Prognostic Significance of Immune Cell Infiltration in Muscle-invasive Bladder Cancer Treated with Definitive Chemoradiation: A Secondary Analysis of RTOG 0524 and RTOG 0712

Chemoradiation therapy (CRT) is a treatment for muscle-invasive bladder cancer (MIBC). Using a novel transcriptomic profiling panel, we validated prognostic immune biomarkers to CRT using 70 pretreatment tumor samples from prospective trials of MIBC (NRG/RTOG 0524 and 0712). Disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) were estimated via the Kaplan-Meier method and stratified by genes correlated with immune cell activation. Cox proportional-hazards models were used to assess group differences. Clustering of gene expression profiles revealed that the cluster with high immune cell content was associated with longer DFS (hazard ratio [HR] 0.53, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.26-1.10; p = 0.071) and OS (HR 0.48, 95% CI 0.24-0.97; p = 0.040) than the cluster with low immune cell content. Higher expression of T-cell infiltration genes (CD8A and ICOS) was associated with longer DFS (HR 0.40, 95% CI 0.21-0.75; p = 0.005) and OS (HR 0.49, 95% CI 0.25-0.94; p = 0.033). Higher IDO1 expression (IFNγ signature) was also associated with longer DFS (HR 0.44, 95% CI 0.24-0.88; p = 0.021) and OS (HR 0.49, 95% CI 0.24-0.99; p = 0.048). These findings should be validated in prospective CRT trials that include biomarkers, particularly for trials incorporating immunotherapy for MIBC. PATIENT SUMMARY: We analyzed patient samples from two clinical trials (NRG/RTOG 0524 and 0712) of chemoradiation for muscle-invasive bladder cancer using a novel method to assess immune cells in the tumor microenvironment. Higher expression of genes associated with immune activation and high overall immune-cell content were associated with better disease-free survival and overall survival for patients treated with chemoradiation.

The radiopharmaceutical radium-223 has immunomodulatory effects in patients and facilitates anti-programmed death receptor-1 therapy in murine models of bone metastatic prostate cancer

BACKGROUND & PURPOSE

Radium-223 (Ra223) improves survival in metastatic prostate cancer (mPC), but its impact on systemic immunity is unclear, and biomarkers of response are lacking. We examined markers of immunomodulatory activity during standard clinical Ra223 and studied the impact of Ra223 on response to immune checkpoint inhibition (ICI) in preclinical models.

MATERIALS & METHODS

We conducted a single-arm biomarker study of Ra223 in 22 bone mPC patients. We measured circulating immune cell subsets and a panel of cytokines before and during Ra223 therapy and correlated them with overall survival (OS). Using two murine mPC models-orthotopic PtenSmad4-null and TRAMP-C1 grafts in syngeneic immunocompetent mice-we tested the efficacy of combining Ra223 with ICI.

RESULTS

Above-median level of IL-6 at baseline was associated with a median OS of 358 versus 947 days for below levels; p = 0.044, from the log-rank test. Baseline PlGF and PSA inversely correlated with OS (p = 0.018 and p = 0.037, respectively, from the Cox model). Ra223 treatment was associated with a mild decrease in some peripheral immune cell populations and a shift in the proportion of MDSCs from granulocytic to myeloid. In mice, Ra223 increased the proliferation of CD8+ and CD4+ helper T cells without leading to CD8+ T cell exhaustion in the mPC lesions. In one of the models, combining Ra223 and anti-PD-1 antibody significantly prolonged survival, which correlated with increased CD8+ T cell infiltration in tumor tissue.

CONCLUSION

The inflammatory cytokine IL-6 and the angiogenic biomarker PlGF at baseline were promising outcome biomarkers after standard Ra223 treatment. In mouse models, Ra223 increased intratumoral CD8+ T cell infiltration and proliferation and could improve OS when combined with anti-PD-1 ICI.

Long-term Outcomes of Chemoradiation for Muscle-invasive Bladder Cancer in Noncystectomy Candidates. Final Results of NRG Oncology RTOG 0524-A Phase 1/2 Trial of Paclitaxel + Trastuzumab with Daily Radiation or Paclitaxel Alone with Daily Irradiation

BACKGROUND

Chemo-radiation is a well-established alternative to radical cystectomy in patients with muscle-invasive bladder cancer. Many patients due to age or medical comorbidity are unfit for either radical cystectomy, or standard cisplatin- or 5-fluorouracil-based chemoradiation, and do not receive appropriate treatment with curative intent. We treated patients with a less aggressive protocol employing seven weekly doses of paclitaxel and daily irradiation. In those whose tumors showed overexpression of her2/neu, seven weekly doses of trastuzumab were also administered.

OBJECTIVE

To report the long-term survival outcomes and toxicity results of the of NRG Oncology RTOG 0524 study.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

Seventy patients were enrolled and 65 (median age: 76 yr) were deemed eligible. Patients were assigned to daily radiation and weekly paclitaxel + trastuzumab (group 1, 20 patients) or to daily radiation plus weekly paclitaxel (group 2, 45 patients) based on tumor her2/neu overexpression. Radiation was delivered in 1.8 Gy fractions to a total dose of 64.8 Gy.

OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS

The primary endpoint was unresolved treatment-related toxicity. The secondary endpoints were complete response rate, protocol completion rate, and disease-free and overall survival.

RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS

Protocol therapy was completed by 60% (group 1) and 76% (group 2); complete response rates at 12 wk were 62% in each group. Acute treatment-related adverse events (AEs) of grade ≥3 were observed in 80% in group 1 and 58% in group 2. There was one treatment-related grade 5 AE in group 1. Unresolved acute treatment-related toxicity was 35% in group 1 and 31% in group 2. The median follow-up was 2.3 yr in all patients and 7.2 yr in surviving patients. Overall survival at 5 yr was 25.0% in group 1 and 37.8% in group 2 (33.8% overall). At 5 yr, disease-free survival was 15.0% in group 1 and 31.1% in group 2.

CONCLUSIONS

In a cohort of patients with muscle-invasive bladder cancer who are not candidates for cystectomy or cisplatin chemotherapy, chemoradiation therapy offers a treatment with a significant response rate and 34% 5-yr overall survival. While there were many AEs in this medically fragile group, there were few grade 4 events and one grade 5 event attributable to therapy.

PATIENT SUMMARY

Patients with invasive bladder cancer who cannot tolerate surgery were treated with radiation and systemic therapy without surgically removing their bladders. Most patients tolerated the treatment, were able to keep their bladders, and showed a significant treatment response rate.

NCCN Guidelines® Insights: Kidney Cancer, Version 2.2024

The NCCN Guidelines for Kidney Cancer provide multidisciplinary recommendations for diagnostic workup, staging, and treatment of patients with renal cell carcinoma (RCC). These NCCN Guidelines Insights focus on the systemic therapy options for patients with advanced RCC and summarize the new clinical data evaluated by the NCCN panel for the recommended therapies in Version 2.2024 of the NCCN Guidelines for Kidney Cancer.

The Double Antibody Drug Conjugate (DAD) phase I trial: sacituzumab govitecan plus enfortumab vedotin for metastatic urothelial carcinoma

BACKGROUND

The antibody-drug conjugates sacituzumab govitecan (SG) and enfortumab vedotin (EV) are standard monotherapies for metastatic urothelial carcinoma (mUC). Given the different targets and payloads, we evaluated the safety and efficacy of SG + EV in a phase I trial in mUC (NCT04724018).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients with mUC and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status ≤1 who had progressed on platinum and/or immunotherapy were enrolled. SG + EV were administered on days 1 + 8 of a 21-day cycle until progression or unacceptable toxicity. Primary endpoint was the incidence of dose-limiting toxicities during cycle 1. The number of patients treated at each of four pre-specified dose levels (DLs) and the maximum tolerated doses in combination (MTD) were determined using a Bayesian Optimal Interval design. Objective response, progression-free survival, and overall survival were secondary endpoints.

RESULTS

Between May 2021 and April 2023, 24 patients were enrolled; 1 patient never started therapy and was excluded from the analysis. Median age was 70 years (range 41-88 years); 11 patients received ≥3 lines of therapy. Seventy-eight percent (18/23) of patients experienced grade ≥3 adverse event (AE) regardless of attribution at any DL, with one grade 5 AE (pneumonitis possibly related to EV). The recommended phase II doses are SG 8 mg/kg with EV 1.25 mg/kg with granulocyte colony-stimulating factor support; MTDs are SG 10 mg/kg with EV 1.25 mg/kg. The objective response rate was 70% (16/23, 95% confidence interval 47% to 87%) with three complete responses; three patients had progressive disease as best response. With a median follow-up of 14 months, 9/23 patients have ongoing response including 6 responses lasting over 12 months.

CONCLUSIONS

The combination of SG + EV was assessed at different DLs and a safe dose for phase II was identified. The combination had encouraging activity in patients with mUC with high response rates, including clinically significant complete responses. Additional study of this combination is warranted.

Phase I LITESPARK-001 study of belzutifan for advanced solid tumors: Extended 41-month follow-up in the clear cell renal cell carcinoma cohort

BACKGROUND

Accumulation of the HIF-2α transcription factor is an oncogenic event implicated in the tumorigenesis of clear cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC). In the phase I LITESPARK-001 study, the first-in-class HIF-2α inhibitor belzutifan demonstrated antitumor activity and an acceptable safety profile for pretreated patients with advanced ccRCC. Updated data with additional follow-up of > 40 months are presented.

METHODS

LITESPARK-001 is an ongoing open-label study with a 3 + 3 dose-escalation design followed by an expansion phase. Patients with ccRCC enrolled at 7 sites received belzutifan 120 mg orally once daily until disease progression, unacceptable toxicity, or patient withdrawal. The data cutoff date was July 15, 2021. The primary end point was identifying the maximum tolerated dose and/or the recommended phase II dose. Secondary end points included objective response rate (ORR) and duration of response (DOR) per RECIST v1.1 by investigator assessment and safety.

RESULTS

Median follow-up was 41.2 months (range, 38.2-47.7). Patients received a median of 3 (range, 1-9) prior systemic therapies. Of 55 patients, 14 (25 %) achieved an objective response. Median DOR was not reached (range, 3.1 + to 38.0 + months). Adverse events (AEs) attributed to study treatment by investigator assessment were reported in 53 patients (96 %). 22 patients (40 %) had grade 3 treatment-related AEs; the most common were anemia (n = 13; 24 %) and hypoxia (n = 7; 13 %). No grade 4 or 5 treatment-related AEs occurred.

CONCLUSION

After a median follow-up of 41.2 months, belzutifan monotherapy demonstrated durable antitumor activity in patients with advanced ccRCC and acceptable safety.

CLINICALTRIALS

gov. NCT02974738.

Radical cystectomy versus trimodality therapy for muscle-invasive bladder cancer: a multi-institutional propensity score matched and weighted analysis

BACKGROUND

Previous randomised controlled trials comparing bladder preservation with radical cystectomy for muscle-invasive bladder cancer closed due to insufficient accrual. Given that no further trials are foreseen, we aimed to use propensity scores to compare trimodality therapy (maximal transurethral resection of bladder tumour followed by concurrent chemoradiation) with radical cystectomy.

METHODS

This retrospective analysis included 722 patients with clinical stage T2-T4N0M0 muscle-invasive urothelial carcinoma of the bladder (440 underwent radical cystectomy, 282 received trimodality therapy) who would have been eligible for both approaches, treated at three university centres in the USA and Canada between Jan 1, 2005, and Dec 31, 2017. All patients had solitary tumours less than 7 cm, no or unilateral hydronephrosis, and no extensive or multifocal carcinoma in situ. The 440 cases of radical cystectomy represent 29% of all radical cystectomies performed during the study period at the contributing institutions. The primary endpoint was metastasis-free survival. Secondary endpoints included overall survival, cancer-specific survival, and disease-free survival. Differences in survival outcomes by treatment were analysed using propensity scores incorporated in propensity score matching (PSM) using logistic regression and 3:1 matching with replacement and inverse probability treatment weighting (IPTW).

FINDINGS

In the PSM analysis, the 3:1 matched cohort comprised 1119 patients (837 radical cystectomy, 282 trimodality therapy). After matching, age (71·4 years [IQR 66·0-77·1] for radical cystectomy vs 71·6 years [64·0-78·9] for trimodality therapy), sex (213 [25%] vs 68 [24%] female; 624 [75%] vs 214 [76%] male), cT2 stage (755 [90%] vs 255 [90%]), presence of hydronephrosis (97 [12%] vs 27 [10%]), and receipt of neoadjuvant or adjuvant chemotherapy (492 [59%] vs 159 [56%]) were similar between groups. Median follow-up was 4·38 years (IQR 1·6-6·7) versus 4·88 years (2·8-7·7), respectively. 5-year metastasis-free survival was 74% (95% CI 70-78) for radical cystectomy and 75% (70-80) for trimodality therapy with IPTW and 74% (70-77) and 74% (68-79) with PSM. There was no difference in metastasis-free survival either with IPTW (subdistribution hazard ratio [SHR] 0·89 [95% CI 0·67-1·20]; p=0·40) or PSM (SHR 0·93 [0·71-1·24]; p=0·64). 5-year cancer-specific survival for radical cystectomy versus trimodality therapy was 81% (95% CI 77-85) versus 84% (79-89) with IPTW and 83% (80-86) versus 85% (80-89) with PSM. 5-year disease-free survival was 73% (95% CI 69-77) versus 74% (69-79) with IPTW and 76% (72-80) versus 76% (71-81) with PSM. There were no differences in cancer-specific survival (IPTW: SHR 0·72 [95% CI 0·50-1·04]; p=0·071; PSM: SHR 0·73 [0·52-1·02]; p=0·057) and disease-free survival (IPTW: SHR 0·87 [0·65-1·16]; p=0·35; PSM: SHR 0·88 [0·67-1·16]; p=0·37) between radical cystectomy and trimodality therapy. Overall survival favoured trimodality therapy (IPTW: 66% [95% CI 61-71] vs 73% [68-78]; hazard ratio [HR] 0·70 [95% CI 0·53-0·92]; p=0·010; PSM: 72% [69-75] vs 77% [72-81]; HR 0·75 [0·58-0·97]; p=0·0078). Outcomes for radical cystectomy and trimodality therapy were not statistically different among centres for cancer-specific survival and metastasis-free survival (p=0·22-0·90). Salvage cystectomy was done in 38 (13%) trimodality therapy patients. Pathological stage in the 440 radical cystectomy patients was pT2 in 124 (28%), pT3-4 in 194 (44%), and 114 (26%) node positive. The median number of nodes removed was 39, the soft tissue positive margin rate was 1% (n=5), and the perioperative mortality rate was 2·5% (n=11).

INTERPRETATION

This multi-institutional study provides the best evidence to date showing similar oncological outcomes between radical cystectomy and trimodality therapy for select patients with muscle-invasive bladder cancer. These results support that trimodality therapy, in the setting of multidisciplinary shared decision making, should be offered to all suitable candidates with muscle-invasive bladder cancer and not only to patients with significant comorbidities for whom surgery is not an option.

FUNDING

Sinai Health Foundation, Princess Margaret Cancer Foundation, Massachusetts General Hospital.

Overall Survival and Updated Results for Sunitinib Compared With Interferon Alfa in Patients With Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma

PURPOSE

A randomized, phase III trial demonstrated superiority of sunitinib over interferon alfa (IFN-α) in progression-free survival (primary end point) as first-line treatment for metastatic renal cell carcinoma (RCC). Final survival analyses and updated results are reported.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Seven hundred fifty treatment-naïve patients with metastatic clear cell RCC were randomly assigned to sunitinib 50 mg orally once daily on a 4 weeks on, 2 weeks off dosing schedule or to IFN-α 9 MU subcutaneously thrice weekly. Overall survival was compared by two-sided log-rank and Wilcoxon tests. Progression-free survival, response, and safety end points were assessed with updated follow-up.

RESULTS

Median overall survival was greater in the sunitinib group than in the IFN-α group (26.4 v 21.8 months, respectively; hazard ratio [HR] = 0.821; 95% CI, 0.673 to 1.001; P = .051) per the primary analysis of unstratified log-rank test (P = .013 per unstratified Wilcoxon test). By stratified log-rank test, the HR was 0.818 (95% CI, 0.669 to 0.999; P = .049). Within the IFN-α group, 33% of patients received sunitinib, and 32% received other vascular endothelial growth factor-signaling inhibitors after discontinuation from the trial. Median progression-free survival was 11 months for sunitinib compared with 5 months for IFN-α (P < .001). Objective response rate was 47% for sunitinib compared with 12% for IFN-α (P < .001). The most commonly reported sunitinib-related grade 3 adverse events included hypertension (12%), fatigue (11%), diarrhea (9%), and hand-foot syndrome (9%).

CONCLUSION

Sunitinib demonstrates longer overall survival compared with IFN-α plus improvement in response and progression-free survival in the first-line treatment of patients with metastatic RCC. The overall survival highlights an improved prognosis in patients with RCC in the era of targeted therapy.

Belzutifan plus cabozantinib for patients with advanced clear cell renal cell carcinoma previously treated with immunotherapy: an open-label, single-arm, phase 2 study

BACKGROUND

Few treatment options are available for patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma who have received previous anti-PD-1-based or anti-PD-L1-based immunotherapy. Combining belzutifan, an HIF-2α inhibitor, with cabozantinib, a multitargeted tyrosine-kinase inhibitor of VEGFR, c-MET, and AXL, might provide more antitumoural effects than either agent alone. We aimed to investigate the antitumour activity and safety of belzutifan plus cabozantinib in patients with advanced clear cell renal cell carcinoma that was previously treated with immunotherapy.

METHODS

This open-label, single-arm, phase 2 study was conducted at ten hospitals and cancer centres in the USA. Patients were enrolled into two cohorts. Patients in cohort 1 had treatment-naive disease (results will be reported separately). In cohort 2, eligible patients were aged 18 years or older with locally advanced or metastatic clear cell renal cell carcinoma, measurable disease according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours version 1.1, an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status score of 0 or 1, and had previously received immunotherapy and up to two systemic treatment regimens. Patients were given belzutifan 120 mg orally once daily and cabozantinib 60 mg orally once daily until disease progression, unacceptable toxicity, or patient withdrawal. The primary endpoint was confirmed objective response assessed by the investigator. Antitumour activity and safety were assessed in all patients who received at least one dose of study treatment. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03634540, and is ongoing.

FINDINGS

Between Sept 27, 2018, and July 14, 2020, 117 patients were screened for eligibility, 52 (44%) of whom were enrolled in cohort 2 and received at least one dose of study treatment. Median age was 63·0 years (IQR 57·5-68·5), 38 (73%) of 52 patients were male, 14 (27%) were female, 48 (92%) were White, two (4%) were Black or African American, and two were Asian (4%). As of data cutoff (Feb 1, 2022), median follow-up was 24·6 months (IQR 22·1-32·2). 16 (30·8% [95% CI 18·7-45·1]) of 52 patients had a confirmed objective response, including one (2%) who had a complete response and 15 (29%) who had partial responses. The most common grade 3-4 treatment-related adverse event was hypertension (14 [27%] of 52 patients). Serious treatment-related adverse events occurred in 15 (29%) patients. One death was considered treatment related by the investigator (respiratory failure).

INTERPRETATION

Belzutifan plus cabozantinib has promising antitumour activity in patients with pretreated clear cell renal cell carcinoma and our findings provide rationale for further randomised trials with belzutifan in combination with a VEGFR tyrosine-kinase inhibitor.

FUNDING

Merck Sharp & Dohme (a subsidiary of Merck & Co) and the National Cancer Institute.

Phase 1 LITESPARK-001 (MK-6482-001) study of belzutifan in advanced solid tumors: Update of the clear cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC) cohort with more than 3 years of total follow-up

4509

Background: Hypoxia-inducible factor 2α (HIF-2α) is a key oncogenic driver in RCC. Antitumor activity of the HIF-2α inhibitor belzutifan has been observed in RCC and is approved for treatment in patients (pts) with VHL disease who require therapy for associated RCC, CNS hemangioblastomas, or pNETs not requiring immediate surgery. Previous data from the phase 1 LITESPARK-001 trial (NCT02974738) designed to evaluate belzutifan in heavily pretreated RCC showed durable antitumor activity and an acceptable safety profile. After more than 3 years of follow-up for pts with ccRCC still receiving treatment, updated data are presented. Methods: Pts enrolled in the ccRCC cohort were previously treated with ≥1 therapy, had RECIST-measurable disease, ECOG PS score of 0 or 1, adequate organ function, and life expectancy of ≥6 months. Pts received oral belzutifan 120 mg once daily. The primary end point was safety. Secondary end points were ORR, DCR (CR + PR + SD), PFS, and DOR per RECIST v1.1 by investigator. The data cutoff date was July 15, 2021. Results: Of 55 pts enrolled in the ccRCC cohort, 9 (16%) remain on treatment as of the data cutoff date of July 15, 2021; the primary reason for discontinuation was progressive disease (n = 34; 62%). Pts received a median of 3 prior therapies (range, 1-9); 39 (71%) received prior VEGF and immunotherapy. Pts were followed while on treatment and for 30 days after the last dose for a median of 41.2 months (range, 38.2-47.7). Twenty-two pts (40%) experienced grade 3 TRAEs. The most common (≥10%) grade 3 TRAEs were anemia (n = 13; 24%) and hypoxia (n = 7; 13%). There were no grade 4 or 5 TRAEs. ORR was 25%, with 1 confirmed CR (2%) and 13 PRs (24%); DCR was 80%. Median DOR was not reached (range, 3.1+ to 37.9+ months); 8 of 14 responding pts (57%) remain in response as of the data cutoff date. Per IMDC risk, 4 of 13 pts with favorable risk achieved response (ORR = 31%; all PRs) and 10 of 42 pts with intermediate/poor risk achieved response (ORR = 24%; 1 CR, 9 PRs). DCR was 92% for pts with favorable risk and 76% for pts with intermediate/poor risk. For pts who received prior VEGF and immunotherapy, 8 of 39 pts achieved response (ORR = 21%; 1 CR; 7 PR); DCR was 74%. For the 16 pts who did not receive prior VEGF/immunotherapy, 6 achieved response (ORR = 38%; all PRs); DCR was 94%. Median PFS for the total cohort was 14.5 months (95% CI, 7.3-22.1); PFS rate at 156 weeks (̃36 months) was 34%. Conclusions: As seen after a median follow-up of > 3 years for pts still receiving treatment, belzutifan monotherapy continued to show a high rate of disease control and durable responses in previously treated pts with advanced ccRCC. Belzutifan exhibited a favorable safety profile, and no new safety signals were observed. In several phase 3 studies, belzutifan is being evaluated as monotherapy and combined therapy for ccRCC. Clinical trial information: NCT02974738.

Biomarker-Based Phase II Study of Sapanisertib (TAK-228): An mTORC1/2 Inhibitor in Patients With Refractory Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma

PURPOSE

Sapanisertib is a kinase inhibitor that inhibits both mammalian target of rapamycin complex 1 (mTORC1) and mTORC2. In this multicenter, single-arm phase II trial, we evaluated the efficacy of sapanisertib in patients with treatment-refractory metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC; NCT03097328).

METHODS

Patients with mRCC of any histology progressing through standard therapy (including prior mTOR inhibitors) had baseline biopsy and received sapanisertib 30 mg by mouth once weekly until unacceptable toxicity or disease progression. The primary end point was objective response rate by RECIST 1.1. Tissue biomarkers of mTOR pathway activation were explored.

RESULTS

We enrolled 38 patients with mRCC (clear cell = 28; variant histology = 10) between August 2017 and November 2019. Twenty-four (63%) had received ≥ 3 prior lines of therapy; 17 (45%) had received prior rapalog therapy. The median follow-up was 10.4 (range 1-27.4) months. Objective response rate was two of 38 (5.3%; 90% CI, 1 to 15.6); the median progression-free survival (PFS) was 2.5 months (95% CI, 1.8 to 3.7). Twelve patients (32%) developed treatment-related grade 3 adverse events, with no grade 4 or 5 toxicities. Alterations in the mTOR pathway genes were seen in 5 of 29 evaluable patients (MTOR n = 1, PTEN n = 3, and TSC1 n = 1) with no association with response or PFS. Diminished or loss of PTEN expression by immunohistochemistry was seen in 8 of 21 patients and trended toward shorter PFS compared with intact PTEN (median 1.9 v 3.7 months; hazard ratio 2.5; 95% CI, 0.9 to 6.7; P = .055).

CONCLUSION

Sapanisertib had minimal activity in treatment-refractory mRCC independent of mTOR pathway alterations. Additional therapeutic strategies are needed for patients with refractory mRCC.

OUP accepted manuscript

Bone metastases are often difficult to manage as they can be symptomatic and skeletal-related events (SREs) can contribute to significant morbidity and declines in performance status. We sought to identify a novel medical treatment for bone metastasis by testing the safety and efficacy of cabozantinib in patients with bone metastasis arising from non-breast, non-prostate, malignant solid tumors. Patients were administered cabozantinib as an oral drug starting at 60 mg per day and radiologic measurements were performed at baseline and every 8 weeks. Thirty-seven patients were enrolled. No SREs were observed throughout the study. Twenty patients had disease measurable by Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) version 1.1. Four of 20 had a partial response by RECIST. An additional 12 patients had some decrease in tumor burden with nine of these having a decrease in tumor burden of at least 10% by RECIST. Six of the patients with at least a minor response had sarcoma. Sixteen patients had biomarkers of bone turnover measured before and after treatment. Most of these patients demonstrated decrease in urine and serum N-telopeptide and serum C-telopeptide. However, these changes in biomarkers of bone turnover did not correlate with radiographic changes measured by RECIST. This study demonstrates clinical activity and safety for cabozantinib in heavily pretreated patients with bone metastasis and shows activity for cabozantinib in patients with metastatic sarcoma.

Kidney Cancer, Version 3.2022, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology

The NCCN Guidelines for Kidney Cancer focus on the screening, diagnosis, staging, treatment, and management of renal cell carcinoma (RCC). Patients with relapsed or stage IV RCC typically undergo surgery and/or receive systemic therapy. Tumor histology and risk stratification of patients is important in therapy selection. The NCCN Guidelines for Kidney Cancer stratify treatment recommendations by histology; recommendations for first-line treatment of ccRCC are also stratified by risk group. To further guide management of advanced RCC, the NCCN Kidney Cancer Panel has categorized all systemic kidney cancer therapy regimens as "Preferred," "Other Recommended Regimens," or "Useful in Certain Circumstances." This categorization provides guidance on treatment selection by considering the efficacy, safety, evidence, and other factors that play a role in treatment selection. These factors include pre-existing comorbidities, nature of the disease, and in some cases consideration of access to agents. This article summarizes surgical and systemic therapy recommendations for patients with relapsed or stage IV RCC.

Outcomes of older men receiving docetaxel for metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer

BACKGROUND

Most men who die of prostate cancer are older than 70 years. The ChemoHormonal Therapy Versus Androgen Ablation Randomized Trial for Extensive Disease in Prostate Cancer (CHAARTED) randomized men of all ages with metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC) to receive androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) with or without docetaxel demonstrating an overall survival (OS) benefit for docetaxel.

METHODS

In a post-hoc analysis of this trial, we assessed patient characteristics and OS in patients ≥70 years ("older men") versus <70 years ("younger men") with Cox proportional hazards models. In addition, we compared adverse events, therapy completion rate, and subsequent treatment patterns between these two groups using Chi-squared tests.

RESULTS

177 (22.4%) patients were ≥70 years. Docetaxel + ADT resulted in improved OS in both older and younger men (Hazard Ratio [HR] 0.45, 95%CI: 0.25-0.80 for older men; HR 0.71, 95%CI: 0.53-0.95 for younger men). This treatment benefit was seen for subgroups of older men with high volume disease (HR 0.43, 95%CI 0.23-0.79) and de novo metastatic disease (HR 0.36, 95%CI 0.19-0.69). A similar proportion of older and younger men completed six cycles of docetaxel (82.6% vs. 87.1%, p = 0.28). Rates of grade 3-5 adverse events were similar between older and younger men (36.8% vs. 26.8%, respectively, p = 0.069). The rate of any Grades 4-5 adverse events did not differ significantly between older and younger men (14.9% vs. 11.9%, respectively, p = 0.46). In the control arm, a smaller proportion of older men received subsequent cancer treatments (34.4% vs. 51.5%, p = 0.017) or subsequent docetaxel (25.6% vs. 37.6%, p = 0.035) compared to younger men.

CONCLUSIONS

Older men with mHSPC had similar OS benefit and clinical outcomes compared to younger men when receiving docetaxel + ADT. Oncologists should consider docetaxel chemotherapy as a favorable treatment option for older men with mHSPC who are fit for chemotherapy.

PROSPER: Phase III RandOmized Study Comparing PERioperative nivolumab versus observation in patients with renal cell carcinoma (RCC) undergoing nephrectomy (ECOG-ACRIN EA8143)

TPS4596

Background: There is no standard adjuvant systemic therapy that increases overall survival (OS) over surgery alone for non-metastatic RCC. Anti-PD-1 nivolumab (nivo) improves OS in metastatic RCC and is well tolerated. In mouse models, priming the immune system prior to surgery with anti-PD-1 results in superior OS compared to adjuvant dosing. Remarkable pathologic responses have been seen with neoadjuvant PD-1 in multiple ph 2 studies in bladder, lung and breast cancers. Phase 2 neoadjuvant RCC trials of nivo show preliminary feasibility and safety with no surgical delays. PROSPER RCC seeks to improve clinical outcomes by priming the immune system with neoadjuvant nivo prior to nephrectomy followed by continued immune system engagement with adjuvant blockade in patients (pts) with high risk RCC compared to standard of care surgery alone. Methods: This global, unblinded, phase 3 National Clinical Trials Network study is accruing pts with clinical stage ≥T2 or TanyN+ RCC of any histology planned for radical or partial nephrectomy. Select oligometastatic disease is permitted if the pt can be rendered ‘no evidence of disease’ within 12 weeks of nephrectomy (≤3 metastases; no brain, bone or liver). In the investigational arm, nivo is administered 480mg IV q4 weeks with 1 dose prior to surgery followed by 9 adjuvant doses. The control arm is nephrectomy followed by standard of care surveillance. There is no placebo. Baseline tumor biopsy is required only in the nivo arm but encouraged in both. Randomized pts are stratified by clinical T stage, node positivity, and M stage. 805 pts provide 84.2% power to detect a 14.4% absolute benefit in recurrence-free survival at 5 years assuming the ASSURE historical control of ̃56% to 70% (HR = 0.70). The study is powered to evaluate a significant increase in OS (HR 0.67). Critical perioperative therapy considerations such as safety, feasibility, and quality of life metrics are integrated. PROSPER RCC embeds a wealth of translational studies to examine the contribution of the baseline immune milieu and neoadjuvant priming with anti-PD-1 on clinical outcomes. As of February 10, 2021, 704 patients have been enrolled (N = 805). Clinical trial information: NCT03055013.

A randomized phase II study comparing cisplatin and gemcitabine with or without berzosertib in patients with advanced urothelial carcinoma

4507

Background: Cisplatin with gemcitabine (CG) remains the standard upfront chemotherapy regimen for metastatic urothelial cancer (mUC). Preclinical synergy was noted between cisplatin and berzosertib, a selective ATR inhibitor. The current study sought to determine if the combination of berzosertib and CG could improve clinical outcomes in mUC. Methods: An open-label, randomized study was conducted across 23 centers in the United States through the Experimental Therapeutics Clinical Trials Network of the National Cancer Institute. Key eligibility criteria included confirmed mUC, no prior cytotoxic therapy for metastatic disease, ≥ 12 months since perioperative therapy and eligibility for cisplatin based on standard criteria. Patients (pts) were randomized to receive either CG alone (control arm) or CG plus berzosertib (experimental arm). In the control arm, 70 mg/m2 of cisplatin was given on day 1 and gemcitabine at 1000 mg/m2 on days 1 and 8 of a 21-day cycle. In the experimental arm, 60 mg/m2 of cisplatin was given on day 1, gemcitabine at 875 mg/m2 on days 1 and 8 and berzosertib at 90 mg/m2 on days 2 and 9 of a 21-day cycle. The primary endpoint of the study was progression-free survival (PFS), with secondary endpoints including response rate (RR), overall survival (OS) and toxicity. Results: A total of 87 pts (median age 67; M:F 68:19) were randomized; 41 pts received CG alone while 46 received CG with berzosertib. Visceral metastases were present in 49% of pts and 52%, 45% and 3% of pts were Bajorin risk 0, 1 and 2, respectively. Median PFS was 8.0 months for both arms (Bajorin risk adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 1.22, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.72-2.08). RR was 54%(4 CR, 21 PR) in the CG with berzosertib arm and 63% (4 CR, 22 PR) in CG alone arm (P = 0.66). Median OS was shorter with CG with berzosertib as compared to CG alone (14.4 versus 19.8 months; Bajorin risk adjusted HR 1.42, 95%CI 0.76-2.68). Notably higher rates of grade 3/4 thrombocytopenia (59% vs 39%) and neutropenia (37% vs 27%) were observed with CG plus berzosertib compared to CG alone. Higher rates of toxicity-related discontinuation were seen in the experimental arm (24% vs 15%), and the median cumulative cisplatin dose in the experimental arm was 250 mg/m2, as compared to 370 mg/m2 in the control arm (P < 0.001). Conclusions: No improvement in PFS was observed with the addition of berzosertib to CG, and a trend towards inferior survival was observed. These results suggest caution in reducing the starting dose of cytotoxic therapy to accommodate addition of a myelosuppressive agent, as in the experimental arm of this study. Clinical trial information: NCT02567409.

Inhibition of hypoxia-inducible factor-2α in renal cell carcinoma with belzutifan: a phase 1 trial and biomarker analysis

Hypoxia-inducible factor-2α (HIF-2α) is a transcription factor that frequently accumulates in clear cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC), resulting in constitutive activation of genes involved in carcinogenesis. Belzutifan (MK-6482, previously known as PT2977) is a potent, selective small molecule inhibitor of HIF-2α. Maximum tolerated dose, safety, pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics and anti-tumor activity of belzutifan were evaluated in this first-in-human phase 1 study (NCT02974738). Patients had advanced solid tumors (dose-escalation cohort) or previously treated advanced ccRCC (dose-expansion cohort). Belzutifan was administered orally using a 3 + 3 dose-escalation design, followed by expansion at the recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D) in patients with ccRCC. In the dose-escalation cohort (n = 43), no dose-limiting toxicities occurred at doses up to 160 mg once daily, and the maximum tolerated dose was not reached; the RP2D was 120 mg once daily. Plasma erythropoietin reductions were observed at all doses; erythropoietin concentrations correlated with plasma concentrations of belzutifan. In patients with ccRCC who received 120 mg once daily (n = 55), the confirmed objective response rate was 25% (all partial responses), and the median progression-free survival was 14.5 months. The most common grade ≥3 adverse events were anemia (27%) and hypoxia (16%). Belzutifan was well tolerated and demonstrated preliminary anti-tumor activity in heavily pre-treated patients, suggesting that HIF-2α inhibition might offer an effective treatment for ccRCC.

A Single-arm, Multicenter, Phase 2 Study of Lenvatinib Plus Everolimus in Patients with Advanced Non-Clear Cell Renal Cell Carcinoma

BACKGROUND

Non-clear cell renal cell carcinoma (nccRCC) accounts for ≤20% of RCC cases. Lenvatinib (a multitargeted tyrosine kinase inhibitor) in combination with everolimus (an mTOR inhibitor) is approved for the treatment of advanced RCC after one prior antiangiogenic therapy.

OBJECTIVE

To determine the safety and efficacy of lenvatinib plus everolimus as a first-line treatment for patients with advanced nccRCC.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This open-label, single-arm, multicenter, phase 2 study enrolled patients with unresectable advanced or metastatic nccRCC and no prior anticancer therapy for advanced disease.

INTERVENTION

Lenvatinib (18 mg) plus everolimus (5 mg) orally once daily.

OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS

The primary endpoint was the objective response rate (ORR) as assessed by investigators according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1. Secondary endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and safety assessments. The 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for ORRs were calculated using the two-sided Clopper-Pearson method. Median PFS and median OS were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier product-limit method and their 95% CIs were estimated via a generalized Brookmeyer and Crowley method.

RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS

The study (start date: February 20, 2017) enrolled 31 patients with nccRCC (papillary, n = 20; chromophobe, n = 9; unclassified, n = 2). At the data cutoff date (July 17, 2019), the best overall response was a partial response (eight patients: papillary, n = 3; chromophobe, n = 4; unclassified, n = 1) for an overall ORR of 26% (95% CI 12-45). Median PFS was 9.2 mo (95% CI 5.5-not estimable), and median OS was 15.6 mo (95% CI 9.2-not estimable). The most common treatment-emergent adverse events were fatigue (71%), diarrhea (58%), decreased appetite (55%), nausea (55%), and vomiting (52%). Limitations include the small sample size and single-arm design.

CONCLUSIONS

Lenvatinib plus everolimus showed promising anticancer activity in patients with advanced nccRCC with an ORR of 26% and is worthy of further study. The safety profile was consistent with the established profile of the study-drug combination.

PATIENT SUMMARY

We examined the combination of lenvatinib plus everolimus as the first therapy for 31 patients who had advanced nccRCC. We found that this treatment seemed effective, because most patients had a decrease in tumor size and manageable treatment-related side effects.

CLINICAL REGISTRATION

This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.Gov as NCT02915783.

The oral HIF-2 α inhibitor MK-6482 in patients with advanced clear cell renal cell carcinoma (RCC): Updated follow-up of a phase I/II study

273

Background: Clear cell RCC (ccRCC) accounts for ~70% of kidney cancer cases in the US. Several first-line therapies are approved for ccRCC, but few patients respond completely and most progress within 5-11 mo. A key oncogenic driver in RCC is the transcription factor hypoxia-inducible factor 2α (HIF-2α). MK-6482 is a small molecule HIF-2α inhibitor that blocks the heterodimerization of HIF-2α with HIF-1β, inducing tumor regression in mouse xenograft RCC models. Updated data presented here include additional follow-up from the expansion cohort of patients with ccRCC from the first-in-human phase 1/2 study of MK-6482 in advanced solid tumors (NCT02974738). Methods: Patients were aged ≥18 y with advanced ccRCC, received ≥1 prior therapy, and had RECIST v1.1 measurable disease, ECOG status 0 or 1, adequate organ function, and life expectancy ≥6 mo. They received 120 mg of MK-6482 orally once daily. Tumors were assessed at baseline, within 7 days before week 9, and then every 8 weeks; response was assessed using RECIST v1.1. The primary end point was safety. Secondary end points included ORR, duration of response (DOR), and PFS. Results: Fifty-five patients with ccRCC were treated with MK-6482 120 mg (52 in expansion and 3 in dose-escalation cohorts). The median number of prior therapies was 3 (range 1-9). Forty-two patients (81%) previously received PD-1/L1 inhibitors and 48 (92%) previously received VEGF inhibitors. Thirteen patients (24%) were classified as favorable risk and 42 (76%) as intermediate or poor risk per IMDC criteria. With a median follow-up of 28 mo, the most common all-grade, all-cause AEs >30% were anemia (76%), fatigue (71%), dyspnea (49%), nausea (36%), cough (31%), and hypoxia (31%). Anemia (27%) and hypoxia (16%) were the most common grade 3 AEs. Two patients (4%) experienced grade 4 AEs, and 4 patients (7%) experienced grade 5 AEs. No grade 4 or 5 AEs were related to treatment. ORR was 25%, with 14 confirmed PRs. Thirty patients (55%) had SD, with a disease control rate (CR+PR+SD) of 80%. Median DOR was not reached; 77% had a response ≥6 mo. By IMDC risk, 4 of 13 patients with favorable risk had PR (ORR = 31%) and 10 of 42 with intermediate or poor risk had PR (ORR = 24%); disease control rate was 92% and 76%, respectively. Median PFS for the total population was 14.5 mo; 51% had a PFS of 12 mo. As of June 1, 2020, 33 patients (60%) discontinued because of PD and 2 (4%) because of AEs; 11 patients (20%) had ongoing treatment. Conclusions: MK-6482 remained well tolerated with a favorable safety profile and promising single-agent activity in patients with ccRCC for all IMDC risk groups after further follow-up. A phase III trial in a similar population is underway. Clinical trial information: NCT02974738 .

Biomarker-based phase II study of sapanisertib (TAK-228), an mTORC1/2 inhibitor in patients with refractory metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC)

306

Background: Approved rapalogs inhibit mTORC1 and have limited activity in mRCC, possibly due to compensatory feedback loops. Sapanisertib addresses the incomplete inhibition of the mTOR pathway through targeting of both mTORC1 and mTORC2 with antitumour activity demonstrated in patients with mRCC. In this multicenter, single arm phase II trial, we evaluated the efficacy of sapanisertib in patients with mRCC progressing on standard therapies (NCT03097328). Methods: Eligible mRCC patients had an ECOG performance status of 0-2 and had progressed on standard therapies. Prior therapy with rapalogs (everolimus, temsirolimus) and variant RCC histologies were permitted. Patients had a baseline biopsy and received treatment with sapanisertib 30 mg by mouth weekly until unacceptable toxicity or disease progression. The primary endpoint was overall response rate (ORR) by RECIST 1.1. Tissue biomarkers of mTOR pathway activation were explored. Results: We enrolled 38 mRCC patients (clear cell = 28; variant histology = 10) between August 2017 and November 2019. The majority had intermediate (76%) or poor risk (11%) by IMDC criteria. Twenty (53%) had received ≥ 3 lines of therapy; 13 (34%) patients received prior rapalogs. Median follow-up was 10.4 months (range 1-27.4) and median duration of therapy was 1.6 (range 0.3-13.8) months. ORR by central review was 2 of 38 (5.3% 90%CI: 1%-15.6%). 31.6% of all patients and 30.7% of those with prior rapalog exposure had some tumor shrinkage during course of treatment. Median progression free survival (PFS) was 2.5 months (95% CI 1.8,3.7). Twelve patients (32%) developed treatment-related grade 3 adverse events (AEs) with no grade 4 or 5 toxicity reported; 6 patients (16%) required dose reduction and 4 (11%) discontinued therapy for AEs. Oncopanel tumor sequencing identified alterations in the mTOR pathway in 6 of 29 patients ( MTOR n = 2, PTEN n = 3, TSC1 n = 1.) Reduced PTEN expression by immunohistochemistry was seen in 7 of 19 patients. There was no association between mTOR pathway mutations or PTEN loss and response to sapanisertib. Conclusions: In this study we demonstrate minimal activity of sapanisertib in patients with treatment refractory mRCC with no clear benefit among patients with mTOR/PTEN pathway alterations. Additional treatment strategies are needed for patients with refractory mRCC.

Outcomes of older men receiving docetaxel for metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer

82

Background: Most men who die of prostate cancer are older than 70 years, and the impact of therapy in this population is poorly defined. The ChemoHormonal Therapy Versus Androgen Ablation Randomized Trial for Extensive Disease in Prostate Cancer (CHAARTED) randomized men of all ages with metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC) to receive androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) with or without docetaxel. Methods: The results of CHAARTED showed an overall survival (OS) benefit for the addition of docetaxel to ADT in men with mHSPC. In a secondary analysis of this trial, we assessed patient characteristics and OS in patients ≥70 years (“older men”) versus <70 years (“younger men”) with Cox proportional hazards models. Additionally, we compared adverse events, therapy completion rate, and subsequent treatment patterns between these two groups using Chi-squared tests. Results: Of the 790 patients enrolled, 177 (22.4%) were ≥70 years. A greater proportion of older men had an impaired performance status (Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group 1-2: 36.7% vs. 28.6%, p=0.038) and prior local therapy (31.7% vs. 25.9%, p<0.001) compared to younger men. Docetaxel + ADT resulted in improved OS in both older and younger men (Hazard Ratio [HR] 0.45, 95%CI: 0.25-0.80 for older men; HR 0.71, 95%CI: 0.53-0.95 for younger men). This treatment benefit was seen for subgroups of older men with high volume disease (HR 0.43, 95%CI 0.23-0.79) and de novo metastatic disease (HR 0.36, 95%CI 0.19-0.69). A similar proportion of older and younger men completed all six cycles of docetaxel (82.6% vs. 87.1%, p=0.28). Rates of grade 3-5 adverse events were similar between older and younger men (36.8% of older men vs. 26.8% of younger men, p=0.69). The rate of any Grade 4-5 adverse events did not differ significantly between older and younger men (14.9% vs. 11.9%, respectively, p=0.46). In the control arm, a smaller proportion of older men received subsequent cancer treatments (34.4% vs. 51.5%, p=0.017) or subsequent docetaxel (25.6% vs. 37.6%, p=0.035) compared to younger men. Conclusions: In summary, older men with mHSPC who were eligible to participate in a clinical trial had similar OS benefit and clinical outcomes compared to younger men when receiving docetaxel chemotherapy + ADT. Oncologists should consider docetaxel chemotherapy as a favorable treatment option for older men with mHSPC who are fit for chemotherapy. Clinical trial information: NCT00309985.

Symptom burden, functional status, and clinical outcomes of hospitalized patients with advanced genitourinary cancers

42

Background: Patients with advanced genitourinary (GU) cancers are often hospitalized for complications of their cancer and symptom management. Yet, little is known about the symptom burden, functional status, and health care utilization of these patients. Methods: We prospectively enrolled patients with advanced cancer who experienced unplanned hospitalizations at an academic medical center. Upon admission, we asked patients to self-report their physical (Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale-revised [ESAS-r]) and psychological (Patient Health Questionnaire-4 [PHQ-4]) symptoms. We also collected data from nursing assessments about impairments in activities of daily living (ADLs). We compared symptoms, functional impairment, readmissions, and overall survival (OS) between cancer types (dichotomizing GU cancers vs other cancer types) and within GU cancers (dichotomizing prostate cancer vs kidney/bladder/adrenal cancer) using univariate and multivariable regression analyses adjusted for age, sex, education, comorbidities, and time since advanced cancer diagnosis. Results: Among 971 patients enrolled, 106 (10.9%) had advanced GU cancers (39.6% prostate cancer, 32.1% kidney cancer, 25.5% bladder cancer, and 2.8% adrenal cancer). Compared to patients with other cancer types, patients with GU cancers were older (median: 69.0 vs 64.0 years, p < 0.001) and had more time since advanced cancer diagnosis (median: 14.0 vs 7.0 months, p < 0.001). In univariate analyses, a greater proportion of patients with GU cancers had an ADL impairment (57.5% vs 38.0%, p < 0.001) compared to other cancer types but the groups did not differ in their physical (Mean = 33.3 vs 32.6, p = 0.61) or depression (Mean = 4.1 vs 3.3, p = 0.05) symptoms. In multivariable models, patients with GU cancers had similar risk of readmission in 90 days (HR 1.31, p = 0.077), but worse survival (median OS: 102.0 days vs 133.5 days, p < 0.001; HR 1.27, p = 0.046). Within GU cancers, patients with kidney/bladder/adrenal cancer (vs. prostate cancer) were younger (median: 66.0 vs 74.0, p < 0.001) with less time since advanced cancer diagnosis (median: 9.0 vs 23.0 months, p = 0.012) but had no difference in symptoms or functional impairment. They were more likely to be admitted for symptom management (66% vs. 39% for prostate cancer, p = 0.026). Patients with kidney/bladder/adrenal cancer also had higher risk of readmission (HR 2.04, p = 0.043) but no difference in OS, compared to patients with prostate cancer. Conclusions: We found that hospitalized patients with advanced GU cancers had significantly greater functional impairment and worse survival compared to those with other cancer types, and those with kidney/bladder/adrenal cancer had significantly higher readmission risk compared to those with prostate cancer. These findings support the need to develop tailored supportive care for hospitalized patients with GU cancers.

Dana-Farber Cancer Institute/Mass General Brigham Fellowship Response to the COVID-19 Pandemic

The coronavirus disease (COVID)-19 pandemic has affected graduate medical education training programs, including hematology-oncology fellowship programs, both across the United States and abroad. Within the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute/Mass General Brigham hematology-oncology fellowship program, fellowship leadership had to quickly reorganize the program's clinical, educational, and research structure to minimize the risk of COVID-19 spread to our patients and staff, allow fellows to assist in the care of patients with COVID-19, maintain formal didactics despite physical distancing, and ensure the mental and physical well-being of fellows. Following the first wave of patients with COVID-19, we anonymously surveyed the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute/Mass General Brigham first-year fellows to explore their perceptions regarding what the program did well and what could have been improved in the COVID-19 response. In this article, we present the feedback from our fellows and the lessons we learned as a program from this feedback. To our knowledge, this represents the first effort in the hematology-oncology literature to directly assess a hematology-oncology program's overall response to COVID-19 through direct feedback from fellows.

NCCN Guidelines Insights: Kidney Cancer, Version 1.2021

The NCCN Guidelines for Kidney Cancer provide multidisciplinary recommendations for diagnostic workup, staging, and treatment of patients with renal cell carcinoma (RCC). These NCCN Guidelines Insights focus on recent updates to the guidelines, including changes to certain systemic therapy recommendations for patients with relapsed or stage IV RCC. They also discuss the addition of a new section to the guidelines that identifies and describes the most common hereditary RCC syndromes and provides recommendations for genetic testing, surveillance, and/or treatment options for patients who are suspected or confirmed to have one of these syndromes.

Multidisciplinary Management of Advanced Kidney Cancer

A number of therapeutic options are available for the treatment of advanced kidney cancer, including targeted therapy, immunotherapy, and nephrectomy. Choice of therapy for advanced kidney cancer is guided by risk stratification. Immunotherapy combinations are generally superior to vascular endothelial growth factor -based monotherapy, and overall survival rates continue to increase substantially. With new systemic therapy options, additional improvements have been noted in durable responses to treatment and in quality of life. Nephrectomy remains an important consideration in selected patients, particularly those with minimal burden of metastatic disease. Managing the adverse events of treatment of advanced kidney cancer requires close attention and multidisciplinary collaboration.

Detection of renal cell carcinoma using plasma and urine cell-free DNA methylomes

Improving early cancer detection has the potential to substantially reduce cancer-related mortality. Cell-free methylated DNA immunoprecipitation and high-throughput sequencing (cfMeDIP-seq) is a highly sensitive assay capable of detecting early-stage tumors. We report accurate classification of patients across all stages of renal cell carcinoma (RCC) in plasma (area under the receiver operating characteristic (AUROC) curve of 0.99) and demonstrate the validity of this assay to identify patients with RCC using urine cell-free DNA (cfDNA; AUROC of 0.86).

PROSPER: Phase III randomized study comparing perioperative nivolumab versus observation in patients with renal cell carcinoma (RCC) undergoing nephrectomy (ECOG-ACRIN EA8143)

TPS5101

Background: There is no standard adjuvant systemic therapy that increases overall survival (OS) over surgery alone for non-metastatic RCC. Anti-PD-1 nivolumab (nivo) improves OS in metastatic RCC and is well tolerated. In mouse models, priming the immune system prior to surgery with anti-PD-1 results in superior OS compared to adjuvant dosing. Remarkable pathologic responses have been seen with neoadjuvant PD-1 in multiple ph 2 studies in bladder, lung and breast cancers. Phase 2 neoadjuvant RCC trials of nivo show preliminary feasibility and safety with no surgical delays. PROSPER RCC seeks to improve clinical outcomes by priming the immune system with neoadjuvant nivo prior to nephrectomy followed by continued immune system engagement with adjuvant blockade in patients (pts) with high risk RCC compared to standard of care surgery alone. Methods: This global, unblinded, phase 3 National Clinical Trials Network study is accruing pts with clinical stage ≥T2 or TanyN+ RCC of any histology planned for radical or partial nephrectomy. Select oligometastatic disease is permitted if the pt can be rendered ‘no evidence of disease’ within 12 weeks of nephrectomy (≤3 metastases; no brain, bone or liver). In the investigational arm, nivo is administered 480mg IV q4 weeks with 1 dose prior to surgery followed by 9 adjuvant doses. The control arm is nephrectomy followed by standard of care surveillance. There is no placebo. Baseline tumor biopsy is required only in the nivo arm but encouraged in both. Randomized pts are stratified by clinical T stage, node positivity, and M stage. 805 pts provide 84.2% power to detect a 14.4% absolute benefit in recurrence-free survival at 5 years assuming the ASSURE historical control of ~56% to 70% (HR = 0.70). The study is powered to evaluate a significant increase in OS (HR 0.67). Critical perioperative therapy considerations such as safety, feasibility, and quality of life metrics are integrated. PROSPER RCC embeds a wealth of translational studies to examine the contribution of the baseline immune milieu and neoadjuvant priming with anti-PD-1 on clinical outcomes. As of February 2020, 396 patients have been enrolled. Clinical trial information: NCT03055013 .

A phase II study of lenvatinib plus everolimus in patients with advanced non-clear cell renal cell carcinoma (nccRCC)

685

Background: Non-clear cell renal cell carcinoma (nccRCC) is an umbrella term that encompasses multiple RCC histological subtypes, including papillary, chromophobe, and undetermined RCC. Both increased expression of the vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) and dysregulation of the mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) pathway occur in nccRCC. Lenvatinib (LEN) is a multitarget tyrosine kinase inhibitor that inhibits the VEGF receptor and other targets; everolimus (EVE) is a mTOR inhibitor. LEN + EVE is approved for the treatment of patients with advanced RCC following 1 prior antiangiogenic therapy. This phase 2 study examined the efficacy and tolerability of LEN + EVE in patients with nccRCC. Methods: This single-arm, multicenter, phase 2 trial assessed the safety and efficacy of LEN (18 mg once daily) + EVE (5 mg once daily) in patients with unresectable advanced or metastatic nccRCC who had not received any chemotherapy for advanced disease. The primary objective was objective response rate (ORR) as assessed by investigators using RECIST v1.1. Secondary objectives included progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and safety assessments. Results: At the time of data cutoff (July 17, 2019), 31 patients with nccRCC (papillary, n = 20; chromophobe, n = 9; unclassified, n = 2) were enrolled and treated. The ORR was 25.8% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 11.9–44.6%); 8 patients achieved a partial response (PR; papillary, n = 3; chromophobe, n = 4; unclassified, n = 1) and no patients had a complete response (CR). The median duration of response was not reached. Additionally, 18 patients (58.1%) had stable disease (SD) and the clinical benefit rate (CR + PR + durable SD [duration ≥ 23 weeks]) was 61.3% (95% CI: 42.2–78.2%). The median PFS was 9.23 months (95% CI: 5.49- not estimable [NE]) and median OS was 15.64 months (95% CI: 9.23–NE). The safety profile observed in this study was similar to the established profile of the study drug combination (LEN + EVE). Conclusions: The combination of LEN + EVE showed promising antitumor activity as first-line therapy in patients with advanced nccRCC. The ORR was 25.8%, which compares favorably to historical reports with EVE monotherapy. Clinical trial information: NCT02915783.

Phase I/II study of the oral HIF-2 α inhibitor MK-6482 in patients with advanced clear cell renal cell carcinoma (RCC)

611

Background: Hypoxia-inducible factor (HIF)-2α is a transcription factor that is a key oncogenic driver in RCC. MK-6482 is a first-in-class small molecule HIF-2α inhibitor that blocks the heterodimerization of HIF-2α with HIF-1β and induces regression in mouse xenograft RCC models. Methods: Pts with advanced ccRCC who had received at least 1 prior therapy were enrolled in an expansion cohort from the first-in-human phase 1/2 study of MK-6482 in advanced solid tumors (NCT02974738). Pts were administered 120 mg of MK-6482 orally once daily. Primary end point: safety. Key secondary end points: ORR, duration of response (DOR), and PFS. Results: Fifty-five pts were enrolled in the dose expansion cohort. Median (range) number of prior therapies was 3 (1-9); 67% received anti–PD-1 and anti-VEGF agents. Five pts (9%) were favorable risk, 40 (73%) were intermediate risk, and 10 (18%) were poor risk by IMDC criteria. With a median follow-up of 13 mo the most common all-grade, all-cause AEs > 30% were anemia (75%), fatigue (67%), dyspnea (47%), nausea (33%), and cough (31%). Anemia (26%) and hypoxia (15%) were the most common grade 3 AEs. No grade 4/5 drug-related AEs were observed. ORR was 24% with 13 confirmed PRs. Thirty-one pts (56%) had SD, with a disease control rate (CR+PR+SD) of 80%. Thirty-five of 52 (67%) pts with baseline and postbaseline assessments had tumor shrinkage. Median DOR was not reached; 81% of pts had response ≥6 mo per Kaplan-Meier estimate. Sixteen pts (29%) continued treatment beyond 12 mo. By IMDC risk, 2/5 pts with favorable risk had PR (ORR = 40%), 10/40 with intermediate risk had PR (ORR = 25%), and 1/10 with poor risk had PR (ORR = 10%); disease control rate was 100%, 80%, and 70%, respectively. Median PFS for the total population was 11.0 mo; the 12 mo PFS rate was 49%. Median PFS for favorable, intermediate, and poor IMDC risk was 16.5, 11.0, and 6.9 mo, respectively. As of May 15, 2019, 30 pts (55%) discontinued due to PD, 2 (4%) due to AEs. Sixteen pts (29%) had treatment ongoing. Conclusions: MK-6482 is well tolerated with a favorable safety profile and demonstrated promising single-agent activity in heavily pretreated pts with ccRCC across IMDC risk groups. A phase 3 trial in a similar population is planned. Clinical trial information: NCT02974738.

PROSPER: Phase III randomized study comparing perioperative nivolumab versus observation in patients with renal cell carcinoma (RCC) undergoing nephrectomy (ECOG-ACRIN EA8143)

TPS765

Background: There is no standard adjuvant systemic therapy that increases overall survival (OS) over surgery alone for non-metastatic RCC. Anti-PD-1 nivolumab (nivo) improves OS in metastatic RCC and is well tolerated. In mouse models, priming the immune system prior to surgery with anti-PD-1 results in superior OS compared to adjuvant dosing. Remarkable pathologic responses have been seen with neoadjuvant PD-1 in multiple ph 2 studies in bladder, lung and breast cancers. Phase 2 neoadjuvant RCC trials of nivo show preliminary feasibility and safety with no surgical delays. PROSPER RCC seeks to improve clinical outcomes by priming the immune system with neoadjuvant nivo prior to nephrectomy followed by continued immune system engagement with adjuvant blockade in patients (pts) with high risk RCC compared to standard of care surgery alone. Methods: This global, unblinded, phase 3 National Clinical Trials Network study is accruing pts with clinical stage ≥T2 or TanyN+ RCC of any histology planned for radical or partial nephrectomy. Select oligometastatic disease is permitted if the pt can be rendered ‘no evidence of disease’ within 12 weeks of nephrectomy (≤3 metastases; no brain, bone or liver). In the investigational arm, nivo is administered 480mg IV q4 weeks with 1 dose prior to surgery followed by 9 adjuvant doses. The control arm is nephrectomy followed by standard of care surveillance. There is no placebo. Baseline tumor biopsy is required only in the nivo arm but encouraged in both. Randomized pts are stratified by clinical T stage, node positivity, and M stage. 805 pts provide 84.2% power to detect a 14.4% absolute benefit in recurrence-free survival at 5 years assuming the ASSURE historical control of ~56% to 70% (HR = 0.70). The study is powered to evaluate a significant increase in OS (HR 0.67). Critical perioperative therapy considerations such as safety, feasibility, and quality of life metrics are integrated. PROSPER RCC embeds a wealth of translational studies to examine the contribution of the baseline immune milieu and neoadjuvant priming with anti-PD-1 on clinical outcomes. As of October 18, 2019, 317 patients have been enrolled. Clinical trial information: NCT03055013.

Clinical and economic outcomes of treatment sequences for intermediate- to poor-risk advanced renal cell carcinoma

Aim: To assess the cost-effectiveness of treatment sequences for patients with intermediate- to poor-risk advanced renal cell carcinoma. Patients & methods: A discrete event simulation model was developed to estimate patients' lifetime costs and survival. Efficacy inputs were derived from the CheckMate 214 and CheckMate 025 studies and network meta-analyses. Safety and cost data were obtained from the published literature. Results: The estimated average quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) gained was the highest on nivolumab + ipilimumab-initiated sequences (3.6-5.3 QALYs) versus tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI)-initiated sequences (2.1-3.7 QALYs). Incremental cost per QALY gained for nivolumab + ipilimumab-initiated sequences was below the willingness-to-pay threshold of $150,000 versus other sequences. Conclusion: Immuno-oncology combination therapy followed by TKIs is cost-effective versus TKI sequences followed by immuno-oncology or sequencing TKIs.

Cabozantinib Versus Sunitinib for Untreated Patients with Advanced Renal Cell Carcinoma of Intermediate or Poor Risk: Subgroup Analysis of the Alliance A031203 CABOSUN trial

Cabozantinib treatment prolonged progression-free survival (PFS) and improved objective response rate (ORR) compared with sunitinib in patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC) of intermediate or poor risk by International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium (IMDC) criteria in the phase II CABOSUN trial (NCT01835158). In the trial, 157 patients were randomized 1:1 to receive cabozantinib or sunitinib, stratified by IMDC risk group and presence of bone metastases. Here, PFS and ORR, both determined by independent radiology committee (IRC), were analyzed by subgroups of baseline characteristics. Cabozantinib treatment was generally associated with improved PFS and ORR versus sunitinib across subgroups, including in groups defined by IMDC risk group, bone metastases, age, and tumor burden. Clinical trial identification number NCT01835158.

NCCN Guidelines Insights: Kidney Cancer, Version 2.2020

The NCCN Guidelines for Kidney Cancer provide multidisciplinary recommendations for the clinical management of patients with clear cell and non-clear cell renal cell carcinoma, and are intended to assist with clinical decision-making. These NCCN Guidelines Insights summarize the NCCN Kidney Cancer Panel discussions for the 2020 update to the guidelines regarding initial management and first-line systemic therapy options for patients with advanced clear cell renal cell carcinoma.

Treatment sequences for advanced renal cell carcinoma: A health economic assessment

Objective

Advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC) is commonly treated with vascular endothelial growth factor or mammalian target of rapamycin inhibitors. As new therapies emerge, interest grows in gaining a deeper understanding of treatment sequences. Recently, we developed a patient-level, discretely integrated condition event (DICE) simulation to estimate survival and lifetime costs for various cancer therapies, using a US payer perspective. Using this model, we explored the impact of treatments such as nivolumab and cabozantinib, and compared the clinical outcomes and cost consequences of commonly used treatment algorithms for patients with advanced RCC.

Methods

Included treatment sequences were pazopanib or sunitinib as first-line treatment, followed by nivolumab, cabozantinib, axitinib, pazopanib or everolimus. Efficacy inputs were derived from the CheckMate 025 trial and a network meta-analysis based on available literature. Safety and cost data were obtained from publicly available sources or literature.

Results

Based on our analysis, the average cost per life-year (LY) was lowest for sequences including nivolumab (sunitinib → nivolumab, $75,268/LY; pazopanib → nivolumab, $84,459/LY) versus axitinib, pazopanib, everolimus and cabozantinib as second-line treatments. Incremental costs per LY gained were $49,592, $73,927 and $30,534 for nivolumab versus axitinib, pazopanib and everolimus-containing sequences, respectively. The model suggests that nivolumab offers marginally higher life expectancy at a lower cost versus cabozantinib-including sequences.

Conclusion

Treatment sequences using nivolumab in the second-line setting are less costly compared with sequential use of targeted agents. In addition to efficacy and safety data, cost considerations may be taken into account when considering treatment algorithms for patients with advanced RCC.

A Phase Ib Study of Axitinib in Combination with Crizotinib in Patients with Metastatic Renal Cell Cancer or Other Advanced Solid Tumors

Lessons Learned.

The combination of axitinib and crizotinib has a manageable safety and tolerability profile, consistent with the profiles of the individual agents when administered as monotherapy.

The antitumor activity reported here for the combination axitinib/crizotinib does not support further study of this combination treatment in metastatic renal cell carcinoma given the current treatment landscape.

Background.

Vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) inhibitors have been successfully used to treat metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC); however, resistance eventually develops in most cases. Tyrosine protein kinase Met (MET) expression increases following VEGF inhibition, and inhibition of both has shown additive effects in controlling tumor growth and metastasis. We therefore conducted a study of axitinib plus crizotinib in advanced solid tumors and mRCC.

Methods.

This phase Ib study included a dose‐escalation phase (starting doses: axitinib 3 mg plus crizotinib 200 mg) to estimate maximum tolerated dose (MTD) in patients with solid tumors and a dose‐expansion phase to examine preliminary efficacy in treatment‐naïve patients with mRCC. Safety, pharmacokinetics, and biomarkers were also assessed.

Results.

No patients in the dose‐escalation phase (n = 22) experienced dose‐limiting toxicity; MTD was estimated to be axitinib 5 mg plus crizotinib 250 mg. The most common grade ≥3 adverse events were hypertension (18.2%) and fatigue (9.1%). In the dose‐expansion phase, overall response rate was 30% (95% confidence interval [CI], 11.9–54.3), and progression‐free survival was 5.6 months (95% CI, 3.5–not reached).

Conclusion.

The combination of axitinib plus crizotinib, at estimated MTD, had a manageable safety profile and showed evidence of modest antitumor activity in mRCC.

Enhancing Antitumor Immunity with Antiangiogenic Therapy: A Clinical Model in Renal Cell Carcinoma?

Combination therapies involving antiangiogenic agents plus immune checkpoint inhibitors have recently demonstrated clinical efficacy in advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC). This commentary summarizes the clinical advances and reviews the potential implications for RCC and other advanced solid tumors.

Clinical and economic outcomes associated with sequential treatment in patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma (aRCC)

4566

Background: Immuno-oncology therapies (IOs) and tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) are recommended for the treatment of aRCC. As new drugs and combination regimens emerge, there is interest in gaining a deeper understanding of optimal treatment sequencing. We aimed to assess clinical and economic outcomes associated with treatment sequences for untreated aRCC patients with IMDC intermediate/poor risk. Methods: A discrete event simulation model was developed to estimate the total costs and survival (in life-years; LYs) over patients’ lifetimes when receiving sequential treatment with nivolumab + ipilimumab (N+I), sunitinib (SUN), pazopanib (PAZ), or cabozantinib (CAB) as first-line (1L) treatment, and nivolumab (NIVO), axitinib (AXI), PAZ, CAB, or lenvatinib + everolimus (LEN+EVE) as second line (2L). Efficacy inputs were derived from the CheckMate 214 trial and a network meta-analysis based on available literature. Safety and cost data were obtained from literature and publicly available sources. Results: N+I initiating sequences were estimated to provide longer survival in mean LYs and lower mean costs/LY versus sequences with 1L TKIs (table). The estimates of incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) for N+I initiating sequences with 2L TKI monotherapy were well below the willingness-to-pay threshold of $50,000. Using 2L LEN+EVE, compared with 2L monotherapies, provided an incremental survival gain but at costs/LY close to $100,000. Conclusions: Use of 1L N+I followed by TKI monotherapy is estimated to provide longer survival while being more cost-effective versus TKIs followed by IOs or sequences cycling TKIs, mainly driven by a longer time to 2L treatment and longer treatment-free survival with N+I. Clinical trials with head-to-head comparisons of treatment sequences would be necessary to validate the findings of the study. [Table: see text]

PROSPER: A phase III randomized study comparing perioperative nivolumab (nivo) versus observation in patients with renal cell carcinoma (RCC) undergoing nephrectomy (ECOG-ACRIN 8143)

TPS4597

Background: The anti-PD-1 antibody nivo improves overall survival (OS) in metastatic RCC and is well tolerated. There is no standard adjuvant (adjuv) systemic therapy that increases OS over surgery alone for non-metastatic RCC. Priming the immune system prior to surgery with anti-PD-1 has shown an OS benefit compared to a pure adjuv approach in mouse solid tumor models. Multiple ph 2 studies in bladder, lung and breast cancers have shown remarkable pathologic responses with neoadjuvant (neoadj) PD-1 blockade. Two ongoing ph 2 studies of perioperative nivo in M0 RCC patients are showing preliminary feasibility and safety with no surgical delays (NCT02575222; NCT02595918). PROSPER RCC (NCT03055013) aims to improve clinical outcomes by priming the immune system prior to nephrectomy with neoadj nivo and continued engagement with adjuv blockade in patients with high risk RCC compared to surgery alone. Methods: This global, unblinded, phase 3 National Clinical Trials Network study is currently accruing patients with clinical stage ≥T2 or TanyN+ RCC of any histology planned for nephrectomy. Oligometastases are permitted if can be rendered NED. We amended the study to enhance accrual and patient quality of life by changing nivo dosing to 480mg q4 wks and requiring baseline tumor biopsy only in the nivo arm. The investigational arm receives 1 dose of nivo prior to surgery followed by 9 adjuv doses. The control arm undergoes standard nephrectomy followed by observation. Randomized patients are stratified by clinical T stage, node positivity, and M stage. Accrual of 805 patients provides 84.2% power to detect a 14.4% absolute benefit in recurrence-free survival (RFS) at 5 years assuming the ASSURE historical control of ~56% to 70% (HR = 0.70). The study is powered to evaluate a significant increase in OS (HR 0.67). Critical perioperative therapy considerations such as safety, feasibility, and quality of life endpoints have been integrated. PROSPER RCC embeds a wealth of translational work aimed at investigating the impact of the baseline immune milieu, the changes induced by neoadjuvant anti-PD-1 priming, and how both may predict clinical outcomes. Clinical trial information: NCT03055013.

PROSPER: A phase III randomized study comparing perioperative nivolumab (nivo) versus observation in patients with localized renal cell carcinoma (RCC) undergoing nephrectomy (ECOG-ACRIN 8143)

TPS684

Background: The anti-PD-1 antibody nivo improves overall survival in metastatic RCC and is well tolerated. There is no standard adjuvant systemic therapy that increases overall survival (OS) over surgery alone for non-metastatic RCC. Priming the immune system prior to surgery with anti-PD-1 has shown an OS benefit compared to a pure adjuvant approach in mouse solid tumor models. The PROSPER RCC trial aims to improve clinical outcomes by priming the immune system prior to nephrectomy with neoadjuvant nivo and continued engagement with adjuvant blockade in patients with high risk M0 RCC compared to surgery alone. Methods: This global, unblinded, phase 3 National Clinical Trials Network study is currently accruing patients with clinical stage ≥T2 or node positive M0 RCC of any histology. Tumor biopsy prior to randomization is mandatory to ensure RCC and permits in depth correlative science. The investigational arm will receive two doses of nivo 240mg prior to surgery followed by adjuvant nivo for 9 months (q2 wks x 3 mo followed by 480mg q4 wks x 6 mo). The control arm will undergo standard nephrectomy followed by observation. Randomized patients are stratified by clinical T stage, node positivity, and histology. To enhance accrual and patient quality of life, key upcoming amendments are being instituted. These include biopsy only in the nivo arm, allowance of oligometastatic disease and bilateral renal masses that can be fully resected/ablated, and change of nivo dosing to q4 wks (1 neoadj; 9 adj). With accrual of 766 patients, there is 84.2% power to detect a 14.4% absolute benefit in recurrence-free survival (RFS) at 5 years assuming the ASSURE historical control of ~56% to 70% (HR = 0.70). The study is also powered to evaluate a significant increase in overall survival (HR 0.67). Safety, feasibility, and quality of life endpoints critical to adjuvant therapy considerations are incorporated. PROSPER RCC embeds a wealth of translational work aimed at investigating the impact of the baseline immune milieu, the changes induced by neoadjuvant anti-PD-1 priming, and how both correlate with clinical outcomes. Clinical trial information: NCT03055013.

An Open Label Phase Ib Dose Escalation Study of TRC105 (Anti-Endoglin Antibody) with Axitinib in Patients with Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma

BACKGROUND

TRC105 is an IgG1 endoglin monoclonal antibody that potentiates VEGF inhibitors in preclinical models. We assessed safety, pharmacokinetics, and antitumor activity of TRC105 in combination with axitinib in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC).

SUBJECTS, MATERIALS, AND METHODS

Heavily pretreated mRCC patients were treated with TRC105 weekly (8 mg/kg and then 10 mg/kg) in combination with axitinib (initially at 5 mg b.i.d. and then escalated per patient tolerance to a maximum of 10 mg b.i.d.) until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity using a standard 3 + 3 phase I design.

RESULTS

Eighteen patients (median number of prior therapies = 3) were treated. TRC105 dose escalation proceeded to 10 mg/kg weekly without dose-limiting toxicity. Adverse event characteristics of each drug were not increased in frequency or severity when the two drugs were administered concurrently. TRC105 and axitinib demonstrated preliminary evidence of activity, including partial responses (PR) by RECIST in 29% of patients, and median progression-free survival (11.3 months). None of the patients with PR had PR to prior first-line treatment. Lower baseline levels of osteopontin and higher baseline levels of TGF-β receptor 3 correlated with overall response rate.

CONCLUSION

TRC105 at 8 and 10 mg/kg weekly was well tolerated in combination with axitinib, with encouraging evidence of activity in patients with mRCC. A multicenter, randomized phase II trial of TRC105 and axitinib has recently completed enrollment (NCT01806064).

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

TRC105 is a monoclonal antibody to endoglin (CD105), a receptor densely expressed on proliferating endothelial cells and also on renal cancer stem cells that is implicated as a mediator of resistance to inhibitors of the VEGF pathway. In this Phase I trial, TRC105 combined safely with axitinib at the recommended single agent doses of each drug in patients with renal cell carcinoma. The combination demonstrated durable activity in a VEGF inhibitor-refractory population and modulated several angiogenic biomarkers. A randomized Phase II trial testing TRC105 in combination with axitinib in clear cell renal cell carcinoma has completed accrual.

Radium-223 Dichloride in Combination with Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor-Targeting Therapy in Advanced Renal Cell Carcinoma with Bone Metastases

Purpose: This study investigates the biologic activity of radium-223 with VEGF-targeted therapy in patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma (aRCC) and bone metastases.Patients and Methods: Fifteen treatment-naïve patients (n = 15) received pazopanib 800 mg orally once daily, and 15 previously treated patients received sorafenib 400 mg orally twice daily. Radium-223 55 kilobecquerel/kg was administered concurrently every 4 weeks for up to six infusions in both cohorts. The primary endpoint was decline in bone turnover markers (Procollagen I Intact N-Terminal, N-telopeptide, C-telopeptide, osteocalcin, and bone-specific alkaline phosphatase) compared with baseline. Secondary endpoints included safety, rate of symptomatic skeletal event (SSE) and time to first SSE, objective response rate, change in analgesic use, and quality of life. Exploratory analysis of tumor genomic alterations was performed.Results: Of the 30 patients enrolled, 83% had IMDC intermediate- or poor-risk disease, 33% had liver metastases, and 83% had a history of SSE prior to enrollment. No dose-limiting toxicity was observed. All bone turnover markers significantly declined from baseline at week 8 and 16. Forty percent of patients experienced treatment-related grade ≥3 adverse events. Response rates were 15% and 18% per RECIST v1.1 and bone response was 50% and 30% per MD Anderson criteria, in the pazopanib and sorafenib cohort, respectively. Median SSE-free interval was 5.8 months and not reached, respectively. Analgesic use remained stable over the study time.Conclusions: Radium-223 combined with VEGF-targeted therapy is biologically active and safe. Randomized-controlled trials are needed to define the role of radium-223 in aRCC with skeletal metastases. Clin Cancer Res; 24(17); 4081-8. ©2018 AACR.

Application of dynamic modeling for survival estimation in advanced renal cell carcinoma

Objective

In oncology, extrapolation of clinical outcomes beyond trial duration is traditionally achieved by parametric survival analysis using population-level outcomes. This approach may not fully capture the benefit/risk profile of immunotherapies due to their unique mechanisms of action. We evaluated an alternative approach—dynamic modeling—to predict outcomes in patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma. We compared standard parametric fitting and dynamic modeling for survival estimation of nivolumab and everolimus using data from the phase III CheckMate 025 study.

Methods

We developed two statistical approaches to predict longer-term outcomes (progression, treatment discontinuation, and survival) for nivolumab and everolimus, then compared these predictions against follow-up clinical trial data to assess their proximity to observed outcomes. For the parametric survival analyses, we selected a probability distribution based on its fit to observed population-level outcomes at 14-month minimum follow-up and used it to predict longer-term outcomes. For dynamic modeling, we used a multivariate Cox regression based on patient-level data, which included risk scores, and probability and duration of response as predictors of longer-term outcomes. Both sets of predictions were compared against trial data with 26- and 38-month minimum follow-up.

Results

Both statistical approaches led to comparable fits to observed trial data for median progression, discontinuation, and survival. However, beyond the trial duration, mean survival predictions differed substantially between methods for nivolumab (30.8 and 51.5 months), but not everolimus (27.2 and 29.8 months). Longer-term follow-up data from CheckMate 025 and phase I/II studies resembled dynamic model predictions for nivolumab.

Conclusions

Dynamic modeling can be a good alternative to parametric survival fitting for immunotherapies because it may help better capture the longer-term benefit/risk profile and support health-economic evaluations of immunotherapies.

A phase III randomized study comparing perioperative nivolumab vs. observation in patients with localized renal cell carcinoma undergoing nephrectomy (PROSPER RCC)

TPS710

Background: The anti-PD-1 antibody nivolumab (nivo) improves overall survival (OS) in metastatic treatment refractory RCC and is generally tolerable. In 2017, there is no standard adjuvant therapy proven to increase OS over surgery alone in non-metastatic (M0) disease. Mouse solid tumor models have revealed an OS benefit with a short course of neoadjuvant PD-1 blockade compared to adjuvant therapy. Two ongoing phase 2 studies of perioperative nivo in RCC patients (pts) are showing preliminary feasibility and safety with no surgical delays/complications. PROSPER RCC will examine if the addition of perioperative nivo to radical or partial nephrectomy can improve clinical outcomes in pts with locally advanced RCC. We are implementing a three-pronged, multidisciplinary approach of presurgical priming with nivo followed by resection and adjuvant PD-1 blockade with the goal of increasing cure and recurrence-free survival (RFS) rates in M0 RCC. Methods: Tumor biopsy prior to randomization is mandatory to ensure RCC diagnosis but will also permit unparalleled correlative science in this global, unblinded, phase 3 National Clinical Trials Network randomized study. 766 pts with clinical stage ≥T2 or any node positive M0 RCC of any histology will be enrolled. The study arm will receive nivo 240mg IV for 2 doses prior to surgery followed by adjuvant dosing for 9 mo (q2 wks x 3 mo followed by q4 wks x 6 mo). The control arm will undergo the current standard of care: surgical resection followed by observation. Pts are stratified by clinical T stage, node positivity, and histology. There is 84.2% power to detect a 14.4% absolute increase in the primary endpoint of RFS from the ASSURE historical control of 55.8% to 70.2% at 5 yrs (HR 0.70). The study is also powered to detect a significant OS benefit (HR 0.67). Safety, feasibility, and quality of life are key secondary endpoints. PROSPER RCC exemplifies team science and incorporates a host of correlative work to examine the significance of the baseline immune milieu and changes induced by neoadjuvant priming and to identify predictive gene expression patterns. New collaborations welcomed. Clinical trial information: NCT03055013.

Cabozantinib versus sunitinib for previously untreated patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC) of intermediate or poor risk: Subgroup analysis of progression-free survival (PFS) and objective response rate (ORR) in the Alliance A031203 CABOSUN trial

582

Background: The randomized phase 2 CABOSUN trial (NCT01835158) compared cabozantinib (C) with sunitinib (S) as initial systemic therapy in patients (pts) with RCC of intermediate or poor risk. Compared with S, C improved both PFS and ORR as assessed by independent radiology review committee (IRC). Median PFS per IRC was 8.6 mo for C vs 5.3 mo for S (HR 0.48, 95% CI 0.31-0.74 two-sided p = 0.0008), and ORR per IRC was 20% vs 9%. Methods: 157 patients were randomized 1:1 to receive C (60 mg qd) or S (50 mg qd, 4 weeks on/2 weeks off) stratified by International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium (IMDC) risk group and the presence of bone metastases. Subgroup analyses of PFS per IRC and ORR per IRC are presented based on stratification factors, age, sex, baseline ECOG status, and MET tumor expression by immunohistochemistry. The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed PFS. PFS and ORR were evaluated by IRC in a post-hoc analysis. Results: 45% of pts were ≥65 years, 78% were male, 54% were ECOG 1 or 2, 19% were poor risk, and 36% had bone metastases. MET status was determined in 131 pts; of these 47% were MET positive. The HR for PFS per IRC favored C over S across all subgroups analyzed (Table). Subgroups with poor prognostic characteristics (poor risk, ECOG 1 or 2, presence of bone metastases) had shorter median PFS for both C and S. Odds ratios for ORR also favored C over S, with the highest C ORR in the MET positive subgroup (34% C vs 10% S). Conclusions: C was associated with improved PFS and ORR compared with S in previously untreated pts with advanced RCC irrespective of baseline characteristics. Clinical trial information: NCT01835158. [Table: see text]