Highlights • Bladder cancer incidence and mortality have changed little over the past 20 years. • Immunotherapy offers improved efficacy and tolerability over other modalities. • Checkpoint ...inhibitors offer an effective alternative for patients with few options. • Recent data on PD-L1 inhibitors have proven their benefit in bladder cancer.
The 2022 guideline provides the current best evidence base for renal cell carcinoma management. Changes in medical management in recent years include the use of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs), ...ICI–ICI combinations, and ICI-targeted therapy combinations. Surgery remains the mainstay for lower-grade tumours, with increasing use of minimally invasive approaches. More robust data are needed to identify optimal follow-up schedules.
The European Association of Urology (EAU) Renal Cell Carcinoma (RCC) Guideline Panel has prepared evidence-based guidelines and recommendations for the management of RCC.
To present a summary of the 2022 RCC guideline, which is based on a standardised methodology including systematic reviews (SRs) and provides transparent and reliable evidence for the management of RCC.
For the 2022 update, a new literature search was carried out with a cutoff date of May 28, 2021, covering the Medline, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases. The data search focused on randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and retrospective or controlled comparator-arm studies, SRs, and meta-analyses. Evidence synthesis was conducted using modified GRADE criteria as outlined for all the EAU guidelines.
All chapters of the RCC guideline were updated on the basis of a structured literature assessment, and clinical practice recommendations were developed. The majority of the studies included were retrospective with matched or unmatched cohorts and were based on single- or multi-institution data or national registries. The exception was systemic treatment of metastatic RCC, for which there are several large RCTs, resulting in recommendations that are based on higher levels of evidence.
The 2022 RCC guidelines have been updated by a multidisciplinary panel of experts using the highest methodological standards. These guidelines provide the most reliable contemporary evidence base for the management of RCC in 2022.
The European Association of Urology panel for guidelines on kidney cancer has thoroughly evaluated the research data available to establish up-to-date international standards for the care of patients with kidney cancer.
The European Association of Urology Renal Cell Carcinoma (RCC) Guideline Panel has prepared evidence-based guidelines and recommendations for the management of RCC.
To provide an updated RCC ...guideline based on standardised methodology including systematic reviews, which is robust, transparent, reproducible, and reliable.
For the 2019 update, evidence synthesis was undertaken based on a comprehensive and structured literature assessment for new and relevant data. Where necessary, formal systematic reviews adhering to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines were undertaken. Relevant databases (Medline, Cochrane Libraries, trial registries, conference proceedings) were searched until June 2018, including randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and retrospective or controlled studies with a comparator arm, systematic reviews, and meta-analyses. Where relevant, risk of bias (RoB) assessment, and qualitative and quantitative syntheses of the evidence were performed. The remaining sections of the document were updated following a structured literature assessment. Clinical practice recommendations were developed and issued based on the modified GRADE framework.
All chapters of the RCC guidelines were updated based on a structured literature assessment, for prioritised topics based on the availability of robust data. For RCTs, RoB was low across studies. For most non-RCTs, clinical and methodological heterogeneity prevented pooling of data. The majority of included studies were retrospective with matched or unmatched cohorts, based on single- or multi-institutional data or national registries. The exception was for the treatment of metastatic RCC, for which there were several large RCTs, resulting in recommendations based on higher levels of evidence.
The 2019 RCC guidelines have been updated by the multidisciplinary panel using the highest methodological standards. These guidelines provide the most reliable contemporary evidence base for the management of RCC in 2019.
The European Association of Urology Renal Cell Carcinoma Guideline Panel has thoroughly evaluated the available research data on kidney cancer to establish international standards for the care of kidney cancer patients.
The 2019 European Association of Urology renal cell cancer guidelines have been updated by a multidisciplinary panel of experts, based on the highest methodological standards. These guidelines provide the most reliable contemporaneous evidence base for the management of patients with renal cell cancer in 2019.
Integrated multi-omics evaluation of 823 tumors from advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC) patients identifies molecular subsets associated with differential clinical outcomes to angiogenesis blockade ...alone or with a checkpoint inhibitor. Unsupervised transcriptomic analysis reveals seven molecular subsets with distinct angiogenesis, immune, cell-cycle, metabolism, and stromal programs. While sunitinib and atezolizumab + bevacizumab are effective in subsets with high angiogenesis, atezolizumab + bevacizumab improves clinical benefit in tumors with high T-effector and/or cell-cycle transcription. Somatic mutations in PBRM1 and KDM5C associate with high angiogenesis and AMPK/fatty acid oxidation gene expression, while CDKN2A/B and TP53 alterations associate with increased cell-cycle and anabolic metabolism. Sarcomatoid tumors exhibit lower prevalence of PBRM1 mutations and angiogenesis markers, frequent CDKN2A/B alterations, and increased PD-L1 expression. These findings can be applied to molecularly stratify patients, explain improved outcomes of sarcomatoid tumors to checkpoint blockade versus antiangiogenics alone, and develop personalized therapies in RCC and other indications.
Display omitted
•Genomics of 823 RCC tumors, including 134 sarcomatoid tumors, reveals 7 subtypes•Subtype specific angiogenesis, immune, metabolic, stromal, and cell-cycle profiles•Differential prevalence of PBRM1, KDM5C, CDKN2A/2B, and TP53 alterations in subsets•Differential outcomes to VEGF blockade alone or in combination with anti-PD-L1
Motzer et al. perform integrative multi-omics analyses of 823 renal cancer tumors from a randomized clinical trial. A robust molecular classification scheme, based on transcriptional and gene alteration profiles and differential clinical outcomes to VEGF blockade alone or in combination with anti-PD-L1, informs personalized treatment strategies and future therapeutic development in RCC.
To improve the prognosis of upper tract urothelial carcinoma (UTUC), clinicians have used neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) or adjuvant chemotherapy (AC) before or after radical nephroureterectomy ...(RNU). Despite some new data, the evidence remains mixed on their efficacy.
To update the current evidence on the role of NAC and AC for UTUC.
We searched for all studies investigating NAC or AC for UTUC in Medline, Embase, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and abstracts from the American Society of Clinical Oncology meetings up to February 2020. A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed.
For NAC, the pooled pathologic complete response rate (≤ypT0N0M0) was 11% (n = 811) and pathologic partial response rate (≤ypT1N0M0) was 43% (n = 869), both across 14 studies. Across six studies, the pooled hazard ratios (HRs) were 0.44 (95% confidence interval CI: 0.32–0.59, p < 0.001) for overall survival (OS) and 0.38 (95% CI: 0.24–0.61, p < 0.001) for cancer-specific survival (CSS) in favor of NAC. The evidence for NAC is at best level 2. As for AC, there was a benefit in OS (pooled HR 0.77; 95% CI: 0.64–0.92, p = 0.004 across 14 studies and 7983 patients), CSS (pooled HR 0.79; 95% CI: 0.69–0.91, p = 0.001 across 18 studies and 5659 patients), and disease-free survival (DFS; pooled HR 0.52; 95% CI: 0.38–0.70 across four studies and 602 patients). While most studies were retrospective (level 2 evidence), there were two prospective randomized trials providing level 1 evidence. There are currently four phase 2 trials on neoadjuvant immunotherapy and three phase 2 trials on adjuvant immunotherapy for UTUC.
NAC for UTUC confers a favorable pathologic response and tumor downstaging rate, and an OS and CSS benefit compared with RNU alone. AC confers an OS, CSS, and DFS benefit compared with RNU alone. Currently, the evidence for AC appears stronger (with positive level 1 evidence) than that for NAC (at best level 2 evidence). Limited data are available for chemoimmunotherapy approaches, but preliminary data support an active research investment.
After a comprehensive search of the latest studies examining the role of neoadjuvant and adjuvant chemotherapy for upper tract urothelial cancer, the pooled evidence shows that perioperative chemotherapy was beneficial for prolonging survival; however, the evidence for adjuvant chemotherapy was stronger than that for neoadjuvant chemotherapy.
Both neoadjuvant and adjuvant chemotherapy for upper tract urothelial carcinoma found to confer survival benefit over radical nephroureterectomy alone. Evidence for adjuvant chemotherapy appears stronger, while that for immunotherapy is promising.
Systemic therapy for metastatic clear cell renal cell carcinoma (mccRCC) has greatly evolved over the last 15yr. More recently, combination strategies involving contemporary immunotherapy have ...emerged as key opportunities to further shift the treatment landscape.
To review the evidence regarding the efficacy and safety of standard therapeutic options in mccRCC as well as combination immunotherapy options on the horizon.
PubMed/Medline, Embase, Web of Knowledge, and Cochrane Library databases were searched up to February 2018 and according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses statement. A narrative review of studies was performed.
Twenty-six studies were included regarding therapies for metastatic RCC including vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF)-directed therapy (n=9), mTOR inhibitors (n=2), cytokines (n=3), vaccines (n=3), and immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs, n=9). VEGF tyrosine kinase inhibitor monotherapy had been the standard therapy, and its use is evolving in the front-line setting with ICIs; cabozantinib provides superior progression-free survival versus sunitinib in intermediate- and poor-risk patients, by International Metastatic RCC Database Consortium criteria. The mTOR therapy is largely inferior to VEGF-directed therapy, although it has a role in combination strategies. Cytokines have largely been replaced in current practice throughout most regions, and vaccines have failed to show improved survival in phase III studies to date. ICIs have now become standard care in untreated patients with intermediate and poor risks, given overall survival benefit seen with CheckMate-214 study; survival data from IMmotion 151 are not yet mature. Several ongoing phase III combination trials, with promising early-phase data, are due to be read out.
The treatment landscape for mccRCC has evolved since the introduction of VEGF inhibitors. Combination therapies involving checkpoint inhibitors could be the next standard of care.
With the expanding role of immune checkpoint inhibitors in metastatic renal cell carcinoma, the treatment paradigm has shifted to include combination therapy in the untreated setting. As the field advances, the bar has been raised in evaluating ongoing combination strategies.
With the expanding role of immune checkpoint inhibitors in metastatic renal cell carcinoma, the treatment paradigm has shifted to include combination therapy in the untreated setting. As the field advances, the bar has been raised in evaluating ongoing combination strategies.
Summary Local treatment of metastases such as metastasectomy or radiotherapy remains controversial in the treatment of metastatic renal cell carcinoma. To investigate the benefits and harms of ...various local treatments, we did a systematic review of all types of comparative studies on local treatment of metastases from renal cell carcinoma in any organ. Interventions included metastasectomy, radiotherapy modalities, and no local treatment. The results suggest that patients treated with complete metastasectomy have better survival and symptom control (including pain relief in bone metastases) than those treated with either incomplete or no metastasectomy. Nevertheless, the available evidence was marred by high risks of bias and confounding across all studies. Although the findings presented here should be interpreted with caution, they and the identified gaps in knowledge should provide guidance for clinicians and researchers, and directions for further research.
Antibodies targeting PD-1 or its ligand 1 PD-L1 such as atezolizumab, have great efficacy in a proportion of metastatic urothelial cancers
. Biomarkers may facilitate identification of these ...responding tumors
. Neoadjuvant use of these agents is associated with pathological complete response in a spectrum of tumors, including urothelial cancer
. Sequential tissue sampling from these studies allowed for detailed on-treatment biomarker analysis. Here, we present a single-arm phase 2 study, investigating two cycles of atezolizumab before cystectomy in 95 patients with muscle-invasive urothelial cancer (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02662309). Pathological complete response was the primary endpoint. Secondary endpoints focused on safety, relapse-free survival and biomarker analysis. The pathological complete response rate was 31% (95% confidence interval: 21-41%), achieving the primary efficacy endpoint. Baseline biomarkers showed that the presence of preexisting activated T cells was more prominent than expected and correlated with outcome. Other established biomarkers, such as tumor mutational burden, did not predict outcome, differentiating this from the metastatic setting. Dynamic changes to gene expression signatures and protein biomarkers occurred with therapy, whereas changes in DNA alterations with treatment were uncommon. Responding tumors showed predominant expression of genes related to tissue repair after treatment, making tumor biomarker interpretation challenging in this group. Stromal factors such as transforming growth factor-β and fibroblast activation protein were linked to resistance, as was high expression of cell cycle gene signatures after treatment.
We report on molecular analyses of baseline tumor samples from the phase 3 JAVELIN Renal 101 trial (n = 886; NCT02684006 ), which demonstrated significantly prolonged progression-free survival (PFS) ...with first-line avelumab + axitinib versus sunitinib in advanced renal cell carcinoma (aRCC). We found that neither expression of the commonly assessed biomarker programmed cell death ligand 1 (PD-L1) nor tumor mutational burden differentiated PFS in either study arm. Similarly, the presence of FcɣR single nucleotide polymorphisms was unimpactful. We identified important biological features associated with differential PFS between the treatment arms, including new immunomodulatory and angiogenesis gene expression signatures (GESs), previously undescribed mutational profiles and their corresponding GESs, and several HLA types. These findings provide insight into the determinants of response to combined PD-1/PD-L1 and angiogenic pathway inhibition and may aid in the development of strategies for improved patient care in aRCC.
Longer follow-up and new trial data from phase 3 randomised controlled trials investigating immune checkpoint blockade (PD-1 or its ligand PD-L1) in advanced clear-cell renal cell carcinoma (RCC) ...have recently become available. The CheckMate 9ER trial demonstrated an improved progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) benefit for the combination of cabozantinib plus nivolumab. A Keynote-426 update demonstrated an ongoing OS benefit for pembrolizumab plus axitinib in the intention-to-treat population, with a PFS benefit seen across all International Metastatic Database Consortium (IMDC) subgroups, while an update of CheckMate 214 confirmed the long-term benefit of ipilimumab plus nivolumab in IMDC intermediate and poor risk patients. The RCC Guidelines Panel continues to recommend these tyrosine kinase inhibitors + immunotherapy (IO) combination across IMDC risk groups in advanced first-line RCC and dual immunotherapy of ipilimumab and nivolumab in IMDC intermediate and poor risk.
New data from trials of immune checkpoint inhibitors for advanced kidney cancer confirm a survival benefit with the combination of cabozantinib plus nivolumab and pembrolizumab plus axitinib and ipilimumab plus nivolumab. These combination therapies are recommended as first-line treatment for advanced kidney cancer.
Longer follow-up data and new trial data from phase 3 randomised controlled trials investigating immune checkpoint blockade (PD-1 or its ligand PD-L1) in advanced clear-cell renal cell carcinoma (RCC) have recently become available. A recent update of Keynote-426 demonstrated an ongoing overall survival benefit for pembrolizumab plus axitinib in the intention-to-treat population, with a progression-free survival benefit seen across all International Metastatic RCC Database Consortium (IMDC) subgroups. The RCC Guidelines Panel continues to recommend this combination across IMDC risk groups in advanced first-line RCC.
PDF
