Prevalence of Dietary Modification and Supplement Use in Patients with Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Receiving Systemic Therapy.

Many patients diagnosed with cancer adopt dietary changes and supplement use, and a growing body of evidence suggests that such modifications can affect outcomes to cancer therapy. We sought to assess the prevalence of these practices and the surrounding physician-patient dialogue among patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma. An online survey was administered by Kidney Cancer Research Alliance (KCCure), interrogating dietary modification patterns, supplement usage, out-of-pocket expenditure related to supplements, and patients' views toward alternative medicine practices. Patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma receiving combination therapy were actively solicited. In total, 289 unique responses were collected. The most common first-line treatments were nivolumab/ipilimumab (32.4%) and axitinib/pembrolizumab (13.1%). Within the cohort, 147 (50.9%) started using supplements following diagnosis of renal cell carcinoma; the most utilized supplements were probiotics, cannabidiol (CBD) oil/marijuana, and Vitamin C, reported by 70 (47.6%), 61 (41.4%), and 54 (36.7%), respectively. Dietary modifications following cancer diagnosis were reported by 101 (34.9%) respondents, of which 19.8% followed the Mediterranean diet and 18.8% adopted a ketogenic diet. Most respondents (71.3%) noted that they consistently report supplement usage to their physicians. A substantial proportion of patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma utilize dietary modification and supplements as an adjunct to antineoplastic therapy. Considering the widespread adoption of these practices and the reported effects on cancer treatment, it is crucial for healthcare providers to engage in discussions with patients regarding supplement use.

Renal Cell Carcinoma of Variant Histology: New Biologic Understanding Leads to Therapeutic Advances.

Renal cell carcinoma (RCC) is one of the 10 most commonly diagnosed solid tumors. Most RCCs are histologically defined as clear cell, comprising approximately 75% of diagnoses. However, the remaining RCC cases are composed of a heterogeneous combination of diverse histopathologic subtypes, each with unique pathogeneses and clinical features. Although the therapeutic approach to both localized and metastatic RCCs has dramatically changed, first with the advent of antiangiogenic targeted therapies and more recently with the approval of immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI)-based combinations, these advances have primarily benefited the clear cell RCC patient population. As such, there remains critical gaps in the optimization of treatment regimens for patients with non-clear cell, or variant, RCC histologies. Herein, we detail recent advances in understanding the biology of RCC with variant histology and how such findings have guided novel clinical studies investigating precision oncology approaches for these rare subtypes. Among the most common variant histology RCCs are papillary RCC, comprising approximately 15%-20% of all diagnoses. Although a histopathologically diverse subset of tumors, papillary RCC is canonically associated with amplification of the MET protooncogene; recently completed and ongoing trials have investigated MET-directed therapies for this patient population. Finally, we discuss the unique biology of RCC with sarcomatoid dedifferentiation and the recent clinical findings detailing its paradoxical sensitivity to ICIs.

Barriers to Clinical Trial Implementation Among Community Care Centers.

Importance: While an overwhelming majority of patients diagnosed with cancer express willingness to participate in clinical trials, only a fraction will enroll onto a research protocol. Objective: To identify critical barriers to trial enrollment to translate findings into actionable practice changes that increase cancer clinical trial enrollment. Design, Setting, and Participants: This survey study included designated site contacts at oncology practices with teams who were highly involved with the Association of Community Cancer Centers (ACCC) Community Oncology Research Institute (ACORI) clinical trials activities, all American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO)-ACCC collaboration pilot sites, and/or sites providing care to at least 25% African American and Hispanic residents. To determine participation trends among health care practices in oncology-focused research, identify barriers to clinical trial implementation and operation, and establish unmet needs for cancer clinics interested in trial participation, a 34-question survey was designed. Survey questions were defined within 3 categories: cancer center demographic characteristics, clinical trial characteristics, and referral practices. The survey was distributed through email and was open from June 20 through October 5, 2022. Main Outcomes and Measures: Participation in and barriers to conducting oncology trials in different community oncology settings. Results: The survey was distributed to 100 cancer centers, with completion by 58 centers (58%) across 25 states. Fifty-two centers (88%) reported that they conduct therapeutic clinical trials, of which 33 (63%) were from urban settings, 11 (21%) were from suburban settings, and 8 (15%) were from rural settings. Only 25% of rural practices (2 of 8) offered phase 1 trials, compared with 67% of urban practices (22 of 33) (P = .01). Respondents noted challenges in conducting research, including patient recruitment (27 respondents [52%]), limited staffing (27 [52%]), and nonrelevant trials for their patient population (25 [48%]). Among sites not offering therapeutic trials, barriers to research conduct included limited infrastructure, funding, and staffing. Most centers (46 of 58 [79%]) referred patients to outside centers for clinical trial enrollment, particularly in the context of late-stage disease and/or disease progression. Only 17 of these sites (37%) had established protocols for patient follow-up subsequent to outside referral. Conclusions and Relevance: In this national survey study of barriers to clinical trial implementation, most sites offered therapeutic trials, but there were significant disparities in trial availability across care settings. Furthermore, fundamental deficiencies in trial support infrastructure limited research activity, including within programs currently conducting research as well as at sites interested in future clinical research opportunities. These results identify crucial unmet needs for oncology clinics to effectively offer clinical trials to patients seeking care.

Stratification of Patients with Renal Cell Carcinoma by the Abundance of Sarcomatoid Features Reveals Differences in Survival and the Underlying Pathobiology.

Sarcomatoid renal cell carcinoma (sRCC) is histologically heterogeneous, with variable sarcomatoid amounts intermixed within epithelial carcinoma. However, the current classification for this aggressive disease is homogeneous and agnostic to the sarcomatoid proportion. We investigated whether sRCC subclassification has prognostic value and can reveal the biology underlying dedifferentiation and its clinical aggressiveness. On the basis of the intratumoral abundance of sarcomatoid features, cases were classified as sarcomatoid-high (≥10% sarcomatoid features) or sarcomatoid-low (<10% sarcomatoid features) in a cohort of 104 consecutive patients with sRCC undergoing nephrectomy at a single center. In comparison to sarcomatoid-low patients (n = 52), sarcomatoid-high patients (n = 52) had significantly shorter overall survival (median 14.5 vs 62.9 mo; p < 0.001), which was confirmed on multivariable analysis, and significantly shorter median metastasis-free survival among patients with clinically localized disease (10.7 vs 39.0 mo; p = 0.043). Transcriptomic analyses of 45 sRCC tumors revealed significant upregulation of nine hallmark pathways related to cell cycle/proliferation, epithelial-to-mesenchymal transition, reactive oxidative species, and interferon-α signaling among sarcomatoid-high (n = 24) versus sarcomatoid-low (n = 21) tumors. Categorization into transcriptomic clusters revealed predominance of proliferative, inflammatory, and immune effector phenotypes among sarcomatoid-high tumors, versus a hypoxia/angiogenesis phenotype among sarcomatoid-low tumors. Overall, these findings indicate prognostic value for sRCC subclassification into high versus low sarcomatoid groups and highlight key biology underlying the differences in clinical outcomes. PATIENT SUMMARY: Sarcomatoid renal cell carcinoma (sRCC) is a highly aggressive form of kidney cancer. The percentage of sarcomatoid features varies among tumors, but sRCC is still defined as a single kidney cancer type. Our results show that grouping patients according to their percentage of sarcomatoid features improves prediction of whether their tumors will become metastatic or lethal, and reveal molecular differences that may be important for this disease. Future assignment of sRCC to high and low sarcomatoid groups may help in guiding research and patient management.

Characterization of papillary and clear cell renal cell carcinoma through imaging mass cytometry reveals distinct immunologic profiles.

Objective: To characterize and further compare the immune cell populations of the tumor microenvironment (TME) in both clear cell and papillary renal cell carcinoma (RCC) using heavy metal-labeled antibodies in a multiplexed imaging approach (imaging mass cytometry). Materials and methods: Formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded (FFPE) baseline tumor tissues from metastatic patients with clear cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC) and papillary renal cell carcinoma (pRCC) were retrospectively requisitioned from an institutional biorepository. Pretreated FFPE samples from 33 RCC patients (10 ccRCC, 23 pRCC) were accessioned and stained for imaging mass cytometry (IMC) analysis. Clinical characteristics were curated from an institutional RCC database. FFPE samples were prepared and stained with heavy metal-conjugated antibodies for IMC. An 11-marker panel of tumor stromal and immune markers was used to assess and quantify cellular relationships in TME compartments. To validate our time-of-flight (CyTOF) analysis, we cross-validated findings with The Cancer Genome Atlas Program (TCGA) analysis and utilized the CIBERSORTx tool to examine the abundance of main immune cell types in pRCC and ccRCC patients. Results: Patients with ccRCC had a longer median overall survival than did those with pRCC (67.7 vs 26.8 mo, respectively). Significant differences were identified in the proportion of CD4+ T cells between disease subtypes (ccRCC 14.1%, pRCC 7.0%, p<0.01). Further, the pRCC cohort had significantly more PanCK+ tumor cells than did the ccRCC cohort (24.3% vs 9.5%, respectively, p<0.01). There were no significant differences in macrophage composition (CD68+) between cohorts. Our results demonstrated a significant correlation between the CyTOF and TCGA analyses, specifically validating that ccRCC patients exhibit higher levels of CD4+ T cells (ccRCC 17.60%, pRCC 15.7%, p<0.01) and CD8+ T cells (ccRCC 17.83%, pRCC 11.15%, p<0.01). The limitation of our CyTOF analysis was the large proportion of cells that were deemed non-characterizable. Conclusions: Our findings emphasize the need to investigate the TME in distinct RCC histological subtypes. We observed a more immune infiltrative phenotype in the TME of the ccRCC cohort than in the pRCC cohort, where a tumor-rich phenotype was noted. As practical predictive biomarkers remain elusive across all subtypes of RCC, further studies are warranted to analyze the biomarker potential of such TME classifications.

Targeted therapies: Expanding the role of FGFR3 inhibition in urothelial carcinoma.

The management of urothelial carcinoma (UC) has rapidly advanced in recent years with new approvals for immune checkpoint inhibitors and antibody-drug conjugates. However, while many UC tumors contain potentially actionable mutations, the role for targeted small molecule inhibitors has been limited. One such target is the fibroblast growth factor receptor (FGFR) family of proteins. Activating mutations and amplifications of FGFR3 are common in UC with higher incidences seen in upper tract as compared to lower tract disease. Consequently, multiple FGFR-directed targeted therapies have been developed and trialed in both UC and other solid tumors harboring FGFR mutations. At current, erdafitinib, an inhibitor of FGFR1-4, is the only approved targeted therapy in metastatic UC following the BLC2001 study, which demonstrated a 49% overall response rate in patients with UC harboring an FGFR3 mutation. Additional FGFR-directed agents also continue to be investigated across multiple disease stages in FGFR-mutated UC including infigratinib, rogaratinib, and AZD4547, among others. Ongoing trials are combining these agents with immune checkpoint inhibitors and chemotherapy regimens. The precision medicine revolution has begun in UC, and FGFR3 inhibitors are leading the charge toward a more personalized, biomarker-driven treatment paradigm.

Learning from BISCAY: The future of biomarker-based trial design in bladder cancer.

A recent article in Nature Medicine explored the combination of immunotherapy with multiple distinct targeted therapies in patients with metastatic urothelial cancer, employing a biomarker-driven approach. Herein, we discuss the merits of this ambitious study and highlight the need for larger biomarker-based randomized trials to arrive at definitive clinical conclusions.

Characterizing the relationships between tertiary and community cancer providers: Results from a survey of medical oncologists in Southern California.

BACKGROUND: Tertiary cancer centers offer clinical expertise and multi-modal approaches to treatment alongside the integration of research protocols. Nevertheless, most patients receive their cancer care at community practices. A better understanding of the relationships between tertiary and community practice environments may enhance collaborations and advance patient care. METHODS: A 31-item survey was distributed to community and tertiary oncologists in Southern California using REDCap. Survey questions assessed the following attributes: demographics and features of clinical practice, referral patterns, availability and knowledge of clinical trials and precision medicine, strategies for knowledge acquisition, and integration of community and tertiary practices. RESULTS: The survey was distributed to 98 oncologists, 85 (87%) of whom completed it. In total, 52 (61%) respondents were community practitioners and 33 (38%) were tertiary oncologists. A majority (56%) of community oncologists defined themselves as general oncologists, whereas almost all (97%) tertiary oncologists reported a subspecialty. Clinical trial availability was the most common reason for patient referrals to tertiary centers (73%). The most frequent barrier to tertiary referral was financial considerations (59%). Clinical trials were offered by 97% of tertiary practitioners compared to 67% of community oncologists (p = 0.001). Most oncologists (82%) reported only a minimal-to-moderate understanding of clinical trials available at regional tertiary centers. CONCLUSIONS: Community oncologists refer patients to tertiary centers primarily with the intent of clinical trial enrollment; however, significant gaps exist in their knowledge of trial availability. Our results identify the need for enhanced communication and collaboration between community and tertiary providers to expand patients' access to clinical trials.

Complementary Role of Circulating Tumor DNA Assessment and Tissue Genomic Profiling in Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma.

PURPOSE: The role of circulating cell-free tumor DNA (ctDNA) as an adjunct to tissue genomic profiling is poorly defined in metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). In this study, we aim to validate previous findings related to genomic alteration (GA) frequency in ctDNA and determine the concordance between ctDNA and tissue-based profiling in patients with mRCC. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: Results of 839 patients with mRCC who had ctDNA assessment with a Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments (CLIA)-certified ctDNA assay between November 2016 and December 2019 were collected. Tissue-based genomic profiling was collected when available and concordance analysis between blood- and tissue-based testing was performed. RESULTS: ctDNA was assessed in 839 patients (comprising 920 samples) with mRCC. GAs were detected in 661 samples (71.8%). Tissue-based GAs were assessed in 112 patients. Limiting our analyses to a common 73-/74-gene set and excluding samples with no ctDNA detected, a total of 228 mutations were found in tissue and blood. Mutations identified in tissue (34.7%; 42/121) were also identified via ctDNA, whereas 28.2% (42/149) of the mutations identified in liquid were also identified via tissue. Concordance between ctDNA and tissue-based profiling was inversely related to the time elapsed between these assays. CONCLUSIONS: This study confirms the feasibility of ctDNA profiling in the largest mRCC cohort to date, with ctDNA identifying multiple actionable alterations. It also demonstrates that ctDNA and tissue-based genomic profiling are complementary, with both platforms identifying unique alterations, and confirms that the frequency of unique alterations increases with greater temporal separation between tests.

A drug delivery perspective on intratumoral-immunotherapy in renal cell carcinoma.

In less than 5years immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) went from first FDA approval to become first-line options in advanced renal cell carcinoma. Despite that many patients have benefited from ICI, a significant fraction of individuals are refractory to these new immunological treatments. In this review, we discussed using intratumoral (i.t.) route of drug administration as an alternative to systemic therapy to increase the response rates and to circumvent potential drug-induced systemic adverse events. We provided a historic account of i.t. drug treatments in cancer and reviewed the contemporary experience in local drug delivery. We discussed the potential for enhancing the therapeutic impact of ICI by leveraging hydrogels as drug delivery vehicles and presented an outlook for implementing i.t. in renal cell carcinoma.

Immune Related Adverse Events: Classification and Management Approaches in Advanced Kidney Cancer.

Recent therapeutic advancements have incorporated immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) into the management of metastatic renal cell carcinoma. Pivotal phase III trials have resulted in Food and Drug Administration approval for anti-programmed death 1/programmed death ligand 1 ICIs, either in combination with anti-cytotoxic T-lymphocyte antigen 4 ICIs or with vascular endothelial growth factor-directed targeted therapies, as standard-of-care frontline regimens. Immune checkpoint inhibitors offer improved clinical outcomes when compared to previous treatment options. However, these agents also present unique toxicity profiles collectively referred to as immune-related adverse events. Common immune-related adverse events include colitis, hepatitis, dermatitis, and thyroiditis. Rare toxicities, such as myocarditis and pneumonitis, have the potential for causing severe harm. Herein, we provide a case-based discussion of how to identify, grade, and manage irAEs in metastatic renal cell carcinoma.

Stool Microbiome Profiling of Patients with Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Receiving Anti-PD-1 Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors.

Preclinical models and early clinical data suggest an interplay between the gut microbiome and response to immunotherapy in solid tumors including metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). We sought to characterize the stool microbiome of mRCC patients receiving a checkpoint inhibitor (CPI) and to assess treatment-related changes in microbiome composition over the course of CPI therapy. Stool was collected from 31 patients before initiation of nivolumab (77%) or nivolumab plus ipilimumab (23%) therapy, of whom 58% experienced clinical benefit. Greater microbial diversity was associated with clinical benefit from CPI therapy (p = 0.001), and multiple species were associated with clinical benefit or lack thereof. Temporal profiling of the microbiome indicated that the relative abundance of Akkermansia muciniphila increased in patients deriving clinical benefit from CPIs. This study substantiates results from previous CPI-related microbiome profiling studies in mRCC. Temporal changes in microbiome composition suggest potential utility in modulating the microbiome for more successful CPI outcomes. PATIENT SUMMARY: We compared the composition and diversity of the gut microbiome in patients receiving immunotherapy for renal cell carcinoma. We found that higher microbial diversity is associated with better treatment outcomes. Treatment response is characterized by changes in microbial species over the course of treatment.

Tivozanib in renal cell carcinoma: a new approach to previously treated disease.

Targeted therapies have been a mainstay of the renal cell carcinoma (RCC) treatment paradigm for the better part of two decades. Multikinase inhibitors of the vascular endothelial growth factor receptor tyrosine kinases (VEGF-TKIs) comprise nearly all targeted therapies in RCC, having been prospectively tested through large, multi-institutional phase III trials. Tivozanib is a VEGF-TKI with high selectivity for VEGF receptors 1-3. Tivozanib has been under investigation for nearly 15 years, with a robust portfolio of preclinical and clinical data. This review seeks to characterize tivozanib within the context of RCC by highlighting preclinical and early clinical trials alongside the phase III trials in RCC, TIVO-1, and TIVO-3. We also aim to explore further trials of tivozanib, whether in combination with other agents and/or in differing disease settings, while providing insight into the utility of tivozanib as a clinical tool for the management of RCC.

Advancing the Science and Management of Renal Cell Carcinoma: Bridging the Divide between Academic and Community Practices.

The treatment of metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) has rapidly evolved; however, the progress made in the field is heavily contingent upon timely and efficient accrual to clinical trials. While a substantial proportion of accrual occurs at tertiary care centers, community sites are playing an increasing role in patient recruitment. In this article, we discuss strategies to optimize collaborations between academic and community sites to facilitate clinical research. Further, as the role of biomarker discovery has become increasingly important in tailoring therapy, we will discuss opportunities to bridge diverse accrual sites for the purpose of translational research.

The Changing Landscape of Management of Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma: Current Treatment Options and Future Directions.

OPINION STATEMENT: For the practicing clinician, the dilemma becomes how most appropriate to sequence the aforementioned regimens. It is challenging to be dogmatic, as there are no comparative studies juxtaposing novel front-line options directly-all of the available studies utilize a comparator arm of sunitinib. With this in mind, the selection of front-line therapy with a patient with mRCC should involve a thorough discussion of both efficacy and safety of available options. The oncologist must also weigh their ability to manage complex immune-related adverse events that can emerge from checkpoint inhibitors, particularly with dual regimens such as nivolumab/ipilimumab. For the patient with good-risk disease, VEGF-directed therapies should remain a component of treatment. The data from CheckMate-214 does not support the use of nivolumab/ipilimumab in this setting, and in fact suggests superiority with the approach of VEGF-TKIs. Until regulatory decisions have been made around bevacizumab/atezolizumab and axitinib/avelumab, sunitinib and pazopanib remain options for patients with good-risk disease, although cabozantinib should be a consideration as well. Although the CABOSUN study did not include patients with good-risk disease, it is important to bear in mind that this was more of a pragmatic decision-inclusion of these patients in the original design could have potentially lengthened the extent of necessary follow-up. From a mechanistic standpoint, there is no reason to assume that cabozantinib would not also achieve superiority to sunitinib in patients with good-risk disease. For patients with intermediate- and poor-risk disease, cabozantinib and nivolumab/ipilimumab represent the only reasonable options thus far that have achieved regulatory approval. As previously noted, nivolumab/ipilimumab has proven benefit in this setting, but should be used only by the oncologist who has ready access to subspecialists who can aid in managing immune-related adverse events. Prompt recognition of colitis, hepatitis, and other sequelae from these therapies is critical, as these toxicities can be life-threatening. If such resources are not available, then cabozantinib should be considered. Cabozantinib should further be contemplated in the subset of patients with bony metastatic disease, where it appears to offer substantial control. Of course, it also represents an option for those individuals who have contraindications to immunotherapy, such as rheumatologic and autoimmune disorders.When combinations of VEGF-directed and immunotherapies are approved, the clinician will have an even more complicated dilemma. Regimens such as a bevacizumab/atezolizumab offer an exceptional safety profile, which may weigh heavily in frail patients who cannot tolerate the side effect profile associated with VEGF-TKIs.