Overall Survival with Adjuvant Pembrolizumab in Renal-Cell Carcinoma

BACKGROUND

Adjuvant pembrolizumab therapy after surgery for renal-cell carcinoma was approved on the basis of a significant improvement in disease-free survival in the KEYNOTE-564 trial. Whether the results regarding overall survival from the third prespecified interim analysis of the trial would also favor pembrolizumab was uncertain.

METHODS

In this phase 3, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, we randomly assigned (in a 1:1 ratio) participants with clear-cell renal-cell carcinoma who had an increased risk of recurrence after surgery to receive pembrolizumab (at a dose of 200 mg) or placebo every 3 weeks for up to 17 cycles (approximately 1 year) or until recurrence, the occurrence of unacceptable toxic effects, or withdrawal of consent. A significant improvement in disease-free survival according to investigator assessment (the primary end point) was shown previously. Overall survival was the key secondary end point. Safety was a secondary end point.

RESULTS

A total of 496 participants were assigned to receive pembrolizumab and 498 to receive placebo. As of September 15, 2023, the median follow-up was 57.2 months. The disease-free survival benefit was consistent with that in previous analyses (hazard ratio for recurrence or death, 0.72; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.59 to 0.87). A significant improvement in overall survival was observed with pembrolizumab as compared with placebo (hazard ratio for death, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.44 to 0.87; P = 0.005). The estimated overall survival at 48 months was 91.2% in the pembrolizumab group, as compared with 86.0% in the placebo group; the benefit was consistent across key subgroups. Pembrolizumab was associated with a higher incidence of serious adverse events of any cause (20.7%, vs. 11.5% with placebo) and of grade 3 or 4 adverse events related to pembrolizumab or placebo (18.6% vs. 1.2%). No deaths were attributed to pembrolizumab therapy.

CONCLUSIONS

Adjuvant pembrolizumab was associated with a significant and clinically meaningful improvement in overall survival, as compared with placebo, among participants with clear-cell renal-cell carcinoma at increased risk for recurrence after surgery. (Funded by Merck Sharp and Dohme, a subsidiary of Merck; KEYNOTE-564 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03142334.).

Pembrolizumab versus placebo as post-nephrectomy adjuvant therapy for clear cell renal cell carcinoma (KEYNOTE-564): 30-month follow-up analysis of a multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial

BACKGROUND

The first interim analysis of the KEYNOTE-564 study showed improved disease-free survival with adjuvant pembrolizumab compared with placebo after surgery in patients with clear cell renal cell carcinoma at an increased risk of recurrence. The analysis reported here, with an additional 6 months of follow-up, was designed to assess longer-term efficacy and safety of pembrolizumab versus placebo, as well as additional secondary and exploratory endpoints.

METHODS

In the multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 KEYNOTE-564 trial, adults aged 18 years or older with clear cell renal cell carcinoma with an increased risk of recurrence were enrolled at 213 hospitals and cancer centres in North America, South America, Europe, Asia, and Australia. Eligible participants had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1, had undergone nephrectomy 12 weeks or less before randomisation, and had not received previous systemic therapy for advanced renal cell carcinoma. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) via central permuted block randomisation (block size of four) to receive pembrolizumab 200 mg or placebo intravenously every 3 weeks for up to 17 cycles. Randomisation was stratified by metastatic disease status (M0 vs M1), and the M0 group was further stratified by ECOG performance status and geographical region. All participants and investigators involved in study treatment administration were masked to the treatment group assignment. The primary endpoint was disease-free survival by investigator assessment in the intention-to-treat population (all participants randomly assigned to a treatment). Safety was assessed in the safety population, comprising all participants who received at least one dose of pembrolizumab or placebo. As the primary endpoint was met at the first interim analysis, updated data are reported without p values. This study is ongoing, but no longer recruiting, and is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03142334.

FINDINGS

Between June 30, 2017, and Sept 20, 2019, 994 participants were assigned to receive pembrolizumab (n=496) or placebo (n=498). Median follow-up, defined as the time from randomisation to data cutoff (June 14, 2021), was 30·1 months (IQR 25·7-36·7). Disease-free survival was better with pembrolizumab compared with placebo (HR 0·63 [95% CI 0·50-0·80]). Median disease-free survival was not reached in either group. The most common all-cause grade 3-4 adverse events were hypertension (in 14 [3%] of 496 participants) and increased alanine aminotransferase (in 11 [2%]) in the pembrolizumab group, and hypertension (in 13 [3%] of 498 participants) in the placebo group. Serious adverse events attributed to study treatment occurred in 59 (12%) participants in the pembrolizumab group and one (<1%) participant in the placebo group. No deaths were attributed to pembrolizumab.

INTERPRETATION

Updated results from KEYNOTE-564 support the use of adjuvant pembrolizumab monotherapy as a standard of care for participants with renal cell carcinoma with an increased risk of recurrence after nephrectomy.

FUNDING

Merck Sharp & Dohme LLC, a subsidiary of Merck & Co, Inc, Rahway, NJ, USA.

Adjuvant Pembrolizumab after Nephrectomy in Renal-Cell Carcinoma

BACKGROUND

Patients with renal-cell carcinoma who undergo nephrectomy have no options for adjuvant therapy to reduce the risk of recurrence that have high levels of supporting evidence.

METHODS

In a double-blind, phase 3 trial, we randomly assigned, in a 1:1 ratio, patients with clear-cell renal-cell carcinoma who were at high risk for recurrence after nephrectomy, with or without metastasectomy, to receive either adjuvant pembrolizumab (at a dose of 200 mg) or placebo intravenously once every 3 weeks for up to 17 cycles (approximately 1 year). The primary end point was disease-free survival according to the investigator's assessment. Overall survival was a key secondary end point. Safety was a secondary end point.

RESULTS

A total of 496 patients were randomly assigned to receive pembrolizumab, and 498 to receive placebo. At the prespecified interim analysis, the median time from randomization to the data-cutoff date was 24.1 months. Pembrolizumab therapy was associated with significantly longer disease-free survival than placebo (disease-free survival at 24 months, 77.3% vs. 68.1%; hazard ratio for recurrence or death, 0.68; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.53 to 0.87; P = 0.002 [two-sided]). The estimated percentage of patients who remained alive at 24 months was 96.6% in the pembrolizumab group and 93.5% in the placebo group (hazard ratio for death, 0.54; 95% CI, 0.30 to 0.96). Grade 3 or higher adverse events of any cause occurred in 32.4% of the patients who received pembrolizumab and in 17.7% of those who received placebo. No deaths related to pembrolizumab therapy occurred.

CONCLUSIONS

Pembrolizumab treatment led to a significant improvement in disease-free survival as compared with placebo after surgery among patients with kidney cancer who were at high risk for recurrence. (Funded by Merck Sharp and Dohme, a subsidiary of Merck; KEYNOTE-564 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03142334.).

Safety and Efficacy of Nivolumab in Patients With Advanced Non-Clear Cell Renal Cell Carcinoma: Results From the Phase IIIb/IV CheckMate 374 Study

BACKGROUND

The open-label phase IIIb/IV CheckMate 374 study (NCT02596035) was conducted to validate the safety and efficacy of flat-dose nivolumab 240 mg every 2 weeks (Q2W) in previously treated advanced/metastatic renal cell carcinoma. Three cohorts included patients with predominantly clear cell histology, non-clear cell histologies, or brain metastases. We report safety and efficacy from the advanced non-clear cell RCC (nccRCC) cohort of CheckMate 374.

METHODS

Eligible patients received 0 to 3 prior systemic therapies. Patients received nivolumab 240 mg Q2W for ≤24 months or until confirmed progression or unacceptable toxicity. The primary endpoint was incidence of high-grade (grade 3-5) immune-mediated adverse events (IMAEs). Exploratory endpoints included objective response rate (ORR), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS).

RESULTS

Forty-four patients had advanced nccRCC (papillary [n = 24], chromophobe [n = 7], unclassified [n = 8], other [n = 5]); 34.1% received ≥1 prior systemic regimen in the advanced/metastatic setting. With median follow-up of 11 (range, 0.4-27) months, no all-cause grade 3-5 IMAEs or treatment-related grade 5 adverse events were reported. ORR was 13.6% (95% confidence interval [CI], 5.2-27.4), with 1 complete response (chromophobe) and 5 partial responses (papillary [n = 2], chromophobe [n = 1], collecting duct [n = 1], and unclassified [n = 1] histology). Median PFS was 2.2 months (95% CI, 1.8-5.4). Median OS was 16.3 months (95% CI, 9.2-not estimable).

CONCLUSIONS

Safety of flat-dose nivolumab 240 mg Q2W was consistent with previous results. Clinically meaningful efficacy was observed with responses in several histologies, supporting nivolumab as a treatment option for patients with advanced nccRCC, a patient population with high unmet need.

A phase I study of everolimus plus sorafenib in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC)

e16056

Background: Everolimus, a mTOR inhibitor and Sorafenib, a Raf kinase inhibitor had shown their efficacy in RCC, as single agents. Combining these two active agents could have potential additive or synergistic effects. We conducted a phase I study to evaluate the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of this combination in patients with progressive mRCC. Methods: Patients predominantly had clear cell RCC, and progressive measurable diseases on prior treatments including immunotherapy, TKI and/or Everolimus. Patients were evaluated weekly for toxicities and every 8 weeks for radiological response, including at least both PET/CT and CT scans at baseline and 1st staging. Patients received daily Everolimus and twice daily sorafenib both orally at escalating dose levels of 2.5mg/400mg (dose level 0), 5mg/400mg (+1), and 10mg/400mg (+2). Results: 18 patients with mRCC were enrolled and 15 patients were evaluable. 6 patients were treated on dose level 0, dose- limited toxicity (DLT) was found in 2/6 patients, one with thrombocytopenia/leukopenia, the other with pneumonitis; 6 patients were treated on dose level +1, DLT of pulmonary embolism was found in 1/6 patient; and 3 patients were treated on dose level +2, without DLT. The most common side effect was grade 1/2 hand-foot syndrome (4/15, 27%). The MTD was dose level +2. Overall response by RECIST was 27% (4/15 patients): pathological complete response (CR) was 6% (1/15); radiographic CR was 6% (1/5); surgical CR after resection was 6% (1/15). 47% (7/15) of the patients had stable disease. Decreased FDG uptake was found in 67% (10/15) of the patients. The median PFS was 5.53 months (range, 1.4–14.7), and OS was 7.9 months (range, 2.3–23). Conclusions: The MTD of combining daily Everolimus 10mg and twice daily sorafenib 400mg are safe and effective for progressive metastatic RCC. The phase II trial is planned to start in early 2009.

[Table: see text]

Granulocyte macrophage: Colony stimulating factor (GM-CSF), ketoconazole, and mitoxantrone as second-line therapy in patients (Pts) with progressive hormone refractory prostate cancer (HRPC)

e16033

Background: A variety of docetaxel regimens have been tested in HRPC pts, yielding response rates between 38% - 69%. Docetaxel therapy has been widely used as first line therapy. Second line therapies, which are non - taxane based with comparable activities do not exist. This trial is built on the significant body of work which has demonstrated anti-tumor activity of GM-CSF, Ketoconazole and Mitoxantrone alone and in combination in pts with HRPC. The trial is designed to assess the combination of all three agents. Methods: No more than two prior chemotherapy regimens (one which contained docetaxel), progressive disease, and adequate marrow / organ function. Treatment consisted of: Ketoconazole daily 400mg po tid, GM-CSF subcutaneous 250mcg / m2 (14 days on/ 7 days off) and Mitoxantrone 12mg / m2 every 3 weeks (maximum cumulative dose of 140mg / m2), until either the completion of Mitoxantrone or maximum anti-tumor benefit. Pts continued Ketoconazole/ GM-CSF until disease progression. PSA was evaluated every 3 weeks and radiographic studies were performed every 9 weeks. Results: 31 pts were enrolled; 4 pts with PSA only, 9 bone only, 5 soft tissue only, and 13 bone and soft tissue. 2 pts withdrew from study due to toxicity. 8 pts had a PSA response of ≥ 50%, 5 pts had a PSA response of ≥ 80%, and 7 pts had a PSA response of ≥ 90%. 9 pts progressed. The majority of pts had stabilization of their bone and soft tissue involvement and 2 pts with nodal involvement demonstrated a radiographic CR. Significant adverse events included grade III/IV neutropenia, thrombocytopenia, and nausea. Median duration of treatment was 6.22 months (range 2 months - 20.5 months). Conclusions: GM-CSF, Ketoconazole and Mitoxantrone in combination demonstrate significant anti-tumor activity and reversible toxicity in pts who have failed prior docetaxel therapy. Information regarding PSA response, radiographic outcome and adverse event data will be presented. This data warrants further investigation such as a randomized phase II study.

[Table: see text]

Vaccination of renal cell cancer (RCC) patients with modified vaccinia Ankara (MVA) delivering tumor antigen 5T4 administered alone or with interleukin 2 (IL-2) or interferon-alpha (IFN)

3026

Background: The attenuated vaccinia virus (MVA) has been engineered to deliver the tumor antigen 5T4 (TroVax). More than 90% of RCCs overexpress the 5T4 antigen. A series of clinical trials were conducted to evaluate the effectiveness of MVA 5T4 as a single agent or in combination with either IL-2 or IFN. Methods: Eligibility: Pathologic diagnosis of clear cell or papillary RCC, progressive measurable metastases, any prior therapy, adequate physiological parameters, Karnofsky performance status ≥ 80%, and no active CNS involvement. A regimen of MVA 5T4 alone or in combination with IL-2 or IFN was given. Results: A total of 53 pts received MVA 5T4 alone or in combination with IL-2 or IFN. 13 pts received MVA 5T4 alone, 25 pts received low dose subcutaneous IL-2, and 15 pts received IFN. Clinical responses were assessed by measuring changes in tumor burden via computed tomography or magnetic resonance imaging scan. 5T4-specific cellular and humoral responses were monitored throughout the study. 5T4 was well tolerated with no serious adverse events attributed to vaccination. Of 48 intention-to-treat pts, 43 mounted 5T4-specific antibody responses. 2 pts showed a complete response for > 36 months and 2 other pts had a partial response for > 24 months and 12 months respectively. 20 pts demonstrated disease stabilization for ≥ 3 months. Median progression-free survival and overall survival for all pts was 3.6 months (range 0.8–29.7) and 13.2 months (range 1–38) respectively. A significant relationship was detected between the magnitude of 5T4-specific antibody response and overall survival. Conclusions: 5T4, whether administered alone or in combination, was well tolerated. High frequency of 5T4-specific immune responses and associated enhanced patient survival is encouraging and warrants further investigation.

[Table: see text]

Optic disc in fundus coloboma

PURPOSE

To categorize and describe the type of optic disc involvement and blood vessel patterns seen in patients with fundus coloboma.

METHODS

This is a prospective study involving 67 eyes of 40 patients with choroidal coloboma. The evaluation included documentation of fundus details using fundus drawings or photographs, or both.

RESULTS

Six types of disc involvement were identified: (1) normal disc outside fundus coloboma (27.8%); (2) disc outside the fundus coloboma and abnormal (10.4%); (3) disc outside the fundus coloboma and independently colobomatous (8.9%); (4) disc within the fundus coloboma and normal (5.0%); (5) disc within the fundus coloboma and colobomatous (44.3%); and (6) disc shape not identified but blood vessels seen emanating from the superior border of the large fundus coloboma (2.9%). Visual acuity was better in types I, II, and III compared with IV, V, and VI. Microphthalmos was more common with the more severe anomalies. High myopia was more common in the less severe anomalies.

CONCLUSION

Optic disc involvement in fundus coloboma is widely variable. Of fundus colobomas, 67.2% are associated with either a frankly colobomatous or an altered disc. Of the discs located outside fundus colobomas, 41% are also abnormal. Visual acuity was better in types I, II, and III.