Toni K. Choueiri

Nivolumab, a programmed death 1 (PD-1) checkpoint inhibitor, was associated with encouraging overall survival in uncontrolled studies involving previously treated patients with advanced renal-cell carcinoma. This randomized, open-label, phase 3 study compared nivolumab with everolimus in patients with renal-cell carcinoma who had received previous treatment.

We performed an extensive immunogenomic analysis of more than 10,000 tumors comprising 33 diverse cancer types by utilizing data compiled by TCGA. Across cancer types, we identified six immune subtypes-wound healing, IFN-γ dominant, inflammatory, lymphocyte depleted, immunologically quiet, and TGF-β dominant-characterized by differences in macrophage or lymphocyte signatures, Th1:Th2 cell ratio, extent of intratumoral heterogeneity, aneuploidy, extent of neoantigen load, overall cell proliferation, expression of immunomodulatory genes, and prognosis. Specific driver mutations correlated with lower (CTNNB1, NRAS, or IDH1) or higher (BRAF, TP53, or CASP8) leukocyte levels across all cancers. Multiple control modalities of the intracellular and extracellular networks (transcription, microRNAs, copy number, and epigenetic processes) were involved in tumor-immune cell interactions, both across and within immune subtypes. Our immunogenomics pipeline to characterize these heterogeneous tumors and the resulting data are intended to serve as a resource for future targeted studies to further advance the field.

Nivolumab plus ipilimumab produced objective responses in patients with advanced renal-cell carcinoma in a pilot study. This phase 3 trial compared nivolumab plus ipilimumab with sunitinib for previously untreated clear-cell advanced renal-cell carcinoma.

Patients with advanced urothelial carcinoma that progresses after platinum-based chemotherapy have a poor prognosis and limited treatment options.In this open-label, international, phase 3 trial, we randomly assigned 542 patients with advanced urothelial cancer that recurred or progressed after platinum-based chemotherapy to receive pembrolizumab (a highly selective, humanized monoclonal IgG4κ isotype antibody against programmed death 1 [PD-1]) at a dose of 200 mg every 3 weeks or the investigator's choice of chemotherapy with paclitaxel, docetaxel, or vinflunine. The coprimary end points were overall survival and progression-free survival, which were assessed among all patients and among patients who had a tumor PD-1 ligand (PD-L1) combined positive score (the percentage of PD-L1-expressing tumor and infiltrating immune cells relative to the total number of tumor cells) of 10% or more.The median overall survival in the total population was 10.3 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 8.0 to 11.8) in the pembrolizumab group, as compared with 7.4 months (95% CI, 6.1 to 8.3) in the chemotherapy group (hazard ratio for death, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.59 to 0.91; P=0.002). The median overall survival among patients who had a tumor PD-L1 combined positive score of 10% or more was 8.0 months (95% CI, 5.0 to 12.3) in the pembrolizumab group, as compared with 5.2 months (95% CI, 4.0 to 7.4) in the chemotherapy group (hazard ratio, 0.57; 95% CI, 0.37 to 0.88; P=0.005). There was no significant between-group difference in the duration of progression-free survival in the total population (hazard ratio for death or disease progression, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.81 to 1.19; P=0.42) or among patients who had a tumor PD-L1 combined positive score of 10% or more (hazard ratio, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.61 to 1.28; P=0.24). Fewer treatment-related adverse events of any grade were reported in the pembrolizumab group than in the chemotherapy group (60.9% vs. 90.2%); there were also fewer events of grade 3, 4, or 5 severity reported in the pembrolizumab group than in the chemotherapy group (15.0% vs. 49.4%).Pembrolizumab was associated with significantly longer overall survival (by approximately 3 months) and with a lower rate of treatment-related adverse events than chemotherapy as second-line therapy for platinum-refractory advanced urothelial carcinoma. (Funded by Merck; KEYNOTE-045 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02256436 .).

There are no robust data on prognostic factors for overall survival (OS) in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (RCC) treated with vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) -targeted therapy.Baseline characteristics and outcomes on 645 patients with anti-VEGF therapy-naïve metastatic RCC were collected from three US and four Canadian cancer centers. Cox proportional hazards regression, followed by bootstrap validation, was used to identify independent prognostic factors for OS.The median OS for the whole cohort was 22 months (95% CI, 20.2 to 26.5 months), and the median follow-up was 24.5 months. Overall, 396, 200, and 49 patients were treated with sunitinib, sorafenib, and bevacizumab, respectively. Four of the five adverse prognostic factors according to the Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center (MSKCC) were independent predictors of short survival: hemoglobin less than the lower limit of normal (P < .0001), corrected calcium greater than the upper limit of normal (ULN; P = .0006), Karnofsky performance status less than 80% (P < .0001), and time from diagnosis to treatment of less than 1 year (P = .01). In addition, neutrophils greater than the ULN (P < .0001) and platelets greater than the ULN (P = .01) were independent adverse prognostic factors. Patients were segregated into three risk categories: the favorable-risk group (no prognostic factors; n = 133), in which median OS (mOS) was not reached and 2-year OS (2y OS) was 75%; the intermediate-risk group (one or two prognostic factors; n = 301), in which mOS was 27 months and 2y OS was 53%; and the poor-risk group (three to six prognostic factors; n = 152), in which mOS was 8.8 months and 2y OS was 7% (log-rank P < .0001). The C-index was 0.73.This model validates components of the MSKCC model with the addition of platelet and neutrophil counts and can be incorporated into patient care and into clinical trials that use VEGF-targeted agents.

Pazopanib and sunitinib provided a progression-free survival benefit, as compared with placebo or interferon, in previous phase 3 studies involving patients with metastatic renal-cell carcinoma. This phase 3, randomized trial compared the efficacy and safety of pazopanib and sunitinib as first-line therapy.We randomly assigned 1110 patients with clear-cell, metastatic renal-cell carcinoma, in a 1:1 ratio, to receive a continuous dose of pazopanib (800 mg once daily; 557 patients) or sunitinib in 6-week cycles (50 mg once daily for 4 weeks, followed by 2 weeks without treatment; 553 patients). The primary end point was progression-free survival as assessed by independent review, and the study was powered to show the noninferiority of pazopanib versus sunitinib. Secondary end points included overall survival, safety, and quality of life.Pazopanib was noninferior to sunitinib with respect to progression-free survival (hazard ratio for progression of disease or death from any cause, 1.05; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.90 to 1.22), meeting the predefined noninferiority margin (upper bound of the 95% confidence interval, <1.25). Overall survival was similar (hazard ratio for death with pazopanib, 0.91; 95% CI, 0.76 to 1.08). Patients treated with sunitinib, as compared with those treated with pazopanib, had a higher incidence of fatigue (63% vs. 55%), the hand-foot syndrome (50% vs. 29%), and thrombocytopenia (78% vs. 41%); patients treated with pazopanib had a higher incidence of increased levels of alanine aminotransferase (60%, vs. 43% with sunitinib). The mean change from baseline in 11 of 14 health-related quality-of-life domains, particularly those related to fatigue or soreness in the mouth, throat, hands, or feet, during the first 6 months of treatment favored pazopanib (P<0.05 for all 11 comparisons).Pazopanib and sunitinib have similar efficacy, but the safety and quality-of-life profiles favor pazopanib. (Funded by GlaxoSmithKline Pharmaceuticals; COMPARZ ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00720941.).

Cabozantinib is an oral, small-molecule tyrosine kinase inhibitor that targets vascular endothelial growth factor receptor (VEGFR) as well as MET and AXL, each of which has been implicated in the pathobiology of metastatic renal-cell carcinoma or in the development of resistance to antiangiogenic drugs. This randomized, open-label, phase 3 trial evaluated the efficacy of cabozantinib, as compared with everolimus, in patients with renal-cell carcinoma that had progressed after VEGFR-targeted therapy.

Kidney cancers have been extensively studied, and insights from an increased understanding of tumor biology have led to increases in survival rates. Therapies aimed at tumor signaling pathways and immunotherapies have improved the outlook for patients with renal cancer.

We describe results from IMmotion150, a randomized phase 2 study of atezolizumab (anti-PD-L1) alone or combined with bevacizumab (anti-VEGF) versus sunitinib in 305 patients with treatment-naive metastatic renal cell carcinoma. Co-primary endpoints were progression-free survival (PFS) in intent-to-treat and PD-L1+ populations. Intent-to-treat PFS hazard ratios for atezolizumab + bevacizumab or atezolizumab monotherapy versus sunitinib were 1.0 (95% confidence interval (CI), 0.69-1.45) and 1.19 (95% CI, 0.82-1.71), respectively; PD-L1+ PFS hazard ratios were 0.64 (95% CI, 0.38-1.08) and 1.03 (95% CI, 0.63-1.67), respectively. Exploratory biomarker analyses indicated that tumor mutation and neoantigen burden were not associated with PFS. Angiogenesis, T-effector/IFN-γ response, and myeloid inflammatory gene expression signatures were strongly and differentially associated with PFS within and across the treatments. These molecular profiles suggest that prediction of outcomes with anti-VEGF and immunotherapy may be possible and offer mechanistic insights into how blocking VEGF may overcome resistance to immune checkpoint blockade.

SNF'ing out antitumor immunity Immune checkpoint inhibitors induce durable tumor regressions in some, but not all, cancer patients. Understanding the mechanisms that determine tumor sensitivity to these drugs could potentially expand the number of patients who benefit (see the Perspective by Ghorani and Quezada). Pan et al. discovered that tumor cells in which a specific SWI/SNF chromatin remodeling complex had been experimentally inactivated were more sensitive to T cell–mediated killing. The cells were more responsive to interferon-γ, leading to increased secretion of cytokines that promote antitumor immunity. Miao et al. examined the genomic features of tumors from patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma who had been treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors. Tumors harboring inactivating mutations in PBRM1 , which encodes a subunit of the same SWI/SNF complex, were more likely to respond to the drugs. Science , this issue p. 770 , p. 801 ; see also p. 745

Brain metastases are associated with a dismal prognosis. Whether brain metastases harbor distinct genetic alterations beyond those observed in primary tumors is unknown. We performed whole-exome sequencing of 86 matched brain metastases, primary tumors, and normal tissue. In all clonally related cancer samples, we observed branched evolution, where all metastatic and primary sites shared a common ancestor yet continued to evolve independently. In 53% of cases, we found potentially clinically informative alterations in the brain metastases not detected in the matched primary-tumor sample. In contrast, spatially and temporally separated brain metastasis sites were genetically homogenous. Distal extracranial and regional lymph node metastases were highly divergent from brain metastases. We detected alterations associated with sensitivity to PI3K/AKT/mTOR, CDK, and HER2/EGFR inhibitors in the brain metastases. Genomic analysis of brain metastases provides an opportunity to identify potentially clinically informative alterations not detected in clinically sampled primary tumors, regional lymph nodes, or extracranial metastases.Decisions for individualized therapies in patients with brain metastasis are often made from primary-tumor biopsies. We demonstrate that clinically actionable alterations present in brain metastases are frequently not detected in primary biopsies, suggesting that sequencing of primary biopsies alone may miss a substantial number of opportunities for targeted therapy.

Purpose To examine the impact of marital status on stage at diagnosis, use of definitive therapy, and cancer-specific mortality among each of the 10 leading causes of cancer-related death in the United States. Methods We used the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results program to identify 1,260,898 patients diagnosed in 2004 through 2008 with lung, colorectal, breast, pancreatic, prostate, liver/intrahepatic bile duct, non-Hodgkin lymphoma, head/neck, ovarian, or esophageal cancer. We used multivariable logistic and Cox regression to analyze the 734,889 patients who had clinical and follow-up information available. Results Married patients were less likely to present with metastatic disease (adjusted odds ratio [OR], 0.83; 95% CI, 0.82 to 0.84; P &lt; .001), more likely to receive definitive therapy (adjusted OR, 1.53; 95% CI, 1.51 to 1.56; P &lt; .001), and less likely to die as a result of their cancer after adjusting for demographics, stage, and treatment (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.79 to 0.81; P &lt; .001) than unmarried patients. These associations remained significant when each individual cancer was analyzed (P &lt; .05 for all end points for each malignancy). The benefit associated with marriage was greater in males than females for all outcome measures analyzed (P &lt; .001 in all cases). For prostate, breast, colorectal, esophageal, and head/neck cancers, the survival benefit associated with marriage was larger than the published survival benefit of chemotherapy. Conclusion Even after adjusting for known confounders, unmarried patients are at significantly higher risk of presentation with metastatic cancer, undertreatment, and death resulting from their cancer. This study highlights the potentially significant impact that social support can have on cancer detection, treatment, and survival.

The International Metastatic Renal-Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium model offers prognostic information for patients with metastatic renal-cell carcinoma. We tested the accuracy of the model in an external population and compared it with other prognostic models.We included patients with metastatic renal-cell carcinoma who were treated with first-line VEGF-targeted treatment at 13 international cancer centres and who were registered in the Consortium's database but had not contributed to the initial development of the Consortium Database model. The primary endpoint was overall survival. We compared the Database Consortium model with the Cleveland Clinic Foundation (CCF) model, the International Kidney Cancer Working Group (IKCWG) model, the French model, and the Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center (MSKCC) model by concordance indices and other measures of model fit.Overall, 1028 patients were included in this study, of whom 849 had complete data to assess the Database Consortium model. Median overall survival was 18·8 months (95% 17·6-21·4). The predefined Database Consortium risk factors (anaemia, thrombocytosis, neutrophilia, hypercalcaemia, Karnofsky performance status <80%, and <1 year from diagnosis to treatment) were independent predictors of poor overall survival in the external validation set (hazard ratios ranged between 1·27 and 2·08, concordance index 0·71, 95% CI 0·68-0·73). When patients were segregated into three risk categories, median overall survival was 43·2 months (95% CI 31·4-50·1) in the favourable risk group (no risk factors; 157 patients), 22·5 months (18·7-25·1) in the intermediate risk group (one to two risk factors; 440 patients), and 7·8 months (6·5-9·7) in the poor risk group (three or more risk factors; 252 patients; p<0·0001; concordance index 0·664, 95% CI 0·639-0·689). 672 patients had complete data to test all five models. The concordance index of the CCF model was 0·662 (95% CI 0·636-0·687), of the French model 0·640 (0·614-0·665), of the IKCWG model 0·668 (0·645-0·692), and of the MSKCC model 0·657 (0·632-0·682). The reported versus predicted number of deaths at 2 years was most similar in the Database Consortium model compared with the other models.The Database Consortium model is now externally validated and can be applied to stratify patients by risk in clinical trials and to counsel patients about prognosis.None.

Cabozantinib is an oral inhibitor of tyrosine kinases including MET, VEGFR, and AXL. The randomised phase 3 METEOR trial compared the efficacy and safety of cabozantinib versus the mTOR inhibitor everolimus in patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma who progressed after previous VEGFR tyrosine-kinase inhibitor treatment. Here, we report the final overall survival results from this study based on an unplanned second interim analysis.In this open-label, randomised phase 3 trial, we randomly assigned (1:1) patients aged 18 years and older with advanced or metastatic clear-cell renal cell carcinoma, measurable disease, and previous treatment with one or more VEGFR tyrosine-kinase inhibitors to receive 60 mg cabozantinib once a day or 10 mg everolimus once a day. Randomisation was done with an interactive voice and web response system. Stratification factors were Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center risk group and the number of previous treatments with VEGFR tyrosine-kinase inhibitors. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival as assessed by an independent radiology review committee in the first 375 randomly assigned patients and has been previously reported. Secondary endpoints were overall survival and objective response in all randomly assigned patients assessed by intention-to-treat. Safety was assessed per protocol in all patients who received at least one dose of study drug. The study is closed for enrolment but treatment and follow-up of patients is ongoing for long-term safety evaluation. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01865747.Between Aug 8, 2013, and Nov 24, 2014, 658 patients were randomly assigned to receive cabozantinib (n=330) or everolimus (n=328). The median duration of follow-up for overall survival and safety was 18·7 months (IQR 16·1-21·1) in the cabozantinib group and 18·8 months (16·0-21·2) in the everolimus group. Median overall survival was 21·4 months (95% CI 18·7-not estimable) with cabozantinib and 16·5 months (14·7-18·8) with everolimus (hazard ratio [HR] 0·66 [95% CI 0·53-0·83]; p=0·00026). Cabozantinib treatment also resulted in improved progression-free survival (HR 0·51 [95% CI 0·41-0·62]; p<0·0001) and objective response (17% [13-22] with cabozantinib vs 3% [2-6] with everolimus; p<0·0001) per independent radiology review among all randomised patients. The most common grade 3 or 4 adverse events were hypertension (49 [15%] in the cabozantinib group vs 12 [4%] in the everolimus group), diarrhoea (43 [13%] vs 7 [2%]), fatigue (36 [11%] vs 24 [7%]), palmar-plantar erythrodysaesthesia syndrome (27 [8%] vs 3 [1%]), anaemia (19 [6%] vs 53 [17%]), hyperglycaemia (3 [1%] vs 16 [5%]), and hypomagnesaemia (16 [5%] vs none). Serious adverse events grade 3 or worse occurred in 130 (39%) patients in the cabozantinib group and in 129 (40%) in the everolimus group. One treatment-related death occurred in the cabozantinib group (death; not otherwise specified) and two occurred in the everolimus group (one aspergillus infection and one pneumonia aspiration).Treatment with cabozantinib increased overall survival, delayed disease progression, and improved the objective response compared with everolimus. Based on these results, cabozantinib should be considered as a new standard-of-care treatment option for previously treated patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma. Patients should be monitored for adverse events that might require dose modifications.Exelixis Inc.

Tumor-infiltrating immune cells have been linked to prognosis and response to immunotherapy; however, the levels of distinct immune cell subsets and the signals that draw them into a tumor, such as the expression of antigen presenting machinery genes, remain poorly characterized. Here, we employ a gene expression-based computational method to profile the infiltration levels of 24 immune cell populations in 19 cancer types. We compare cancer types using an immune infiltration score and a T cell infiltration score and find that clear cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC) is among the highest for both scores. Using immune infiltration profiles as well as transcriptomic and proteomic datasets, we characterize three groups of ccRCC tumors: T cell enriched, heterogeneously infiltrated, and non-infiltrated. We observe that the immunogenicity of ccRCC tumors cannot be explained by mutation load or neo-antigen load, but is highly correlated with MHC class I antigen presenting machinery expression (APM). We explore the prognostic value of distinct T cell subsets and show in two cohorts that Th17 cells and CD8+ T/Treg ratio are associated with improved survival, whereas Th2 cells and Tregs are associated with negative outcomes. Investigation of the association of immune infiltration patterns with the subclonal architecture of tumors shows that both APM and T cell levels are negatively associated with subclone number. Our analysis sheds light on the immune infiltration patterns of 19 human cancers and unravels mRNA signatures with prognostic utility and immunotherapeutic biomarker potential in ccRCC.

We describe the landscape of somatic genomic alterations of 66 chromophobe renal cell carcinomas (ChRCCs) on the basis of multidimensional and comprehensive characterization, including mtDNA and whole-genome sequencing. The result is consistent that ChRCC originates from the distal nephron compared with other kidney cancers with more proximal origins. Combined mtDNA and gene expression analysis implicates changes in mitochondrial function as a component of the disease biology, while suggesting alternative roles for mtDNA mutations in cancers relying on oxidative phosphorylation. Genomic rearrangements lead to recurrent structural breakpoints within TERT promoter region, which correlates with highly elevated TERT expression and manifestation of kataegis, representing a mechanism of TERT upregulation in cancer distinct from previously observed amplifications and point mutations.

Purpose Cabozantinib is an oral potent inhibitor of vascular endothelial growth factor receptor 2, MET, and AXL and is a standard second-line therapy for metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). This randomized phase II multicenter trial evaluated cabozantinib compared with sunitinib as first-line therapy in patients with mRCC. Patients and Methods Eligible patients had untreated clear cell mRCC and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 to 2 and were intermediate or poor risk per International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium criteria. Patients were randomly assigned at a one-to-one ratio to cabozantinib (60 mg once per day) or sunitinib (50 mg once per day; 4 weeks on, 2 weeks off). Progression-free survival (PFS) was the primary end point. Objective response rate (ORR), overall survival, and safety were secondary end points. Results From July 2013 to April 2015, 157 patients were randomly assigned (cabozantinib, n = 79; sunitinib, n = 78). Compared with sunitinib, cabozantinib treatment significantly increased median PFS (8.2 v 5.6 months) and was associated with a 34% reduction in rate of progression or death (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.46 to 0.95; one-sided P = .012). ORR was 33% (95% CI, 23% to 44%) for cabozantinib versus 12% (95% CI, 5.4% to 21%) for sunitinib. All-causality grade 3 or 4 adverse events were 67% for cabozantinib and 68% for sunitinib and included diarrhea (cabozantinib, 10% v sunitinib, 11%), fatigue (6% v 15%), hypertension (28% v 22%), palmar-plantar erythrodysesthesia (8% v 4%), and hematologic adverse events (3% v 22%). Conclusion Cabozantinib demonstrated a significant clinical benefit in PFS and ORR over standard-of-care sunitinib as first-line therapy in patients with intermediate- or poor-risk mRCC.

Renal-cell carcinoma is highly vascular, and proliferates primarily through dysregulation of the vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) pathway. We tested sunitinib and sorafenib, two oral anti-angiogenic agents that are effective in advanced renal-cell carcinoma, in patients with resected local disease at high risk for recurrence.In this double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomised, phase 3 trial, we enrolled patients at 226 study centres in the USA and Canada. Eligible patients had pathological stage high-grade T1b or greater with completely resected non-metastatic renal-cell carcinoma and adequate cardiac, renal, and hepatic function. Patients were stratified by recurrence risk, histology, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status, and surgical approach, and computerised double-blind randomisation was done centrally with permuted blocks. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1:1) to receive 54 weeks of sunitinib 50 mg per day orally throughout the first 4 weeks of each 6 week cycle, sorafenib 400 mg twice per day orally throughout each cycle, or placebo. Placebo could be sunitinib placebo given continuously for 4 weeks of every 6 week cycle or sorafenib placebo given twice per day throughout the study. The primary objective was to compare disease-free survival between each experimental group and placebo in the intention-to-treat population. All treated patients with at least one follow-up assessment were included in the safety analysis. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00326898.Between April 24, 2006, and Sept 1, 2010, 1943 patients from the National Clinical Trials Network were randomly assigned to sunitinib (n=647), sorafenib (n=649), or placebo (n=647). Following high rates of toxicity-related discontinuation after 1323 patients had enrolled (treatment discontinued by 193 [44%] of 438 patients on sunitinib, 199 [45%] of 441 patients on sorafenib), the starting dose of each drug was reduced and then individually titrated up to the original full doses. On Oct 16, 2014, because of low conditional power for the primary endpoint, the ECOG-ACRIN Data Safety Monitoring Committee recommended that blinded follow-up cease and the results be released. The primary analysis showed no significant differences in disease-free survival. Median disease-free survival was 5·8 years (IQR 1·6-8·2) for sunitinib (hazard ratio [HR] 1·02, 97·5% CI 0·85-1·23, p=0·8038), 6·1 years (IQR 1·7-not estimable [NE]) for sorafenib (HR 0·97, 97·5% CI 0·80-1·17, p=0·7184), and 6·6 years (IQR 1·5-NE) for placebo. The most common grade 3 or worse adverse events were hypertension (105 [17%] patients on sunitinib and 102 [16%] patients on sorafenib), hand-foot syndrome (94 [15%] patients on sunitinib and 208 [33%] patients on sorafenib), rash (15 [2%] patients on sunitinib and 95 [15%] patients on sorafenib), and fatigue 110 [18%] patients on sunitinib [corrected]. There were five deaths related to treatment or occurring within 30 days of the end of treatment; one patient receiving sorafenib died from infectious colitis while on treatment and four patients receiving sunitinib died, with one death due to each of neurological sequelae, sequelae of gastric perforation, pulmonary embolus, and disease progression. Revised dosing still resulted in high toxicity.Adjuvant treatment with the VEGF receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitors sorafenib or sunitinib showed no survival benefit relative to placebo in a definitive phase 3 study. Furthermore, substantial treatment discontinuation occurred because of excessive toxicity, despite dose reductions. These results provide a strong rationale against the use of these drugs for high-risk kidney cancer in the adjuvant setting and suggest that the biology of cancer recurrence might be independent of angiogenesis.US National Cancer Institute and ECOG-ACRIN Cancer Research Group, Pfizer, and Bayer.

Abstract Cisplatin-based chemotherapy is the standard of care for patients with muscle-invasive urothelial carcinoma. Pathologic downstaging to pT0/pTis after neoadjuvant cisplatin-based chemotherapy is associated with improved survival, although molecular determinants of cisplatin response are incompletely understood. We performed whole-exome sequencing on pretreatment tumor and germline DNA from 50 patients with muscle-invasive urothelial carcinoma who received neoadjuvant cisplatin-based chemotherapy followed by cystectomy (25 pT0/pTis “responders,” 25 pT2+ “nonresponders”) to identify somatic mutations that occurred preferentially in responders. ERCC2, a nucleotide excision repair gene, was the only significantly mutated gene enriched in the cisplatin responders compared with nonresponders (q &amp;lt; 0.01). Expression of representative ERCC2 mutants in an ERCC2-deficient cell line failed to rescue cisplatin and UV sensitivity compared with wild-type ERCC2. The lack of normal ERCC2 function may contribute to cisplatin sensitivity in urothelial cancer, and somatic ERCC2 mutation status may inform cisplatin-containing regimen usage in muscle-invasive urothelial carcinoma. Significance: Somatic ERCC2 mutations correlate with complete response to cisplatin-based chemosensitivity in muscle-invasive urothelial carcinoma, and clinically identified mutations lead to cisplatin sensitivity in vitro. Nucleotide excision repair pathway defects may drive exceptional response to conventional chemotherapy. Cancer Discov; 4(10); 1140–53. ©2014 AACR. See related commentary by Turchi et al., p. 1118 This article is highlighted in the In This Issue feature, p. 1103

Renal cell carcinoma (RCC) is not a single disease, but several histologically defined cancers with different genetic drivers, clinical courses, and therapeutic responses. The current study evaluated 843 RCC from the three major histologic subtypes, including 488 clear cell RCC, 274 papillary RCC, and 81 chromophobe RCC. Comprehensive genomic and phenotypic analysis of the RCC subtypes reveals distinctive features of each subtype that provide the foundation for the development of subtype-specific therapeutic and management strategies for patients affected with these cancers. Somatic alteration of BAP1, PBRM1, and PTEN and altered metabolic pathways correlated with subtype-specific decreased survival, while CDKN2A alteration, increased DNA hypermethylation, and increases in the immune-related Th2 gene expression signature correlated with decreased survival within all major histologic subtypes. CIMP-RCC demonstrated an increased immune signature, and a uniform and distinct metabolic expression pattern identified a subset of metabolically divergent (MD) ChRCC that associated with extremely poor survival.

Renal cell carcinoma (RCC) is not a single disease, but several histologically defined cancers with different genetic drivers, clinical courses, and therapeutic responses. The current study evaluated 843 RCC from the three major histologic subtypes, including 488 clear cell RCC, 274 papillary RCC, and 81 chromophobe RCC. Comprehensive genomic and phenotypic analysis of the RCC subtypes reveals distinctive features of each subtype that provide the foundation for the development of subtype-specific therapeutic and management strategies for patients affected with these cancers. Somatic alteration of BAP1, PBRM1, and PTEN and altered metabolic pathways correlated with subtype-specific decreased survival, while CDKN2A alteration, increased DNA hypermethylation, and increases in the immune-related Th2 gene expression signature correlated with decreased survival within all major histologic subtypes. CIMP-RCC demonstrated an increased immune signature, and a uniform and distinct metabolic expression pattern identified a subset of metabolically divergent (MD) ChRCC that associated with extremely poor survival.

Molecular alterations involving the PI3K/AKT/mTOR pathway (including mutation, copy number, protein, or RNA) were examined across 11,219 human cancers representing 32 major types. Within specific mutated genes, frequency, mutation hotspot residues, in silico predictions, and functional assays were all informative in distinguishing the subset of genetic variants more likely to have functional relevance. Multiple oncogenic pathways including PI3K/AKT/mTOR converged on similar sets of downstream transcriptional targets. In addition to mutation, structural variations and partial copy losses involving PTEN and STK11 showed evidence for having functional relevance. A substantial fraction of cancers showed high mTOR pathway activity without an associated canonical genetic or genomic alteration, including cancers harboring IDH1 or VHL mutations, suggesting multiple mechanisms for pathway activation.

The NCCN Guidelines for Kidney Cancer provide multidisciplinary recommendations for the clinical management of patients with clear cell and non-clear cell renal carcinoma. These guidelines are developed by a multidisciplinary panel of leading experts from NCCN Member Institutions consisting of medical oncologists, hematologists and hematologic oncologists, radiation oncologists, urologists, and pathologists. The NCCN Guidelines are in continuous evolution and are updated annually or sometimes more often, if new high-quality clinical data become available in the interim.

Purpose Foretinib is an oral multikinase inhibitor targeting MET, VEGF, RON, AXL, and TIE-2 receptors. Activating mutations or amplifications in MET have been described in patients with papillary renal cell carcinoma (PRCC). We aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of foretinib in patients with PRCC. Patients and Methods Patients were enrolled onto the study in two cohorts with different dosing schedules of foretinib: cohort A, 240 mg once per day on days 1 through 5 every 14 days (intermittent arm); cohort B, 80 mg daily (daily dosing arm). Patients were stratified on the basis of MET pathway activation (germline or somatic MET mutation, MET [7q31] amplification, or gain of chromosome 7). The primary end point was overall response rate (ORR). Results Overall, 74 patients were enrolled, with 37 in each dosing cohort. ORR by Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) 1.0 was 13.5%, median progression-free survival was 9.3 months, and median overall survival was not reached. The presence of a germline MET mutation was highly predictive of a response (five of 10 v five of 57 patients with and without germline MET mutations, respectively). The most frequent adverse events of any grade associated with foretinib were fatigue, hypertension, gastrointestinal toxicities, and nonfatal pulmonary emboli. Conclusion Foretinib demonstrated activity in patients with advanced PRCC with a manageable toxicity profile and a high response rate in patients with germline MET mutations.

Background: The benefit of cytoreductive nephrectomy (CN) for overall survival (OS) is unclear in patients with synchronous metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) in the era of targeted therapy.Objective: To determine OS benefit of CN compared with no CN in mRCC patients treated with targeted therapies.Design, setting, and participants: Retrospective data from patients with synchronous mRCC (n = 1658) from the International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium (IMDC) were used to compare 982 mRCC patients who had a CN with 676 mRCC patients who did not.Outcome measurements and statistical analysis: OS was compared and hazard ratios (HRs) adjusted for IMDC poor prognostic criteria.Results and limitations: Patients who had CN had better IMDC prognostic profiles versus those without (favorable, intermediate, or poor in 9%, 63%, and 28% vs 1%, 45%, and 54%, respectively).The median OS of patients with CN versus without CN was 20.6 versus 9.5 mo ( p < 0.0001).When adjusted for IMDC criteria to correct for imbalances, the HR of death was 0.60 (95% confidence interval, 0.52-0.69;p < 0.0001).Patients estimated to survive <12 mo may receive marginal benefit from CN. Patients who have four or more of the IMDC prognostic criteria did not benefit from CN. Data were collected retrospectively.

Blockade of the programmed death-1 inhibitory cell-surface molecule on immune cells using the fully human immunoglobulin G4 antibody nivolumab mediates tumor regression in a portion of patients with advanced treatment-refractory solid tumors. We report clinical activity, survival, and long-term safety in patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC) treated with nivolumab in a phase I study with expansion cohorts.A total of 34 patients with previously treated advanced RCC, enrolled between 2008 and 2012, received intravenous nivolumab (1 or 10 mg/kg) in an outpatient setting once every two weeks for up to 96 weeks and were observed for survival and duration of response after treatment discontinuation.Ten patients (29%) achieved objective responses (according to RECIST [version 1.0]), with median response duration of 12.9 months; nine additional patients (27%) demonstrated stable disease lasting > 24 weeks. Three of five patients who stopped treatment while in response continued to respond for ≥ 45 weeks. Median overall survival in all patients (71% with two to five prior systemic therapies) was 22.4 months; 1-, 2-, and 3-year survival rates were 71%, 48%, and 44%, respectively. Grade 3 to 4 treatment-related adverse events occurred in 18% of patients; all were reversible.Patients with advanced treatment-refractory RCC treated with nivolumab demonstrated durable responses that in some responders persisted after drug discontinuation. Overall survival is encouraging, and toxicities were generally manageable. Ongoing randomized clinical trials will further assess the impact of nivolumab on overall survival in patients with advanced RCC.

<h3>Context</h3>Whether androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) causes excess cardiovascular deaths in men with prostate cancer is highly controversial and was the subject of a joint statement by multiple medical societies and a US Food and Drug Administration safety warning.<h3>Objective</h3>To perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials to determine whether ADT is associated with cardiovascular mortality, prostate cancer–specific mortality (PCSM), and all-cause mortality in men with unfavorable-risk, nonmetastatic prostate cancer.<h3>Data Sources</h3>A search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases for relevant randomized controlled trials in English between January 1, 1966, and April 11, 2011.<h3>Study Selection</h3>Inclusion required nonmetastatic disease, intervention group with gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist–based ADT, control group with no immediate ADT, complete information on cardiovascular deaths, and median follow-up of more than 1 year.<h3>Data Extraction</h3>Extraction was by 2 independent reviewers. Summary incidence, relative risk (RR), and CIs were calculated using random-effects or fixed-effects models.<h3>Results</h3>Among 4141 patients from 8 randomized trials, cardiovascular death in patients receiving ADT vs control was not significantly different (255/2200 vs 252/1941 events; incidence, 11.0%; 95% CI, 8.3%-14.5%; vs 11.2%; 95% CI, 8.3%-15.0%; RR, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.79-1.10; P = .41). ADT was not associated with excess cardiovascular death in trials of at least 3 years (long duration) of ADT (11.5%; 95% CI, 8.1%-16.0%; vs 11.5%; 95% CI, 7.5%-17.3%; RR, 0.91; 95% CI, 0.75-1.10; P = .34) or in trials of 6 months or less (short duration) of ADT (10.5%; 95% CI, 6.3%-17.0%; vs 10.3%; 95% CI, 8.2%-13.0%; RR, 1.00; 95% CI, 0.73-1.37; P = .99). Among 4805 patients from 11 trials with overall death data, ADT was associated with lower PCSM (443/2527 vs 552/2278 events; 13.5%; 95% CI, 8.8%-20.3%; vs 22.1%; 95% CI, 15.1%-31.1%; RR, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.56-0.84; P &lt; .001) and lower all-cause mortality (1140/2527 vs 1213/2278 events; 37.7%; 95% CI, 27.3%-49.4%; vs 44.4%; 95% CI, 32.5%-57.0%; RR, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.80-0.93; P &lt; .001).<h3>Conclusion</h3>In a pooled analysis of randomized trials in unfavorable-risk prostate cancer, ADT use was not associated with an increased risk of cardiovascular death but was associated with a lower risk of PCSM and all-cause mortality.

Purpose Sunitinib and sorafenib are oral vascular endothelial growth factor receptor (VEGFR) tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) used in a vast range of cancers. Arterial thromboembolic events (ATE) have been described with these agents, although the overall risk remains unclear. We did a systematic review and meta-analysis to determine the incidence and the relative risk (RR) associated with the use of sunitinib and sorafenib. Patients and Methods PubMed databases were searched for articles published from January 1966 to July 2009, and abstracts presented at the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) and the European Society of Medical Oncology (ESMO) meetings held between 2004 and 2009 were searched for relevant clinical trials. Eligible studies included phase II and III trials and expanded access programs. Statistical analyses were conducted to calculate the summary incidence, RRs, and 95% CIs, using random-effects or fixed-effects models based on the heterogeneity of included studies. Results A total of 10,255 patients were selected for this meta-analysis. The incidence for ATE was 1.4% (95% CI, 1.2% to 1.6%). The RR of ATEs associated with sorafenib and sunitinib was 3.03 (95% CI, 1.25 to 7.37; P = .015) compared with control patients. The analysis was also stratified for the underlying malignancy (renal cell cancer v non-renal cell cancer) and TKI (sunitinib v sorafenib), but no significant differences in incidence or RR were observed. Conclusion Treatment with VEGFR TKIs sunitinib and sorafenib is associated with a significant increase in the risk of ATEs.

Purpose Sunitinib and sorafenib are novel tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) that have shown significant clinical activity in metastatic clear cell renal cell carcinoma (RCC). The activity of sunitinib and sorafenib in non–clear cell histologies has not been evaluated. Patients and Methods Clinical features at study entry and treatment outcomes were evaluated in patients with metastatic papillary RCC (PRCC) and chromophobe RCC (ChRCC) who received either sunitinib or sorafenib as their initial TKI treatment in five US and French institutions. Response rate and survival were documented. Fisher's exact test was used for categoric variables, and the Kaplan-Meier method was used to estimate survival. Results Fifty-three patients were included. The number of patients with papillary and chromophobe histologies was 41 (77%) and 12 (23%), respectively. Response rate, progression-free survival (PFS) time, and overall survival time for the entire cohort were 10%, 8.6 months, and 19.6 months, respectively. Three (25%) of 12 ChRCC patients achieved a response (two patients treated with sorafenib and one treated with sunitinib), and PFS was 10.6 months. Two (4.8%) of 41 PRCC patients achieved a response (both patients were treated with sunitinib). PFS for the whole cohort was 7.6 months. Sunitinib-treated PRCC patients had a PFS of 11.9 months compared with 5.1 months for sorafenib-treated patients (P &lt; .001). Conclusion Patients with PRCC and ChRCC may have prolonged PFS from sunitinib and sorafenib, although clinical responses remain overall low in PRCC. Additional prospective trials with these agents in non–clear cell RCC will further clarify their use in the future.

Abstract Immune-related adverse events (irAE) have been described with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI), but the incidence and relative risk (RR) of irAEs associated with these drugs remains unclear. We selected five key irAEs from treatments with approved cytotoxic T-lymphocyte–associated protein 4 (CTLA-4), programmed cell death 1 (PD-1), and programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) inhibitors (ipilimumab, nivolumab, or pembrolizumab, and atezolizumab, respectively) to better characterize their safety profile. We performed a meta-analysis of randomized phase II/III immunotherapy trials, with non-ICI control arms, conducted between 1996 and 2016. We calculated the incidence and RR of selected all-grade and high-grade gastrointestinal, liver, skin, endocrine, and pulmonary irAEs across the trials using random-effect models. Twenty-one trials were included, totaling 11,454 patients, of whom 6,528 received an ICI (nivolumab, 1,534; pembrolizumab, 1,522; atezolizumab, 751; and ipilimumab, 2,721) and 4,926 had not. Compared with non-ICI arms, ICIs were associated with more all-grade colitis (RR 7.66, P &amp;lt; 0.001), aspartate aminotransferase (AST) elevation (RR 1.80; P = 0.020), rash (RR 2.50; P = 0.001), hypothyroidism (RR 6.81; P &amp;lt; 0.001), and pneumonitis (RR 4.14; P = 0.012). Rates of high-grade colitis (RR 5.85; P &amp;lt; 0.001) and AST elevation (RR 2.79; P = 0.014) were higher in the ICI arms. Ipilimumab was associated with a higher risk of all-grade rash (P = 0.006) and high-grade colitis (P = 0.021) compared with PD-1/PD-L1 ICIs. Incidence of fatal irAE was &amp;lt; 1%. This meta-analysis offers substantial evidence that ICIs are associated with a small but significant increase in risk of selected all-grade irAEs and high-grade gastrointestinal and liver toxicities. Although fatal irAEs remain rare, AEs should be recognized promptly as early interventions may alleviate future complications. Cancer Immunol Res; 5(4); 312–8. ©2017 AACR.

The role of adjuvant chemotherapy remains poorly defined for the management of muscle-invasive bladder cancer (MIBC). The last meta-analysis evaluating adjuvant chemotherapy, conducted in 2005, had limited power to fully support its use. To update the current evidence of the benefit of postoperative adjuvant cisplatin-based chemotherapy compared with control (ie, surgery alone) in patients with MIBC. A comprehensive literature review was performed to identify all randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing adjuvant cisplatin-based chemotherapy with control for patients with MIBC. The search included the Medline, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases, and abstracts from the American Society of Clinical Oncology meetings up to May 2013. An updated systematic review and meta-analysis was performed. A total of 945 patients included in nine RCTs (five previously analyzed, one updated, and three new) were examined. For overall survival, the pooled hazard ratio (HR) across all nine trials was 0.77 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.59–0.99; p = 0.049). For disease-free survival, the pooled HR across seven trials reporting this outcome was 0.66 (95% CI, 0.45–0.91; p = 0.014). This disease-free survival benefit was more apparent among those with positive nodal involvement (p = 0.010). This updated and improved meta-analysis of randomized trials provides further evidence of an overall survival and disease-free survival benefit in patients with MIBC receiving adjuvant cisplatin-based chemotherapy after radical cystectomy.

Purpose The present study sought to identify pretreatment prognostic factors for overall survival (OS) in patients with metastatic transitional cell carcinoma of the urothelial tract (TCCU) who experienced treatment failure with the first-line, platinum-based regimen included in the phase III vinflunine trial. Patients and Methods In total, 370 patients with platinum-refractory TCCU were included in this analysis. Potential prognostic factors were recorded prospectively. Univariate analysis was used to identify clinical and laboratory factors that significantly impact survival. Multivariate analysis was used to identify independent prognostic factors, and bootstrap analysis was performed for internal validation, forming a prognostic model. External validation was performed on the phase II vinflunine study CA183001. Results Multivariate analysis and the internal validation identified Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (PS) more than 0, hemoglobin level less than 10 g/dL, and the presence of liver metastasis as the main adverse prognostic factors for OS. External validation confirmed these prognostic factors. Four subgroups were formed based on the presence of zero, one, two, or three prognostic factors; the median OS times for these groups were 14.2, 7.3, 3.8, and 1.7 months (P &lt; .001), respectively. Conclusion We identified and both internally and externally validated three adverse risk factors (PS, hemoglobin level, and liver metastasis) that predict for OS and developed a scoring system that classifies patients with platinum-refractory disease on second-line chemotherapy into four risk groups with different outcome. Similar to the first-line setting, the presence of visceral metastases and poor PS predict a worse prognosis. These factors, together with low hemoglobin, can be used for prognostication and future patient stratification in clinical trials.

No AccessJournal of UrologyAdult Urology1 Jan 2011The Impact of Cytoreductive Nephrectomy on Survival of Patients With Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Receiving Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor Targeted Therapy Toni K. Choueiri, Wanling Xie, Christian Kollmannsberger, Scott North, Jennifer J. Knox, J. Geoffrey Lampard, David F. McDermott, Brian I. Rini, and Daniel Y.C. Heng Toni K. ChoueiriToni K. Choueiri Kidney Cancer Center, Dana Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, Massachusetts More articles by this author , Wanling XieWanling Xie Kidney Cancer Center, Dana Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, Massachusetts More articles by this author , Christian KollmannsbergerChristian Kollmannsberger British Columbia Cancer Agency, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada More articles by this author , Scott NorthScott North Cross Cancer Institute, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada More articles by this author , Jennifer J. KnoxJennifer J. Knox Princess Margaret Hospital, Toronto, Ontario, Canada More articles by this author , J. Geoffrey LampardJ. Geoffrey Lampard University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada More articles by this author , David F. McDermottDavid F. McDermott Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, Massachusetts More articles by this author , Brian I. RiniBrian I. Rini Cleveland Clinic Taussig Cancer Institute, Cleveland, Ohio More articles by this author , and Daniel Y.C. HengDaniel Y.C. Heng Tom Baker Cancer Center, Calgary, Alberta, Canada More articles by this author View All Author Informationhttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2010.09.012AboutFull TextPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints ShareFacebookLinked InTwitterEmail Abstract Purpose: Vascular endothelial growth factor targeted therapy is a standard of care in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma. The role of cytoreductive nephrectomy in the era of novel agents remains poorly defined. Materials and Methods: We retrospectively reviewed baseline characteristics and outcomes of 314 patients with anti-vascular endothelial growth factor therapy naïve, metastatic renal cell carcinoma from United States and Canadian cancer centers to study the impact of cytoreductive nephrectomy on overall survival. Results: Patients who underwent cytoreductive nephrectomy (201) were younger (p <0.01), and more likely to have a better Karnofsky performance status (p <0.01), more than 1 site of metastasis (p = 0.04) and lower corrected calcium levels (p <0.01) compared to those who did not undergo cytoreductive nephrectomy (113). On univariable analysis cytoreductive nephrectomy was associated with a median overall survival of 19.8 months compared to 9.4 months for patients who did not undergo cytoreductive nephrectomy (HR 0.44; 95% CI 0.32, 0.59; p <0.01). On multivariable analysis and adjusting for established prognostic risk factors the overall survival difference persisted (adjusted HR 0.68; 95% CI 0.46, 0.99; p = 0.04) in favor of the cytoreductive nephrectomy group. In subgroup analyses stratified for favorable/intermediate/poor risk criteria, patients in the poor risk group had a marginal benefit (p = 0.06). Similarly patients with Karnofsky performance status less than 80% also had a marginal survival benefit (p = 0.08). Conclusions: In this retrospective study cytoreductive nephrectomy was independently associated with a prolonged overall survival of patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma treated with vascular endothelial growth factor targeted agents, although the benefit is marginal in those patients with poor risk features. References 1 : Nephrectomy followed by interferon alfa-2b compared with interferon alfa-2b alone for metastatic renal-cell cancer. N Engl J Med2001; 345: 1655. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar 2 : Radical nephrectomy plus interferon-alfa-based immunotherapy compared with interferon alfa alone in metastatic renal-cell carcinoma: a randomised trial. Lancet2001; 358: 966. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar 3 : Cytoreductive nephrectomy in patients with metastatic renal cancer: a combined analysis. J Urol2004; 171: 1071. Link, Google Scholar 4 : The current role of angiogenesis inhibitors in the treatment of renal cell carcinoma. Semin Oncol2006; 33: 596. Google Scholar 5 : State-of-the-art treatment of metastatic renal cell carcinoma. Curr Oncol2009; 16: S16. Google Scholar 6 : Optimizing recent advances in metastatic renal cell carcinoma. Curr Oncol Rep2009; 11: 218. Google Scholar 7 : Cytoreductive nephrectomy for metastatic renal cell carcinoma: is it still imperative in the era of targeted therapy?. Clin Cancer Res2007; 13: 693s. Google Scholar 8 : Interferon-alfa as a comparative treatment for clinical trials of new therapies against advanced renal cell carcinoma. J Clin Oncol2002; 20: 289. Google Scholar 9 : Validation and extension of the Memorial Sloan-Kettering prognostic factors model for survival in patients with previously untreated metastatic renal cell carcinoma. J Clin Oncol2005; 23: 832. Google Scholar 10 : Prognostic factors associated with long-term survival in previously untreated metastatic renal cell carcinoma. Ann Oncol2007; 18: 249. Google Scholar 11 : Clinical factors associated with outcome in patients with metastatic clear-cell renal cell carcinoma treated with vascular endothelial growth factor-targeted therapy. Cancer2007; 110: 543. Google Scholar 12 : Prognostic nomogram for sunitinib in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma. Cancer2008; 113: 1552. Google Scholar 13 : Prognostic factors for overall survival in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma treated with vascular endothelial growth factor-targeted agents: results from a large, multicenter study. J Clin Oncol2009; 27: 5794. Google Scholar 14 : Nephrectomy before interleukin-2 therapy for patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma. J Urol1997; 158: 1691. Link, Google Scholar 15 Cowey CL, Amin C, Pruthi RS et al: Neoadjuvant clinical trial with sorafenib for patients with stage II or higher renal cell carcinoma. J Clin Oncol 28: 1502. Google Scholar 16 : Sunitinib for treatment of advanced renal cell cancer: primary tumor response. Clin Cancer Res2008; 14: 2431. Google Scholar 17 : Outcome after cytoreductive nephrectomy for metastatic renal cell carcinoma is predicted by fractional percentage of tumour volume removed. BJU Int2007; 100: 755. Google Scholar 18 Risk MC, Lerner M, Logan T et al: Retrospective comparison of metastatic tumor volume to primary tumor volume in patients undergoing cytoreductive nephrectomy for metastatic renal cell carcinoma. Presented at the 2010 Genitourinary Cancers Symposium, abstract 395. Google Scholar 19 : Temsirolimus, interferon alfa, or both for advanced renal-cell carcinoma. N Engl J Med2007; 356: 2271. Google Scholar 20 : Cytoreductive nephrectomy for kidney cancer with sarcomatoid histology–is up-front resection indicated and, if not, is it avoidable?. J Urol2009; 182: 2164. Link, Google Scholar 21 : Cytoreductive nephrectomy for metastatic renal cell carcinoma with nonclear cell histology. J Urol2007; 178: 1896. Link, Google Scholar 22 : The possible role of postoperative azotemia in enhanced survival of patients with metastatic renal cancer after cytoreductive nephrectomy. Cancer Res2002; 62: 5218. Google Scholar 23 : Disease stage variation in CD4+ and CD8+ T-cell reactivity to the receptor tyrosine kinase EphA2 in patients with renal cell carcinoma. Cancer Res2003; 63: 4481. Google Scholar 24 : Serum immunosuppressive acidic protein and natural killer cell activity in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma before and after nephrectomy. J Urol2000; 164: 673. Link, Google Scholar 25 : Immunological parameters in peripheral blood of patients with renal cell carcinoma before and after nephrectomy. Br J Urol1994; 74: 15. Google Scholar 26 : Evaluation of peri-operative peripheral and renal venous levels of pro- and anti-angiogenic factors and their relevance in patients with renal cell carcinoma. BJU Int2007; 100: 209. Google Scholar © 2011 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.FiguresReferencesRelatedDetailsCited byReese S, Khaleel S, Silagy A, Xie A, Eismann L, Vazquez-Rivera K, Oparanozie A, Patil S, Coleman J, Motzer R, Kotecha R, Russo P, Voss M and Hakimi A (2023) Prognostic Factors for Survival in Patients Undergoing Surveillance After Cytoreductive NephrectomyJournal of Urology, VOL. 210, NO. 2, (273-279), Online publication date: 1-Aug-2023.Bhindi B, Habermann E, Mason R, Costello B, Pagliaro L, Thompson R, Leibovich B and Boorjian S (2018) Comparative Survival following Initial Cytoreductive Nephrectomy versus Initial Targeted Therapy for Metastatic Renal Cell CarcinomaJournal of Urology, VOL. 200, NO. 3, (528-534), Online publication date: 1-Sep-2018.Abel E, Spiess P, Margulis V, Master V, Mann M, Zargar-Shoshtari K, Borregales L, Sexton W, Patil D, Matin S, Wood C and Karam J (2017) Cytoreductive Nephrectomy for Renal Cell Carcinoma with Venous Tumor ThrombusJournal of Urology, VOL. 198, NO. 2, (281-288), Online publication date: 1-Aug-2017.Laguna M (2016) Re: First-Line Sunitinib versus Pazopanib in Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma: Results from the International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database ConsortiumJournal of Urology, VOL. 197, NO. 3 Part 1, (603-603), Online publication date: 1-Mar-2017.Gershman B, Thompson R, Moreira D, Boorjian S, Lohse C, Costello B, Cheville J and Leibovich B (2016) Lymph Node Dissection is Not Associated with Improved Survival among Patients Undergoing Cytoreductive Nephrectomy for Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma: A Propensity Score Based AnalysisJournal of Urology, VOL. 197, NO. 3 Part 1, (574-579), Online publication date: 1-Mar-2017.Laguna M (2016) Re: Comprehensive Characterization of the Perioperative Morbidity of Cytoreductive NephrectomyJournal of Urology, VOL. 196, NO. 1, (57-59), Online publication date: 1-Jul-2016.Laguna M (2015) Re: Cytoreductive Nephrectomy in Patients with Synchronous Metastases from Renal Cell Carcinoma: Results from the International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database ConsortiumJournal of Urology, VOL. 193, NO. 5, (1514-1515), Online publication date: 1-May-2015.Smaldone M, Handorf E, Kim S, Thompson R, Costello B, Corcoran A, Wong Y, Uzzo R, Leibovich B, Kutikov A and Boorjian S (2014) Temporal Trends and Factors Associated with Systemic Therapy after Cytoreductive Nephrectomy: An Analysis of the National Cancer DatabaseJournal of Urology, VOL. 193, NO. 4, (1108-1113), Online publication date: 1-Apr-2015.Tilki D, Hu B, Nguyen H, Dall’Era M, Bertini R, Carballido J, Chandrasekar T, Chromecki T, Ciancio G, Daneshmand S, Gontero P, Gonzalez J, Haferkamp A, Hohenfellner M, Huang W, Koppie T, Linares E, Lorentz C, Mandel P, Martinez-Salamanca J, Master V, Matloob R, McKiernan J, Mlynarczyk C, Montorsi F, Novara G, Pahernik S, Palou J, Pruthi R, Ramaswamy K, Rodriguez Faba O, Russo P, Shariat S, Spahn M, Terrone C, Thieu W, Vergho D, Wallen E, Xylinas E, Zigeuner R, Libertino J and Evans C (2014) Impact of Synchronous Metastasis Distribution on Cancer Specific Survival in Renal Cell Carcinoma after Radical Nephrectomy with Tumor ThrombectomyJournal of Urology, VOL. 193, NO. 2, (436-442), Online publication date: 1-Feb-2015.Babaian K, Merrill M, Matin S, Tamboli P, Tannir N, Jonasch E, Wood C and Karam J (2014) Partial Nephrectomy in the Setting of Metastatic Renal Cell CarcinomaJournal of Urology, VOL. 192, NO. 1, (36-42), Online publication date: 1-Jul-2014.McKiernan J and Wood C (2013) Cytoreductive Nephrectomy for Metastatic Renal Cell CarcinomaJournal of Urology, VOL. 190, NO. 2, (386-388), Online publication date: 1-Aug-2013. Volume 185Issue 1January 2011Page: 60-66 Advertisement Copyright & Permissions© 2011 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.Keywordsneoplasm metastasiscarcinomarenal cellprognosisnephrectomysurvivalMetrics Author Information Toni K. Choueiri Kidney Cancer Center, Dana Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, Massachusetts More articles by this author Wanling Xie Kidney Cancer Center, Dana Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, Massachusetts More articles by this author Christian Kollmannsberger British Columbia Cancer Agency, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada More articles by this author Scott North Cross Cancer Institute, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada More articles by this author Jennifer J. Knox Princess Margaret Hospital, Toronto, Ontario, Canada More articles by this author J. Geoffrey Lampard University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada More articles by this author David F. McDermott Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, Massachusetts More articles by this author Brian I. Rini Cleveland Clinic Taussig Cancer Institute, Cleveland, Ohio More articles by this author Daniel Y.C. Heng Tom Baker Cancer Center, Calgary, Alberta, Canada More articles by this author Expand All Advertisement PDF downloadLoading ...

Purpose This phase III trial evaluated the efficacy and safety of pazopanib versus placebo in patients with locally advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC) at high risk for relapse after nephrectomy. Patients and Methods A total of 1,538 patients with resected pT2 (high grade) or ≥ pT3, including N1, clear cell RCC were randomly assigned to pazopanib or placebo for 1 year; 403 patients received a starting dose of 800 mg or placebo. To address toxicity attrition, the 800-mg starting dose was lowered to 600 mg, and the primary end point analysis was changed to disease-free survival (DFS) for pazopanib 600 mg versus placebo (n = 1,135). Primary analysis was performed after 350 DFS events in the intent-to-treat (ITT) pazopanib 600 mg group (ITT600mg), and DFS follow-up analysis was performed 12 months later. Secondary end point analyses included DFS with ITT pazopanib 800 mg (ITT800mg) and safety. Results The primary analysis results of DFS ITT600mg favored pazopanib but did not show a significant improvement over placebo (hazard ratio [HR], 0.86; 95% CI, 0.70 to 1.06; P = .165). The secondary analysis of DFS in ITT800mg (n = 403) yielded an HR of 0.69 (95% CI, 0.51 to 0.94). Follow-up analysis in ITT600mg yielded an HR of 0.94 (95% CI, 0.77 to 1.14). Increased ALT and AST were common adverse events leading to treatment discontinuation in the pazopanib 600 mg (ALT, 16%; AST, 5%) and 800 mg (ALT, 18%; AST, 7%) groups. Conclusion The results of the primary DFS analysis of pazopanib 600 mg showed no benefit over placebo in the adjuvant setting.

DNA aptamers represent a novel strategy in anti-cancer medicine. AS1411, a DNA aptamer targeting nucleolin (a protein which is overexpressed in many tumor types), was evaluated in patients with metastatic, clear-cell, renal cell carcinoma (RCC) who had failed treatment with ≥1 prior tyrosine kinase inhibitor.In this phase II, single-arm study, AS1411 was administered at 40 mg/kg/day by continuous intravenous infusion on days 1-4 of a 28-day cycle, for two cycles. Primary endpoint was overall response rate; progression-free survival (PFS) and safety were secondary endpoints.35 patients were enrolled and treated. One patient (2.9 %) had a response to treatment. The response was dramatic (84 % reduction in tumor burden by RECIST 1.0 criteria) and durable (patient remains free of progression 2 years after completing therapy). Whole exome sequencing of this patient's tumor revealed missense mutations in the mTOR and FGFR2 genes which is of interest because nucleolin is known to upregulate mTOR pathway activity by enhancing AKT1 mRNA translation. No other responses were seen. Thirty-four percent of patients had an AS1411-related adverse event, all of which were mild or moderate.AS1411 appears to have minimal activity in unselected patients with metastatic RCC. However, rare, dramatic and durable responses can be observed and toxicity is low. One patient in this study had an excellent response and was found to have FGFR2 and mTOR mutations which will be of interest in future efforts to discover and validate predictive biomarkers of response to nucleolin targeted compounds. DNA aptamers represent a novel way to target cancer cells at a molecular level and continue to be developed with a view to improving treatment and imaging in cancer medicine.

(Immunity 48, 812–830.e1–e14; April 17, 2018) In the originally published version of this article, the authors neglected to include Younes Mokrab and Aaron M. Newman as co-authors and misspelled the names of authors Charles S. Rabkin and Ilya Shmulevich. The author names have been corrected here and online. In addition, the concluding sentence of the subsection “Immune Signature Compilation” in the Method Details in the original published article was deemed unclear because it did not specify differences among the gene set scoring methods. The concluding sentences now reads “Gene sets from Bindea et al., Senbabaoglu et al., and the MSigDB C7 collection were scored using single-sample gene set enrichment (ssGSEA) analysis (Barbie et al., 2009), as implemented in the GSVA R package (Hänzelmann et al., 2013). All other signatures were scored using methods found in the associated citations.” The Immune Landscape of CancerThorsson et al.ImmunityApril 5, 2018In BriefThorsson et al. present immunogenomics analyses of more than 10,000 tumors, identifying six immune subtypes that encompass multiple cancer types and are hypothesized to define immune response patterns impacting prognosis. This work provides a resource for understanding tumor-immune interactions, with implications for identifying ways to advance research on immunotherapy. Full-Text PDF Open Access

Previous studies combining PD-1 checkpoint inhibitors with tyrosine kinase inhibitors of the VEGF pathway have been characterised by excess toxicity, precluding further development. We hypothesised that axitinib, a more selective VEGF inhibitor than others previously tested, could be combined safely with pembrolizumab (anti-PD-1) and yield antitumour activity in patients with treatment-naive advanced renal cell carcinoma.In this ongoing, open-label, phase 1b study, which was done at ten centres in the USA, we enrolled patients aged 18 years or older who had advanced renal cell carcinoma (predominantly clear cell subtype) with their primary tumour resected, and at least one measureable lesion, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0-1, controlled hypertension, and no previous systemic therapy for renal cell carcinoma. Eligible patients received axitinib plus pembrolizumab in a dose-finding phase to estimate the maximum tolerated dose, and additional patients were enrolled into a dose-expansion phase to further establish safety and determine preliminary efficacy. Axitinib 5 mg was administered orally twice per day with pembrolizumab 2 mg/kg given intravenously every 3 weeks. We assessed safety in all patients who received at least one dose of axitinib or pembrolizumab; antitumour activity was assessed in all patients who received study treatment and had an adequate baseline tumour assessment. The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed dose-limiting toxicity during the first two cycles (6 weeks) to estimate the maximum tolerated dose and recommended phase 2 dose. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02133742.Between Sept 23, 2014, and March 25, 2015, we enrolled 11 patients with previously untreated advanced renal cell carcinoma to the dose-finding phase and between June 3, 2015, and Oct 13, 2015, we enrolled 41 patients to the dose-expansion phase. All 52 patients were analysed together. No unexpected toxicities were observed. Three dose-limiting toxicities were reported in the 11 patients treated during the 6-week observation period (dose-finding phase): one patient had a transient ischaemic attack and two patients were only able to complete less than 75% of the planned axitinib dose because of treatment-related toxicity. At the data cutoff date (March 31, 2017), 25 (48%) patients were still receiving study treatment. Grade 3 or worse treatment-related adverse events occurred in 34 (65%) patients; the most common included hypertension (n=12 [23%]), diarrhoea (n=5 [10%]), fatigue (n=5 [10%]), and increased alanine aminotransferase concentration (n=4 [8%]). The most common potentially immune-related adverse events (probably related to pembrolizumab) included diarrhoea (n=15 [29%]), increased alanine aminotransferase concentration (n=9 [17%]) or aspartate aminotransferase concentration (n=7 [13%]), hypothyroidism (n=7 [13%]), and fatigue (n=6 [12%]). 28 (54%) patients had treatment-related serious adverse events. At data cutoff, 38 (73%; 95% CI 59·0-84·4) patients achieved an objective response (complete or partial response).The treatment combination of axitinib plus pembrolizumab is tolerable and shows promising antitumour activity in patients with treatment-naive advanced renal cell carcinoma. Whether or not the combination works better than a sequence of VEGF pathway inhibition followed by an anti-PD-1 therapy awaits the completion of a phase 3 trial comparing axitinib plus pembrolizumab with sunitinib monotherapy (NCT02853331).Pfizer Inc.

On the basis of multidimensional and comprehensive molecular characterization (including DNA methalylation and copy number, RNA, and protein expression), we classified 894 renal cell carcinomas (RCCs) of various histologic types into nine major genomic subtypes. Site of origin within the nephron was one major determinant in the classification, reflecting differences among clear cell, chromophobe, and papillary RCC. Widespread molecular changes associated with TFE3 gene fusion or chromatin modifier genes were present within a specific subtype and spanned multiple subtypes. Differences in patient survival and in alteration of specific pathways (including hypoxia, metabolism, MAP kinase, NRF2-ARE, Hippo, immune checkpoint, and PI3K/AKT/mTOR) could further distinguish the subtypes. Immune checkpoint markers and molecular signatures of T cell infiltrates were both highest in the subtype associated with aggressive clear cell RCC. Differences between the genomic subtypes suggest that therapeutic strategies could be tailored to each RCC disease subset.

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.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.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).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.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.

Purpose The von Hippel-Lindau tumor suppressor is inactivated in the majority of clear cell renal cell carcinomas (ccRCCs), leading to inappropriate stabilization of hypoxia-inducible factor-2α (HIF-2α). PT2385 is a first-in-class HIF-2α antagonist. Objectives of this first-in-human study were to characterize the safety, pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, and efficacy, and to identify the recommended phase II dose (RP2D) of PT2385. Patients and Methods Eligible patients had locally advanced or metastatic ccRCC that had progressed during one or more prior regimens that included a vascular endothelial growth factor inhibitor. PT2385 was administered orally at twice-per-day doses of 100 to 1,800 mg, according to a 3 + 3 dose-escalation design, followed by an expansion phase at the RP2D. Results The dose-escalation and expansion phases enrolled 26 and 25 patients, respectively. Patients were heavily pretreated, with a median of four (range, one to seven) prior therapies. No dose-limiting toxicity was observed at any dose. On the basis of safety, pharmacokinetic, and pharmacodynamic profiling, the RP2D was defined as 800 mg twice per day. PT2385 was well tolerated, with anemia (grade 1 to 2, 35%; grade 3, 10%), peripheral edema (grade 1 to 2, 37%; grade 3, 2%), and fatigue (grade 1 to 2, 37%; no grade 3 or 4) being the most common treatment-emergent adverse events. No patients discontinued treatment because of adverse events. Complete response, partial response, and stable disease as best response were achieved by 2%, 12%, and 52% of patients, respectively. At data cutoff, eight patients remained in the study, with 13 patients in the study for ≥ 1 year. Conclusion PT2385 has a favorable safety profile and is active in patients with heavily pretreated ccRCC, validating direct HIF-2α antagonism for the treatment of patients with ccRCC.

Intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) and laparoscopic or robotic minimally invasive radical prostatectomy (MIRP) are costlier alternatives to three-dimensional conformal radiation therapy (3D-CRT) and open radical prostatectomy for treating prostate cancer. We assessed temporal trends in their utilization and their impact on national health care spending.Using Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results-Medicare linked data, we determined treatment patterns for 45,636 men age ≥ 65 years who received definitive surgery or radiation for localized prostate cancer diagnosed from 2002 to 2005. Costs attributable to prostate cancer care were the difference in Medicare payments in the year after versus the year before diagnosis.Patients received surgery (26%), external RT (38%), or brachytherapy with or without RT (36%). Among surgical patients, MIRP utilization increased substantially (1.5% among 2002 diagnoses v 28.7% among 2005 diagnoses, P < .001). For RT, IMRT utilization increased substantially (28.7% v 81.7%; P < .001) and for men receiving brachytherapy, supplemental IMRT increased significantly (8.5% v 31.1%; P < .001). The mean incremental cost of IMRT versus 3D-CRT was $10,986 (in 2008 dollars); of brachytherapy plus IMRT versus brachytherapy plus 3D-CRT was $10,789; of MIRP versus open RP was $293. Extrapolating these figures to the total US population results in excess spending of $282 million for IMRT, $59 million for brachytherapy plus IMRT, and $4 million for MIRP, compared to less costly alternatives for men diagnosed in 2005.Costlier prostate cancer therapies were rapidly and widely adopted, resulting in additional national spending of more than $350 million among men diagnosed in 2005 and suggesting the need for comparative effectiveness research to weigh their costs against their benefits.

The randomised phase 2 CABOSUN trial comparing cabozantinib with sunitinib as initial therapy for advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC) of intermediate or poor risk met the primary end-point of improving progression-free survival (PFS) as assessed by investigator. We report PFS by independent radiology review committee (IRC) assessment, ORR per IRC and updated overall survival (OS).Previously untreated patients with advanced RCC of intermediate or poor risk by IMDC criteria were randomised 1:1 to cabozantinib 60 mg daily or sunitinib 50 mg daily (4 weeks on/2 weeks off). Stratification was by risk group and presence of bone metastases.A total of 157 patients were randomised 1:1 to cabozantinib (n = 79) or sunitinib (n = 78). Median PFS per IRC was 8.6 months (95% confidence interval [CI] 6.8-14.0) versus 5.3 months (95% CI 3.0-8.2) for cabozantinib versus sunitinib (hazard ratio [HR] 0.48 [95% CI 0.31-0.74]; two-sided p = 0.0008), and ORR per IRC was 20% (95% CI 12.0-30.8) versus 9% (95% CI 3.7-17.6), respectively. Subgroup analyses of PFS by stratification factors and MET tumour expression were consistent with results for the overall population. With a median follow-up of 34.5 months, median OS was 26.6 months (95% CI 14.6-not estimable) with cabozantinib and 21.2 months (95% CI 16.3-27.4) with sunitinib (HR 0.80 [95% CI 0.53-1.21]. The incidence of grade 3 or 4 adverse events was 68% for cabozantinib and 65% for sunitinib.In this phase 2 trial, cabozantinib treatment significantly prolonged PFS per IRC compared with sunitinib as initial systemic therapy for advanced RCC of poor or intermediate risk.NCT01835158.

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.

Sunitinib and everolimus are standard first-line and second-line therapies, respectively, in clear cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC). To conduct a randomized phase 2 trial comparing sunitinib and everolimus in non–clear cell RCC (non-ccRCC). Patients with metastatic, non-ccRCC, or ccRCC with >20% sarcomatoid features (ccSRCC) were randomized to receive sunitinib or everolimus with crossover at disease progression. Primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS) in first-line therapy; 108 patients were needed to show improvement in median PFS (mPFS) from 12 wk with sunitinib to 20 wk with everolimus. Interim analysis of 68 patients (papillary [27], chromophobe [12], unclassified [10], translocation [7], ccSRCC [12]) prompted early trial closure. The mPFS in first-line therapy was 6.1 mo with sunitinib and 4.1 mo with everolimus (p = 0.6); median overall survival (mOS) was not reached with sunitinib and was 10.5 mo with everolimus, respectively (p = 0.014). At final analysis, mOS was 16.2 and 14.9 mo with sunitinib and everolimus, respectively (p = 0.18). There were four partial responses (PRs) in first-line therapy (sunitinib: 3 of 33 [9%]; everolimus, 1 of 35 [2.8%]) and four PRs in second-line therapy (sunitinib: 2 of 21 [9.5%]; everolimus, 2 of 23 [8.6%]), with mPFS of 1.8 mo and 2.8 mo, respectively. In patients without sarcomatoid features in their tumors (n = 49), mOS was 31.6 mo with sunitinib and 10.5 mo with everolimus (p = 0.075). Genomic profiling of a chromophobe RCC from a patient with a PR to first-line everolimus revealed a somatic TSC2 mutation. In this trial, everolimus was not superior to sunitinib. Both agents demonstrated modest efficacy, underscoring the need for better therapies in non-ccRCC. This randomized phase 2 trial provides the first head-to-head comparison of everolimus and sunitinib in patients with metastatic non–clear cell renal cell carcinoma (non-ccRCC). The observed very modest efficacy underscores the need to develop more effective therapies for non-ccRCC.

Background Adrenocortical carcinoma is a rare, aggressive cancer for which few treatment options are available. Linsitinib (OSI-906) is a potent, oral small molecule inhibitor of both IGF-1R and the insulin receptor, which has shown acceptable tolerability and preliminary evidence of anti-tumour activity. We assessed linsitinib against placebo to investigate efficacy in patients with advanced adrenocortical carcinoma. Methods In this international, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 3 study, adult patients with histologically confirmed locally advanced or metastatic adrenocortical carcinoma were recruited at clinical sites in nine countries. Patients were randomly assigned (2:1) twice-daily 150 mg oral linsitinib or placebo via a web-based, centralised randomisation system and stratified according to previous systemic cytotoxic chemotherapy for adrenocortical carcinoma, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status, and use of one or more oral antihyperglycaemic therapy at randomisation. Allocation was concealed by blinded block size and permuted block randomisation. The primary endpoint was overall survival, calculated from date of randomisation until death from any cause. The primary analysis was done in the intention-to-treat population. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00924989. Findings Between Dec 2, 2009, and July 11, 2011, 139 patients were enrolled, of whom 90 were assigned to linsitinib and 49 to placebo. The trial was unblinded on March 19, 2012, based on data monitoring committee recommendation due to the failure of linsitinib to increase either progression-free survival or overall survival. At database lock and based on 92 deaths, no difference in overall survival was noted between linsitinib and placebo (median 323 days [95% CI 256–507] vs 356 days [249–556]; hazard ratio 0·94 [95% CI 0·61–1·44]; p=0·77). The most common treatment-related adverse events of grade 3 or worse in the linsitinib group were fatigue (three [3%] patients vs no patients in the placebo group), nausea (two [2%] vs none), and hyperglycaemia (two [2%] vs none). No adverse events in the linsitinib group were deemed to be treatment related; one death (due to sepsis and megacolon) in the placebo group was deemed to be treatment related. Interpretation Linsitinib did not increase overall survival and so cannot be recommended as treatment for this general patient population. Further studies of IGF-1R and insulin receptor inhibitors, together with genetic profiling of responders, might pave the way toward individualised and improved therapeutic options in adrenocortical carcinoma. Funding Astellas.

Purpose Bevacizumab is a treatment option in patients with metastatic breast cancer. Congestive heart failure (CHF) has been reported, although the overall incidence and relative risk (RR) of this complication remains unclear. We performed an up-to-date, comprehensive meta-analysis to determine the risk of serious CHF in patients with breast cancer receiving bevacizumab. Methods The databases of Medline were searched for articles from 1966 to March 2010. Abstracts presented at the American Society of Clinical Oncology and the San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium meetings were also searched for relevant clinical trials. Eligible studies include randomized trials with bevacizumab in patients with breast cancer. Adequate reporting of safety profile data was required for inclusion. Statistical analyses were conducted to calculate the summary incidence, RR, and 95% CIs by using random-effects models. Results A total of 3,784 patients were included. Overall incidence results for high-grade CHF in bevacizumab- and placebo-treated patients were 1.6% (95% CI, 1.0% to 2.6%) and 0.4% (95% CI, 0.2% to 1.0%), respectively. The RR of CHF in bevacizumab-treated patients was 4.74 (95% CI, 1.66 to 11.18; P = .001) compared with placebo-treated ones. In subgroup analyses, there were no significant differences in CHF incidence or risk between patients treated with low-dose (2.5 mg/kg) versus high-dose (5 mg/kg) bevacizumab or among patients treated with different chemotherapy regimens. No evidence of publication bias was observed. Conclusion This is the first comprehensive report to show that bevacizumab is associated with an increased risk of significant heart failure in patients with breast cancer.

Abstract Understanding the genetic mechanisms of sensitivity to targeted anticancer therapies may improve patient selection, response to therapy, and rational treatment designs. One approach to increase this understanding involves detailed studies of exceptional responders: rare patients with unexpected exquisite sensitivity or durable responses to therapy. We identified an exceptional responder in a phase I study of pazopanib and everolimus in advanced solid tumors. Whole-exome sequencing of a patient with a 14-month complete response on this trial revealed two concurrent mutations in mTOR, the target of everolimus. In vitro experiments demonstrate that both mutations are activating, suggesting a biologic mechanism for exquisite sensitivity to everolimus in this patient. The use of precision (or “personalized”) medicine approaches to screen patients with cancer for alterations in the mTOR pathway may help to identify subsets of patients who may benefit from targeted therapies directed against mTOR. Significance: The study of exceptional responders represents a promising approach to better understanding the mechanisms that underlie sensitivity to targeted anticancer therapies. Here, we identify two activating mTOR mutations in a patient with exquisite sensitivity to everolimus and pazopanib, suggesting an approach to identifying patients who might benefit most from mTOR inhibitors. Cancer Discov; 4(5); 546–53. ©2014 AACR. See related commentary by Rejto and Abraham, p. 513 This article is highlighted in the In This Issue feature, p. 495

BackgroundProgrammed death ligand-1 (PD-L1) expression in nonclear-cell RCC (non-ccRCC) and its association with clinical outcomes are unknown.MethodsFormalin-fixed paraffin-embedded (FFPE) specimens were obtained from 101 patients with non-ccRCC. PD-L1 expression was evaluated by immunohistochemistry in both tumor cell membrane and tumor-infiltrating mononuclear cells (TIMC). PD-L1 tumor positivity was defined as ≥5% tumor cell membrane staining. For PD-L1 expression in TIMC, a combined score based on the extent of infiltrate and percentage of positive cells was used. Baseline clinico-pathological characteristics and outcome data [time to recurrence (TTR) and overall survival (OS)] were correlated with PD-L1 staining.ResultsAmong 101 patients, 11 (10.9%) were considered PD-L1+ in tumor cells: 2/36 (5.6%) of chromophobe RCC, 5/50 (10%) of papillary RCC, 3/10 (30%) of Xp11.2 translocation RCC and 1/5 (20%) of collecting duct carcinoma. PD-L1 positivity (PD-L1+) in tumor cells was significantly associated with higher stage (P = 0.01) and grade (P = 0.03), as well as shorter OS (P < 0.001). On the other hand, PD-L1 positivity by TIMC was observed in 57 (56.4%) patients: 13/36 (36.1%) of chromophobe RCC, 30/50 (60%) of papillary RCC, 9/10 (90%) of Xp11.2 translocation RCC and 5/5 (100%) of collecting duct carcinoma. A trend toward shorter OS was observed in patients with PD-L1+ in TIMC (P = 0.08). PD-L1+ in both tumor cell membrane and TIMC cells were associated with shorter TTR (P = 0.02 and P = 0.03, respectively).ConclusionIn non-ccRCC, patients with PD-L1+ tumors appear to have worse clinical outcomes, although only PD-L1 positivity in tumor cells is associated with higher tumor stage and grade.

Shirley Liu, Jun Liu and colleagues present a computational method to infer the CDR3 sequences of tumor-infiltrating T cells from RNA-seq data. They apply the method to 9,142 samples across 29 cancer types and show that it can be used to simultaneously identify immunogenic neoantigens and tumor-reactive T cell clonotypes. We developed a computational method to infer the complementarity-determining region 3 (CDR3) sequences of tumor-infiltrating T cells in 9,142 RNA-seq samples across 29 cancer types. We identified over 600,000 CDR3 sequences, including 15% that were full length. CDR3 sequence length distribution and amino acid conservation, as well as variable gene usage, for infiltrating T cells in many tumors, except in brain and kidney cancers, resembled those for peripheral blood cells from healthy donors. We observed a strong association between T cell diversity and tumor mutation load, and we predicted SPAG5 and TSSK6 as putative immunogenic cancer/testis antigens in multiple cancers. Finally, we identified three potential immunogenic somatic mutations on the basis of their co-occurrence with CDR3 sequences. One of them, a PRAMEF4 mutation encoding p.Phe300Val, was predicted to result in peptide binding strongly to both MHC class I and class II molecules, with matched HLA types in its carriers. Our analyses have the potential to simultaneously identify immunogenic neoantigens and tumor-reactive T cell clonotypes.

In 2008, an estimated 54,390 Americans were diagnosed with kidney cancer and 13,010 died of the disease in the United States. 1 Renal cell carcinoma (RCC) comprises approximately 2% of all malignancies, with a median age at diagnosis of 65 years.The rate of RCC has increased 2% per year for the past 65 years.The reason for this increase is unknown.Approximately 90% of renal tumors are RCC, and 85% of these are clear cell tumors. 2Other, less-common cell types include papillary, chromophobe, and Bellini (collecting) duct tumors.Collecting duct carcinoma comprises fewer than 1% of all cases.Medullary renal carcinoma is a variant of collecting duct renal carcinoma and was initially described as occurring in patients who are sickle cell-trait positive.Smoking and obesity are among the risk fac-

Background Sunitinib and sorafenib are oral vascular endothelial growth factor receptor (VEGFR) tyrosine-kinase inhibitors used in various cancers. Bleeding has been described with these agents, although the overall risk remains unclear. We did a systematic review and meta-analysis to calculate the incidence and relative risk associated with use of sunitinib and sorafenib. Methods We searched PubMed (from January, 1966, to April, 2009) and meeting proceedings of the American Society of Clinical Oncology and the European Society of Medical Oncology (2004–09) for relevant clinical trials. Eligible studies included phase 2 and 3 trials and expanded-access programmes. Statistical analyses were done to calculate summary incidences, relative risks, and 95% CI, using random-effects or fixed-effects models based on the heterogeneity of included studies. Findings 23 trials were selected for the meta-analysis, yielding a total of 6779 patients. The incidence of bleeding events (all grades) was 16·7% (95% CI 12·7–21·5), and that of high-grade events was 2·4% (1·6–3·9). The relative risk of all-grade bleeding events associated with sunitinib and sorafenib (for randomised controlled trials only) was 2·0 (1·14–3·49; p=0·015). Our analysis was also stratified by underlying malignant disease (renal-cell carcinoma vs non-renal-cell carcinoma) and agent used, but no differences were recorded. Interpretation Treatment with the VEGFR tyrosine-kinase inhibitors sunitinib and sorafenib is associated with a significant increase in risk of bleeding. Funding None.

Programmed death-1 (PD-1) receptor/PD-1 ligand (PD-L1) pathway negatively regulates T-cell-mediated responses. The prognostic impact of PD-L1 expression needs to be defined in urothelial carcinoma (UC).Formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded tumor samples from 160 patients with UC were retrieved. PD-L1 expression was evaluated by immunohistochemistry using a mouse monoclonal anti-PD-L1 antibody (405.9A11). PD-L1 positivity on tumor cell membrane was defined as ≥5% of tumor cell membrane staining. The extent of tumor-infiltrating mononuclear cells (TIMCs) as well as PD-L1 expression on TIMCs was scored from 0 to 4. A score of 2, 3, or 4 was considered PD-L1-positive. Clinico-pathological variables were documented. The Cox regression model was used to assess the association of PD-L1 expression with overall survival (OS) in patients who developed metastases.TIMCs were present in 143 of the 160 patient samples. Out of 160 samples, 32 (20%) had positive PD-L1 expression in tumor cell membrane. Out of 143 samples with TIMCs, 58 (40%) had positive PD-L1 expression in TIMCs. Smoking history, prior BCG use and chromosome 9 loss did not correlate with PD-L1 expression in either tumor cell membrane or TIMCs. PD-L1 positivity was not different between non-invasive or invasive UC. In patients who developed metastases (M1) and were treated with systemic therapy (n = 100), PD-L1 positivity on tumor cell membrane was seen in 14% of patients and did not correlate with OS (P = 0.45). Out of 89 M1 patients who had evaluable PD-L1 on TIMCs, PD-L1 expression was seen in 33% of patients and was significantly associated with longer OS on multivariate analysis (P = 0.0007).PD-L1 is widely expressed in tumor cell membrane and TIMCs in UC. PD-L1 in tumor cells was not predictive of OS. However, positive PD-L1 expression in TIMCs was significantly associated with longer survival in those patients who developed metastases.

PD-L1 expression in primary clear-cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC) increases the likelihood of response to anti-PD-1 inhibition, but fails to identify all responders. We hypothesized that PD-L1 levels assessed in randomly selected areas of the primary tumors may not accurately reflect expression levels in metastatic lesions, which are the target of systemic therapy. Therefore, we compared PD-L1 expression in a series of primary ccRCC and their metastases. Tissue blocks from 53 primary ccRCCs and 76 corresponding metastases were retrieved. Areas with predominant and highest nuclear grade were selected. Slides were immunostained with a validated anti-PD-L1 antibody (405.9A11). Membranous expression in tumor cells was quantified using H-score. Expression in tumor-infiltrating mononuclear cells (TIMC) was quantified using a combined score. Discordant tumor cell PD-L1 staining between primary tumors and metastases was observed in 11 of 53 cases (20.8%). Overall, tumor cell PD-L1 levels were not different in primary tumors and metastases (P = 0.51). Tumor cell PD-L1 positivity was associated with higher T stage (P = 0.03) and higher Fuhrman nuclear grade (P < 0.01). Within individual lesions, PD-L1 positivity was heterogeneous and almost exclusively detected in high nuclear grade areas (P < 0.001). No difference was found in PD-L1 levels in TIMCs between primary tumors and metastases (P = 0.82). The heterogeneity of PD-L1 expression in ccRCC suggests that its assessment as a predictive biomarker for PD-1 blockade may require analysis of metastatic lesions. Notably, because PD-L1 expression was mostly detected in high nuclear grade areas, to avoid false-negative results, these areas should be specifically selected for assessment.

Survival results are now mature for a noninferiority trial comparing pazopanib with sunitinib in renal-cell carcinoma. Median survival was 42.5 months with pazopanib and 43.6 months with sunitinib, a difference that wasnot significant.

Abstract Purpose: Nivolumab, an anti-PD-1 immune checkpoint inhibitor, improved overall survival versus everolimus in a phase 3 trial of previously treated patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). We investigated immunomodulatory activity of nivolumab in a hypothesis-generating prospective mRCC trial. Experimental Design: Nivolumab was administered intravenously every 3 weeks at 0.3, 2, or 10 mg/kg to previously treated patients and 10 mg/kg to treatment-naïve patients with mRCC. Baseline and on-treatment biopsies and blood were obtained. Clinical activity, tumor-associated lymphocytes, PD-L1 expression (Dako immunohistochemistry; ≥5% vs. &amp;lt;5% tumor membrane staining), tumor gene expression (Affymetrix U219), serum chemokines, and safety were assessed. Results: In 91 treated patients, median overall survival [95% confidence interval (CI)] was 16.4 months [10.1 to not reached (NR)] for nivolumab 0.3 mg/kg, NR for 2 mg/kg, 25.2 months (12.0 to NR) for 10 mg/kg, and NR for treatment-naïve patients. Median percent change from baseline in tumor-associated lymphocytes was 69% (CD3+), 180% (CD4+), and 117% (CD8+). Of 56 baseline biopsies, 32% had ≥5% PD-L1 expression, and there was no consistent change from baseline to on-treatment biopsies. Transcriptional changes in tumors on treatment included upregulation of IFNγ-stimulated genes (e.g., CXCL9). Median increases in chemokine levels from baseline to C2D8 were 101% (CXCL9) and 37% (CXCL10) in peripheral blood. No new safety signals were identified. Conclusions: Immunomodulatory effects of PD-1 inhibition were demonstrated through multiple lines of evidence across nivolumab doses. Biomarker changes from baseline reflect nivolumab pharmacodynamics in the tumor microenvironment. These data may inform potential combinations. Clin Cancer Res; 22(22); 5461–71. ©2016 AACR.

Gene expression signatures have proven to be useful tools in many cancers to identify distinct subtypes of disease based on molecular features that drive pathogenesis, and to aid in predicting clinical outcomes. However, there are no current signatures for kidney cancer that are applicable in a clinical setting.To generate a signature biomarker for the clear cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC) good risk (ccA) and poor risk (ccB) subtype classification that could be readily applied to clinical samples to develop an integrated model for biologically defined risk stratification.A set of 72 ccRCC sample standards was used to develop a 34-gene classifier (ClearCode34) for assigning ccRCC tumors to subtypes. The classifier was applied to RNA-sequencing data from 380 nonmetastatic ccRCC samples from the Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA), and to 157 formalin-fixed clinical samples collected at the University of North Carolina.Kaplan-Meier analyses were performed on the individual cohorts to calculate recurrence-free survival (RFS), cancer-specific survival (CSS), and overall survival (OS). Training and test sets were randomly selected from the combined cohorts to assemble a risk prediction model for disease recurrence.The subtypes were significantly associated with RFS (p<0.01), CSS (p<0.01), and OS (p<0.01). Hazard ratios for subtype classification were similar to those of stage and grade in association with recurrence risk, and remained significant in multivariate analyses. An integrated molecular/clinical model for RFS to assign patients to risk groups was able to accurately predict CSS above established, clinical risk-prediction algorithms.The ClearCode34-based model provides prognostic stratification that improves upon established algorithms to assess risk for recurrence and death for nonmetastatic ccRCC patients.We developed a 34-gene subtype predictor to classify clear cell renal cell carcinoma tumors according to ccA or ccB subtypes and built a subtype-inclusive model to analyze patient survival outcomes.

Purpose In advanced urothelial cancer, treatment with dose-dense methotrexate, vinblastine, doxorubicin, and cisplatin (ddMVAC) results in a high response rate, less toxicity, and few dosing delays. We explored the efficacy and safety of neoadjuvant ddMVAC with pegfilgrastim support in muscle-invasive urothelial cancer (MIUC). Patients and Methods Patients with cT2-cT4, N0-1, M0 MIUC were enrolled. Four cycles of ddMVAC were administered, followed by radical cystectomy. The primary end point was pathologic response (PaR) defined by pathologic downstaging to ≤ pT1N0M0. The study used Simon's optimal two-stage design to evaluate null and alternative hypotheses of PaR rate of 35% versus 55%. Secondary end points included toxicity, disease-free survival (DFS), radiologic response (RaR), and biomarker correlates, including ERCC1. Results Between December 2008 and April 2012, 39 patients (cT2N0, 33%; cT3N0, 18%; cT4N0, 3%; cT2-4N1, 43%; unspecified, 3%) were enrolled. Median follow-up was 2 years. Overall, 49% (80% CI, 38 to 61) achieved PaR of ≤ pT1N0M0, and we concluded this regimen was effective. High-grade (grade ≥ 3) toxicities were observed in 10% of patients, with no neutropenic fevers or treatment-related death. One-year DFS was 89% versus 67% for patients who achieved PaR compared with those who did not (hazard ratio [HR], 2.6; 95% CI, 0.8 to 8.1; P = .08) and 86% versus 62% for patients who achieved RaR compared with those who did not (HR, 4.1; 95% CI, 1.3 to 12.5; P = .009). We found no association between serum tumor markers or ERCC1 expression with response or survival. Conclusion In patients with MIUC, neoadjuvant ddMVAC was well tolerated and resulted in significant pathologic and radiologic downstaging.

The combination of an immune checkpoint inhibitor and a VEGF pathway inhibitor to treat patients with advanced renal-cell carcinoma might increase the clinical benefit of these drugs compared with their use alone. Here, we report preliminary results for the combination of avelumab, an IgG1 monoclonal antibody against the programmed cell death protein ligand PD-L1, and axitinib, a VEGF receptor inhibitor approved for second-line treatment of advanced renal-cell carcinoma, in treatment-naive patients with advanced renal-cell carcinoma.The JAVELIN Renal 100 study is an ongoing open-label, multicentre, dose-finding, and dose-expansion, phase 1b study, done in 14 centres in the USA, UK, and Japan. Eligible patients were aged 18 years or older (≥20 years in Japan) and had histologically or cytologically confirmed advanced renal-cell carcinoma with clear-cell component, life expectancy of at least 3 months, an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 1 or less, received no previous systemic treatment for advanced renal cell carcinoma, and had a resected primary tumour. Patients enrolled into the dose-finding phase received 5 mg axitinib orally twice daily for 7 days, followed by combination therapy with 10 mg/kg avelumab intravenously every 2 weeks and 5 mg axitinib orally twice daily. Based on the pharmacokinetic data from the dose-finding phase, ten additional patients were enrolled into the dose-expansion phase and assigned to this regimen. The other patients in the dose-expansion phase started taking combination therapy directly. The primary endpoint was dose-limiting toxicities in the first 4 weeks (two cycles) of treatment with avelumab plus axitinib. Safety and antitumour activity analyses were done in all patients who received at least one dose of avelumab or axitinib. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02493751.Between Oct 30, 2015, and Sept 30, 2016, we enrolled six patients into the dose-finding phase and 49 into the dose-expansion phase of the study. One dose-limiting toxicity of grade 3 proteinuria due to axitinib was reported among the six patients treated during the dose-finding phase. At the cutoff date (April 13, 2017), six (100%, 95% CI 54-100) of six patients in the dose-finding phase and 26 (53%, 38-68) of 49 patients in the dose-expansion phase had confirmed objective responses (32 [58%, 44-71] of all 55 patients). 32 (58%) of 55 patients had grade 3 or worse treatment-related adverse events, the most frequent being hypertension in 16 (29%) patients and increased concentrations of alanine aminotransferase, amylase, and lipase, and palmar-plantar erythrodysaesthesia syndrome in four (7%) patients each. Six (11%) of 55 patients died before data cutoff, five (9%) due to disease progression and one (2%) due to treatment-related autoimmune myocarditis. At the end of the dose-finding phase, the maximum tolerated dose established for the combination was avelumab 10 mg/kg every 2 weeks and axitinib 5 mg twice daily.The safety profile of the combination avelumab plus axitinib in treatment-naive patients with advanced renal-cell carcinoma seemed to be manageable and consistent with that of each drug alone, and the preliminary data on antitumour activity are encouraging. A phase 3 trial is assessing avelumab and axitinib compared with sunitinib monotherapy.Pfizer and Merck.

Abstract Purpose: The interaction of programmed death-1 ligand (PD-L1) with its receptor (PD-1) on T cells inactivates antitumor immune responses. PD-L1 expression has been associated with poor outcomes in renal cell carcinoma (RCC) but has not been investigated in advanced RCC patients receiving VEGF-targeted therapy. Experimental Design: Formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded specimens were collected at baseline from patients in the COMPARZ trial. Tumor cell PD-L1 expression by IHC was evaluated using H-score (HS). Dual PD-L1/CD68 staining was used to differentiate PD-L1 tumor expression from tumor-associated macrophages. Intratumor CD8-positive T cells were quantified morphometrically. Associations between biomarkers and survival were investigated using the log-rank test. Results: HS data were available from 453 of 1,110 patients. Sixty-four percent of patients had negative PD-L1 expression (HS = 0). Patients with HS &amp;gt; 55 (n = 59, 13%) had significantly shorter overall survival (OS) than those with HS ≤ 55 in both pazopanib and sunitinib arms (median 15.1 vs. 35.6 and 15.3 vs. 27.8 months, respectively, P = 0.03). In both arms, median OS was shortest in patients with HS &amp;gt; 55 and intratumor CD8-positive T-cell counts &amp;gt; 300 (9.6 and 11.9 months with pazopanib and sunitinib, respectively). Median OS in patients with HS ≤ 55 and CD8-positive T-cell counts ≤ 300 was 36.8 and 28.0 months with pazopanib and sunitinib, respectively. Progression-free survival results were similar to OS results. Conclusions: Increased tumor cell PD-L1, or PD-L1 plus tumor CD8-positive T-cell counts, were associated with shorter survival in patients with metastatic RCC receiving VEGF-targeted agents. These findings may have implications for future design of randomized clinical trials in advanced RCC. Clin Cancer Res; 21(5); 1071–7. ©2014 AACR.

To the authors' knowledge, it remains unknown whether race-based differences in cancer outcomes have changed with time. In the current study, the authors assessed whether racial disparities in cancer-specific mortality have improved over the last 20 years.The Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results program was used to identify 2,713,474 patients diagnosed between 1988 and 2007 with either lung, breast, prostate, or colorectal cancer (the leading 3 causes of cancer-related mortality among each sex). After exclusions, 1,001,978 patients remained eligible for analysis. The impact of race on cancer-specific mortality was assessed using the regression model of Fine and Gray; an interaction model evaluated trends over time.African Americans presented with a more advanced stage of disease (P < .001) and underwent definitive therapy less often (P < .001) than whites. After adjustment for demographics and year of diagnosis, African Americans were found to have higher estimates of cancer-specific mortality than whites for all cancers combined (hazards ratio, 1.28; 95% confidence interval, 1.26-1.30 [P < .001]) and within each individual cancer (each P < .05). These differences did not change significantly between 1988 through 1997 and 1998 through 2007, except among patients with breast cancer, in whom survival disparities increased. These findings remained significant after adjustment for stage of disease at presentation and receipt of definitive therapy (hazards ratio for breast cancer mortality in African Americans vs whites: 1.37 from 1988-1997 and 1.53 from 1998-2007; P for interaction, < .001).The survival gap for African Americans has not closed over time. Race-based differences in outcome persist independent of stage of disease and treatment, suggesting that additional strategies beyond screening and improving access to care, such as further research into tumor biologies disproportionately affecting African Americans, are needed to improve survival for African American patients with cancer.

The role of adjuvant chemotherapy (AC) or neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NC) remains poorly defined for the management of upper tract urothelial carcinoma (UTUC), although some studies suggest a benefit.To update the current evidence on the role of NC and AC for UTUC patients.We searched for all studies investigating NC or AC for UTUC in Medline, Embase, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and abstracts from the American Society of Clinical Oncology meetings prior to February 2014. A systematic review and meta-analysis were performed.No randomized trials investigated the role of AC for UTUC. There was one prospective study (n=36) investigating adjuvant carboplatin-paclitaxel and nine retrospective studies, with a total of 482 patients receiving cisplatin-based or non-cisplatin-based AC after nephroureterectomy (NU) and 1300 patients receiving NU alone. Across three cisplatin-based studies, the pooled hazard ratio (HR) for overall survival (OS) was 0.43 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.21-0.89; p=0.023) compared with those who received surgery alone. For disease-free survival (DFS), the pooled HR across two studies was 0.49 (95% CI, 0.24-0.99; p=0.048). Benefit was not seen for non-cisplatin-based regimens. For NC, two phase 2 trials demonstrated favorable pathologic downstaging rates, with 3-yr OS and disease-specific survival (DSS) ≤ 93%. Across two retrospective studies investigating NC, there was a DSS benefit, with a pooled HR of 0.41 (95% CI, 0.22-0.76; p=0.005).There appears to be an OS and DFS benefit for cisplatin-based AC in UTUC. This evidence is limited by the retrospective nature of studies and their relatively small sample size. NC appears to be promising, but more trials are needed to confirm its utility.After a comprehensive search of studies examining the role of chemotherapy for upper tract urothelial cancer, the pooled evidence shows that cisplatin-based adjuvant chemotherapy was beneficial for prolonging survival.

An elevated Neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) is associated with worse outcomes in several malignancies. However, its role with contemporary immune checkpoint blockade (ICB) is unknown. We investigated the utility of NLR in metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) patients treated with PD-1/PD-L1 ICB.We examined NLR at baseline and 6 (±2) weeks later in 142 patients treated between 2009 and 2017 at Dana-Farber Cancer Institute (Boston, USA). Landmark analysis at 6 weeks was conducted to explore the prognostic value of relative NLR change on overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), and objective response rate (ORR). Cox and logistic regression models allowed for adjustment of line of therapy, number of IMDC risk factors, histology and baseline NLR.Median follow up was 16.6 months (range: 0.7-67.8). Median duration on therapy was 5.1 months (<1-61.4). IMDC risk groups were: 18% favorable, 60% intermediate, 23% poor-risk. Forty-four percent were on first-line ICB and 56% on 2nd line or more. Median NLR was 3.9 (1.3-42.4) at baseline and 4.1 (1.1-96.4) at week 6. Patients with a higher baseline NLR showed a trend toward lower ORR, shorter PFS, and shorter OS. Higher NLR at 6 weeks was a significantly stronger predictor of all three outcomes than baseline NLR. Relative NLR change by ≥25% from baseline to 6 weeks after ICB therapy was associated with reduced ORR and an independent prognostic factor for PFS (p < 0.001) and OS (p = 0.004), whereas a decrease in NLR by ≥25% was associated with improved outcomes.Early decline and NLR at 6 weeks are associated with significantly improved outcomes in mRCC patients treated with ICB. The prognostic value of the readily-available NLR warrants larger, prospective validation.

The skeleton and liver are frequently involved sites of metastasis in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (RCC).To analyze outcomes based on the presence of bone metastases (BMs) and/or liver metastases (LMs) in patients with RCC treated with targeted therapy.We conducted a review from the International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium (IMDC) of 2027 patients with metastatic RCC.We analyzed the impact of the site of metastasis on overall survival (OS) and time-to-treatment failure. Statistical analyses were performed using multivariable Cox regression.The presence of BMs was 34% overall, and when stratified by IMDC risk groups was 27%, 33%, and 43% in the favorable-, intermediate-, and poor-risk groups, respectively (p<0.001). The presence of LMs was 19% overall and higher in the poor-risk patients (23%) compared with the favorable- or intermediate-risk groups (17%) (p=0.003). When patients were classified into four groups based on the presence of BMs and/or LMs, the hazard ratio, adjusted for IMDC risk factors, was 1.4 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.22-1.62) for BMs, 1.42 (95% CI, 1.17-1.73) for LMs, and 1.82 (95% CI, 1.47-2.26) for both BMs and LMs compared with other metastatic sites (p<0.0001). The prediction model performance for OS was significantly improved when BMs and LMs were added to the IMDC prognostic model (likelihood ratio test p<0.0001). Data in this analysis were collected retrospectively.The presence of BMs and LMs in patients treated with targeted agents has a negative impact on survival. Patients with BMs and/or LMs may benefit from earlier inclusion on clinical trials of novel agents or combination-based therapies.

Response patterns to nivolumab differ from those seen with other approved targeted therapies. To investigate the efficacy of nivolumab in previously treated patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma who were treated beyond (Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors) RECIST progression. This was a subgroup analysis of patients treated with nivolumab in the phase 3 CheckMate 025 study. Patients continuing to tolerate therapy and exhibiting investigator-assessed clinical benefit were eligible to be treated beyond RECIST progression (TBP) and received therapy for ≥4 wk after first progression; patients not treated beyond RECIST progression (NTBP) received 0 wk to <4 wk of therapy after progression. Nivolumab 3 mg/kg intravenously every 2 wk. Of 406 nivolumab-treated patients, 316 (78%) progressed by RECIST criteria. Of those who progressed, 48% were TBP, 52% were NTBP. Before being TBP, objective response rate (95% confidence interval) was 20% (14–28) and 14% (9–21) in patients TBP and NTBP, respectively. Differences in clinical characteristics assessed at first progression between patients TBP versus NTBP included better Karnofsky performance status, less deterioration in Karnofsky performance status, shorter time to response, lower incidence of new bone lesions, and improved quality of life. Postprogression, 13% of all patients TBP (20/153) had ≥30% tumor burden reduction including patients with preprogression and postprogression tumor measurements (n = 142) and complete/partial response (28%, 8/29), stable disease (6%, 3/47), and progressive disease (14%, 9/66) as their best response before being TBP. Incidence of treatment-related adverse events in patients TBP was lower after (59%) versus before (71%) progression. Limitations included potential bias from the nonrandomized nature of the analysis. A subset of patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma and RECIST progression experienced tumor reduction postprogression with nivolumab, and had an acceptable safety profile. Clinical judgment remains essential when switching therapy. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01668784. A subset of patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma and disease progression may continue to benefit from nivolumab treatment beyond progression as evidenced by tumor reduction postprogression and an acceptable safety profile.

This study aimed to apply the International mRCC Database Consortium (IMDC) prognostic model in metastatic non-clear cell renal cell carcinoma (nccRCC). In addition, the survival outcome of metastatic nccRCC patients was characterized.Data on 2215 patients (1963 with clear-cell RCC [ccRCC] and 252 with nccRCC) treated with first-line VEGF- and mTOR-targeted therapies were collected from the IMDC. Time to treatment failure (TTF) and overall survival (OS) were compared in groups with favorable, intermediate, and poor prognoses according to IMDC prognostic criteriaThe median OS of the entire cohort was 20.9 months. nccRCC patients were younger (P < .0001) and more often presented with low hemoglobin (P = .014) and elevated neutrophils (P = .0001), but otherwise had clinicopathological features similar to those of ccRCC patients. OS (12.8 vs 22.3 months; P < .0001) and TTF (4.2 vs 7.8 months; P < .0001) were worse in nccRCC patients compared with ccRCC patients. The hazard ratio for death and TTF when adjusted for the prognostic factors was 1.41 (95% CI, 1.19-1.67; P < .0001) and 1.54 (95% CI, 1.33-1.79; P < .0001), respectively. The IMDC prognostic model reliably discriminated 3 risk groups to predict OS and TTF in nccRCC; the median OS of the favorable, intermediate, and poor prognosis groups was 31.4, 16.1, and 5.1 months, respectively (P < .0001), and the median TTF was 9.6, 4.9, and 2.1 months, respectively (P < .0001).Although targeted agents have significantly improved the outcome of patients with nccRCC, for the majority survival is still inferior compared with patients with ccRCC. The IMDC prognostic model reliably predicts OS and TTF in nccRCC and ccRCC patients.

Several reports suggest that cisplatin is associated with an increased risk of thromboembolism. However, because the excess risk of venous thromboembolic events (VTEs) with cisplatin-based chemotherapy has not been well described, we conducted a systemic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials evaluating the incidence and risk of VTEs associated with cisplatin-based chemotherapy.PubMed was searched for articles published from January 1, 1990, to December 31, 2010. Eligible studies included prospective randomized phase II and III trials evaluating cisplatin-based versus non-cisplatin-based chemotherapy in patients with solid tumors. Data on all-grade VTEs were extracted. Study quality was calculated using Jadad scores. Incidence rates, relative risks (RRs), and 95% CIs were calculated using a random effects model.A total of 8,216 patients with various advanced solid tumors from 38 randomized controlled trials were included. The incidence of VTEs was 1.92% (95% CI, 1.07 to 2.76) in patients treated with cisplatin-based chemotherapy and 0.79% (95% CI, 0.45 to 1.13) in patients treated with non-cisplatin-based regimens. Patients receiving cisplatin-based chemotherapy had a significantly increased risk of VTEs (RR, 1.67; 95% CI, 1.25 to 2.23; P = .01). Exploratory subgroup analysis revealed the highest RR of VTEs in patients receiving a weekly equivalent cisplatin dose > 30 mg/m(2) (2.71; 95% CI, 1.17 to 6.30; P = .02) and in trials reported during 2000 to 2010 (1.72; 95% CI, 1.27 to 2.34; P = .01).Cisplatin is associated with a significant increase in the risk of VTEs in patients with advanced solid tumors when compared with non-cisplatin-based chemotherapy.

Vascular endothelial growth factor receptor (VEGFR) tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) have become the cornerstone in the treatment of several malignancies. These drugs have also been associated with an increase in the risk of potentially life-threatening adverse events, such as arterial thrombotic events, bleeding, congestive heart failure, and others. We performed an up-to-date meta-analysis to determine the risk of fatal adverse events (FAEs) in patients with cancer treated with VEGFR TKIs.MEDLINE and PubMed databases were searched for articles published from January 1966 to February 2011. Eligible studies were limited to trials of US Food and Drug Administration-approved VEGFR TKIs (pazopanib, sunitinib, and sorafenib) that reported on patients with cancer with any primary tumor type, randomized design, and adequate safety profile. Statistical analyses were conducted to calculate the summary incidence, relative risk (RR), and 95% CIs by using random-effects or fixed-effects models on the basis of the heterogeneity of included studies.In all, 4,679 patients from 10 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were included, with 2,856 from sorafenib, 1,388 from sunitinib, and 435 from pazopanib trials. The incidence of FAEs related to VEGFR TKIs was 1.5% (95% CI, 0.8% to 2.4%) with an RR of 2.23 (95% CI, 1.12 to 4.44; P = .023) compared with control patients. On subgroup analysis, no difference in the rate of FAEs was found between different VEGFR TKIs or tumor types. No evidence of publication bias was observed.In a meta-analysis of RCTs, the use of VEGFR TKIs was associated with an increased risk of FAEs compared with control patients.

The NCCN Guidelines for Kidney Cancer provide multidisciplinary recommendations for the clinical management of patients with clear cell and non-clear cell renal carcinoma. These NCCN Guidelines Insights highlight the recent updates/changes in these guidelines, and updates include axitinib as first-line treatment option for patients with clear cell renal carcinoma, new data to support pazopanib as subsequent therapy for patients with clear cell carcinoma after first-line treatment with another tyrosine kinase inhibitor, and guidelines for follow-up of patients with renal cell carcinoma.

Abstract Purpose: We examined the hypothesis that mutations in mTOR pathway genes are associated with response to rapalogs in metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). Experimental Design: We studied a cohort of mRCC patients who were treated with mTOR inhibitors with distinct clinical outcomes. Tumor DNA from 79 subjects was successfully analyzed for mutations using targeted next-generation sequencing of 560 cancer genes. Responders were defined as those with partial response (PR) by RECIST v1.0 or stable disease with any tumor shrinkage for 6 months or longer. Nonresponders were defined as those with disease progression during the first 3 months of therapy. Fisher exact test assessed the association between mutation status in mTOR pathway genes and treatment response. Results: Mutations in MTOR, TSC1, or TSC2 were more common in responders, 12 (28%) of 43, than nonresponders, 4 (11%) of 36 (P = 0.06). Mutations in TSC1 or TSC2 alone were also more common in responders, 9 (21%), than nonresponders, 2(6%), (P = 0.05). Furthermore, 5 (42%) of 12 subjects with PR had mutations in MTOR, TSC1, or TSC2 compared with 4 (11%) of 36 nonresponders (P = 0.03). Eight additional non-mTOR pathway genes were found to be mutated in at least 4 of 79 tumors (5%); none were associated positively with response. Conclusions: In this cohort of mRCC patients, mutations in MTOR, TSC1, or TSC2 were more common in patients who experienced clinical benefit from rapalogs than in those who progressed. However, a substantial fraction of responders (24 of 43, 56%) had no mTOR pathway mutation identified. Clin Cancer Res; 22(10); 2445–52. ©2016 AACR. See related commentary by Voss and Hsieh, p. 2320

The role of cytoreductive nephrectomy (CN) in metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) has become unclear since the introduction of targeted therapies (TT). We sought to evaluate contemporary utilization rates of CN and to examine the survival benefit of CN compared with non-CN patients treated with TT.We used the National Cancer Data Base to identify patients with clinical mRCC treated with TT between 2006 and 2013. The intervention of interest was CN. Multivariable logistic regression predicting receipt of CN was performed. Overall survival (OS) was examined using Cox regression models and incremental survival analyses were performed. Sensitivity analyses using propensity scores were conducted.Of 15,390 patients treated with TT, 5,374 (35%) underwent CN between 2006 and 2013. Patients who were younger, privately insured, treated at an academic center, and had lower tumor stage and cN0 disease were more likely to undergo CN. The median OS of CN versus non-CN patients was 17.1 (95% CI, 16.3 to 18.0 months) versus 7.7 months (95% CI, 7.4 to 7.9 months; P < .001). In sensitivity analyses using propensity scores adjustment in addition to other available covariates, CN patients had a lower risk of any death (hazard ratio, 0.45; 95% CI, 0.40 to 0.50; P < .001). The survival benefit of CN was +0.7 and +3.6 months in patients who survived ≤ 6 and ≤ 24 months, respectively, versus no CN.CN is performed in three of 10 patients with mRCC who are receiving TT. Several patient and sociodemographic characteristics were associated with receipt of CN. When feasible, CN may offer an OS benefit when combined with TT.

BACKGROUND VEGF signaling pathway inhibitor (anti‐VEGF) therapy is associated with hypertension, but little is known about predisposing clinical characteristics. This study describes the real‐world association between baseline clinical characteristics, blood pressure (BP) response, and survival in patients prescribed anti‐VEGF therapies. METHODS Clinical data from Partners HealthCare in Massachusetts was obtained from adults treated with anti‐VEGF therapies (2002‐2013). Treatment‐induced hypertensive response was defined as worsening of preexisting hypertension or new diagnosis of hypertension (if no prior hypertension history). RESULTS Data from 1120 patients with renal cell carcinoma (32.2%), hepatocellular carcinoma (11.6%), gastrointestinal stromal tumors (12.5%), and other sarcomas (15.3%) were analyzed. Most patients received sunitinib (52%), sorafenib (25.9%), or pazopanib (18%). A treatment‐induced hypertensive response was identified in 49.7% of treated patients. Preexisting hypertension, present in 65.4%, was an independent risk factor for BP elevation (odds ratio [OR], 1.56; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.27‐1.92); other risk factors included age ≥60 years (OR, 1.26; 95% CI, 1.06‐1.52), and body mass index (BMI) ≥25 kg/m 2 (OR, 1.26; 95% CI, 1.04‐1.53). Race, sex, anti‐VEGF therapy prescribed, and baseline antihypertensive class were not significant risk factors. The absolute observed mean increase in BP was 21 mm Hg (systolic)/15 mm Hg (diastolic), both in patients with and without preexisting hypertension. The development of hypertension predicted improved survival (hazard ratio, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.65‐0.89). CONCLUSIONS Preexisting hypertension, age, and BMI identify patients at risk for significant anti‐VEGF therapy‐induced BP elevation. Hypertension appears to be a clinical biomarker of efficacy of anti‐VEGF therapies in a broad range of malignancies. Cancer 2015;121:311–9 . © 2014 American Cancer Society .

Obesity is an established risk factor for clear cell renal cell carcinoma (RCC); however, some reports suggest that RCC developing in obese patients may be more indolent. We investigated the clinical and biologic effect of body mass index (BMI) on treatment outcomes in patients with metastatic RCC.The impact of BMI (high BMI: ≥ 25 kg/m2 v low BMI: < 25 kg/m2) on overall survival (OS) and treatment outcome with targeted therapy was investigated in 1,975 patients from the International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium (IMDC) and in an external validation cohort of 4,657 patients. Gene expression profiling focusing on fatty acid metabolism pathway, in The Cancer Genome Atlas data set, and immunohistochemistry staining for fatty acid synthase (FASN) were also investigated. Cox regression was undertaken to estimate the association of BMI with OS, adjusted for the IMDC prognostic factors.In the IMDC cohort, median OS was 25.6 months (95% CI, 23.2 to 28.6) in patients with high BMI versus 17.1 months (95% CI, 15.5 to 18.5) in patients with low BMI (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.73 to 0.95). In the validation cohort, high BMI was associated with improved OS (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.74 to 0.93; medians: 23.4 months [95% CI, 21.9 to 25.3 months] v 14.5 months [95% CI, 13.8 to 15.9 months], respectively). In The Cancer Genome Atlas data set (n = 61), FASN gene expression inversely correlated with BMI (P = .034), and OS was longer in the low FASN expression group (medians: 36.8 v 15.0 months; P = .002). FASN immunohistochemistry positivity was more frequently detected in IMDC poor (48%) and intermediate (34%) risk groups than in the favorable risk group (17%; P-trend = .015).High BMI is a prognostic factor for improved survival and progression-free survival in patients with metastatic RCC treated with targeted therapy. Underlying biology suggests a role for the FASN pathway.

Purpose Given the lack of randomized trials comparing robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) and open radical prostatectomy (ORP), we sought to re-examine the outcomes of these techniques using a cohort of patients treated in the postdissemination era. Patients and Methods Overall, data from 5,915 patients with prostate cancer treated with RARP or ORP within the SEER-Medicare linked database diagnosed between October 2008 and December 2009 were abstracted. Postoperative complications, blood transfusions, prolonged length of stay (pLOS), readmission, additional cancer therapies, and costs of care within the first year after surgery were compared between the two surgical approaches. To decrease the effect of unmeasured confounders, instrumental variable analysis was performed. Multivariable logistic regression analyses were then performed. Results Overall, 2,439 patients (41.2%) and 3,476 patients (58.8%) underwent ORP and RARP, respectively. In multivariable analyses, patients undergoing RARP had similar odds of overall complications, readmission, and additional cancer therapies compared with patients undergoing ORP. However, RARP was associated with a higher probability of experiencing 30- and 90-day genitourinary and miscellaneous medical complications (all P ≤ .02). Additionally, RARP led to a lower risk of experiencing blood transfusion and of having a pLOS (all P &lt; .001). Finally, first-year reimbursements were greater for patients undergoing RARP compared with ORP (P &lt; .001). Conclusion RARP and ORP have comparable rates of complications and additional cancer therapies, even in the postdissemination era. Although RARP was associated with lower risk of blood transfusions and a slightly shorter length of stay, these benefits do not translate to a decrease in expenditures.

(Cell Reports 23, 313–326; April 3, 2018) In the originally published version of this article, the author list contained two errors. Specifically, David J. Kwiatkowski was misspelled as David J. Kwaitkowski, and William Y. Kim was inadvertently written as William T. Kim. Both names have been corrected online. The authors regret this error. The Cancer Genome Atlas Comprehensive Molecular Characterization of Renal Cell CarcinomaRicketts et al.Cell ReportsApril 5, 2018In BriefRicketts et al. find distinctive features of each RCC subtype, providing the foundation for development of subtype-specific therapeutic and management strategies. Somatic alteration of BAP1, PBRM1, and metabolic pathways correlates with subtype-specific decreased survival, while CDKN2A alteration, DNA hypermethylation, and Th2 immune signature correlate with decreased survival within all subtypes. Full-Text PDF Open Access

Purpose Patients with advanced papillary renal cell carcinoma (PRCC) have limited therapeutic options. PRCC may involve activation of the MET pathway, for example, through gene amplification or mutations. Savolitinib (AZD6094, HMPL-504, volitinib) is a highly selective MET tyrosine kinase inhibitor. We report results of a single-arm, multicenter, phase II study evaluating the safety and efficacy of savolitinib in patients with PRCC according to MET status. Patients and Methods Patients with histologically confirmed locally advanced or metastatic PRCC were enrolled and received savolitinib 600 mg orally once daily. MET-driven PRCC was defined as any of the following: chromosome 7 copy gain, focal MET or HGF gene amplification, or MET kinase domain mutations. Efficacy was assessed according to MET status. Safety, toxicity, and patient-reported health-related quality-of-life outcomes were assessed in all patients. Results Of 109 patients treated, PRCC was MET driven in 44 (40%) and MET independent in 46 (42%); MET status was unknown in 19 (17%). MET-driven PRCC was strongly associated with response; there were eight confirmed partial responders with MET-driven disease (18%), but none with MET-independent disease ( P = .002). Median progression-free survival for patients with MET-driven and MET-independent PRCC was 6.2 months (95% CI, 4.1 to 7.0 months) and 1.4 months (95% CI, 1.4 to 2.7 months), respectively (hazard ratio, 0.33; 95% CI, 0.20 to 0.52; log-rank P &lt; .001). The most frequent adverse events associated with savolitinib were nausea, fatigue, vomiting, and peripheral edema. Conclusion These data show activity and tolerability of savolitinib in the subgroup of patients with MET-driven PRCC. Furthermore, molecular characterization of MET status was more predictive of response to savolitinib than a classification based on pathology. These findings justify investigating savolitinib in MET-driven PRCC.

BACKGROUND Neoadjuvant chemotherapy in pure urothelial bladder cancer provides a significant survival benefit. However, to the authors' knowledge, it is unknown whether this benefit persists in histological variants. The objective of the current study was to assess the effect of neoadjuvant chemotherapy on the probability of non‐organ‐confined disease and overall survival after radical cystectomy (RC) in patients with histological variants. METHODS Querying the National Cancer Data Base, the authors identified 2018 patients with histological variants who were undergoing RC for bladder cancer between 2003 and 2012. Variants were categorized as micropapillary or sarcomatoid differentiation, squamous cell carcinoma, adenocarcinoma, neuroendocrine tumors, and other histology. Logistic regression models estimated the odds of non‐organ‐confined disease at the time of RC for each histological variant, stratified by the receipt of neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Cox regression models were used to examine the effect of neoadjuvant chemotherapy on overall mortality in each variant subgroup. RESULTS Patients with neuroendocrine tumors (odds ratio [OR], 0.16; 95% confidence interval [95% CI], 0.08‐0.32 [ P &lt;.001]), micropapillary differentiation (OR, 0.30; 95% CI, 0.10‐0.95 [ P= .041]), sarcomatoid urothelial carcinoma (OR, 0.40; 95% CI, 0.17‐0.94 [ P= .035]), and adenocarcinoma (OR, 0.24; 95% CI, 0.06‐0.91 [ P= .035]) were less likely to harbor non‐organ‐confined disease at the time of RC when treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy. An overall survival benefit for neoadjuvant chemotherapy was only found in patients with neuroendocrine tumors (hazard ratio, 0.49; 95% CI, 0.33‐0.74 [ P= .001]). CONCLUSIONS Patients with neuroendocrine tumors benefit from neoadjuvant chemotherapy, as evidenced by better overall survival and lower rates of non‐organ‐confined disease at the time of RC. For tumors with micropapillary differentiation, sarcomatoid differentiation, or adenocarcinoma, neoadjuvant chemotherapy decreased the frequency of non‐organ‐confined disease at the time of RC. However, this favorable effect did not translate into a statistically significant overall survival benefit for these patients, potentially due to the aggressive tumor biology. Cancer 2017;123:4346‐55 . © 2017 American Cancer Society .

The first interim analysis of the KEYNOTE-564 study showed improved disease-free survival with adjuvant pembrolizumab compared with placebo after surgery in patients with clear cell renal cell carcinoma at an increased risk of recurrence. The analysis reported here, with an additional 6 months of follow-up, was designed to assess longer-term efficacy and safety of pembrolizumab versus placebo, as well as additional secondary and exploratory endpoints.In the multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 KEYNOTE-564 trial, adults aged 18 years or older with clear cell renal cell carcinoma with an increased risk of recurrence were enrolled at 213 hospitals and cancer centres in North America, South America, Europe, Asia, and Australia. Eligible participants had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1, had undergone nephrectomy 12 weeks or less before randomisation, and had not received previous systemic therapy for advanced renal cell carcinoma. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) via central permuted block randomisation (block size of four) to receive pembrolizumab 200 mg or placebo intravenously every 3 weeks for up to 17 cycles. Randomisation was stratified by metastatic disease status (M0 vs M1), and the M0 group was further stratified by ECOG performance status and geographical region. All participants and investigators involved in study treatment administration were masked to the treatment group assignment. The primary endpoint was disease-free survival by investigator assessment in the intention-to-treat population (all participants randomly assigned to a treatment). Safety was assessed in the safety population, comprising all participants who received at least one dose of pembrolizumab or placebo. As the primary endpoint was met at the first interim analysis, updated data are reported without p values. This study is ongoing, but no longer recruiting, and is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03142334.Between June 30, 2017, and Sept 20, 2019, 994 participants were assigned to receive pembrolizumab (n=496) or placebo (n=498). Median follow-up, defined as the time from randomisation to data cutoff (June 14, 2021), was 30·1 months (IQR 25·7-36·7). Disease-free survival was better with pembrolizumab compared with placebo (HR 0·63 [95% CI 0·50-0·80]). Median disease-free survival was not reached in either group. The most common all-cause grade 3-4 adverse events were hypertension (in 14 [3%] of 496 participants) and increased alanine aminotransferase (in 11 [2%]) in the pembrolizumab group, and hypertension (in 13 [3%] of 498 participants) in the placebo group. Serious adverse events attributed to study treatment occurred in 59 (12%) participants in the pembrolizumab group and one (<1%) participant in the placebo group. No deaths were attributed to pembrolizumab.Updated results from KEYNOTE-564 support the use of adjuvant pembrolizumab monotherapy as a standard of care for participants with renal cell carcinoma with an increased risk of recurrence after nephrectomy.Merck Sharp & Dohme LLC, a subsidiary of Merck & Co, Inc, Rahway, NJ, USA.

In the primary analysis of CheckMate 9ER, nivolumab plus cabozantinib showed superior progression-free survival, overall survival, and objective response over sunitinib in patients with previously untreated advanced renal cell carcinoma (median follow-up of 18·1 months). Here, we report extended follow-up of overall survival and updated efficacy and safety.This open-label, randomised, phase 3 trial was done in 125 hospitals and cancer centres across 18 countries. We included patients aged 18 years or older with previously untreated advanced or metastatic clear-cell renal cell carcinoma, a Karnofsky performance status of 70% or higher, measurable disease according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1 assessed by the investigator, any International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium (IMDC) prognostic risk category, and available tumour tissue for PD-L1 testing. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to nivolumab (240 mg) intravenously every 2 weeks plus cabozantinib (40 mg) orally once daily or sunitinib (50 mg orally) once daily (4 weeks per 6-week cycle). Randomisation, stratified by IMDC risk status, tumour PD-L1 expression, and geographical region, was done by permuted block within each stratum using a block size of four, via an interactive response system. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival by blinded independent central review. Overall survival was a secondary endpoint (reported here as the preplanned final analysis according to the protocol). Efficacy was assessed in all randomly assigned patients; safety was assessed in all patients who received at least one dose of any study drug. This ongoing study, closed to recruitment, is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03141177.Between Sept 11, 2017, and May 14, 2019, 323 patients were randomly assigned to the nivolumab plus cabozantinib group and 328 to the sunitinib group. With an extended follow-up (data cutoff of June 24, 2021; median 32·9 months [IQR 30·4-35·9]), median overall survival was 37·7 months (95% CI 35·5-not estimable) in the nivolumab plus cabozantinib group and 34·3 months (29·0-not estimable) in the sunitinib group (hazard ratio [HR] 0·70 [95% CI 0·55-0·90], p=0·0043) and updated median progression-free survival was 16·6 months (12·8-19·8) versus 8·3 months (7·0-9·7; HR 0·56 [95% CI 0·46-0·68], p<0·0001). Grade 3-4 treatment-related adverse events occurred in 208 (65%) of 320 patients with nivolumab plus cabozantinib versus 172 (54%) of 320 with sunitinib. The most common grade 3-4 treatment-related adverse events were hypertension (40 [13%] of 320 patients in the nivolumab plus cabozantinib group vs 39 [12%] of 320 in the sunitinib group), palmar-plantar erythrodysaesthesia (25 [8%] vs 26 [8%]), and diarrhoea (22 [7%] vs 15 [5%]). Grade 3-4 treatment-related serious adverse events occurred in 70 (22%) of 320 patients in the nivolumab plus cabozantinib group and 31 (10%) of 320 in the cabozantinib group. One additional treatment-related death occurred with sunitinib (sudden death).With extended follow-up and preplanned final overall survival analysis per protocol, nivolumab plus cabozantinib demonstrated improved efficacy versus sunitinib, further supporting the combination in the first-line treatment of advanced renal cell carcinoma.Bristol Myers Squibb and Ono Pharmaceutical.

<h3>Importance</h3> Geriatric (aged ≥80 years) patients are historically underrepresented in cancer clinical trials. Little is known about the efficacy of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) in geriatric patients. These agents are associated with immune-related adverse events (irAEs), which may be particularly associated with morbidity in this population. <h3>Objective</h3> To provide insight into the clinical outcomes and safety of ICIs among geriatric patients (aged ≥80 years) with cancer. <h3>Design, Setting, and Participants</h3> A Multicenter, international retrospective study of 928 geriatric patients with different tumors treated with single-agent ICIs between 2010 to 2019 from 18 academic centers in the US and Europe. Analyses were conducted from January 2021 to April 2021. <h3>Main Outcomes and Measures</h3> Clinical outcomes and irAE patterns in geriatric patients treated with single-agent ICIs. <h3>Results</h3> Median (range) age of the 928 patients at ICI initiation was 83.0 (75.8-97.0) years. Most patients (806 [86.9%]) were treated with anti–programmed cell death 1 therapy. Among the full cohort, the 3 most common tumors were non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC, 345 [37.2%]), melanoma (329 [35.5%]), and genitourinary (GU) tumors (153 [16.5%]). Objective response rates for patients with NSCLC, melanoma, and GU tumors were 32.2%, 39.3%, and 26.2%, respectively. Median PFS and OS, respectively, were 6.7 and 10.9 months (NSCLC), 11.1 and 30.0 months (melanoma), and 6.0 and 15.0 months (GU). Within histologically specific subgroups (NSCLC, melanoma, and GU), clinical outcomes were similar across age subgroups (aged &lt;85 vs ≥85 years). Among all 928 patients, 383 (41.3%) experienced ≥1 irAE(s), including 113 (12.2%) that were reported to be grade (G) 3 to 4 based on Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (version 5.0). The median time to irAE onset was 9.8 weeks; 219 (57%) occurred within the first 3 months after ICI initiation. Discontinuation of treatment with ICIs owing to irAEs occurred in 137 (16.1%) patients. There was no significant difference in the rate of irAEs among patients aged younger than 85, 85 to 89, and 90 years or older. Despite the similar rate of G3 or higher irAEs, ICIs were discontinued due to irAEs more than twice as often among patients aged 90 years or older compared with patients younger than 90 years (30.9% vs 15.1%,<i>P</i> = .008). <h3>Conclusions and Relevance</h3> The findings of this international cohort study suggest that treatment with ICIs may be effective and generally well tolerated among older patients with cancer, though ICI discontinuation owing to irAEs was more frequent with increasing age.

Vaccination is an important preventive health measure to protect against symptomatic and severe COVID-19. Impaired immunity secondary to an underlying malignancy or recent receipt of antineoplastic systemic therapies can result in less robust antibody titers following vaccination and possible risk of breakthrough infection. As clinical trials evaluating COVID-19 vaccines largely excluded patients with a history of cancer and those on active immunosuppression (including chemotherapy), limited evidence is available to inform the clinical efficacy of COVID-19 vaccination across the spectrum of patients with cancer.We describe the clinical features of patients with cancer who developed symptomatic COVID-19 following vaccination and compare weighted outcomes with those of contemporary unvaccinated patients, after adjustment for confounders, using data from the multi-institutional COVID-19 and Cancer Consortium (CCC19).Patients with cancer who develop COVID-19 following vaccination have substantial comorbidities and can present with severe and even lethal infection. Patients harboring hematologic malignancies are over-represented among vaccinated patients with cancer who develop symptomatic COVID-19.Vaccination against COVID-19 remains an essential strategy in protecting vulnerable populations, including patients with cancer. Patients with cancer who develop breakthrough infection despite full vaccination, however, remain at risk of severe outcomes. A multilayered public health mitigation approach that includes vaccination of close contacts, boosters, social distancing, and mask-wearing should be continued for the foreseeable future.

Predictive biomarkers could allow more precise use of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) in treating advanced cancers. Given the central role of HLA molecules in immunity, variation at the HLA loci could differentially affect the response to ICIs. The aim of this epidemiological study was to determine the effect of HLA-A*03 as a biomarker for predicting response to immunotherapy.In this epidemiological study, we investigated the clinical outcomes (overall survival, progression free survival, and objective response rate) after treatment for advanced cancer in eight cohorts of patients: three observational cohorts of patients with various types of advanced tumours (the Memorial Sloan Kettering Integrated Mutation Profiling of Actionable Cancer Targets [MSK-IMPACT] cohort, the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute [DFCI] Profile cohort, and The Cancer Genome Atlas) and five clinical trials of patients with advanced bladder cancer (JAVELIN Solid Tumour) or renal cell carcinoma (CheckMate-009, CheckMate-010, CheckMate-025, and JAVELIN Renal 101). In total, these cohorts included 3335 patients treated with various ICI agents (anti-PD-1, anti-PD-L1, and anti-CTLA-4 inhibitors) and 10 917 patients treated with non-ICI cancer-directed therapeutic approaches. We initially modelled the association of HLA amino-acid variation with overall survival in the MSK-IMPACT discovery cohort, followed by a detailed analysis of the association between HLA-A*03 and clinical outcomes in MSK-IMPACT, with replication in the additional cohorts (two further observational cohorts and five clinical trials).HLA-A*03 was associated in an additive manner with reduced overall survival after ICI treatment in the MSK-IMPACT cohort (HR 1·48 per HLA-A*03 allele [95% CI 1·20-1·82], p=0·00022), the validation DFCI Profile cohort (HR 1·22 per HLA-A*03 allele, 1·05-1·42; p=0·0097), and in the JAVELIN Solid Tumour clinical trial for bladder cancer (HR 1·36 per HLA-A*03 allele, 1·01-1·85; p=0·047). The HLA-A*03 effect was observed across ICI agents and tumour types, but not in patients treated with alternative therapies. Patients with HLA-A*03 had shorter progression-free survival in the pooled patient population from the three CheckMate clinical trials of nivolumab for renal cell carcinoma (HR 1·31, 1·01-1·71; p=0·044), but not in those receiving control (everolimus) therapies. Objective responses were observed in none of eight HLA-A*03 homozygotes in the ICI group (compared with 59 [26·6%] of 222 HLA-A*03 non-carriers and 13 (17·1%) of 76 HLA-A*03 heterozygotes). HLA-A*03 was associated with shorter progression-free survival in patients receiving ICI in the JAVELIN Renal 101 randomised clinical trial for renal cell carcinoma (avelumab plus axitinib; HR 1·59 per HLA-A*03 allele, 1·16-2·16; p=0·0036), but not in those receiving control (sunitinib) therapy. Objective responses were recorded in one (12·5%) of eight HLA-A*03 homozygotes in the ICI group (compared with 162 [63·8%] of 254 HLA-A*03 non-carriers and 40 [55·6%] of 72 HLA-A*03 heterozygotes). HLA-A*03 was associated with impaired outcome in meta-analysis of all 3335 patients treated with ICI at genome-wide significance (p=2·01 × 10-8) with no evidence of heterogeneity in effect (I2 0%, 95% CI 0-0·76) INTERPRETATION: HLA-A*03 is a predictive biomarker of poor response to ICI. Further evaluation of HLA-A*03 is warranted in randomised trials. HLA-A*03 carriage could be considered in decisions to initiate ICI in patients with cancer.National Institutes of Health, Merck KGaA, and Pfizer.

The efficacy and safety of treatment with cabozantinib in combination with nivolumab and ipilimumab in patients with previously untreated advanced renal-cell carcinoma are unknown. Download a PDF of the Research Summary. In this phase 3, double-blind trial, we enrolled patients with advanced clear-cell renal-cell carcinoma who had not previously received treatment and had intermediate or poor prognostic risk according to the International Metastatic Renal-Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium categories. Patients were randomly assigned to receive 40 mg of cabozantinib daily in addition to nivolumab and ipilimumab (experimental group) or matched placebo in addition to nivolumab and ipilimumab (control group). Nivolumab (3 mg per kilogram of body weight) and ipilimumab (1 mg per kilogram) were administered once every 3 weeks for four cycles. Patients then received nivolumab maintenance therapy (480 mg once every 4 weeks) for up to 2 years. The primary end point was progression-free survival, as determined by blinded independent review according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors, version 1.1, and was assessed in the first 550 patients who had undergone randomization. The secondary end point was overall survival, assessed in all patients who had undergone randomization. Overall, 855 patients underwent randomization: 428 were assigned to the experimental group and 427 to the control group. Among the first 550 patients who had undergone randomization (276 in the experimental group and 274 in the control group), the probability of progression-free survival at 12 months was 0.57 in the experimental group and 0.49 in the control group (hazard ratio for disease progression or death, 0.73; 95% confidence interval, 0.57 to 0.94; P=0.01); 43% of the patients in the experimental group and 36% in the control group had a response. Grade 3 or 4 adverse events occurred in 79% of the patients in the experimental group and in 56% in the control group. Follow-up for overall survival is ongoing. Among patients with previously untreated, advanced renal-cell carcinoma who had intermediate or poor prognostic risk, treatment with cabozantinib plus nivolumab and ipilimumab resulted in significantly longer progression-free survival than treatment with nivolumab and ipilimumab alone. Grade 3 or 4 adverse events were more common in the experimental group than in the control group. (Funded by Exelixis; COSMIC-313 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03937219.) QUICK TAKE VIDEO SUMMARYCabozantinib in Advanced Renal-Cell Carcinoma 02:05

Background In the CheckMate 9ER trial, patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma who received first-line nivolumab plus cabozantinib had significantly better progression-free survival compared with those given sunitinib. In this study, we aimed to describe the patient-reported outcome (PRO) results from CheckMate 9ER. Methods In this open-label, randomised, phase 3 trial done in 125 cancer centres, urology centres, and hospitals across 18 countries, patients aged 18 years or older with previously untreated advanced renal cell carcinoma with a clear-cell component, a Karnofsky performance status of 70% or more, and available tumour tissue were randomly assigned (1:1) via interactive response technology to nivolumab 240 mg intravenously every 2 weeks plus oral cabozantinib 40 mg per day, or oral sunitinib 50 mg per day monotherapy for 4 weeks in 6-week cycles. The primary endpoint of progression-free survival was reported previously. PROs were analysed as prespecified exploratory endpoints at common timepoints (at baseline and every 6 weeks) until week 115. Disease-related symptoms were evaluated using the 19-item Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Kidney Symptom Index (FKSI-19), and global health status was assessed with the three-level EQ-5D (EQ-5D-3L) visual analogue scale (VAS) and UK utility index. PRO analyses were done in the intention-to-treat population. Change from baseline was assessed using mixed-model repeated measures. A time-to-deterioration analysis was done for first and confirmed deterioration events. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03141177, and is closed to recruitment. Findings Between Sept 11, 2017, and May 14, 2019, 323 patients were randomly assigned to nivolumab plus cabozantinib and 328 to sunitinib. Median follow-up was 23·5 months (IQR 21·0–26·5). At baseline, patients in both groups reported low symptom burden (FKSI-19 disease-related symptoms version 1 mean scores at baseline were 30·24 [SD 5·19] for the nivolumab plus cabozantinib group and 30·06 [5·03] for the sunitinib group). Change from baseline in PRO scores indicated that nivolumab plus cabozantinib was associated with more favourable outcomes versus sunitinib (treatment difference 2·38 [95% CI 1·20–3·56], nominal p<0·0001, effect size 0·33 [95% CI 0·17–0·50] for FKSI-19 total score; 1·33 [0·84–1·83], nominal p<0·0001, 0·45 [0·28–0·61] for FKSI-19 disease-related symptoms version 1; 3·48 [1·58–5·39], nominal p=0·0004, 0·30 [0·14–0·47] for EQ-5D-3L VAS; and 0·04 [0·01–0·07], nominal p=0·0036, 0·25 [0·08–0·41] for EQ-5D-3L UK utility index), reaching significance at most timepoints. Nivolumab plus cabozantinib was associated with decreased risk of clinically meaningful deterioration for FKSI-19 total score compared with sunitinib (first deterioration event hazard ratio 0·70 [95% CI 0·56–0·86], nominal p=0·0007; confirmed deterioration event 0·63 [0·50–0·80], nominal p=0·0001). Interpretation PROs were maintained or improved with nivolumab plus cabozantinib versus sunitinib. Compared with sunitinib, nivolumab plus cabozantinib significantly delayed time to deterioration of patient-reported outcome scores. These results suggest a benefit for nivolumab plus cabozantinib compared with sunitinib in the treatment of patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma. Funding Bristol Myers Squibb.

The role of upfront cytoreductive nephrectomy (CN) for metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) in the era of immune checkpoint inhibitors is unclear.To evaluate the relationship between upfront CN and clinical outcomes in the setting of mRCC treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors or targeted therapy.Using the International Metastatic RCC Database Consortium, we retrospectively identified patients diagnosed with de novo mRCC treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors or targeted therapy.Overall survival (OS) was compared between the two groups using the Kaplan-Meier method and multivariable Cox regressions adjusting for known prognostic factors.We identified a total of 4639 eligible patients with mRCC. Among the 4202 patients treated with targeted therapy and 437 patients treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors, 2326 (55%) and 234 (54%) patients received upfront CN prior to treatment start. In multivariable analyses, CN was associated with significantly better OS in both the immune checkpoint inhibitor-treated (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.61; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.41-0.90, p = 0.013) and the targeted therapy treatment (HR: 0.72; 95% CI, 0.67-0.78, p < 0.001) group. There was no difference in OS benefit of CN between the immune checkpoint inhibitor and targeted therapy treatment groups (interaction p = 0.6). Limitations include selection of patients from large academic centers and the retrospective nature of the study.Upfront CN is associated with a significant OS benefit in selected patients treated by either immune checkpoint inhibitors or targeted therapy, and still has a role in selected patients in the era of immune checkpoint inhibitors.Before effective systemic therapies were available for metastatic kidney cancer, surgical removal of the primary (kidney) tumor was the mainstay of treatment. The role of removing the primary tumor has recently been called into question given that more effective systemic therapies have become available. In this study, we find that removal of the primary kidney tumor still has a benefit for selected patients treated with highly effective modern systemic therapies, including targeted therapies and immune checkpoint inhibitors.

The immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) pembrolizumab is US FDA approved for treatment of solid tumors with high tumor mutational burden (TMB-high; ≥10 variants/Mb). However, the extent to which TMB-high generalizes as an accurate biomarker in diverse patient populations is largely unknown. Using two clinical cohorts, we investigated the interplay between genetic ancestry, TMB, and tumor-only versus tumor-normal paired sequencing in solid tumors. TMB estimates from tumor-only panels substantially overclassified individuals into the clinically important TMB-high group due to germline contamination, and this bias was particularly pronounced in patients with Asian/African ancestry. Among patients with non-small cell lung cancer treated with ICIs, those misclassified as TMB-high from tumor-only panels did not associate with improved outcomes. TMB-high was significantly associated with improved outcomes only in European ancestries and merits validation in non-European ancestry populations. Ancestry-aware tumor-only TMB calibration and ancestry-diverse biomarker studies are critical to ensure that existing disparities are not exacerbated in precision medicine.

Translocation renal cell carcinoma (tRCC) is a poorly characterized subtype of kidney cancer driven by MiT/TFE gene fusions. Here, we define the landmarks of tRCC through an integrative analysis of 152 patients with tRCC identified across genomic, clinical trial, and retrospective cohorts. Most tRCCs harbor few somatic alterations apart from MiT/TFE fusions and homozygous deletions at chromosome 9p21.3 (19.2% of cases). Transcriptionally, tRCCs display a heightened NRF2-driven antioxidant response that is associated with resistance to targeted therapies. Consistently, we find that outcomes for patients with tRCC treated with vascular endothelial growth factor receptor inhibitors (VEGFR-TKIs) are worse than those treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI). Using multiparametric immunofluorescence, we find that the tumors are infiltrated with CD8+ T cells, though the T cells harbor an exhaustion immunophenotype distinct from that of clear cell RCC. Our findings comprehensively define the clinical and molecular features of tRCC and may inspire new therapeutic hypotheses.

Non-Hispanic Black individuals experience a higher burden of COVID-19 than the general population; hence, there is an urgent need to characterize the unique clinical course and outcomes of COVID-19 in Black patients with cancer.To investigate racial disparities in severity of COVID-19 presentation, clinical complications, and outcomes between Black patients and non-Hispanic White patients with cancer and COVID-19.This retrospective cohort study used data from the COVID-19 and Cancer Consortium registry from March 17, 2020, to November 18, 2020, to examine the clinical characteristics and outcomes of COVID-19 in Black patients with cancer. Data analysis was performed from December 2020 to February 2021.Black and White race recorded in patient's electronic health record.An a priori 5-level ordinal scale including hospitalization intensive care unit admission, mechanical ventilation, and all-cause death.Among 3506 included patients (1768 women [50%]; median [IQR] age, 67 [58-77] years), 1068 (30%) were Black and 2438 (70%) were White. Black patients had higher rates of preexisting comorbidities compared with White patients, including obesity (480 Black patients [45%] vs 925 White patients [38%]), diabetes (411 Black patients [38%] vs 574 White patients [24%]), and kidney disease (248 Black patients [23%] vs 392 White patients [16%]). Despite the similar distribution of cancer type, cancer status, and anticancer therapy at the time of COVID-19 diagnosis, Black patients presented with worse illness and had significantly worse COVID-19 severity (unweighted odds ratio, 1.34 [95% CI, 1.15-1.58]; weighted odds ratio, 1.21 [95% CI, 1.11-1.33]).These findings suggest that Black patients with cancer experience worse COVID-19 outcomes compared with White patients. Understanding and addressing racial inequities within the causal framework of structural racism is essential to reduce the disproportionate burden of diseases, such as COVID-19 and cancer, in Black patients.

Background Immune checkpoint inhibitors are the standard of care for first-line treatment of patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma, yet optimised treatment of patients whose disease progresses after these therapies is unknown. The aim of this study was to determine whether adding atezolizumab to cabozantinib delayed disease progression and prolonged survival in patients with disease progression on or after previous immune checkpoint inhibitor treatment. Methods CONTACT-03 was a multicentre, randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial, done in 135 study sites in 15 countries in Asia, Europe, North America, and South America. Patients aged 18 years or older with locally advanced or metastatic renal cell carcinoma whose disease had progressed with immune checkpoint inhibitors were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive atezolizumab (1200 mg intravenously every 3 weeks) plus cabozantinib (60 mg orally once daily) or cabozantinib alone. Randomisation was done through an interactive voice-response or web-response system in permuted blocks (block size four) and stratified by International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium risk group, line of previous immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy, and renal cell carcinoma histology. The two primary endpoints were progression-free survival per blinded independent central review and overall survival. The primary endpoints were assessed in the intention-to-treat population and safety was assessed in all patients who received at least one dose of study drug. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04338269, and is closed to further accrual. Findings From July 28, 2020, to Dec 27, 2021, 692 patients were screened for eligibility, 522 of whom were assigned to receive atezolizumab–cabozantinib (263 patients) or cabozantinib (259 patients). 401 (77%) patients were male and 121 (23%) patients were female. At data cutoff (Jan 3, 2023), median follow-up was 15·2 months (IQR 10·7–19·3). 171 (65%) patients receiving atezolizumab–cabozantinib and 166 (64%) patients receiving cabozantinib had disease progression per central review or died. Median progression-free survival was 10·6 months (95% CI 9·8–12·3) with atezolizumab–cabozantinib and 10·8 months (10·0–12·5) with cabozantinib (hazard ratio [HR] for disease progression or death 1·03 [95% CI 0·83–1·28]; p=0·78). 89 (34%) patients in the atezolizumab–cabozantinib group and 87 (34%) in the cabozantinib group died. Median overall survival was 25·7 months (95% CI 21·5–not evaluable) with atezolizumab–cabozantinib and was not evaluable (21·1–not evaluable) with cabozantinib (HR for death 0·94 [95% CI 0·70–1·27]; p=0·69). Serious adverse events occurred in 126 (48%) of 262 patients treated with atezolizumab–cabozantinib and 84 (33%) of 256 patients treated with cabozantinib; adverse events leading to death occurred in 17 (6%) patients in the atezolizumab–cabozantinib group and nine (4%) in the cabozantinib group. Interpretation The addition of atezolizumab to cabozantinib did not improve clinical outcomes and led to increased toxicity. These results should discourage sequential use of immune checkpoint inhibitors in patients with renal cell carcinoma outside of clinical trials. Funding F Hoffmann-La Roche and Exelixis.

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

Cytokine storm due to COVID-19 can cause high morbidity and mortality and may be more common in patients with cancer treated with immunotherapy (IO) due to immune system activation.To determine the association of baseline immunosuppression and/or IO-based therapies with COVID-19 severity and cytokine storm in patients with cancer.This registry-based retrospective cohort study included 12 046 patients reported to the COVID-19 and Cancer Consortium (CCC19) registry from March 2020 to May 2022. The CCC19 registry is a centralized international multi-institutional registry of patients with COVID-19 with a current or past diagnosis of cancer. Records analyzed included patients with active or previous cancer who had a laboratory-confirmed infection with SARS-CoV-2 by polymerase chain reaction and/or serologic findings.Immunosuppression due to therapy; systemic anticancer therapy (IO or non-IO).The primary outcome was a 5-level ordinal scale of COVID-19 severity: no complications; hospitalized without requiring oxygen; hospitalized and required oxygen; intensive care unit admission and/or mechanical ventilation; death. The secondary outcome was the occurrence of cytokine storm.The median age of the entire cohort was 65 years (interquartile range [IQR], 54-74) years and 6359 patients were female (52.8%) and 6598 (54.8%) were non-Hispanic White. A total of 599 (5.0%) patients received IO, whereas 4327 (35.9%) received non-IO systemic anticancer therapies, and 7120 (59.1%) did not receive any antineoplastic regimen within 3 months prior to COVID-19 diagnosis. Although no difference in COVID-19 severity and cytokine storm was found in the IO group compared with the untreated group in the total cohort (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.80; 95% CI, 0.56-1.13, and aOR, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.41-1.93, respectively), patients with baseline immunosuppression treated with IO (vs untreated) had worse COVID-19 severity and cytokine storm (aOR, 3.33; 95% CI, 1.38-8.01, and aOR, 4.41; 95% CI, 1.71-11.38, respectively). Patients with immunosuppression receiving non-IO therapies (vs untreated) also had worse COVID-19 severity (aOR, 1.79; 95% CI, 1.36-2.35) and cytokine storm (aOR, 2.32; 95% CI, 1.42-3.79).This cohort study found that in patients with cancer and COVID-19, administration of systemic anticancer therapies, especially IO, in the context of baseline immunosuppression was associated with severe clinical outcomes and the development of cytokine storm.ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04354701.

Breakthrough SARS-CoV-2 infections following vaccination against COVID-19 are of international concern. Patients with cancer have been observed to have worse outcomes associated with COVID-19 during the pandemic. We sought to evaluate the clinical characteristics and outcomes of patients with cancer who developed breakthrough SARS-CoV-2 infections after 2 or 3 doses of mRNA vaccines. We evaluated the clinical characteristics of patients with cancer who developed breakthrough infections using data from the multi-institutional COVID-19 and Cancer Consortium (CCC19; NCT04354701). Analysis was restricted to patients with laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 diagnosed in 2021 or 2022, to allow for a contemporary unvaccinated control population; potential differences were evaluated using a multivariable logistic regression model after inverse probability of treatment weighting to adjust for potential baseline confounding variables. Adjusted odds ratios (aOR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) are reported. The primary endpoint was 30-day mortality, with key secondary endpoints of hospitalization and ICU and/or mechanical ventilation (ICU/MV). The analysis included 2486 patients, of which 564 and 385 had received 2 or 3 doses of an mRNA vaccine prior to infection, respectively. Hematologic malignancies and recent receipt of systemic anti-neoplastic therapy were more frequent among vaccinated patients. Vaccination was associated with improved outcomes: in the primary analysis, 2 doses (aOR: 0.62, 95% CI: 0.44–0.88) and 3 doses (aOR: 0.20, 95% CI: 0.11–0.36) were associated with decreased 30-day mortality. There were similar findings for the key secondary endpoints of ICU/MV (aOR: 0.60, 95% CI: 0.45–0.82 and 0.37, 95% CI: 0.24–0.58) and hospitalization (aOR: 0.60, 95% CI: 0.48–0.75 and 0.35, 95% CI: 0.26–0.46) for 2 and 3 doses, respectively. Importantly, Black patients had higher rates of hospitalization (aOR: 1.47, 95% CI: 1.12–1.92), and Hispanic patients presented with higher rates of ICU/MV (aOR: 1.61, 95% CI: 1.06–2.44). Vaccination against COVID-19, especially with additional doses, is a fundamental strategy in the prevention of adverse outcomes including death, among patients with cancer. This study was partly supported by grants from the National Cancer Institute grant number P30 CA068485 to C-YH, YS, SM, JLW; T32-CA236621 and P30-CA046592 to C.R.F; CTSA 2UL1TR001425-05A1 to TMW-D; ACS/FHI Real-World Data Impact Award, P50 MD017341-01, R21 CA242044-01A1, Susan G. Komen Leadership Grant Hunt to MKA. REDCap is developed and supported by Vanderbilt Institute for Clinical and Translational Research grant support (UL1 TR000445 from NCATS/NIH).

603 Background: First-line nivolumab plus cabozantinib (N+C) demonstrated superiority over sunitinib (S) with 25.4 mo minimum follow-up (median, 32.9 mo) in patients (pts) with aRCC in the CheckMate 9ER trial. Here, we report survival, response per blinded independent central review (BICR), and safety after 3 y minimum follow-up in all randomized pts and by IMDC risk score. Methods: Pts were randomized 1:1 (stratified by IMDC risk score, tumor PD-L1 expression, region) to N 240 mg flat dose IV Q2W + C 40 mg PO QD vs SUN 50 mg PO for 4 wk (6-wk cycles) until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity (max N treatment, 2 y). Primary endpoint: progression-free survival (PFS) by BICR. Secondary endpoints: overall survival (OS), objective response rate (ORR) by BICR, and safety. Results: In total, 323 pts were randomized to N+C and 328 to S. With 36.5 mo minimum follow-up (median, 44.0 mo), PFS and OS benefits were maintained with N+C vs S in intent-to-treat pts. Median PFS was 16.6 vs 8.4 mo (HR 0.59 [95% CI 0.49–0.71], P &lt; 0.0001) and median OS was 49.5 vs 35.5 mo (HR 0.70 [95% CI 0.56–0.87], P = 0.0014). ORR (95% CI) was higher with N+C vs S (56% [50–62] vs 28% [23–33]), and 13% vs 5% of pts achieved complete response (CR), respectively. Median duration of response was 22.1 vs 16.1 mo for N+C vs S. PFS, OS, and response are reported across prespecified IMDC risk groups in the table. Any-grade treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) occurred in 97% vs 93% of pts treated with N+C vs S (grade ≥ 3 TRAE, 67% vs 55%). TRAEs led to discontinuation of C only in 10% of pts, N only in 10% of pts, N+C in 7% of pts, N or C in 28% of pts, and S in 11% of pts. Conclusions: After 3 y minimum follow-up, survival and response benefits were maintained with N+C and remained consistent with previous follow-ups. Median OS with N+C improved by 11.8 mo since the previous data cut. Responses with N+C were durable, with higher CR rates with N+C vs S regardless of IMDC risk group. No new safety signals emerged with additional follow-up in either arm. These results continue to support N+C as a first-line treatment for pts with aRCC. Clinical trial information: NCT03141177 . [Table: see text]

The combination of immuno-oncology (IO) agents ipilimumab and nivolumab (IPI-NIVO) and vascular endothelial growth factor targeted therapies (VEGF-TT) combined with IO (IO-VEGF) are current standard of care first-line treatments for metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). To establish real-world clinical benchmarks for IO combination therapies based on the International mRCC Database Consortium (IMDC) criteria. Patients with mRCC who received first-line IPI-NIVO, IO-VEGF, or VEGF-TT from 2002 to 2021 were identified using the IMDC database and stratified according to IMDC risk groups. Overall survival (OS), time to next treatment (TTNT), and treatment duration (TD) were calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method and compared between IMDC risk groups within each treatment cohort by the log-rank test. The overall response rate (ORR) was calculated by physician assessment of the best overall response. The primary outcome was OS at 18 mo. In total, 728 patients received IPI-NIVO, 282 IO-VEGF, and 7163 VEGF-TT. The median follow-up times for patients remaining alive were 14.3 mo for IPI-NIVO, 14.9 mo IO-VEGF, and 34.4 mo for VEGF-TT. OS at 18 mo for favorable, intermediate, and poor risk was, respectively, 90%, 78%, and 50% for those receiving IPI-NIVO; 93%, 83%, and 74% for IO-VEGF; and 84%, 64%, and 28% for VEGF-TT. ORRs in favorable-, intermediate-, and poor-risk groups were 41.3%, 40.6%, and 33.0% for those receiving IPI-NIVO; 60.3%, 56.8%, and 40.9% for IO-VEGF; and 39.3%, 33.5%, and 20.9% for VEGF-TT, respectively. The IMDC model stratified patients into statistically distinct risk groups for the three endpoints of OS, TTNT, and TD within each treatment cohort. Limitations of this study were the retrospective design and short follow-up. This study demonstrated that the IMDC model continues to risk stratify patients with mRCC treated with contemporary first-line IO combination therapies and provided real-world survival benchmarks. The International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium model continues to stratify patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma receiving modern combination treatments in the real-world setting.

•This is the first trial in any malignancy to show that antibody-drug conjugates could be safely given in combination.•Combination MTD was SG 10 mg/kg and EV 1.25 mg/kg days 1+8 every 21 days with no new safety signals compared to monotherapy.•Combination recommended phase II dose is SG 8 mg/kg + EV 1.25 mg/kg on days 1, 8 of every 21-day cycle.•Objective response rate was 70% (95% CI 47-87%); 9/23 patient shave ongoing response with 14-month median follow-up.•Further studies are in development exploring SG and EV alone or with pembrolizumab in urothelial carcinoma. BackgroundThe 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 methodsPatients 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.ResultsBetween 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.ConclusionsThe 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. 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 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. 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. 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.

Brain metastases (BM) from breast cancer are associated with significant morbidity and mortality. In the current study, we have examined a cohort of breast cancer patients who went on to develop BM for clinical-pathologic features and predictive markers that identify this high-risk subgroup of patients at the time of diagnosis. The primary tumors from 55 patients who developed BM were used to construct a tissue microarray. The clinical and pathologic features were recorded and the tissue microarray was stained for estrogen receptor, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2, cytokeratin 5/6, and epidermal growth factor receptor by immunohistochemistry. This cohort of patients was compared against a group of 254 patients who remain free of metastases (67 mo mean follow-up), and another cohort of 40 patients who developed mixed visceral and bone metastatic disease without brain recurrence over a similar period of time. Breast cancer patients who went on to develop BM were more likely to be <50 years old (P<0.001), and the primary tumors were more likely to be estrogen receptor negative (P<0.001) and high grade (P=0.002). The primary tumors were also more likely to express cytokeratin 5/6 (P<0.001) and epidermal growth factor receptor (P=0.001), and to overexpress human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (P=0.001). The data presented above suggest a profile for breast cancer patients at increased risk for developing BM. Predictive factors to help identify patients with metastatic breast cancer who are at an increased risk for developing central nervous system recurrence might allow for screening of this population for early detection and treatment or for the development of targeted strategies for prevention.

Therapy targeted against the vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) pathway is a standard of care for patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (RCC). The identification of patients who are more likely to benefit from these agents is warranted.In total, 120 patients with metastatic clear-cell RCC received bevacizumab, sorafenib, sunitinib, or axitinib on 1 of 9 prospective clinical trials at the Cleveland Clinic. Clinical features associated with outcome were identified by univariate analysis; then, a stepwise modeling approach based on Cox proportional hazards regression was used to identify independent prognostic factors and to form a model for progression-free survival (PFS). A bootstrap algorithm was used to provide internal validation.The overall median PFS was 13.8 months, and the objective response according to the Response Criteria in Solid Tumors was 34%. Multivariate analysis identified time from diagnosis to current treatment <2 years; baseline platelet and neutrophil counts >300 K/microL and >4.5 K/microL, respectively; baseline corrected serum calcium <8.5 mg/dL or >10 mg/dL; and initial Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status >0 as independent, adverse prognostic factors (PF) for PFS. Three prognostic subgroups were formed based on the number of adverse prognostic factors present. The median PFS in patients with 0 or 1 adverse prognostic factor was 20.1 months compared with 13 months in patients with 2 adverse prognostic factors and 3.9 months in patients with >2 adverse prognostic factors.Five independent prognostic factors for predicting PFS were identified and were used to categorize patients with metastatic RCC who received VEGF-targeted therapies into 3 risk groups. These prognostic factors can be incorporated into patient care and clinical trials that use such novel, VEGF-targeted agents.

The von Hippel-Lindau (VHL) gene is often inactivated (by mutation or promoter hypermethylation) in renal cell carcinoma but the relation to therapeutic outcome is unclear.Patients with metastatic clear cell renal cell carcinoma with available baseline tumor samples who received vascular endothelial growth factor targeted therapy were included in analysis. Patient characteristics, VHL gene status and clinical outcome were documented. Our primary end point was to test for response rate in relation to VHL inactivation. Progression-free survival and overall survival in relation to VHL status were investigated as secondary end points.A total of 123 patients were evaluable. Response rate, median progression-free survival and median overall survival were 37% (95% CI 28-46), 10.8 (95% CI 7.7-14.8) and 29.8 (CI not estimable) months, respectively. Patients with VHL inactivation had a response rate of 41% vs 31% for those with wild-type VHL (p = 0.34). Patients with loss of function mutations (frameshift, nonsense, splice and in-frame deletions/insertions) had a 52% response rate vs 31% with wild-type VHL (p = 0.04). On multivariate analysis the presence of a loss of function mutation remained an independent prognostic factor associated with improved response. Progression-free survival and overall survival were not significantly different based on VHL status.To our knowledge this is the largest analysis investigating the impact of VHL inactivation on the outcome of vascular endothelial growth factor targeted agents in metastatic renal cell carcinoma. We did not find a statistically significant increase in response to vascular endothelial growth factor targeted agents in patients with VHL inactivation. Loss of function mutations identified a population of patients with a greater response. Investigation of downstream markers is under way.

Abstract Purpose: To develop a single validated model for survival in metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) using a comprehensive international database. Experimental Design: A comprehensive database of 3,748 patients including previously reported clinical prognostic factors was established by pooling patient-level data from clinical trials. Following quality control and standardization, descriptive statistics were generated. Univariate analyses were conducted using proportional hazards models. Multivariable analysis using a log–logistic model stratified by center and multivariable fractional polynomials was conducted to identify independent predictors of survival. Missing data were handled using multiple imputation methods. Three risk groups were formed using the 25th and 75th percentiles of the resulting prognostic index. The model was validated using an independent data set of 645 patients treated with tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) therapy. Results: Median survival in the favorable, intermediate and poor risk groups was 26.9 months, 11.5 months, and 4.2 months, respectively. Factors contributing to the prognostic index included treatment, performance status, number of metastatic sites, time from diagnosis to treatment, and pretreatment hemoglobin, white blood count, lactate dehydrogenase, alkaline phosphatase, and serum calcium. The model showed good concordance when tested among patients treated with TKI therapy (C statistic = 0.741, 95% CI: 0.714–0.768). Conclusions: Nine clinical factors can be used to model survival in mRCC and form distinct prognostic groups. The model shows utility among patients treated in the TKI era. Clin Cancer Res; 17(16); 5443–50. ©2011 AACR.

Purpose Vandetanib is an oral once-daily tyrosine kinase inhibitor with activity against vascular endothelial growth factor receptor 2 and epidermal growth factor receptor. Vandetanib in combination with docetaxel was assessed in patients with advanced urothelial cancer (UC) who progressed on prior platinum-based chemotherapy. Patients and Methods The primary objective was to determine whether vandetanib 100 mg plus docetaxel 75 mg/m 2 intravenously every 21 days prolonged progression-free survival (PFS) versus placebo plus docetaxel. The study was designed to detect a 60% improvement in median PFS with 80% power and one-sided α at 5%. Patients receiving docetaxel plus placebo had the option to cross over to single-agent vandetanib at progression. Overall survival (OS), overall response rate (ORR), and safety were secondary objectives. Results In all, 142 patients were randomly assigned and received at least one dose of therapy. Median PFS was 2.56 months for the docetaxel plus vandetanib arm versus 1.58 months for the docetaxel plus placebo arm, and the hazard ratio for PFS was 1.02 (95% CI, 0.69 to 1.49; P = .9). ORR and OS were not different between both arms. Grade 3 or higher toxicities were more commonly seen in the docetaxel plus vandetanib arm and included rash/photosensitivity (11% v 0%) and diarrhea (7% v 0%). Among 37 patients who crossed over to single-agent vandetanib, ORR was 3% and OS was 5.2 months. Conclusion In this platinum-pretreated population of advanced UC, the addition of vandetanib to docetaxel did not result in a significant improvement in PFS, ORR, or OS. The toxicity of vandetanib plus docetaxel was greater than that for vendetanib plus placebo. Single-agent vandetanib activity was minimal.

To compare long-term, updated overall survival (OS) of patients with advanced transitional cell carcinoma of the urothelium (TCCU) treated with vinflunine plus best supportive care (BSC) or BSC alone, after failure of platinum-based chemotherapy.Three hundred and seventy patients were randomly assigned in a phase III trial and allocated (2:1) to vinflunine (320 or 280 mg/m(2)) plus BSC or BSC alone. The first report (Bellmunt J, Theodore C, Demkov T et al. Phase III trial of vinflunine plus best supportive care compared with best supportive care alone after a platinumcontaining regimen in patients with advanced transitional cell carcinoma of the urothelial tract. J Clin Oncol 2009; 27(27): 4454-4461) had a median follow-up of 22.1 m and the current report has a follow-up of 45.4 m.Three hundred and fifty-two patients had died (censoring rate 5%). In the intention-to-treat (ITT) population, the median OS was 6.9 m and 4.6 m for vinflunine plus BSC versus BSC alone, respectively (n.s.). In multivariate Cox analysis, the addition of vinflunine was independently correlated with improved survival (HR: 0.719; 95% CI:0.570-0.906, P = 0.0052). In the eligible population, the median OS in both the arms was 6.9 and 4.3 m, respectively (HR: 0.78; 95% CI:0.61-0.96; P = 0.0227), indicating an estimated 22% reduction in the risk of death.The updated OS data confirm the positive treatment effect of vinflunine on survival that was previously reported. These results are consistent over time and confirm that vinflunine is a valuable option for second-line treatment in patients with advanced TCCU after failure of platinum-based regimens.