Disparities With Systemic Therapies for Black Men Having Advanced Prostate Cancer: Where Do We Stand?

PURPOSE: Prostate cancer represents the most common cancer diagnosis in Black men and is the second leading cause of cancer death in this population. Multilevel disparities have been well-documented in Black men with prostate cancer and play a role in poorer survival outcomes when compared with White men with prostate cancer. In this review, we highlight the changing trend in disparities for systemic therapy outcomes in Black men diagnosed with metastatic prostate cancer. METHODS: We reviewed data from real-world registries and prospective clinical trials with a particular focus on equal access settings to compare outcomes to systemic therapies between Black and White men with metastatic prostate cancer. RESULTS: In metastatic prostate cancer, there is growing evidence to suggest that Black men may have similar, if not better, outcomes to systemic therapies than White men with advanced disease, as corroborated by prospective studies and clinical trials where health care delivery and follow-up are more likely to be standardized. CONCLUSION: This review illustrates the importance of nonbiological drivers of racial disparities in Black men with advanced prostate cancer. Mitigating barriers to health care access and delivery as well as including participation in clinical trials will be pivotal to ongoing efforts to address disparities in systemic therapy outcomes for Black men with metastatic prostate cancer.

Genetic and biological drivers of prostate cancer disparities in Black men.

Black men with prostate cancer have historically had worse outcomes than white men with prostate cancer. The causes of this disparity in outcomes are multi-factorial, but a potential basis is that prostate cancers in Black men are biologically distinct from prostate cancers in white men. Evidence suggests that genetic and ancestral factors, molecular pathways involving androgen and non-androgen receptor signalling, inflammation, epigenetics, the tumour microenvironment and tumour metabolism are contributing factors to the racial disparities observed. Key genetic and molecular pathways linked to prostate cancer risk and aggressiveness have potential clinical relevance. Describing biological drivers of prostate cancer disparities could inform efforts to improve outcomes for Black men with prostate cancer.

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

BACKGROUND: Few treatment options are available for patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma who have received previous anti-PD-1-based or anti-PD-L1-based immunotherapy. Combining belzutifan, an HIF-2α inhibitor, with cabozantinib, a multitargeted tyrosine-kinase inhibitor of VEGFR, c-MET, and AXL, might provide more antitumoural effects than either agent alone. We aimed to investigate the antitumour activity and safety of belzutifan plus cabozantinib in patients with advanced clear cell renal cell carcinoma that was previously treated with immunotherapy. METHODS: This open-label, single-arm, phase 2 study was conducted at ten hospitals and cancer centres in the USA. Patients were enrolled into two cohorts. Patients in cohort 1 had treatment-naive disease (results will be reported separately). In cohort 2, eligible patients were aged 18 years or older with locally advanced or metastatic clear cell renal cell carcinoma, measurable disease according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours version 1.1, an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status score of 0 or 1, and had previously received immunotherapy and up to two systemic treatment regimens. Patients were given belzutifan 120 mg orally once daily and cabozantinib 60 mg orally once daily until disease progression, unacceptable toxicity, or patient withdrawal. The primary endpoint was confirmed objective response assessed by the investigator. Antitumour activity and safety were assessed in all patients who received at least one dose of study treatment. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03634540, and is ongoing. FINDINGS: Between Sept 27, 2018, and July 14, 2020, 117 patients were screened for eligibility, 52 (44%) of whom were enrolled in cohort 2 and received at least one dose of study treatment. Median age was 63·0 years (IQR 57·5-68·5), 38 (73%) of 52 patients were male, 14 (27%) were female, 48 (92%) were White, two (4%) were Black or African American, and two were Asian (4%). As of data cutoff (Feb 1, 2022), median follow-up was 24·6 months (IQR 22·1-32·2). 16 (30·8% [95% CI 18·7-45·1]) of 52 patients had a confirmed objective response, including one (2%) who had a complete response and 15 (29%) who had partial responses. The most common grade 3-4 treatment-related adverse event was hypertension (14 [27%] of 52 patients). Serious treatment-related adverse events occurred in 15 (29%) patients. One death was considered treatment related by the investigator (respiratory failure). INTERPRETATION: Belzutifan plus cabozantinib has promising antitumour activity in patients with pretreated clear cell renal cell carcinoma and our findings provide rationale for further randomised trials with belzutifan in combination with a VEGFR tyrosine-kinase inhibitor. FUNDING: Merck Sharp & Dohme (a subsidiary of Merck & Co) and the National Cancer Institute.

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

PURPOSE: A randomized, phase III trial demonstrated superiority of sunitinib over interferon alfa (IFN-α) in progression-free survival (primary end point) as first-line treatment for metastatic renal cell carcinoma (RCC). Final survival analyses and updated results are reported. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Seven hundred fifty treatment-naïve patients with metastatic clear cell RCC were randomly assigned to sunitinib 50 mg orally once daily on a 4 weeks on, 2 weeks off dosing schedule or to IFN-α 9 MU subcutaneously thrice weekly. Overall survival was compared by two-sided log-rank and Wilcoxon tests. Progression-free survival, response, and safety end points were assessed with updated follow-up. RESULTS: Median overall survival was greater in the sunitinib group than in the IFN-α group (26.4 v 21.8 months, respectively; hazard ratio [HR] = 0.821; 95% CI, 0.673 to 1.001; P = .051) per the primary analysis of unstratified log-rank test (P = .013 per unstratified Wilcoxon test). By stratified log-rank test, the HR was 0.818 (95% CI, 0.669 to 0.999; P = .049). Within the IFN-α group, 33% of patients received sunitinib, and 32% received other vascular endothelial growth factor-signaling inhibitors after discontinuation from the trial. Median progression-free survival was 11 months for sunitinib compared with 5 months for IFN-α (P < .001). Objective response rate was 47% for sunitinib compared with 12% for IFN-α (P < .001). The most commonly reported sunitinib-related grade 3 adverse events included hypertension (12%), fatigue (11%), diarrhea (9%), and hand-foot syndrome (9%). CONCLUSION: Sunitinib demonstrates longer overall survival compared with IFN-α plus improvement in response and progression-free survival in the first-line treatment of patients with metastatic RCC. The overall survival highlights an improved prognosis in patients with RCC in the era of targeted therapy.

Targeting Glutamine Metabolism in Prostate Cancer.

Glutamine is a conditionally essential amino acid important for cancer cell proliferation through intermediary metabolism leading to de novo synthesis of purine and pyrimidine nucleotides, hexosamine biosytnehsis, fatty acid synthesis through reductive carboxylation, maintenance of redox homeostasis, glutathione synthesis, production of non-essential amino acids, and mitochondrial oxidative phosphorylation. Prostate cancer has increasingly been characterized as a tumor type that is heavily dependent on glutamine for growth and survival. In this review, we highlight the preclinical evidence that supports a relationship between glutamine signaling and prostate cancer progression. We focus on the regulation of glutamine metabolism in prostate cancer through key pathways involving the androgen receptor pathway, MYC, and the PTEN/PI3K/mTOR pathway. We end with a discussion on considerations for translation of targeting glutamine metabolism as a therapeutic strategy to manage prostate cancer. Here, it is important to understand that the tumor microenvironment also plays a role in facilitating glutamine signaling and resultant prostate cancer growth. The druggability of prostate cancer glutamine metabolism is more readily achievable with our greater understanding of tumor metabolism and the advent of selective glutaminase inhibitors that have proven safe and tolerable in early-phase clinical trials.

LITESPARK-011: belzutifan plus lenvatinib vs cabozantinib in advanced renal cell carcinoma after anti-PD-1/PD-L1 therapy.

The first-in-class, small molecule HIF-2α inhibitor, belzutifan, has demonstrated promising antitumor activity in previously treated patients with clear cell renal cell carcinoma (RCC). HIF-2α also regulates VEGF expression and is involved in resistance to anti-VEGF therapy. This study describes the rationale and design for a randomized, phase III study evaluating efficacy and safety of belzutifan plus the tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) lenvatinib versus the TKI cabozantinib in patients with advanced RCC progressing after anti-PD-1/PD-L1 therapy in the first- or second-line setting or as adjuvant therapy. Considering the unmet need for effective and tolerable treatment of advanced RCC following immune checkpoint inhibitors, belzutifan plus lenvatinib may have a positive benefit/risk profile. Clinical Trial Registration: NCT04586231 (ClinicalTrials.gov).

Efficacy and Safety of Telaglenastat Plus Cabozantinib vs Placebo Plus Cabozantinib in Patients With Advanced Renal Cell Carcinoma: The CANTATA Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Dysregulated metabolism is a hallmark of renal cell carcinoma (RCC). Glutaminase is a key enzyme that fuels tumor growth by converting glutamine to glutamate. Telaglenastat is an investigational, first-in-class, selective, oral glutaminase inhibitor that blocks glutamine utilization and downstream pathways. Preclinically, telaglenastat synergized with cabozantinib, a VEGFR2/MET/AXL inhibitor, in RCC models. Objective: To compare the efficacy and safety of telaglenastat plus cabozantinib (Tela + Cabo) vs placebo plus cabozantinib (Pbo + Cabo). Design, Setting, and Participants: CANTATA was a randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind, pivotal trial conducted at sites in the US, Europe, Australia, and New Zealand. Eligible patients had metastatic clear-cell RCC following progression on 1 to 2 prior lines of therapy, including 1 or more antiangiogenic therapies or nivolumab plus ipilimumab. The data cutoff date was August 31, 2020. Data analysis was performed from December 2020 to February 2021. Interventions: Patients were randomized 1:1 to receive oral cabozantinib (60 mg daily) with either telaglenastat (800 mg twice daily) or placebo until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point was progression-free survival (Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1) assessed by blinded independent radiology review. Results: A total of 444 patients were randomized: 221 to Tela + Cabo (median [range] age, 61 [21-81] years; 47 [21%] women and 174 [79%] men) and 223 to Pbo + Cabo (median [range] age, 62 [29-83] years; 68 [30%] women and 155 [70%] men). A total of 276 (62%) patients had received prior immune checkpoint inhibitors, including 128 with prior nivolumab plus ipilimumab, 93 of whom had not received prior antiangiogenic therapy. Median progression-free survival was 9.2 months for Tela + Cabo vs 9.3 months for Pbo + Cabo (HR, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.74-1.21; P = .65). Overall response rates were 31% (69 of 221) with Tela + Cabo vs 28% (62 of 223) with Pbo + Cabo. Treatment-emergent adverse event (TEAE) rates were similar between arms. Grade 3 to 4 TEAEs occurred in 160 patients (71%) with Tela + Cabo and 172 patients (79%) with Pbo + Cabo and included hypertension (38 patients [17%] vs 40 patients [18%]) and diarrhea (34 patients [15%] vs 29 patients [13%]). Cabozantinib was discontinued due to AEs in 23 patients (10%) receiving Tela + Cabo and 33 patients (15%) receiving Pbo + Cabo. Conclusions and Relevance: In this randomized clinical trial, telaglenastat did not improve the efficacy of cabozantinib in metastatic RCC. Tela + Cabo was well tolerated with AEs consistent with the known risks of both agents. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03428217.

Hypoxia-inducible factor pathway genes predict survival in metastatic clear cell renal cell carcinoma.

PURPOSE: Hypoxia inducible factor (HIF) pathway alterations drive progression of clear cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC). We aim to evaluate genes within the canonical and non-canonical HIF pathways as predictors of survival in metastatic ccRCC. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Gene expression was determined from 324 archival pretreatment nephrectomy specimens from CALGB90206, a phase III trial of patients treated with interferon alpha (INF-α) vs. INF-α plus bevacizumab. TaqMan RT-qPCR was performed using RNA from tumors macrodissected based on review by genitourinary pathology. RESULTS: A total of 35 HIF-related genes were assessed by Cox regression analysis. After adjusting for sex and Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center risk score (MSKCC-RS), 11 genes predicted OS: HIF2A (HR 1.059, P = 0.012), EGLN3 (HR 1.089, P = 0.012), VEGFC (HR 0.904, P = 0.039), VEGFD (HR 1.085, P = 0.016), FLT4 (HR 1.093, P = 0.038), CCND1 (HR 1.077, P = 0.026), TGFA (HR 1.127, P = 0.003), EGFR (HR 1.151, P = 0.028), VHL (HR 0.764, P = 0.002), HSP90AA1 (HR 0.845, P = 0.002), and PTEN (HR 1.163, P = 0.050); 7 genes predicted PFS: HIF2A (HR 1.060, P = 0.011), CCND1 (HR 1.082, P = 0.016), TGFA (HR 1.096, P = 0.026), EP300 (HR 1.171, P = 0.031), VHL (HR 0.775, P = 0.007), HSP90AA1 (HR 0.871, P = 0.015), and TP53 (HR 1.119, P = 0.050). Most of these genes validated as significant predictors of survival in the external, TCGA dataset. In multivariate analysis of all externally validated genes, VEGFC (HR 0.906, P = 0.043), TGFA (HR 1.122, P = 0.003), CITED2 (HR 1.113, P = 0.035) and EP300 (HR 1.136, P = 0.049) predicted OS; and HIF2A (HR 1.049, P = 0.036) and EP300 (HR 1.199, P = 0.010) predicted PFS. EGLN3 (HR 1.156, P = 0.045) and BNIP3 (HR 1.254, P = 0.049) significantly interacted with treatment status and predicted PFS in patients treated with IFN-α and IFN-α+bevacizumab, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: We identified specific gene isoforms in both the canonical and non-canonical HIF pathways associated with metastatic RCC survival. EGLN3 and BNIP3 showed significant interaction with treatment arm and may be predictive of treatment response. We have identified genes for future prospective investigation as predictive biomarkers and novel drug targets.

Advance Care Planning in Patients With Metastatic Cancer: A Quality Improvement Initiative.

PURPOSE: An initiative aimed to increase the rate of advance care planning (ACP) activities for outpatients with metastatic cancer, an essential step to achieving goal concordant care. METHODS: Patients with metastatic cancer were identified by International Classification of Diseases-10 coding and later by oncologists' electronic health record documentation of metastatic tumor status. ACP activities were defined as either an ACP note, Advance Directive, Physician Orders for Life-Sustaining Therapy (POLST), or a Palliative Medicine (PM) consultation within the prior year. From 2017 to 2020, the initiative screened more than 5,000 total unique cancer patients per year. PM consultants were embedded in tumor boards, oncology care team meetings, and shared oncology clinic space. Quarterly reports were sent to 60 oncologists at three cancer care sites with data of their percentage of ACP activities for patients with metastatic cancer compared with their peers. Oncologists' identities were initially blinded, but later unblinded. Oncologists also received a monthly list of patients with metastatic cancer without ACP activities. RESULTS: The rate of ACP activities for patients with metastatic cancer increased from a baseline of 37% in July 2017 to 57% by the end of 2020. PM consultations increased from 12% to 39% and ACP notes increased from 16% to 29% during the same interval. There was no change in Advance Directive (17%-20%) or POLST completion (7%-6%). CONCLUSION: ACP activities are an essential step to achieve goal concordant care, and this initiative successfully increased ACP activities for patients with metastatic cancer. However, given that the main source of increased ACP activities during this initiative was PM referrals, further progress will depend upon strengthening the oncology care teams' ACP skills and motivation for completion.

First-line Immune Checkpoint Inhibitor Combinations in Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma: Where Are We Going, Where Have We Been?

The combination of targeted therapy and immunotherapy in the treatment of metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) has significantly improved outcomes for many patients. There are multiple FDA-approved regimens for the frontline setting based on numerous randomized Phase III trials. Despite these efforts, there remains a conundrum of identifying a biomarker-driven approach for these patients and it is unclear how to predict which patients are most likely to respond to these agents. This is due, in part, to an incomplete understanding of how these drug combinations work. The use of tyrosine kinase inhibitors that have multiple 'off-target' effects may lend themselves to the benefits observed when given in combination with immunotherapy. Further, targeting multiple clones within a patient's heterogenic tumor that are responsive to targeted therapy and others that are responsive to immunotherapy may also explain some level of improved response rates to the combination approaches compared to monotherapies. This review highlights the 5 FDA-approved regimens for mRCC in the frontline setting and offers insights into potential mechanisms for improved outcomes seen in these combination approaches.

Clinical Utility of Olaparib in the Treatment of Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer: A Review of Current Evidence and Patient Selection.

Metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) is an aggressive and fatal disease with a median survival of 36 months. With the advent of genetic sequencing to identify individual genomic profiles and acquired tumor-specific pathways, targeted therapies have revolutionized cancer treatment, including the treatment strategy in mCRPC. Poly(adenosine 5'-diphosphate) ribose polymerase inhibitors (PARPi) are oral drugs that target mutations in the homologous recombination repair (HRR) pathway, which are found in approximately 27% of prostate cancer patients. In May 2020, the first PARP inhibitor, olaparib, was approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for men with mCRPC with HHR gene mutations based on the findings of the Phase III PROfound trial that showed improved overall survival in men with mCRPC who received olaparib and whose disease had progressed on a novel hormonal agent. This review summarizes the current evidence and clinical utility of olaparib as treatment in men with mCRPC. We describe the mechanism of action of PARPi, key clinical trials of olaparib in men with mCRPC, and ongoing Phase II and III clinical trials investigating olaparib in combination therapy and as front-line therapy in mCRPC.

Second-Line Therapies in the Changing Landscape of First-Line Therapies for Metastatic Clear Cell Renal Cell Cancer.

In recent years, first-line therapies for metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) have shifted to a combination of immune checkpoint inhibitors or a combination of antiangiogenesis tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) and immunotherapy. This has led to a need to address standard-of-care treatment in the second-line setting. Our review presents an analysis of current and upcoming data to guide treatment decisions. After progression on nivolumab plus ipilimumab, current data favor monotherapy TKI with cabozantinib or axitinib. Current literature for second-line therapy given after combination TKI plus immunotherapy shows the strongest evidence for either single-agent cabozantinib or combination everolimus with lenvatinib. Investigations are ongoing for the role of TKIs with immunotherapy in the second-line setting. Novel agents, such as HIF2α inhibitors, are currently being studied as single agents and in combination with other treatment modalities in efforts to improve patient outcomes in mRCC.

Integrating PARP Inhibitors Into Advanced Prostate Cancer Therapeutics.

DNA-damage repair (DDR) pathway mutations can sensitize cancer cells to a class of cancer therapeutics known as PARP inhibitors. Given that DDR alterations can be found in up to one-third of advanced prostate cancers, PARP inhibitors have recently been established in treatment-refractory settings. We provide an updated review of the clinical data supporting the 4 PARP inhibitors that have undergone the most investigation thus far in metastatic castrate-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). Two of these agents are currently approved for the treatment of DDR-altered mCRPC. We end with a discussion on integration of approved PARP inhibitors into advanced prostate cancer clinical practice.

Summary from the Kidney Cancer Association's Inaugural Think Thank: Coalition for a Cure.

Close to 74,000 cases of renal cell carcinoma (RCC) are diagnosed each year in the United States. The past 2 decades have shown great developments in surgical techniques, targeted therapy and immunotherapy agents, and longer complete response rates. However, without a global cure, there is still room for further advancement in improving patient care in this space. To address some of the gaps restricting this progress, the Kidney Cancer Association brought together a group of 27 specialists across the areas of clinical care, research, industry, and advocacy at the inaugural "Think Tank: Coalition for a Cure" session. Topics addressed included screening, imaging, rarer RCC subtypes, combination drug therapy options, and patient response. This commentary summarizes the discussion of these topics and their respective clinical challenges, along with a proposal of projects for collaboration in overcoming those needs and making a greater impact on care for patients with RCC moving forward.

Comparison of Large, Medium, and Small Solid Tumor Gene Panels for Detection of Clinically Actionable Mutations in Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Next-generation sequencing of gene panels has supplanted single-gene testing for cancer molecular diagnostics in many laboratories. Considerations for the optimal number of genes to assess in a panel depend on the purpose of the testing. OBJECTIVE: To address the optimal size for the identification of clinically actionable variants in different-sized solid tumor sequencing panels. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Sequencing results from 480 patients with a large, 315 gene, panel were compared against coverage of a medium, 161 gene, and small, 50 gene, panel. RESULTS: The large panel detected a total of 2072 sequence variants in 480 patient specimens; 61 (12.7%) contained variants for which there is therapy approved by the US Food and Drug Administration, 89 (18.5%) had variants associated with an off-label therapy, and 312 (65.0%) contained variants eligible for a genomically matched clinical trial. The small panel covered only 737 of the 2072 variants (35.5%) and somewhat fewer therapy-related variants (on-label 88.5%, off-label 60.7%). The medium-size panel included 1354 of the 2072 (65.3%) variants reported by the large panel. All 318 patients with a clinically actionable variant would have been identified by the medium panel. CONCLUSIONS: The results demonstrate that a carefully designed medium size gene panel is as effective as a large panel for the detection of clinically actionable variants and can be run by most molecular pathology laboratories.

Combination Androgen Receptor Inhibition and Docetaxel in Metastatic Castration-sensitive Prostate Cancer: The Next Step in First-line Treatment?

The addition of docetaxel and abiraterone to androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) heralded a new era in the first-line treatment of metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer (mCSPC). Following the success of these combination regimens, 3 new trials presented data on using enzalutamide or apalutamide in men with mCSPC, which showed similar success. These seminal trials collectively established the addition of docetaxel, enzalutamide, apalutamide, or abiraterone to ADT as standards in the upfront treatment of mCSPC. Notably, a subset of patients in these more recent trials were treated with a combination of docetaxel, ADT, and androgen receptor signaling inhibitors or maintenance androgen receptor signaling inhibitors after docetaxel and ADT that provided an initial glimpse into the efficacy of these triplet or maintenance strategies. We discuss the implications of these recent findings and place them in context of the current mCSPC treatment landscape.

COVID-19 and androgen-targeted therapy for prostate cancer patients.

The current pandemic (COVID-19) caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is a global health challenge with active development of antiviral drugs and vaccines seeking to reduce its significant disease burden. Early reports have confirmed that transmembrane serine protease 2 (TMPRSS2) and angiotensin converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) are critical targets of SARS-CoV-2 that facilitate viral entry into host cells. TMPRSS2 and ACE2 are expressed in multiple human tissues beyond the lung including the testes where predisposition to SARS-CoV-2 infection may exist. TMPRSS2 is an androgen-responsive gene and its fusion represents one of the most frequent alterations in prostate cancer. Androgen suppression by androgen deprivation therapy and androgen receptor signaling inhibitors form the foundation of prostate cancer treatment. In this review, we highlight the growing evidence in support of androgen regulation of TMPRSS2 and ACE2 and the potential clinical implications of using androgen suppression to downregulate TMPRSS2 to target SARS-CoV-2. We also discuss the future directions and controversies that need to be addressed in order to establish the viability of targeting TMPRSS2 and/or ACE2 through androgen signaling regulation for COVID-19 treatment, particularly its relevance in the context of prostate cancer management.

Results of the ADAPT Phase 3 Study of Rocapuldencel-T in Combination with Sunitinib as First-Line Therapy in Patients with Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma.

PURPOSE: Rocapuldencel-T is an autologous immunotherapy prepared from mature monocyte-derived dendritic cells (DC), coelectroporated with amplified tumor RNA plus CD40L RNA. This pivotal phase III trial was initiated to investigate the safety and efficacy of a combination therapy dosing regimen of Rocapuldencel-T plus sunitinib in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients received either Rocapuldencel-T plus standard of care (SOC) or SOC treatment alone. The primary objective compared overall survival (OS) between groups. Secondary objectives included safety assessments, progression-free survival (PFS), and tumor responses based on RECIST 1.1 criteria. Exploratory analyses included immunologic assessments and correlates with OS. RESULTS: Between 2013 and 2016, 462 patients were randomized 2:1, 307 to the combination group and 155 to the SOC group. Median OS in the combination group was 27.7 months [95% confidence interval (CI) 23.0-35.9] and 32.4 months (95% CI, 22.5-) in the SOC group HR of 1.10 (95% CI, 0.83-1.40). PFS was 6.0 months and 7.83 months for the combination and SOC groups, respectively [HR = 1.15 (95% CI, 0.92-1.44)]. The ORR was 42.7% (95% CI, 37.1-48.4) for the combination group and 39.4% (95% CI, 31.6-47.5) for the SOC group. Median follow up was 29 months (0.4-47.7 months). On the basis of the lack of clinical efficacy, the ADAPT trial was terminated on February 17, 2017. Immune responses were detected in 70% of patients treated with Rocapuldencel-T, and the magnitude of the immune response positively correlated with OS. In addition, we report the survival-predictive value of measuring IL-12 produced by the DC vaccine and the observation that high baseline numbers of T regulatory cells are associated with improved outcomes in DC-treated patients, but are associated with poor outcomes in patients receiving SOC treatment. No serious adverse events attributed to the study medication have been reported to date. CONCLUSIONS: Rocapuldencel-T did not improve OS in patients treated with combination therapy, although the induced immune response correlated with OS. Moreover, we identified two potential survival-predictive biomarkers for patients receiving DC based immunotherapy, IL-12 produced by the DC vaccine and higher numbers of T regulatory cells present in the peripheral blood of patients with advanced RCC.