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.

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.

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.

HIF-2 Complex Dissociation, Target Inhibition, and Acquired Resistance with PT2385, a First-in-Class HIF-2 Inhibitor, in Patients with Clear Cell Renal Cell Carcinoma.

PURPOSE: The heterodimeric transcription factor HIF-2 is arguably the most important driver of clear cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC). Although considered undruggable, structural analyses at the University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center (UTSW, Dallas, TX) identified a vulnerability in the α subunit, which heterodimerizes with HIF1ß, ultimately leading to the development of PT2385, a first-in-class inhibitor. PT2385 was safe and active in a first-in-human phase I clinical trial of patients with extensively pretreated ccRCC at UTSW and elsewhere. There were no dose-limiting toxicities, and disease control ≥4 months was achieved in 42% of patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We conducted a prospective companion substudy involving a subset of patients enrolled in the phase I clinical trial at UTSW (n = 10), who were treated at the phase II dose or above, involving multiparametric MRI, blood draws, and serial biopsies for biochemical, whole exome, and RNA-sequencing studies. RESULTS: PT2385 inhibited HIF-2 in nontumor tissues, as determined by a reduction in erythropoietin levels (a pharmacodynamic marker), in all but one patient, who had the lowest drug concentrations. PT2385 dissociated HIF-2 complexes in ccRCC metastases, and inhibited HIF-2 target gene expression. In contrast, HIF-1 complexes were unaffected. Prolonged PT2385 treatment resulted in the acquisition of resistance, and we identified a gatekeeper mutation (G323E) in HIF2α, which interferes with drug binding and precluded HIF-2 complex dissociation. In addition, we identified an acquired TP53 mutation elsewhere, suggesting a possible alternate mechanism of resistance. CONCLUSIONS: These findings demonstrate a core dependency on HIF-2 in metastatic ccRCC and establish PT2385 as a highly specific HIF-2 inhibitor in humans. New approaches will be required to target mutant HIF-2 beyond PT2385 or the closely related PT2977 (MK-6482).

The society for immunotherapy of cancer consensus statement on immunotherapy for the treatment of advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC).

The approval of immunotherapeutic agents and immunotherapy-based combination strategies in recent years has revolutionized the treatment of patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma (aRCC). Nivolumab, a programmed death 1 (PD-1) immune checkpoint inhibitor monoclonal antibody, was approved as monotherapy in 2015 for aRCC after treatment with a VEGF-targeting agent. In April 2018, the combination of nivolumab and ipilimumab, a CTLA-4 inhibitor, was approved for intermediate- and poor-risk, previously untreated patients with aRCC. Then, in 2019, combinations therapies consisting of pembrolizumab (anti-PD-1) or avelumab (anti-PD-ligand (L) 1) with axitinib (a VEGF receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitor) were also approved to treat aRCC and are likely to produce dramatic shifts in the therapeutic landscape. To address the rapid advances in immunotherapy options for patients with aRCC, the Society for Immunotherapy of Cancer (SITC) reconvened its Cancer Immunotherapy Guidelines (CIG) Renal Cell Carcinoma Subcommittee and tasked it with generating updated consensus recommendations for the treatment of patients with this disease.

Role of Biomarkers in Prediction of Response to Therapeutics in Metastatic Renal-Cell Carcinoma.

Renal-cell carcinoma remains one of the elusive cancers that lacks a biomarker. It is the eighth most commonly diagnosed malignancy in the United States, and the incidence has slowly trended upward. In addition to the increase in newly diagnosed cases, the prevalence and overall survival of individuals with kidney cancer also has increased substantially. This formal review synopsizes the literature regarding the current treatment landscape, the utility of biomarkers in renal-cell carcinoma, and future directions regarding next-generation sequencing of circulating tumor DNA.

Developments in the use of tyrosine kinase inhibitors in the treatment of renal cell carcinoma.

INTRODUCTION: Renal cell carcinoma (RCC) is among the most commonly diagnosed solid malignancies, but until recently there were few systemic treatment options for advanced disease. Since 2005, the treatment landscape has been transformed by the development of several novel systemic therapies. In particular, tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) targeting the vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) pathway have been instrumental in improving outcomes in patients with metastatic disease. Areas covered: The armamentarium of TKIs available for the treatment of RCC has expanded in recent years. The most active area of research at this time is the development of treatment regimens combining newer-generation TKIs and immune checkpoint inhibitors. Emerging data point to a role for combination therapy in the frontline management of advanced RCC. Other ongoing areas of research include the use of TKIs in the adjuvant setting and the role of cytoreductive nephrectomy within a changing treatment landscape. Expert opinion: Although TKIs and immune checkpoint inhibitors have incrementally improved outcomes for patients with advanced RCC, long-term survival remains poor. The development of regimens combining these agents represents the next step in the evolution of the field. For the clinician, this will offer exciting possibilities and novel challenges.

Sunitinib in Patients With Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma: Clinical Outcome According to International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium Risk Group.

BACKGROUND: Sunitinib malate, a targeted tyrosine kinase inhibitor, is standard of care for metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) and serves as the active comparator in several ongoing mRCC clinical trials. In this analysis we report benchmarks for clinical outcomes on the basis of International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium (IMDC) risk groups for patients treated with sunitinib for mRCC in a first-line setting. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective analysis was performed on data from sunitinib-treated patients (n = 375) in the pivotal phase III trial of sunitinib versus interferon-α as first-line treatment for mRCC. Objective response rates (ORRs) were determined from independently reviewed radiologic assessments. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to estimate median progression-free survival (PFS) and median overall survival (OS) according to patient risk group. RESULTS: Median PFS (95% confidence interval [CI]) was 14.1 (13.4-17.1), 10.7 (10.5-12.5), 2.4 (1.1-4.7), and 10.6 (8.1-10.9) months in sunitinib-treated patients in the IMDC favorable (n = 134), intermediate (n = 205), poor (n = 34), and intermediate + poor (n = 239) risk groups, respectively. Median OS (95% CI) was 23.0 (19.8-27.8), 5.1 (4.3-9.9), and 20.3 (16.8-23.0) months in sunitinib-treated patients in IMDC intermediate, poor, and intermediate + poor risk groups, respectively, and was not reached in the favorable risk group (>50% of patients were alive at data cutoff). ORRs (95% CI) was 53.0% (44.2%-61.7%), 33.7% (27.2%-40.6%), 11.8% (3.3%-27.5%), and 30.5% (24.8%-36.8%) in sunitinib-treated patients in IMDC favorable, intermediate, poor, and intermediate + poor risk groups, respectively. CONCLUSION: Results of this retrospective analysis show differences in patient outcomes for PFS, OS, and ORR on the basis of IMDC prognostic risk group assignment for patients with mRCC.

Phase I Dose-Escalation Trial of PT2385, a First-in-Class Hypoxia-Inducible Factor-2α Antagonist in Patients With Previously Treated Advanced Clear Cell Renal Cell Carcinoma.

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.

Wearable activity monitors to assess performance status and predict clinical outcomes in advanced cancer patients.

An objective evaluation of patient performance status (PS) is difficult because patients spend the majority of their time outside of the clinic, self-report to providers, and undergo dynamic changes throughout their treatment experience. Real-time, objective activity data may allow for a more accurate assessment of PS and physical function, while reducing the subjectivity and bias associated with current assessments. Consenting patients with advanced cancer wore a wearble activity monitor for three consecutive visits in a prospective, single-cohort clinical trial. Provider-assessed PS (ECOG/Karnofsky) and NIH PROMIS® patient-reported outcomes (PROs) were assessed at each visit. Associations between wearable activity monitor metrics (steps, distance, stairs) and PS, clinical outcomes (adverse events, hospitalizations, survival), and PROs were assessed using correlation statistics and in multivariable logistic regression models. Thirty-seven patients were evaluated (54% male, median 62 years). Patients averaged 3700 steps, 1.7 miles, and 3 flights of stairs per day. Highest correlations were observed between average daily steps and ECOG-PS and KPS (r = 0.63 and r = 0.69, respectively p < 0.01). Each 1000 steps/day increase was associated with reduced odds for adverse events (OR: 0.34, 95% CI 0.13, 0.94), hospitalizations (OR: 0.21 95% CI 0.56, 0.79), and hazard for death (HR: 0.48 95% CI 0.28-0.83). Significant correlations were also observed between activity metrics and PROs. Our trial demonstrates the feasibility of using wearable activity monitors to assess PS in advanced cancer patients and suggests their potential use to predict clinical and patient-reported outcomes. These findings should be validated in larger, randomized trials.