Final overall survival analysis for the phase II RECORD-3 study of first-line everolimus followed by sunitinib versus first-line sunitinib followed by everolimus in metastatic RCC

Optimal sequencing of the first- and second-line target therapies in metastatic renal cell carcinoma: based on nationally representative data analysis from the Korean National Health Insurance System

BACKGROUND

The authors intend to compare the effects of each targeted therapy (TT) in the treatment of patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) using big data based on the Korean National Health Insurance System (NHIS) and determine the optimal treatment sequence.

METHODS

Data on the medical use of patients with kidney cancer were obtained from the NHIS database from January 1, 2002, to December 31, 2020. Patient variables included age, sex, income level, place of residence, prescribing department, and duration from diagnosis to the prescription date. The primary outcome was overall survival (OS) for each drug and sequencing. We performed propensity score matching (PSM) according to age, sex, and Charlson Comorbidity Index based on the primary TTs.

RESULTS

After 1:1 PSM, the sunitinib (SUN) (n = 1,214) and pazopanib (PAZ) (n = 1,214) groups showed a well-matched distribution across the entire cohort. In the primary treatment group, PAZ had lower OS than SUN (HR, 1.167; p = 0.0015). In the secondary treatment group, axitinib (AXI) had more favorable OS than cabozantinib (CAB) (HR, 0.735; p = 0.0118), and everolimus had more adverse outcomes than CAB (HR, 1.544; p < 0.0001). In the first to second TT sequencing, SUN-AXI had the highest OS; however, there was no statistically significant difference when compared with PAZ-AXI, which was the second highest (HR, 0.876; p = 0.3312). The 5-year survival rate was calculated in the following order: SUN-AXI (51.44%), PAZ-AXI (47.12%), SUN-CAB (43.59%), and PAZ-CAB (34.28%). When the four sequencing methods were compared, only SUN-AXI versus PAZ-CAB (p = 0.003) and PAZ-AXI versus PAZ-CAB (p = 0.017) were statistically significant.

CONCLUSIONS

In a population-based RWD analysis of Korean patients with mRCC, SUN-AXI sequencing was shown to be the most effective among the first to second TT sequencing methods in treatment, with a relative survival advantage over other sequencing combinations. To further support the results of this study, risk-stratified analysis is needed.

Prevalence and Landscape of Actionable Genomic Alterations in Renal Cell Carcinoma

PURPOSE

We report our experience with next-generation sequencing to characterize the landscape of actionable genomic alterations in renal cell carcinoma (RCC).

EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN

A query of our institutional clinical sequencing database (MSK-IMPACT) was performed that included tumor samples from 38,468 individuals across all cancer types. Somatic variations were annotated using a precision knowledge database (OncoKB) and the available clinical data stratified by level of evidence. Alterations associated with response to immune-checkpoint blockade (ICB) were analyzed separately; these included DNA mismatch repair (MMR) gene alterations, tumor mutational burden (TMB), and microsatellite instability (MSI). Data from The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) consortium as well as public data from several clinical trials in metastatic RCC were used for validation purposes. Multiregional sequencing data from the TRAcking Cancer Evolution through Therapy (TRACERx) RENAL cohort were used to assess the clonality of somatic mutations.

RESULTS

Of the 753 individuals with RCC identified in the MSK-IMPACT cohort, 115 showed evidence of targetable alterations, which represented a prevalence of 15.3% [95% confidence interval (CI), 12.7%-17.8%). When stratified by levels of evidence, the alterations identified corresponded to levels 2 (11.3%), 3A (5.2%), and 3B (83.5%). A low prevalence was recapitulated in the TCGA cohort at 9.1% (95% CI, 6.9%-11.2%). Copy-number variations predominated in papillary RCC tumors, largely due to amplifications in the MET gene. Notably, higher rates of actionability were found in individuals with metastatic disease (stage IV) compared with those with localized disease (OR, 2.50; 95% CI, 1.16-6.16; Fisher's P = 0.01). On the other hand, the prevalence of alterations associated with response to ICB therapy was found to be approximately 5% in both the MSK-IMPACT and TCGA cohorts and no associations with disease stage were identified (OR, 1.35; 95% CI, 0.46-5.40; P = 0.8). Finally, multiregional sequencing revealed that the vast majority of actionable mutations occurred later during tumor evolution and were only present subclonally in RCC tumors.

CONCLUSIONS

RCC harbors a low prevalence of clinically actionable alterations compared with other tumors and the evidence supporting their clinical use is limited. These aberrations were found to be more common in advanced disease and seem to occur later during tumor evolution. Our study provides new insights on the role of targeted therapies for RCC and highlights the need for additional research to improve treatment selection using genomic profiling.

Targeted therapy for metastatic renal cell carcinoma

BACKGROUND

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

OBJECTIVES

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

SEARCH METHODS

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

SELECTION CRITERIA

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

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

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

MAIN RESULTS

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

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

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

Management of Metastatic Nonclear Renal Cell Carcinoma: What Are the Options and Challenges?

This case presents a 68-yr-old female patient with primary metastatic nonclear renal cell carcinoma (RCC) with multiple bone lesions. The patient underwent a single resection of skull bone lesion (diagnostic for poorly differentiated carcinoma of unknown origin) and cytoreductive nephrectomy. The pathology of the kidney specimen demonstrated an oncocytic papillary RCC. Within 3 mo, she developed skeletal progressive disease and was started on systemic therapy (sunitinib). After initial stabilization, bone metastasis progressed during the third cycle of sunitinib and required second-line therapy (cabozantinib). One of the major unmet needs in non-clear cell RCC is the lack of specific systemic therapy. Data on immunotherapy are still limited. Inclusion of these patients in clinical trials is strongly recommended. PATIENT SUMMARY: Patients with metastatic kidney cancer who present with the less common histological subtype (non-clear cell) have poor survival. In this case, the patient responded to second-line therapy. Very few therapies provide response to treatment. Patients should be offered participation in clinical trials testing combinations with immunotherapy.

Cabozantinib as a second-line treatment option in hepatocellular carcinoma

INTRODUCTION

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is one of the most frequent tumors affecting the gastrointestinal tract and a universal cause of morbidity and mortality. Cabozantinib is a strong multi-inhibitor of receptor tyrosine kinases approved for renal cell carcinoma that could be useful also for the treatment of HCC.

AREAS COVERED

This review describes the chemical structure, the pharmacologic properties and current knowledge of the efficacy of cabozantinib in the treatment of HCC based on data available from first phase and later phase clinical trials. The ongoing studies testing cabozantinib, either alone or in combination with other drugs, are also described.

EXPERT OPINION

Despite the recent achievements in the use of cabozantinib for patients diagnosed with hepatocellular carcinoma, data are still needed to allow clinicians to make better decisions on how to treat specific patient subgroups.

Ramucirumab, A Second-Line Option For Patients With Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Review Of The Evidence

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is the most frequent primary liver cancer and predominantly develops in patients with liver cirrhosis. In patients with advanced disease, such as extra-hepatic extension or portal vein involvement, and with intermediate disease unsuitable for locoregional therapies, systemic therapy is recommended, if liver function and performance status are adequate. Following a decade of negative Phase III trials since the approval of sorafenib, more recently several drugs have proven efficacy both in first line versus sorafenib (lenvatinib) or in second line versus placebo (regorafenib, cabozantinib, ramucirumab). In this review, we summarize the preclinical and clinical evidence supporting the use of ramucirumab, a recombinant IgG1 monoclonal antibody that specifically binds to Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor receptor 2 (VEGFR-2), in HCC. Following the results of the REACH trial, that was negative in the overall study population but identified a subgroup that could benefit from ramucirumab treatment, the REACH-2 trial was a randomized, placebo-controlled trial, designed to assess ramucirumab as second line in patients with alpha-fetoprotein (AFP) ≥400 ng/mL. The results of REACH-2 were published in February 2019, leading to Food and Drug Administration and European Medicines Agency approval of the drug as second-line agent for advanced HCC (after sorafenib) in patients with AFP ≥400 ng/mL. For the first time in the history of systemic treatments for HCC, a predictive factor of efficacy was identified. In this review, we also discuss the potential clinical development of systemic treatments in HCC, focusing on combination therapies with immunotherapy (following the recent results of the combination of atezolizumab and bevacizumab in the IMbrave 150 clinical trial) and treatment sequences as a way to maximize survival benefit.

Melanoma immunotherapy: strategies to overcome pharmacological resistance

Introduction: Although checkpoint inhibitors have provided a breakthrough in how melanoma is treated, about half of patients still do not respond due to primary or acquired resistance. New strategies are, therefore, required to increase the number of patients benefiting from immunotherapy. This systematic review investigates novel combinations that may overcome immune resistance in patients with melanoma.Areas covered: We provide an overview of immune-related resistance mechanisms and the various therapeutic strategies that can be considered in attempting to overcome these barriers, including combined immunotherapy approaches and combinations with chemotherapy, radiotherapy, and targeted therapy.Expert opinion: The immune response is a dynamic process in which the tumor microenvironment and immune cells interact in a variety of ways. New treatment approaches aim to enrich the tumor microenvironment with immune-infiltrate and increase response to immune checkpoint inhibitors.

Update on optimal treatment for metastatic colorectal cancer from the AGITG expert meeting: ESMO congress 2019

Introduction: Outcomes in metastatic colorectal cancer are improving, due to the tailoring of therapy enabled by better understanding of clinical behavior according to molecular subtype.Areas covered: A review of the literature and recent conference presentations was undertaken on the topic of systemic treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer. This review summarizes expert discussion of the current evidence for therapies in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) based on molecular subgrouping.Expert opinion: EGFR-targeted and VEGF-targeted antibodies are now routinely incorporated into treatment strategies for mCRC. EGFR-targeted antibodies are restricted to patients with extended RAS wild-type profiles, with evidence that they should be further restricted to patients with left-sided tumors. Clinically distinct treatment pathways based on tumor RAS, BRAF, HER2 and MMR status, are now clinically applicable. Evidence suggests therapy for additional subgroups will soon be defined; the most advanced being for patients with KRAS G12 C mutation and gene TRK fusion defects.

Antibiotic use and the efficacy of immune checkpoint inhibitors in cancer patients: a pooled analysis of 2740 cancer patients

The gut microbiota plays a critical role in the anti-tumor immune response. There is increasing data showing that antibiotics (ATBs) change the composition of the gut microbiota and affect the efficacy of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs). However, this is the first meta-analysis to evaluate the association between ATB use and ICI efficacy in cancer patients to provide a better understanding of the strength of this association. We performed a literature search for relevant studies that evaluated the relationship between ATB use and ICI efficacy using the PubMed, Embase, and conference databases. The primary outcomes consisted of overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) measured by hazard ratios (HR) and corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CI). Subgroup and sensitivity analyses were also performed. A total of 19 eligible studies comprising 2,740 cancer patients treated with ICIs were included in the analysis. Our results indicated that ATB use was negatively associated with OS in cancer patients (HR = 2.37; 95% CI = 2.05-2.75; P < .001), without heterogeneity (I2 = 0.0%; P = .851). Moreover, ATB use significantly reduced PFS in patients treated with ICIs (HR = 1.84; 95% CI = 1.49-2.26; P < .001; I2 = 56.2%). Similar results were obtained in the subgroup analyses stratified by the time of ATB use and cancer type. Sensitivity analyses confirmed the stability of our results. Therefore, the findings of our meta-analysis indicated that ATB use is negatively associated with OS and PFS in cancer patients treated with ICI immunotherapy.

Predictors of benefits from frontline chemoimmunotherapy in stage IV non-small-cell lung cancer: a meta-analysis

Background: Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have dramatically expanded the therapeutic landscape of non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). In a previous study, gender, smoking history, and PD-L1 status were found to influence the efficacy of single-agent ICI in NSCLC. This meta-analysis evaluated the clinical and molecular factors that could predict a benefit from adding ICIs to first-line chemotherapy in metastatic NSCLC. Patients and Methods: The pooled hazard ratio (HR) of progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) among the selected subgroups were analyzed using the random effects model. The correlation between PD-L1 expression and outcome was analyzed by meta-regression. Results: Seven phase III randomized controlled trials comparing chemo-immunotherapy (CIT) with chemotherapy in untreated stage 4 NSCLC were included. CIT evenly improved PFS irrespective of age, gender, histology, smoking history, and performance status. Among patients with baseline hepatic metastasis treated with Atezolizumab-containing CIT, PFS improvement was only detected with the addition of Bevacizumab. Whereas patients with EGFR/ALK-driven cancer exhibited greater PFS with the addition of ICI to a Bevacizumab (BEV)-based regimen, the derived benefit was no longer statistically significant among those treated with non-BEV-based regimens. Although the superior PFS conferred by CIT was noticeable across all PD-L1 expression subgroups, this benefit correlated with PD-L1 level and was more pronounced in the "PD-L1 high" cohort. Except for patients harboring EGFR/ALK aberrations or squamous histology, CIT consistently improved OS across the other selected subgroups. Conclusions: The survival advantage associated with first-line CIT in metastatic NSCLC was observed in different patient populations, including those for which single-agent ICI has marginal therapeutic benefit. Our findings support the role of chemotherapy with or without VEGF blockade as enhancers of ICI activity in NSCLC.

Complete response in patients with locally advanced rectal cancer after neoadjuvant treatment with nivolumab

Introduction: PD-1 inhibitors have been approved for the treatment of dMMR patients with metastatic colorectal cancer, but the efficacy of neoadjuvant treatment with PD-1 in dMMR locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC) patients has not yet been defined.

Patients and methods: Two patients with LARC received Nivolumab as neoadjuvant treatment in July 2017. Whole-exome sequencing (WES) and multiplex immunofluorescence analysis were performed.

Results: Of the two patients, one achieved pathological complete response after six cycles of nivolumab followed by surgery. The other patient was confirmed to be clinical complete response after six cycles of nivolumab. “Watch and wait” strategy was performed for anal preservation. WES showed high tumor mutation burden. Multiplex immunofluorescence analysis showed immune microenvironment alternation between pretreatment specimen and post-treatment specimen.

Conclusion: Neoadjuvant nivolumab induced complete response in both of the two patients with LARC. Immunotherapy might be an alternative strategy for neoadjuvant treatment for dMMR/MSI rectal cancer.

Polyfunctional tumor-reactive T cells are effectively expanded from non-small cell lung cancers, and correlate with an immune-engaged T cell profile

Non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is the second most prevalent type of cancer. With the current treatment regimens, the mortality rate remains high. Therefore, better therapeutic approaches are necessary. NSCLCs generally possess many genetic mutations and are well infiltrated by T cells (TIL), making TIL therapy an attractive option. Here we show that T cells from treatment naive, stage I-IVa NSCLC tumors can effectively be isolated and expanded, with similar efficiency as from normal lung tissue. Importantly, 76% (13/17) of tested TIL products isolated from NSCLC lesions exhibited clear reactivity against primary tumor digests, with 0.5%-30% of T cells producing the inflammatory cytokine Interferon (IFN)-γ. Both CD4⁺ and CD8⁺ T cells displayed tumor reactivity. The cytokine production correlated well with CD137 and CD40L expression. Furthermore, almost half (7/17) of the TIL products contained polyfunctional T cells that produced Tumor Necrosis Factor (TNF)-α and/or IL-2 in addition to IFN-γ, a hallmark of effective immune responses. Tumor-reactivity in the TIL products correlated with high percentages of CD103⁺CD69⁺CD8⁺ T cell infiltrates in the tumor lesions, with PD-1^hiCD4⁺ T cells, and with FoxP3⁺CD25⁺CD4⁺ regulatory T cell infiltrates, suggesting that the composition of T cell infiltrates may predict the level of tumor reactivity. In conclusion, the effective generation of tumor-reactive and polyfunctional TIL products implies that TIL therapy will be a successful treatment regimen for NSCLC patients.

HPV16 RNA-LPX vaccine mediates complete regression of aggressively growing HPV-positive mouse tumors and establishes protective T cell memory

HPV16 infections are associated with a variety of cancers and there is compelling evidence that the transforming activity of HPV16 critically depends on the expression of the viral oncoproteins E6 and E7. Therapeutic cancer vaccines capable of generating durable and specific immunity against these HPV16 antigens hold great promise to achieve long-term disease control. Here we show in mice that HPV16 E7 RNA-LPX, an intravenously administered cancer vaccine based on immuno-pharmacologically optimized antigen-encoding mRNA, efficiently primes and expands antigen-specific effector and memory CD8⁺ T cells. HPV-positive TC-1 and C3 tumors of immunized mice are heavily infiltrated with activated immune cells and HPV16-specific T cells and are polarized towards a proinflammatory, cytotoxic and less immune-suppressive contexture. E7 RNA-LPX immunization mediates complete and durable remission of progressing tumors. Circulating memory T cells are highly cytotoxic and protect from tumor rechallenge. Moreover, E7 RNA-LPX immunization sensitizes anti-PD-L1 refractory tumors to checkpoint blockade. In conclusion, our data highlight the potential of HPV16 RNA-LPX for the treatment of HPV-driven cancers.

Human papillomavirus genotypes and infection among women in Changzhou, China

Human papillomavirus (HPV) infection is a major cause of cervical cancer. HPV vaccine has been shown to be highly effective in preventing HPV infection, and understanding the genotypes of HPV infection can guide the utilization of HPV vaccine. This epidemiological study aimed to investigate the genotype distribution of HPV in HPV-positive female patients in Changzhou. This study enrolled HPV-positive female patients admitted at the Affiliated Changzhou No. 2 People's Hospital of Nanjing Medical University were enrolled in this study. HPV genotypes were identified via standard HPV DNA testing. The cohort comprised 5738 patients, that the predominant genotypes were HPV52 (13.4%), HPV16 (9.6%), HPV58 (8.8%), HPV81 (8.6%), and HPV53 (7.7%). HPV infection prevalence was the highest among those aged 41-45 y (16.6%), followed by those aged 31-35 y (15.1%) and 36-40 y (15.1%). In total, 46.8% of infections were found in women aged 31-45 y. The main genotypes of HPV infection upon physical examination or diagnosis of cervicitis and cervical cancer were HPV52, 16, 58, 81, and 53. HPV52, 16, 58, 81, and 53 are the most predominant genotypes of HPV infection. Further, HPV infection is most prevalent among women aged 31-45 y. Our findings provide experimental evidence for guiding HPV vaccination policy.

Systemic therapy in metastatic renal cell carcinoma

PURPOSE

Current systemic treatment of targeted therapies, namely the vascular endothelial growth factor-antibody (VEGF-AB), VEGF receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) and mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) inhibitors, have improved progression-free survival and replaced non-specific immunotherapy with cytokines in metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC).

METHODS

A panel of experts convened to review currently available phase 3 data for mRCC treatment of approved agents, in addition to available EAU guideline data for a collaborative review as the plurality of substances offers different options of first-, second- and third-line treatment with potential sequencing.

RESULTS

Sunitinib and pazopanib are approved treatments in first-line therapy for patients with favorable- or intermediate-risk clear cell RCC (ccRCC). Temsirolimus has proven benefit over interferon-alfa (IFN-α) in patients with non-clear cell RCC (non-ccRCC). In the second-line treatment TKIs or mTOR inhibitors are treatment choices. Therapy options after TKI failure consist of everolimus and axitinib. Available third-line options consist of everolimus and sorafenib. Recently, nivolumab, a programmed death-1 (PD1) checkpoint inhibitor, improved overall survival benefit compared to everolimus after failure of one or two VEGFR-targeted therapies, which is likely to become the first established checkpoint inhibitor in mRCC. Data for the sequencing of agents remain limited.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite the high level of evidence for first and second-line treatment in mRCC, data for third-line therapy are limited. Possible sequences include TKI-mTOR-TKI or TKI-TKI-mTOR with the upcoming checkpoint inhibitors in perspective, which might settle a new standard of care after previous TKI therapy.

Genomic Biomarkers of a Randomized Trial Comparing First-line Everolimus and Sunitinib in Patients with Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma

BACKGROUND

Metastatic renal cell carcinoma (RCC) patients are commonly treated with vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) inhibitors or mammalian target of rapamycin inhibitors. Correlations between somatic mutations and first-line targeted therapy outcomes have not been reported on a randomized trial.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the relationship between tumor mutations and treatment outcomes in RECORD-3, a randomized trial comparing first-line everolimus (mTOR inhibitor) followed by sunitinib (VEGF inhibitor) at progression with the opposite sequence in 471 metastatic RCC patients.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

Targeted sequencing of 341 cancer genes at ∼540× coverage was performed on available tumor samples from 258 patients; 220 with clear cell histology (ccRCC).

OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS

Associations between somatic mutations and median first-line progression free survival (PFS1L) and overall survival were determined in metastatic ccRCC using Cox proportional hazards models and log-rank tests.

RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS

Prevalent mutations (≥ 10%) were VHL (75%), PBRM1 (46%), SETD2 (30%), BAP1 (19%), KDM5C (15%), and PTEN (12%). With first-line everolimus, PBRM1 and BAP1 mutations were associated with longer (median [95% confidence interval {CI}] 12.8 [8.1, 18.4] vs 5.5 [3.1, 8.4] mo) and shorter (median [95% CI] 4.9 [2.9, 8.1] vs 10.5 [7.3, 12.9] mo) PFS1L, respectively. With first-line sunitinib, KDM5C mutations were associated with longer PFS1L (median [95% CI] of 20.6 [12.4, 27.3] vs 8.3 [7.8, 11.0] mo). Molecular subgroups of metastatic ccRCC based on PBRM1, BAP1, and KDM5C mutations could have predictive values for patients treated with VEGF or mTOR inhibitors. Most tumor DNA was obtained from primary nephrectomy samples (94%), which could impact correlation statistics.

CONCLUSIONS

PBRM1, BAP1, and KDM5C mutations impact outcomes of targeted therapies in metastatic ccRCC patients.

PATIENT SUMMARY

Large-scale genomic kidney cancer studies reported novel mutations and heterogeneous features among individual tumors, which could contribute to varied clinical outcomes. We demonstrated correlations between somatic mutations and treatment outcomes in clear cell renal cell carcinoma, supporting the value of genomic classification in prospective studies.