median OS was not reached for P + A, 27.6 mo for I + N, and 26.9 mo for TKIm (p = 0.237). On adjusted multivariable analysis, treatment with P + A was associated with better ToT (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 0.59, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.47-0.72 vs I + N; 0.37, 95% CI, 0.30-0.45 vs TKIm; p < 0.0001) and better TTNT (aHR 0.61, 95% CI 0.49-0.77 vs I + N; 0.53, 95% CI 0.42-0.67 vs TKIm; p < 0.0001). Limitations include the retrospective design and the limited follow-up for characterization of survival.

Conclusions

We noted substantial uptake of IO-based therapies in the first-line community oncology setting since their approval. In addition, the study provides insights into clinical effectiveness, tolerability, and/or compliance of IO-based therapies.

Patient summary

We examined the use of immunotherapy for patients with metastatic kidney cancer. The findings suggest rapid implementation of these new treatments by oncologists working in the community setting, which is reassuring for patients with this disease.

Comparing efficacy and safety of first-line treatment of metastatic renal cell carcinoma: A Bayesian network meta-regression analysis

Background

This Bayesian network meta-regression analysis provides a head-to-head comparison of first-line therapeutic immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) and tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKI) combinations for metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) using median follow-up time as covariate.

Methods

We searched Six databases for a comprehensive analysis of randomised clinical trials (RCTs). Comparing progression free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) of different interventions at the same time node by Bayesian network meta-analysis. Bayesian network meta-regression analysis was performed on objective response rate (ORR), adverse events (AEs) (grade ≥ 3) and the hazard ratios (HR) associated with PFS and OS, with the median follow-up time as the covariate.

Results

Eventually a total of 22 RCTs reporting 11,090 patients with 19 interventions. Lenvatinib plus Pembrolizumab (LenPem) shows dominance of PFS, and Pembrolizumab plus Axitinib (PemAxi) shows superiority in OS at each time point. After meta-regression analysis, for HRs of PFS, LenPem shows advantages; for HRs of OS, PemAxi shows superiority; For ORR, LenPem provides better results. For AEs (grade ≥ 3), Atezolizumab plus Bevacizumab (AtezoBev) is better.

Conclusion

Considering the lower toxicity and the higher quality of life, PemAxi should be recommended as the optimal therapy in treating mRCC.

Systematic review registration

https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/, identifier CRD4202236775.

Trends of kidney cancer burden from 1990 to 2019 in European Union 15 + countries and World Health Organization regions

In recent decades, variability in the incidence and mortality of kidney cancer (KC) has been reported. This study aimed to compare trends in incidence, mortality, and disability-adjusted life years (DALY) of KC between the European Union (EU) 15 + countries and 6 World Health Organization (WHO) regions. The data of KC Age-standardized incidence rates (ASIRs), age-standardized mortality rates (ASMRs), and age-standardized DALYs were extracted from the Global Burden of Disease database. Joinpoint regression was employed to examine trends. From 1990 to 2019, the ASIR increased in most countries except for Luxembourg (males), the USA (females) and Austria and Sweden (both sexes). ASIR increased across all 6 WHO regions for both sexes except for females in Americas. The ASMR increased in 10/19 countries for males and 9/19 for females as well across most WHO regions. The mortality-to-incidence ratio (MIR) decreased in all countries and WHO regions. Trends in DALYs were variable across countries and WHO regions. While the incidence and mortality from KC rose in most EU15 + countries and WHO regions from 1990 to 2019, the universal drop in MIR suggests an overall improvement in KC outcomes. This is likely multifactorial, including earlier detection of KC and improved treatments.

Comparative Effectiveness of Front-Line Ipilimumab and Nivolumab or Axitinib and Pembrolizumab in Metastatic Clear Cell Renal Cell Carcinoma

BACKGROUND

Treatment of metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) is rapidly evolving with new combination therapies demonstrating improved response rates and survival. There are no head-to-head prospective trials comparing an immunotherapy doublet with an immunotherapy/tyrosine-kinase inhibitor-based combination. We compare real-world outcomes in patients treated with axitinib/pembrolizumab (axi/pembro) or ipilimumab/nivolumab (ipi/nivo). The primary endpoints were overall-survival (OS) and real-world progression-free survival (rwPFS).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We used a de-identified database to select patients diagnosed with clear cell mRCC and treated with front-line axi/pembro or ipi/nivo from 2018 to 2022. Analyses are adjusted using propensity score-based inverse probability of treatment weighting, balancing age, gender, insurance, race, IMDC risk, and nephrectomy status. We compared survival by treatment groups using weighted and unweighted Kaplan-Meier curves with log-rank tests and weighted Cox proportional hazards regressions.

RESULTS

We included a total of 1506 patients with mRCC who received frontline axi/pembro (n = 547) or ipi/nivo (n = 959). Median follow-up time was 20.0 months (range: 0.2-47.6). Baseline demographics were similar between the 2 cohorts. Adjusted median OS for the full population was 28.9 months for axi/pembro and was 24.3 months for ipi/nivo (P = .09). Twenty-four-month survival was 53.8% for axi/pembro treated patients and 50.2% for ipi/nivo treated patients. rwPFS was 10.6 months for axi/pembro treated patients and 6.9 months for ipi/nivo treated patients. Treatment with axi/pembro conferred improved survival in the IMDC favorable risk strata, with no significant difference in survival observed within the full cohort.

CONCLUSIONS

In this retrospective, real-world study of patients treated with front-line combination therapy, patients with IMDC favorable risk disease had better survival when treated with axi/pembro compared to ipi/nivo. However, survival for the entire population and the 24-month median overall survival were not statistically different between treatment groups. Longer follow-up is necessary to discern any emerging significant differences.

Comprehensive assessments of immuno-oncology drug-based combination therapies as first-line treatment for advanced renal cell carcinoma

Over the last decade, there have been substantial progress in the field of systemic therapy for advanced renal cell carcinoma. Through the transition from treatment with cytokines to molecular-targeted agents, and currently to immuno-oncology drugs, the prognostic outcomes of patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma have been markedly improved. In particular, based on the promising outcomes of recently conducted pivotal randomized clinical trials, immuno-oncology drug-based combination therapy by either dual immune checkpoint inhibition or combined inhibition of an immune checkpoint and tyrosine kinase, is currently regarded as a standard of care for treatment-naïve advanced renal cell carcinoma patients. However, insufficient data are available with respect to the selection of optimal systemic therapies for advanced renal cell carcinoma in the first-line setting due to the lack of a head-to-head comparison between approved immuno-oncology drug-based combination therapies. In this review, therefore, we summarize interesting findings associated with first-line combination therapies for advanced renal cell carcinoma obtained from both randomized clinical trials and real-world clinical practices, in order to present useful guidance to help make treatment decisions for patients with treatment-naïve advanced renal cell carcinoma.

Clear cell renal cell carcinoma with stage IV cavoatrial tumour thrombus extension and rapid metastatic reoccurrence postsurgical treatment with review of current treatment strategies

Renal cell carcinoma (RCC) is the most aggressive urological malignancy, with a high recurrence rate. Despite the rapid evolution of the treatment of RCC from non-specific cytotoxic therapies to specific novel combination therapies, the general prognosis for advanced RCC remains poor because patients' responses to these therapies vary. Herein, we present the case of a male in early forties who was diagnosed with a right lower pole renal mass with a level IV tumour thrombus, which was later confirmed as stage IIIc clear cell RCC. About 19 months after radical nephrectomy (curative surgery), the patient was diagnosed with a biopsy-proven metastatic disease, which was not responsive to first-line treatment owing to insufficient data on the best treatment regimen. Herein, we also present a literature review on the pathological impact of genomic alterations in tumour suppressors and highlight emerging paradigm shifts in the treatment of RCC.

CaboPoint: a phase II study of cabozantinib as second-line treatment in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma

Cabozantinib is an inhibitor of multiple tyrosine kinases, including AXL, MET and VEGF receptors. Here, we describe the rationale and design for the phase II CaboPoint trial (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03945773), which will evaluate the efficacy and safety of cabozantinib as a second-line treatment in patients with unresectable, locally advanced or metastatic renal cell carcinoma whose disease has progressed despite checkpoint inhibitor therapy. Patients will be recruited into two cohorts: prior ipilimumab plus nivolumab (cohort A) or prior checkpoint inhibitor-VEGF-targeted therapy (cohort B). All patients will receive once-daily oral cabozantinib 60 mg for up to 18 months. The primary end point is objective response rate. Secondary end points include overall survival, progression-free survival and safety.

First-Line Treatment of Metastatic Clear Cell Renal Cell Carcinoma: What Are the Most Appropriate Combination Therapies?

The development of antiangiogenic treatments, followed by immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI), has significantly changed the management of metastatic clear cell renal cell cancer. Several phase III trials show the superiority of combination therapy, dual immunotherapy (ICI-ICI) or ICI plus tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKI) of the vascular endothelium growth factor (VEGF) over sunitinib monotherapy. The question is therefore what is the best combination for a given patient? A strategy based on the International Metastatic Database Consortium (IMDC) classification is currently recommended with pembrolizumab + axitinib, cabozantinib + nivolumab, and lenvatinib + pembrolizumab (for all patients) or nivolumab + ipilimumab (for patients with intermediate or poor risk), which are the first-line treatment standards of care. However, several issues remain unresolved and require further investigation, such as the PD-L1 status, the relevance of possible options based on the patient's profile, and consideration of second-line and subsequent treatments.

A Living, Interactive Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis of First-line Treatment of Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma

CONTEXT

Identifying the most effective first-line treatment for metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) is challenging as rapidly evolving data quickly outdate the existing body of evidence, and current approaches to presenting the evidence in user-friendly formats are fraught with limitations.

OBJECTIVE

To maintain living evidence for contemporary first-line treatment for previously untreated mRCC.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

We have created a living, interactive systematic review (LISR) and network meta-analysis for first-line treatment of mRCC using data from randomized controlled trials comparing contemporary treatment options with single-agent tyrosine kinase inhibitors. We applied an advanced programming and artificial intelligence-assisted framework for evidence synthesis to create a living search strategy, facilitate screening and data extraction using a graphical user interface, automate the frequentist network meta-analysis, and display results in an interactive manner.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

As of October 22, 2020, the LISR includes data from 14 clinical trials. Baseline characteristics are summarized in an interactive table. The cabozantinib + nivolumab combination (CaboNivo) is ranked the highest for the overall response rate, progression-free survival, and overall survival, whereas ipilimumab + nivolumab (NivoIpi) is ranked the highest for achieving a complete response (CR). NivoIpi, and atezolizumab + bevacizumab (AteBev) were ranked highest (lowest toxicity) and CaboNivo ranked lowest for treatment-related adverse events (AEs). Network meta-analysis results are summarized as interactive tables and plots, GRADE summary-of-findings tables, and evidence maps.

CONCLUSIONS

This innovative living and interactive review provides the best current evidence on the comparative effectiveness of multiple treatment options for patients with untreated mRCC. Trial-level comparisons suggest that CaboNivo is likely to cause more AEs but is ranked best for all efficacy outcomes, except NivoIpi offers the best chance of CR. Pembrolizumab + axitinib and NivoIpi are acceptable alternatives, except NivoIpi may not be preferred for patients with favorable risk. Although network meta-analysis provides rankings with statistical adjustments, there are inherent biases in cross-trial comparisons with sparse direct evidence that does not replace randomized comparisons.

PATIENT SUMMARY

It is challenging to decide the best option among the several treatment combinations of immunotherapy and targeted treatments for newly diagnosed metastatic kidney cancer. We have created interactive evidence summaries of multiple treatment options that present the benefits and harms and evidence certainty for patient-important outcomes. This evidence is updated as soon as new studies are published.

Comparative Efficacy and Safety of Anti-PD-1/PD-L1 Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors for Refractory or Relapsed Advanced Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer-A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis

Simple Summary

Improving treatment strategies for refractory or relapsed advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) remains a challenge. Efficacy and safety of the immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs), nivolumab (Niv) plus atezolizumab (Atz), were compared with those of ramucirumab (Ram) plus docetaxel (Doc), and the efficacy and safety of these two ICIs were compared with each other, using patient groups without programmed cell death ligand-1 (PD-L1) constraint. Additionally, efficacy and safety of, Niv, Atz, and pembrolizumab (Pem) were compared using a PD-L1 positive (≥1%) subgroup with refractory or relapsed advanced NSCLC. Niv or Atz was found to be more effective and safer than Ram plus Doc in groups without PD-L1 constraint. In the PD-L1 positive subgroup, Pem (10 mg/kg) showed the highest efficacy for ensuring overall survival, followed by Niv, Pem (2 mg/kg), Atz, and Doc. These results may help clinicians select and evaluate treatment options for relapsed or refractory advanced NSCLC.

Abstract

The efficacy and safety of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) in refractory or relapsed advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) have not yet been compared with those of ramucirumab (Ram) plus docetaxel (Doc). Furthermore, comprehensive comparisons between ICIs have not been conducted to date. In the current study, a Bayesian network meta-analysis of related phase III clinical trials was performed to compare the efficacy and safety of Ram+Doc, Niv, Atz, and Doc treatments in patient groups lacking the PD-L1 constraint. Surface under the cumulative ranking area (SUCRA) revealed that the overall survival (OS) of patients treated with Niv was the highest, followed by Atz, Ram+Doc, and Doc. Regarding grades 3–5 treatment-related adverse events (G3–5AEs), the use of Niv was ranked the safest, followed by Atz, Doc, and Ram+Doc. Significant differences in OS were observed between Niv and Ram+Doc, while significant differences in G3–5AEs were observed between Ram+Doc and Niv or Atz. In the PD-L1 positive (≥1%) patient subgroup, Pem (10 mg/kg) ranked the highest in efficacy for OS, followed by Niv, Pem (2 mg/kg), Atz, and Doc. These findings may expectedly provide oncologists with useful insights into therapeutic selection for refractory or relapsed advanced NSCLC.