KCJ Journal Club
Dr. Robert Figlin, MD
██ Checkpoint inhibitors in metastatic papillary renal cell carcinoma.
M de Vries-Brilland et al. Cancer Treat Rev. 2021 Sep;99:102228. doi: 10.1016/j.ctrv.2021.102228. Epub 2021 May 20.
Papillary Renal Cell Carcinoma (pRCC) is the most common non-clear cell RCC (nccRCC) and a distinct entity, although heterogenous, associated with poor outcomes. The treatment landscape of metastatic pRCC (mpRCC) relied so far on targeted therapies, mimicking previous developments in metastatic clear-cell renal cell carcinoma. However, antiangiogenics as well as mTOR inhibitors retain only limited activity in mpRCC. As development of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) is now underway in patients with mpRCC, we aimed at discussing early activity data and potential for future therapeutic strategies in monotherapy or combination. Expression of immune checkpoints such as PD-L1 and infiltrative immune cells in pRCC could provide insights into their potential immunogenicity, although this is currently poorly described. Based on retrospective and prospective data, efficacy of ICI as single agent remains limited. Combinations with tyrosine-kinase inhibitors, notably with anti-MET inhibitors, harbor promising response rates and may enter the standard of care in untreated patients. Collaborative work is needed to refine the molecular and immune landscape of pRCC, and pursue efforts to set up predictive biomarker-driven clinical trials in these rare tumors.
██ Molecular determinants of response to PD-L1 blockade across tumor types
Romain Banchereau et al. Nat Commun. 2021 Jun 25;12(1):3969. doi: 10.1038/s41467-021-24112-w. PMID: 34172722 PMCID: PMC8233428
Abstract:
Immune checkpoint inhibitors targeting the PD-1/PD-L1 axis lead to durable clinical responses in subsets of cancer patients across multiple indications, including non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), urothelial carcinoma (UC) and renal cell carcinoma (RCC). Herein, we complement PD-L1 immunohistochemistry (IHC) and tumor mutation burden (TMB) with RNA-seq in 366 patients to identify unifying and indication-specific molecular profiles that can predict response to checkpoint blockade across these tumor types. Multiple machine learning approaches failed to identify a baseline transcriptional signature highly predictive of response across these indications. Signatures described previously for immune checkpoint inhibitors also failed to validate. At the pathway level, significant heterogeneity is observed between indications, in particular within the PD-L1+ tumors. mUC and NSCLC are molecularly aligned, with cell cycle and DNA damage repair genes associated with response in PD-L1- tumors. At the gene level, the CDK4/6 inhibitor CDKN2A is identified as a significant transcriptional correlate of response, highlighting the association of non-immune pathways to the outcome of checkpoint blockade. This cross-indication analysis reveals molecular heterogeneity between mUC, NSCLC and RCC tumors, suggesting that indication-specific molecular approaches should be prioritized to formulate treatment strategies.██ Arterial Spin Labeled Perfusion MRI for the Evaluation of Response to Tyrosine Kinase Inhibition Therapy in Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma
Leo L Tsai et al. Radiology 2021 Feb;298(2):332-340 doi: 10.1148/radiol.2020201763
BACKGROUND: Background Tumor perfusion may inform therapeutic response and resistance in metastatic renal cell carcinoma (RCC) treated with antiangiogenic therapy. Purpose To determine if arterial spin labeled (ASL) MRI perfusion changes are associated with tumor response and disease progression in metastatic RCC treated with vascular endothelial growth factor receptor (VEGFR) tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs).
Materials and Methods In this prospective study (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00749320), metastatic RCC perfusion was measured with ASL MRI before and during sunitinib or pazopanib therapy between October 2008 and March 2014.
Objective response rate (ORR) and progression free survival (PFS) were calculated. Perfusion was compared between responders and nonresponders at baseline, at week 2, after cycle 2 (12 weeks), after cycle 4 (24 weeks), and at disease progression and compared with the ORR by using the Wilcoxon rank sum test and with PFS by using the log-rank test. Results Seventeen participants received sunitinib (mean age, 59 years ± 7.0 [standard deviation]; 11 men); 11 participants received pazopanib (mean age, 63 years ± 6.6; eight men). Responders had higher baseline tumor perfusion than nonresponders (mean, 404 mL/100 g/min ± 213 vs 199 mL/100 g/min ± 136; P = .02). Perfusion decreased from baseline to week 2 (-53 mL/100 g/min ± 31; P < .001), after cycle 2 (-65 mL/100 g/min ± 25; P < .001), and after cycle 4 (-79 mL/100 g/min ± 15; P = .008). Interval reduction in perfusion at those three time points was not associated with ORR (P = .63, .29, and .27, respectively) or PFS (P = .28, .27, and .32). Perfusion increased from cycle 4 to disease progression (51% ± 11; P < .001).
Conclusion: Arterial spin labeled perfusion MRI may assist in identifying responders to vascular endothelial growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitors and may help detect early evidence of disease progression in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma. © RSNA, 2020 Online supplemental material is available for this article. See also the editorial by Goh and De Vita in this issue.
██ Outcomes based on age in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma treated with first line targeted therapy or checkpoint immunotherapy: Older patients more prone to toxicity
J Geriatr Oncol . 2021 Jun;12(5):827-833. doi: 10.1016/j.jgo.2020.12.008. Epub 2020 Dec 31.
Objectives: Older patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) were underrepresented in pivotal trials. Materials and methods: Consecutive patients with mRCC treated at Aarhus University Hospital with first line tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKI), mTOR inhibitors, or checkpoint immunotherapy (CPI) were retrospectively analyzed in age-subgroups; ≥ 75, 65-74, and < 65 years, with overall survival (OS), time-totreatment discontinuation (TTD), and progression-free survival (PFS) as endpoints. Hazards ratios were adjusted (aHR) for International Metastatic RCC Database Consortium (IMDC) risk factors, histology, and age.
Results: Of 838 patients, 159 (19%) were ≥ 75 years, 324 (39%) 65-74 years, and 355 (42%) < 65 years. Treatments were TKI in 729 (87%) patients, mTOR in 43 (5%) and CPI in 67 (8%). Older patients ≥ 75 years compared with 65-74 years and < 65 years had lower toxicity-adjusted median doses of pazopanib, 300 mg vs. 400 mg vs. 600 mg, respectively, (p < 0.001), and sunitinib, 25 mg vs. 37.5 mg vs. 50 mg, respectively (p < 0.001); numerically fewer doses of CPI, median 2 vs. 5 vs. 5, respectively, (p = 0.2); a higher proportion had dose reduction/interruption, 76% vs. 55% vs. 41%, respectively, (p < 0.001); and shorter mean time to dose reduction/interruption, 0.5 months vs. 1.9 months vs. 3.4 months, respectively, (p < 0.001). After adjusting IMDC prognostic factors and histology in multivariate analyses,age did not impact OS (aHR 1.0; 95% CI 0.99-1.02, p = 0.2), TTD (aHR 1.0; 95% CI 0.99-1.01, p = 0.4) or PFS (aHR 1.0, 95% CI 0.99-1.01; p = 0.9).
Conclusion: Older patients with mRCC were more prone to toxicity; but age did not impact outcomes. Proactive dose modification/interruption and awareness may help to reduce toxicity while maintaining efficacy.
██ The 2021 Updated European Association of Urology Guidelines on Renal Cell Carcinoma: Immune Checkpoint Inhibitor-based Combination Therapies for Treatment-naive Metastatic Clearcell Renal Cell Carcinoma Are Standard of Care.
Jens Bedke et al. Eur Urol. 2021 Oct;80(4):393-397. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo. 2021.04.042. Epub 2021 May 29.
Methods: We conducted a retrospective analysis of mRCC patients who received combination TKI-IO post-firstline therapy between November 2015 and January 2019 at MD Anderson Cancer Center and Duke Cancer Institute. Chart review detailed patient characteristics, treatments, toxicity, and survival. Independent radiologists, blinded to clinical data, assessed best radiographic response using RECIST v1.1. Results: We identified 48 mRCC patients for inclusion: median age 65 years, 75.0% clear cell histology, 68.8% IMDC intermediate risk, and median two prior systemic therapies. TKIIO combinations included nivolumab-cabozantinib (N +C; 24 patients), nivolumab-pazopanib (N+P; 13), nivolumab-axitinib (6), nivolumab-lenvatinib (2), and nivolumab-ipilimumab- cabozantinib (3). The median progression-free survival was 11.6 months and the median overall survival was not reached. Response data were available in 45 patients: complete response (CR; n = 3, 6.7%), partial response (PR; 20, 44.4%), stable disease (SD; 19, 42.2%), and progressive disease (3, 6.7%). Overall response rate was 51% and disease control rate (CR+PR+SD) was 93%. Only one patient had a grade ≥3 adverse event.
Conclusion: To our knowledge, this is the first case series reporting off-label use of combination TKI-IO for mRCC. TKI-IO combinations, particularly N+P and N+C, are well tolerated and efficacious. Although further prospective research is essential, slow disease progression on IO or TKI monotherapy may be safely controlled with addition of either TKI or IO.
██ COVID-19 and financial toxicity in patients with renal cell carcinoma Michael D Staehler. 2021 Jul;39(7):2559-2565. doi: 10.1007/s00345-020-03476-6. Epub 2020 Oct 22
Purpose: To ascertain renal cell carcinoma (RCC) financial toxicity on COVID-19 during the COVID-19 crisis as patients are struggling with therapeutic and financial implications. Methods: An online survey was conducted from March 22 to March 25, 2020. It included baseline demographic, clinicopathologic, treatment-related information, anxiety levels related to COVID-19, questions related to financial concerns about COVID-19 as well as the validated 11-item COST measure.
Results: Five-hundred-and-thirty-nine patients (39%:58% male:female) from 14 countries responded. 23% of the patients did not feel in control of their financial situation but 8% reported being very satisfied with their finances. The median COST score was 21.5 (range 1-44). Metastatic patients who have not started systemic therapy had a COST score (19.8 range 2-41) versus patients on oral systemic therapy had a COST score (23.9 range 4-44). Patients in follow-up after surgery had a median COST score at 20.8 (range 1-40). A low COST scores correlated (p < 0.001) were female gender (r = 0.108), younger age (r = 0.210), urban living situation (r = 0.68), a lower educational level (r = 0.155), lower income (r = 0.165), higher anxiety about acquiring COVID-19 (r = 0.198), having metastatic disease (r = 0.073) and a higher distress score about cancer progression (r = 0.224).
Conclusion: Our data highlight severe financial impact of COVID-19. Acknowledging financial hardship and thorough counseling of cancer patients should be part of the conversation during the pandemic. Treatment and surveillance of RCC patients might have to be adjusted to contemplate financial and medical needs.
Download PDF
