Checkpoint inhibitor therapy is a standard of care for patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma. Treatment options after checkpoint inhibitor therapy include vascular endothelial growth factor ...receptor (VEGF-R) tyrosine kinase inhibitors, although no prospective data regarding their use in this setting exist. Axitinib is a VEGF-R inhibitor with clinical data supporting increased activity with dose titration. We aimed to investigate the activity of dose titrated axitinib in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma who were previously treated with checkpoint inhibitor.
We did a multicentre, phase 2 trial of axitinib given on an individualised dosing algorithm. Patients at least 18 years of age with histologically or cytologically confirmed locally recurrent or metastatic renal cell carcinoma with clear cell histology, a Karnofsky Performance Status of 70% or more, and measurable disease who received checkpoint inhibitor therapy as the most recent treatment were eligible. There was no limit on number of previous therapies received. Patients received oral axitinib at a starting dose of 5 mg twice daily with dose titration every 14 days in 1 mg increments (ie, 5 mg twice daily to 6 mg twice daily, up to 10 mg twice daily maximum dose) if there was no axitinib-related grade 2 or higher mucositis, diarrhoea, hand-foot syndrome, or fatigue. If one or more of these grade 2 adverse events occurred, axitinib was withheld for 3 days before the same dose was resumed. Dose reductions were made if recurrent grade 2 adverse events despite treatment breaks or grade 3–4 adverse events occurred. The primary outcome was progression-free survival. Analyses were done per protocol in all patients who received at least one dose of axitinib. Recruitment has been completed and the trial is ongoing. This trial is registered with ClincalTrials.gov, number NCT02579811.
Between Jan 5, 2016 and Feb 21, 2018, 40 patients were enrolled and received at least one dose of study treatment. With a median follow-up of 8·7 months (IQR 3·7–14·2), the median progression-free survival was 8·8 months (95% CI 5·7–16·6). Fatigue (83%) and hypertension (75%) were the most common all-grade adverse events. The most common grade 3 adverse event was hypertension (24 patients 60%). There was one (3%) grade 4 adverse event (elevated lipase) and no treatment-related deaths occurred. Serious adverse events that were likely related to therapy occurred in eight (20%) patients; the most common were dehydration (n=4) and diarrhoea (n=2).
Individualised axitinib dosing in patients with metastatic renal cell inoma previously treated with checkpoint inhibitors did not meet the prespecified threshold for progression free survival, but these data show that this individualised titration scheme is feasible and has robust clinical activity. These prospective results warrant consideration of axitinib in this setting.
Pfizer.
Summary Background A subset of patients with metastatic renal-cell carcinoma show indolent growth of metastases. Because of the toxicity and non-curative nature of systemic therapy, some of these ...patients could benefit from initial active surveillance. We aimed to characterise the time to initiation of systemic therapy in patients with metastatic renal-cell carcinoma under active surveillance. Methods In this prospective phase 2 trial, we enrolled patients with treatment-naive, asymptomatic, metastatic renal-cell carcinoma from five hospitals in the USA, Spain, and the UK. Patients were radiographically assessed at baseline, every 3 months for year 1, every 4 months for year 2, then every 6 months thereafter. Patients continued on observation until initiation of systemic therapy for metastatic renal-cell carcinoma; a decision that was made at the discretion of the treating physician and patient. The primary endpoint of the study was time to initiation of systemic therapy in the per-protocol population. The follow-up of patients is ongoing. Findings Between Aug 21, 2008, and June 7, 2013, we enrolled 52 patients. Median follow-up of patients in the study was 38·1 months (IQR 29·4–48·9). In the 48 patients included in analysis, median time on surveillance from registration on study until initiation of systemic therapy was 14·9 months (95% CI 10·6–25·0). Multivariate analysis showed that higher numbers of International Metastatic Database Consortium (IMDC) adverse risk factors (p=0·0403) and higher numbers of metastatic disease sites (p=0·0414) were associated with a shorter surveillance period. 22 (46%) patients died during the study period, all from metastatic renal-cell carcinoma. Interpretation A subset of patients with metastatic renal-cell carcinoma can safely undergo surveillance before starting systemic therapy. Additional investigation is required to further define the benefits and risks of this approach. Funding None.
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.
Immunotherapy-based combinations, driven by PD-1, PD-L1, and CTLA-4 inhibitors, has altered the treatment landscape for metastatic renal cell carcinoma (RCC). Despite significant improvements in ...clinical outcomes, many patients do not experience deep or lasting benefits. Recent efforts to determine which patients are most likely to benefit from immunotherapy and immunotherapy-based combinations have shown promise but have not yet affected clinical practice. PD-L1 expression via immunohistochemistry (IHC) has shown promise in a few clinical trials, although variations in the IHC assays as well as the use of different values for positivity presents unique challenges for this potential biomarker. Several other candidate biomarkers were investigated including tumor mutational burden, gene expression signatures, single gene mutations, human endogenous retroviruses, the gastrointestinal microbiome, and peripheral blood laboratory markers. While individually these biomarkers have yet to explain the heterogeneity of treatment response to immunotherapy, using aggregate information from these biomarkers may inform clinically useful predictive biomarkers.
Bevacizumab is an antibody that binds vascular endothelial growth factor and has activity in metastatic renal cell carcinoma (RCC). Interferon alfa (IFN-alpha) is the historic standard initial ...treatment for RCC. A prospective, randomized, phase III trial of bevacizumab plus IFN-alpha versus IFN-alpha monotherapy was conducted.
Patients with previously untreated, metastatic clear cell RCC were randomly assigned to receive either bevacizumab (10 mg/kg intravenously every 2 weeks) plus IFN-alpha (9 million units subcutaneously three times weekly) or the same dose and schedule of IFN-alpha monotherapy in a multicenter phase III trial. The primary end point was overall survival (OS). Secondary end points were progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate, and safety.
Seven hundred thirty-two patients were enrolled. The median OS time was 18.3 months (95% CI, 16.5 to 22.5 months) for bevacizumab plus IFN-alpha and 17.4 months (95% CI, 14.4 to 20.0 months) for IFN-alpha monotherapy (unstratified log-rank P = .097). Adjusting on stratification factors, the hazard ratio was 0.86 (95% CI, 0.73 to 1.01; stratified log-rank P = .069) favoring bevacizumab plus IFN-alpha. There was significantly more grade 3 to 4 hypertension (HTN), anorexia, fatigue, and proteinuria for bevacizumab plus IFN-alpha. Patients who developed HTN on bevacizumab plus IFN-alpha had a significantly improved PFS and OS versus patients without HTN.
OS favored the bevacizumab plus IFN-alpha arm but did not meet the predefined criteria for significance. HTN may be a biomarker of outcome with bevacizumab plus IFN-alpha.
Treatment for renal cell carcinoma has been revolutionised by inhibitors of VEGF receptor. Previous studies have suggested that treatment with a VEGF receptor (VEGFR) tyrosine kinase inhibitor might ...be effective in patients who had previous checkpoint inhibitor therapy. Therefore, TIVO-3 was designed to compare the efficacy and safety of tivozanib (a potent and selective VEGFR inhibitor) with those of sorafenib as third-line or fourth-line therapy in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma.
In this open-label, randomised, controlled trial done at 120 academic hospitals in 12 countries, we enrolled eligible patients older than 18 years with histologically or cytologically confirmed metastatic renal cell carcinoma and at least two previous systemic treatments (including at least one previous treatment with a VEGFR inhibitor), measurable disease according to the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1, and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1. Patients were excluded if they had received previous treatment with tivozanib or sorafenib. Patients were stratified by International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium risk category and type of previous therapy and randomised (1:1) with a complete permuted block design (block size of four) to either tivozanib 1·5 mg orally once daily in 4-week cycles or sorafenib 400 mg orally twice daily continuously. Investigators and patients were not masked to treatment. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival by independent review in the intention-to-treat population. Safety analyses were done in all patients who received at least one dose of study treatment. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02627963.
Between May 24, 2016, and Aug 14, 2017, 350 patients were randomly assigned to receive tivozanib (175 patients) or sorafenib (175 patients). Median follow-up was 19·0 months (IQR 15·0–23·4). Median progression-free survival was significantly longer with tivozanib (5·6 months, 95% CI 5·29–7·33) than with sorafenib (3·9 months, 3·71–5·55; hazard ratio 0·73, 95% CI 0·56–0·94; p=0·016). The most common grade 3 or 4 treatment-related adverse event was hypertension (35 20% of 173 patients treated with tivozanib and 23 14% of 170 patients treated with sorafenib). Serious treatment-related adverse events occurred in 19 (11%) patients with tivozanib and in 17 (10%) patients with sorafenib. No treatment-related deaths were reported.
Our study showed that tivozanib as third-line or fourth-line therapy improved progression-free survival and was better tolerated compared with sorafenib in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma.
AVEO Oncology.
Summary Background In a phase 2 study in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma, overall survival was associated with T-cell responses against IMA901, a vaccine consisting of ten ...tumour-associated peptides. In this phase 3 trial, we aimed to determine the clinical effect of adding IMA901 to sunitinib, the standard first-line treatment in metastatic renal cell carcinoma with postulated favourable immunomodulatory effects. Methods The IMPRINT study is an open-label, randomised, controlled, phase 3 trial done at 124 clinical sites in 11 countries. HLA-A*02 -positive patients (aged ≥18 years) with treatment-naive, histologically confirmed metastatic or locally advanced (or both) clear-cell renal cell carcinoma were randomly assigned (3:2) to receive sunitinib plus up to ten intradermal vaccinations of IMA901 (4·13 mg) and granulocyte macrophage colony-stimulating factor (75 μg), with one dose of cyclophosphamide (300 mg/m2 ) 3 days before the first vaccination, or to receive sunitinib alone. Sunitinib (50 mg) was given orally once daily, with each cycle defined as 4 weeks on treatment followed by 2 weeks off treatment, until progression of disease as determined by the investigator, death, or withdrawal of consent. Block randomisation (block size five) was done centrally using an interactive web response system, stratified by prognostic risk, geographical region, and previous nephrectomy. Patients and investigators were not masked to treatment allocation. The primary endpoint was overall survival from randomisation until death of any cause as determined by the investigator, analysed by intention to treat. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov , number NCT01265901. Findings Between Dec 22, 2010, and Dec 15, 2012, we screened 1171 patients, of whom 339 were randomly assigned to receive sunitinib plus IMA901 (n=204) or sunitinib monotherapy (n=135). Patients had a median follow-up of 33·27 months (IQR 29·92–35·64). Median overall survival did not differ significantly between the groups (33·17 months 95% CI 27·81–41·36 in the sunitinib plus IMA901 group vs not reached 33·67–not reached in the sunitinib monotherapy group; hazard ratio 1·34 0·96–1·86; p=0·087). 116 (57%) of 202 patients in the sunitinib plus IMA901 group and 62 (47%) of 132 in the sunitinib group had grade 3 or worse adverse events, the most common of which were hypertension, neutropenia, and anaemia in both groups, and mild-to-moderate transient injection-site reactions (eg, erythema, pruritus) were the most frequent IMA901-related side-effect in the sunitinib plus IMA901 group. Serious adverse events leading to death occurred in four (2%) patients (one respiratory failure and circulatory collapse possibly related to sunitinib, one oesophageal varices haemorrhage possibly related to sunitinib, one cardiac arrest possibly related to sunitinib, and one myocardial infarction) and eight (6%) patients in the sunitinib group (one case each of renal failure, oesophageal varices haemorrhage, circulatory collapse, wound infection, ileus, cerebrovascular accident possibly treatment related, and sepsis). Interpretation IMA901 did not improve overall survival when added to sunitinib as first-line treatment in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma. The magnitude of immune responses needs to be improved before further development of IMA901 in this disease is indicated. Funding Immatics Biotechnologies.
Purpose of Review
Four immuno-oncology (IO)-based combinations have demonstrated overall survival benefit as frontline treatment of metastatic clear cell renal cell carcinoma (mccRCC). Choosing among ...the available combinations depends on treating physician’s interpretation of existing data without level I evidence to inform choice of therapy. Landmark trials of mccRCC are reviewed and perspective on treatment options is provided.
Recent Findings
The four IO-based combinations reviewed are ipilimumab/nivolumab (IO/IO), pembrolizumab/axitinib (IO/TKI), nivolumab/cabozantinib (IO/TKI), and pembrolizumab/lenvatinib (IO/TKI). The ipilimumab/nivolumab combination is notable for durable efficacy after extended 4-year follow-up. IO/TKI combinations have clinical efficacy across all IMDC risk groups with higher response rates and longer progression-free survival (PFS) but also had higher ≥ grade 3 adverse events rate. Patient tumor burden, performance status, and IMDC risk group are factors in choosing an IO-based treatment.
Summary
IO/IO and IO/TKI combinations for mccRCC have distinct efficacy and toxicity profiles. Future studies are needed to identify biomarkers to optimize patient outcomes.
Interim analyses of the IMmotion151 trial (A Study of Atezolizumab in Combination With Bevacizumab Versus Sunitinib in Participants With Untreated Advanced Renal Cell Carcinoma) reported improved ...progression-free survival (PFS) for patients with programmed death ligand 1-positive (PD-L1+) metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) receiving the PD-L1 inhibitor atezolizumab plus the vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) inhibitor bevacizumab vs the receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitor sunitinib. Overall survival (OS) results were immature at interim analyses.
To report the final OS results, safety, and exploratory biomarker analyses of the association of transcriptomic subgroups with OS in the IMmotion151 trial.
IMmotion151 was a multicenter, open-label, phase 3 randomized clinical trial that compared the efficacy and safety of atezolizumab plus bevacizumab vs sunitinib in patients with untreated mRCC. IMmotion151 included patients from 152 academic medical centers and community oncology practices in 21 countries. Adult patients with mRCC with components of clear cell or sarcomatoid histologic features, measurable disease (according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors, version 1.1), adequate performance status, hematologic and end organ function, and tumor tissue available for PD-L1 testing were included. IMmotion151 was initiated on May 20, 2015, and the study is ongoing. This final analysis was performed from May 20, 2015, to February 14, 2020.
Receipt of 1200 mg of intravenous (IV) atezolizumab every 3 weeks and 15 mg/kg of IV bevacizumab every 3 weeks or 50 mg orally once daily of sunitinib (4 weeks on and 2 weeks off).
The coprimary end points were PFS (previously reported) in patients with PD-L1+ disease and OS in the intention-to-treat population. Additional exploratory outcomes included OS in the PD-L1+ population, association with transcriptomic subgroups, and safety.
The IMmotion151 trial assessed 915 patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma. Mean (IQR) age was 62 (56-69) years for patients receiving atezolizumab plus bevacizumab and 60 (54-66) years for patients receiving sunitinib; 669 (73.1%) were male and 246 (26.9%) were female. The final analysis showed similar median OS in patients receiving atezolizumab plus bevacizumab vs sunitinib in the intention-to-treat (36.1 vs 35.3 months) and PD-L1+ (38.7 vs 31.6 months) populations. No new safety signals were reported. The additional exploratory outcome of atezolizumab plus bevacizumab vs sunitinib showed improved median OS trends in patients whose tumors were characterized by T-effector/proliferative, proliferative, or small nucleolar RNA transcriptomic profiles (35.4 vs 21.2 months; hazard ratio, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.50-0.98).
The primary end point of PFS was met at interim analyses, although no improvement in OS was observed with atezolizumab plus bevacizumab at the final analysis. Biomarker analyses provided insight into which patients with mRCC may benefit from combined anti-PD-L1 and anti-VEGF therapy.
ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02420821.
Summary Background Previous prognostic models for second-line systemic therapy in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma have not been studied in the setting of targeted therapy. We sought to ...validate the International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium (IMDC) model in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma receiving next-line targeted therapy after progression on first-line targeted therapy. Methods In this population-based study, we analysed patients who received second-line targeted therapy for metastatic renal cell carcinoma at 19 centres in Canada, USA, Greece, Japan, Singapore, South Korea, and Denmark. The primary endpoint was overall survival since the initiation of second-line therapy. We compared the prognostic performance of the IMDC model with the three-factor MSKCC model used for previously treated patients for overall survival since the start of second-line targeted therapy. Findings Between Jan 1, 2005, and Nov 30, 2012, we included 1021 patients treated with second-line targeted therapy. Median overall survival since the start of second-line targeted therapy was 12·5 months (95% CI 11·3–14·3). Five of six predefined factors in the IMDC model (anaemia, thrombocytosis, neutrophilia, Karnofsky performance status KPS <80, and <1 year from diagnosis to first-line targeted therapy) were independent predictors of poor overall survival on multivariable analysis. The concordance index using all six prognostic factors (ie, also including hypercalcaemia) was 0·70 (95% CI 0·67–0·72) with the IMDC model and was 0·66 (95% CI 0·64–0·68) with the three-factor MSKCC model. When patients were divided into three risk categories using IMDC criteria, median overall survival was 35·3 months (95% CI 28·3–47·8) in the favourable risk group (n=76), 16·6 months (14·9–17·9) in the intermediate risk group (n=529), and 5·4 months (4·7–6·8) in the poor risk group (n=261). Interpretation The IMDC prognostic model can be applied to patients previously treated with targeted therapy, in addition to previously validated populations in first-line targeted therapy. The IMDC prognostic model in the second-line targeted therapy setting has an improved prognostic performance and is applicable to a more contemporary patient cohort than that of the three-factor MSKCC model. Funding DF/HCC Kidney Cancer SPORE P50 CA101942-01, Kidney Cancer Research Network of Canada, Canadian Institute for Health Research, Trust Family, Loker Pinard, Michael Brigham, and Gerald DeWulf.
PDF
