Development and Methodological Validation of a Modified Staging System for de Novo Metastatic Breast Cancer.

Importance: Validation of a new method for prognostication of de novo metastatic breast cancer (dnMBC) to better reflect the heterogenecity of the disease. Objective: To perform external methodological validation of the Plichta staging system, a novel prognostic system for de novo metastatic breast cancer (dnMBC). Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective cohort study used a multicenter, nationwide, population-based Danish Breast Cancer Group database to validate the new method. Participants were patients with dnMBC diagnosed between 2010 and 2019. Data were analyzed from April to June 2023. Main outcomes and measures: A recursive partitioning analysis (RPA) was performed, as demonstrated by Plichta and colleagues, to group patients with similar overall survival (OS) based on clinical factors. The main outcome was to group patients into 4 prognostic groups based on 3-year OS as stage IVa, greater than 70%; stage IVb, 50% to 70%; stage IVc, 25% to less than 50%; or stage IVd, less than 25%. Bootstrapping was applied for 1000 iterations, with final stage assignments based on the most commonly occurring assignment. Results: A total of 1859 women were included with a median (IQR) age of 69 (57-77) years. With a median potential follow-up of 89.9 (95% CI, 86.4-95.1) months and a median OS of 31.7 (95% CI, 29.5-34.1) months, the RPA stratified patients into 10 groups, with organ sites, estrogen receptor status, and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 status as the key clinical factors. Three-year survival rates ranged from 62% (95% CI, 56%-69%) to 8% (95% CI, 3%-21%), which were further combined into 3 stage groups: IVb, 59.4% (95% CI, 56.2%-62.8%); IVc, 39.4% (95% CI, 36.2%-43.0%); and IVd, 15.4% (95% CI, 11.2%-21.3%) (P < .001). Following bootstrapping, an IVa group emerged, resulting in 4 stage groups with separate 3-year OS rates identified as IVa, 75.8% (95% CI, 67.8%-84.7%); IVb, 58.8% (95% CI, 55.5%-62.3%); IVc, 39.2% (95% CI, 35.8%-43.0%); and IVd, 14.4% (95% CI, 10.8%-19.4%) (P < .001). Conclusions and relevance: These findings provide external and independent validation of the methods applied in the novel Plichta staging system for dnMBC. This could guide future revisions of the current American Joint Committee on Cancer staging guidelines and may be incorporated as a stratification factor in clinical trials.

Cytoreductive Nephrectomy in Select Primary Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Patients: A Comprehensive Nationwide Outcome Analysis.

(1) Background: The role of cytoreductive nephrectomy (CN) is controversial in patients with primary metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). (2) Methods: We evaluated the impact of CN, or no CN, followed by first-line targeted therapy (TT) in a nationwide unselected cohort of 437 consecutive patients with primary mRCC over a two-year period with a minimum of five years of follow-up. Data sources were national registries supplemented with manually extracted information from individual patient medical records. Cox proportional hazards estimated the hazard ratio (HR) of overall death and cancer-specific death after one and three years. (3) Results: 210 patients underwent CN and 227 did not. A total of 176 patients (40%) had CN followed by TT, 160 (37%) had TT alone, 34 (8%) underwent CN followed by observation, and 67 (15%) received no treatment. After adjustments in Model 2, patients treated with TT alone demonstrated a worsened overall survival (OS) compared to those treated with CN + TT, HR 0.63 (95% CI: 0.19-2.04). (4) Conclusions: In this nationwide study, CN was associated with enhanced outcomes in carefully selected patients with primary mRCC. Further randomized trials are warranted.

Multicenter randomized trial of deferred cytoreductive nephrectomy in synchronous metastatic renal cell carcinoma receiving checkpoint inhibitors: the NORDIC-SUN-Trial.

BACKGROUND: Primary tumor removal by cytoreductive nephrectomy in synchronous metastatic renal cell carcinoma patients has been investigated in the context of various treatment regimens. Two randomized controlled trials investigated the role and timing of cytoreductive nephrectomy in the era of targeted therapy and demonstrated that upfront nephrectomy should no longer be performed when patients require systemic therapy. Superiority of checkpoint immunotherapy agents has led to a paradigm change from targeted therapies to immunotherapy-based first-line treatment in patients with primary metastatic disease; thus, deferred cytoreductive nephrectomy needs to be verified in the immunotherapy setting. Furthermore, a need exists for personalizing treatment choices for the individual patient to avoid unnecessary overtreatment. METHODS/DESIGN: To explore the impact of cytoreductive nephrectomy in this patient group receiving checkpoint immunotherapy, we initiated a randomized, controlled trial comparing deferred cytoreductive nephrectomy with no surgery. The trial integrates a comprehensive translational research program with specimen sampling for biomarker analysis. DISCUSSION: The trial aims to show that deferred cytoreductive nephrectomy improves overall survival in patients with synchronous metastatic renal cell carcinoma, and furthermore, to identify relevant biomarkers for personalized renal cancer management. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03977571 June 6, 2019.

Outcomes of Patients with Brain Metastases from Renal Cell Carcinoma Receiving First-line Therapies: Results from the International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium.

Patients with brain metastases (BrM) from renal cell carcinoma and their outcomes are not well characterized owing to frequent exclusion of this population from clinical trials. We analyzed data for patients with or without BrM using the International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium (IMDC). A total of 389/4799 patients (8.1%) had BrM on initiation of systemic therapy. First-line immuno-oncology (IO)-based combination therapy was associated with longer median overall survival (OS; 32.7 mo, 95% confidence interval [CI] 22.3-not reached) versus tyrosine kinase inhibitor monotherapy (20.6 mo, 95% CI 15.7-24.5; p = 0.019), as were intensive focal therapies with stereotactic radiotherapy or neurosurgery (31.4 mo, 95% CI 22.3-37.5) versus whole-brain radiotherapy alone or no focal therapy (16.5 mo, 95% CI 10.2-21.1; p = 0.028). On multivariable analysis, IO-based regimens (HR 0.49, 95% CI 0.25-0.97; p = 0.040) and stereotactic radiotherapy or neurosurgery (HR 0.48, 95% CI 0.29-0.78; p = 0.003) were independently associated with longer OS, as was IMDC favorable or intermediate risk (HR 0.40, 95% CI 0.24-0.66; p < 0.001). Intensive systemic and focal therapies were associated with better prognosis in this population. Further studies should explore the clinical effectiveness of multimodal strategies. PATIENT SUMMARY: In a large group of patients with advanced kidney cancer, we found that 8.1% had brain metastases when starting systemic therapy. Patients with brain metastases had significantly poorer prognosis than those without brain metastases. Receipt of combination immunotherapy, stereotactic radiotherapy, or neurosurgery was associated with longer overall survival.

Characterization of Patients with Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Undergoing Deferred, Upfront, or No Cytoreductive Nephrectomy in the Era of Combination Immunotherapy: Results from the International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium.

BACKGROUND: The role of cytoreductive nephrectomy (CN) has not yet been well characterized in the era of combination immunotherapy. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate characteristics and outcomes for patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) who received immuno-oncology (IO)-based combination therapy according to CN status. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Using the International mRCC Database Consortium (IMDC), patients with mRCC who received frontline IO-based combinations were included. Upfront CN was defined as CN up to 3 mo before diagnosis of metastatic disease but before systemic therapy initiation. Deferred CN was defined as CN after systemic therapy initiation. OUTCOMES MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Overall survival (OS) from initiation of systemic therapy was estimated via Cox proportional-hazards regression. A 12-mo landmark time and a time-varying covariate for CN status were used to mitigate potential bias. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: Of the 385 patients eligible for landmark analysis, 24, 182, and 179 underwent deferred CN, upfront CN, and no CN, respectively. Patients in the no CN subgroup were older (63 yr vs 57 yr in the deferred CN subgroup and 60 yr in the upfront CN subgroup; p = 0.001) and a higher proportion had bone metastases (44% vs 26% in the deferred CN subgroup and 23% in the upfront CN subgroup; p < 0.001). A lower proportion of patients in the upfront CN subgroup had IMDC poor risk (23% vs 43% in the no CN subgroup and 47% in the deferred CN subgroup; p < 0.001). On multivariable analysis, CN receipt was an independent favorable prognostic factor (hazard ratio 0.45, 95% confidence interval 0.26-0.78; p = 0.005). The study is limited by the lack of randomization and its retrospective nature. CONCLUSIONS: Despite changes in practice patterns with the advent of novel therapeutic agents, CN may still serve as an effective surgical intervention in carefully selected patients. PATIENT SUMMARY: For patients with metastatic kidney cancer, surgery to remove the primary tumor was traditionally the treatment of choice, but immunotherapy drugs are now another option for these patients. We analyzed data for contemporary patients with metastatic kidney cancer who received combination immunotherapy as their first treatment. We found that in selected patients receiving immunotherapy, surgery to remove the primary tumor as well can result in better prognosis.

Lifestyle and Clinical Factors in a Nationwide Stage III and IV Renal Cell Carcinoma Study.

BACKGROUND: The aim was to investigate whether patient-related or clinical risk factors present at the diagnosis of advanced stage renal cell carcinoma (RCC) had an impact on the overall mortality, cancer-specific mortality, and recurrence risk in a national cohort. METHODS: Patients registered with stage III and IV RCC in the Danish Renal Cancer Database (DaRenCa) in 2014-2016 were included in the study and followed up until recurrence or death. We conducted a Cox Proportional Hazard Model to examine the association between several variables and the development of RCC. These variables included BMI, hypertension, smoking status, symptoms at diagnosis, performance status, multidisciplinary team (MDT) discussion, surgical margin, and primary metastasis. Separate analyses were performed for cc-RCC and non-ccRCC patients. RESULTS: In our cohort of 929 patients, 424 individuals died from RCC during the follow-up period, with a median follow-up time of 4.1 (95% CI: 0.8-5.0) years for ccRCC and 2.0 (95% CI: 0.1-5.0) years for non-ccRCC. A multivariate analysis demonstrated that a positive surgical margin (HR 1.53 and 1.43), synchronous metastasis (HR 2.06 and 3.23), and poor performance status (HR 4.73 and 5.27) were significantly associated with a decreased 5-year overall and cancer-specific survival, respectively. Furthermore, a positive surgical margin was associated with a higher risk of recurrence in ccRCC. MDT discussion was found to reduce mortality risk in non-ccRCC. CONCLUSION: Clinical- and disease-related variables have a greater impact on RCC mortality and recurrence than the selected lifestyle-related factors. The inclusion of MDT discussion in the diagnosis and management of advanced RCC should be further evaluated for its potential to improve patient outcomes.

Late adverse events to iodinated contrast media in patients treated with IL-2: a safety report from the Danish Renal Carcinoma Group (DaRenCa) study - 1.

BACKGROUND: A higher incidence of late adverse events (LAEs) to iodinated contrast media in interleukin-2 (IL-2)-treated patients has been reported. PURPOSE: To assess the incidence of LAEs after administration of iodinated contrast media in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) treated with IL-2. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Patients were randomized to treatment with IL-2 and interferon-α with/without bevacizumab in the Danish Renal Carcinoma Group study - 1. Patients underwent a computed tomography (CT) scan at baseline, at one month, at three months, and every third month until RECIST 1.1 defined progression. LAEs due to iodinated contrast media were systematically registered according to the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events classification. RESULTS: In total, 89 patients were included and underwent a total of 507 contrast-enhanced CT scans. An overall incidence of 46 (9.1%) LAEs was observed in 38 of 89 (42.7%) patients; 3 LAEs at baseline (3.4% of all baseline scans), 39 (13.9%) LAEs during IL-2-based therapies, and 4 (2.9%) LAEs after termination of IL-based therapies. There was no difference in progression-free survival, overall survival, and treatment response in patients experiencing LAEs compared to patients without LAEs (P = 0.2, P = 0.5, and P = 0.6, respectively). CONCLUSION: Patients with mRCC demonstrated a higher incidence of LAEs after administration of iodinated contrast during ongoing IL-2 therapy, indicating that iodinated contrast media may cause a recall phenomenon of IL-2 toxicities in patients with mRCC. Treatment with IL-2 should not be a contraindication for contrast-enhanced scans in patients with mRCC but expertise and vigilance are required.

Outcomes for International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium Prognostic Groups in Contemporary First-line Combination Therapies for Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma.

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

Upfront Cytoreductive Nephrectomy for Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Treated with Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors or Targeted Therapy: An Observational Study from the International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium.

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

CABOSEQ: The Effectiveness of Cabozantinib in Patients With Treatment Refractory Advanced Renal Cell Carcinoma: Results From the International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium (IMDC).

BACKGROUND: There are limited data evaluating the activity of cabozantinib (CABO) as second line (2L) therapy post standard of care ipilimumab-nivolumab (IPI-NIVO) or immuno-oncology(IO)/vascular endothelial growth factor inhibitor (VEGFi) combinations (IOVE). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Using the IMDC database, we sought to identify the objective response rate, time to treatment failure (TTF) and overall survival (OS) of 2L CABO after IPI-NIVO, IOVE combinations, pazopanib or sunitinib (PAZ/SUN) or other first line (1L) therapies. Multivariable Cox regression, adjusted for underlying differences in IMDC groups, was used to compare differences in OS for 2L CABO based on preceding therapy. RESULTS: Three hundred and forty-six patients received 2L CABO (78 post IPI NIVO, 46 post IOVE, 161 post PAZ/SUN, 61 post Other). Of the entire cohort, 12.6%, 62.6%, and 24.8% were IMDC favourable, intermediate, and poor risk, respectively. Patients that received 1L IPI-NIVO had a median OS of 21.4 (95% CI, 12.1 - NE [Not evaluable]) months compared to 15.7 (95% CI, 9.3 - NE) months in 1L IOVE and 20.7 (95% CI, 15.6 - 35.6) months in 1L PAZ/SUN, P = .28. Median TTF from the initiation of 2L CABO in the overall population was 7.6 (95% CI, 6.6 - 9.0) months. We were unable to detect a significant difference in 2L CABO OS based on type of 1L therapy received: 1L IPI-NIVO (reference group) vs. 1L IOVE HR 1.73 (95% CI, 0.83 - 3.62 P = .14), 1L PAZ/SUN 1.16 (95% CI, 0.67 - 2.00 P = .60), however given the retrospective observational nature of this work a lack of sufficient power may contribute to this. CONCLUSION: In a large real world dataset, we identified clinically meaningful activity of 2L CABO after all evaluated contemporary 1L therapies, irrespective of whether the 1L regimen included a VEGFi. These are real world benchmarks with which to counsel our patients.

Soluble CD163: a novel independent prognostic biomarker in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma.

The hemoglobin-haptoglobin scavenger receptor CD163 is present in both a membrane-bound form on monocytes and macrophages (mCD163) and a shed soluble circulating form (sCD163). CD163 is a well-described marker of M2-like tumor-associated macrophages, but in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC), monocyte mCD163 and serum sCD163 levels have not previously been investigated and associated with patient overall survival (OS). Here, we report mCD163 expression on peripheral blood monocytes, as well as sCD163 serum levels, in samples from 89 patients newly diagnosed with mRCC and 20 healthy controls. We found that in mRCC patients, compared to healthy controls, monocyte mCD163 levels were reduced (P < 0.001) whereas serum sCD163 levels were increased (P = 0.004). Moreover, an inverse correlation between mCD163 and sCD163 levels (P = 0.04) was shown. In survival analyses, intermediary levels of monocyte mCD163 were associated with longest OS, compared to both lower and higher mCD163 levels, which were both associated with worse outcomes (P < 0.01). Further, higher levels of sCD163 at diagnosis were associated with poor OS in both univariate (P < 0.001) and multivariate analysis (HR = 1.28; 95%CI 1.09-1.50, P = 0.002). Importantly, stratification by low vs. high sCD163 was able to separate patients with International Metastatic RCC Database Consortium (IMDC) intermediate risk (IMDCINT) into two subgroups with different OS (P = 0.03): IMDCINT-sCD163LOW showed survival similar to IMDCFAV patients, and IMDCINT-sCD163HIGH showed survival similar to IMDCPOOR patients. Thus, baseline sCD163 is a novel independent biomarker of OS in mRCC, and using sCD163 as an add-on biomarker may improve prognostic value for patients in the heterogenous IMDC intermediate group.

Long-term outcomes with nivolumab plus ipilimumab versus sunitinib in first-line treatment of patients with advanced sarcomatoid renal cell carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma with sarcomatoid features (sRCC) have a poor prognosis and limited therapeutic options. First-line nivolumab plus ipilimumab (NIVO+IPI) provided efficacy benefits over sunitinib (SUN) in patients with intermediate/poor-risk sRCC at 42 months minimum follow-up in the phase 3 CheckMate 214 trial. In this exploratory post hoc analysis, we report clinical efficacy of NIVO+IPI in sRCC after a minimum follow-up of 5 years. METHODS: In CheckMate 214, patients with clear cell advanced RCC were randomized to NIVO 3 mg/kg plus IPI 1 mg/kg every 3 weeks (four doses), then NIVO 3 mg/kg every 2 weeks versus SUN 50 mg once daily (4 weeks; 6-week cycles). Randomized patients with sRCC were identified via independent central pathology review of archival tumor tissue or histological classification per local pathology report. Overall survival (OS), as well as progression-free survival (PFS) and objective response rate (ORR) per independent radiology review using Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors V.1.1, were evaluated in all International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium intermediate/poor-risk sRCC patients and by baseline tumor PD-L1 expression level (≥1% vs <1%). Safety outcomes are reported using descriptive statistics. RESULTS: In total, 139 patients with intermediate/poor-risk sRCC were identified (NIVO+IPI, n=74; SUN, n=65). At 5 years minimum follow-up, more patients remained on treatment with NIVO+IPI versus SUN (12% vs zero). Efficacy benefits with NIVO+IPI versus SUN were maintained with median OS of 48.6 vs 14.2 months (HR 0.46), median PFS of 26.5 vs 5.5 months (HR 0.50), and ORR 60.8% vs 23.1%. In addition, median duration of response was longer (not reached vs 25.1 months), and more patients had complete responses (23.0% vs 6.2%) with NIVO+IPI versus SUN, respectively. Efficacy was better with NIVO+IPI versus SUN regardless of tumor PD-L1 expression, but the magnitude of OS, PFS, and ORR benefits with NIVO+IPI was greater for sRCC patients with tumor PD-L1 ≥1%. No new safety signals emerged in either arm with longer follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with intermediate/poor-risk sRCC, NIVO+IPI maintained long-term survival benefits and demonstrated durable and deep responses over SUN at minimum follow-up of 5 years, supporting NIVO+IPI as a preferred first-line therapy in this population. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02231749.

Molecular analysis and favorable clinical outcomes in real-world patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Prior biomarker studies have mainly been restricted to advanced RCC patients treated in clinical trials or have had limited integration of immunotherapy features such as programmed death ligand (PD-L)-1 with gene expression signatures intended to capture other canonical pathways to confirm their prognostic value. MATERIAL AND METHODS: PD-L1 and PD-L2 by immunohistochemistry (IHC), PD-L2 messenger RNA (mRNA), and 10 gene expression profile (GEP) signatures targeting immune, angiogenesis and canonical pathways were analyzed in nephrectomy specimens from 227 advanced clear cell RCC (ccRCC) and 42 non-clear cell RCC (nccRCC) patients treated with targeted therapies including VEGF and mTOR inhibitors. Biomarker association with best overall response (BOR), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS) were evaluated using multivariable modeling. Except for PD-L1 IHC and angiogenesis, tested with a nominal p-value of .05, multiplicity control was applied with a 0.1 significance level given limited experience in this setting. RESULTS: The strongest biomarker correlations were observed for hypoxia inducible factor (HIF)-2a and angiogenesis signatures (rho = 0.860 [ccRCC], 0.819 [nccRCC]); hypoxia and glycolysis signatures (rho = 0.943 [ccRCC], 0.973 [nccRCC]); PD-L2 mRNA and T-cell-inflamed GEP signatures (rho = 0.764 [ccRCC], 0.897 [nccRCC]); and PD-L2 mRNA and monocytic myeloid-derived suppressor cell signature (rho = 0.787 [ccRCC], 0.815 [nccRCC]). For ccRCC, higher angiogenesis expression was associated with improved BOR (OR:2.85 [95%CI:1.37, 5.93]), longer PFS (HR:0.61 [95%CI:0.45, 0.82]) and OS (HR:0.74 [95%CI:0.54, 1.00]); higher PD-L1 expression with shorter OS (HR:1.44 [95%CI:1.01, 2.07]). For nccRCC, there was more than a two-fold increased risk with longer OS associated with lower angiogenesis (HR:2.43 [95%CI:1.04, 5.68]), glycolysis (HR:7.03 [95%CI:1.51, 32.76]) and hypoxia (HR:8.83 [95%CI:1.69, 46.05]) gene signature expression. CONCLUSION: Data pointed at PD-L1 IHC and angiogenesis expression in ccRCC and hypoxia, glycolysis, and angiogenesis expression in nccRCC as potential prognostic factors. These findings may have implications for the design and interpretation of advanced RCC trials and to identify potential targets for combination therapy strategies.

Adjuvant atezolizumab versus placebo for patients with renal cell carcinoma at increased risk of recurrence following resection (IMmotion010): a multicentre, randomised, double-blind, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: The standard of care for locoregional renal cell carcinoma is surgery, but many patients experience recurrence. The objective of the current study was to determine if adjuvant atezolizumab (vs placebo) delayed recurrence in patients with an increased risk of recurrence after resection. METHODS: IMmotion010 is a randomised, double-blind, multicentre, phase 3 trial conducted in 215 centres in 28 countries. Eligible patients were patients aged 18 years or older with renal cell carcinoma with a clear cell or sarcomatoid component and increased risk of recurrence. After nephrectomy with or without metastasectomy, patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive atezolizumab (1200 mg) or placebo (both intravenous) once every 3 weeks for 16 cycles or 1 year. Randomisation was done with an interactive voice-web response system. Stratification factors were disease stage (T2 or T3a vs T3b-c or T4 or N+ vs M1 no evidence of disease), geographical region (north America [excluding Mexico] vs rest of the world), and PD-L1 status on tumour-infiltrating immune cells (<1% vs ≥1% expression). The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed disease-free survival in the intention-to-treat population, defined as all patients who were randomised, regardless of whether study treatment was received. The safety-evaluable population included all patients randomly assigned to treatment who received any amount of study drug (ie, atezolizumab or placebo), regardless of whether a full or partial dose was received. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03024996, and is closed to further accrual. FINDINGS: Between Jan 3, 2017, and Feb 15, 2019, 778 patients were enrolled; 390 (50%) were assigned to the atezolizumab group and 388 (50%) to the placebo group. At data cutoff (May 3, 2022), the median follow-up duration was 44·7 months (IQR 39·1-51·0). Median investigator-assessed disease-free survival was 57·2 months (95% CI 44·6 to not evaluable) with atezolizumab and 49·5 months (47·4 to not evaluable) with placebo (hazard ratio 0·93, 95% CI 0·75-1·15, p=0·50). The most common grade 3-4 adverse events were hypertension (seven [2%] patients who received atezolizumab vs 15 [4%] patients who received placebo), hyperglycaemia (ten [3%] vs six [2%]), and diarrhoea (two [1%] vs seven [2%]). 69 (18%) patients who received atezolizumab and 46 (12%) patients who received placebo had a serious adverse event. There were no treatment-related deaths. INTERPRETATION: Atezolizumab as adjuvant therapy after resection for patients with renal cell carcinoma with increased risk of recurrence showed no evidence of improved clinical outcomes versus placebo. These study results do not support adjuvant atezolizumab for treatment of renal cell carcinoma. FUNDING: F Hoffmann-La Roche and Genentech, a member of the Roche group.

von Hippel-Lindau disease: Updated guideline for diagnosis and surveillance.

von Hippel Lindau disease (vHL) is caused by a hereditary predisposition to multiple neoplasms, especially hemangioblastomas in the retina and CNS, renal cell carcinomas (RCC), pheochromocytomas, neuroendocrine pancreatic tumours (PNET) and endolymphatic sac tumours. Evidence based approaches are needed to ensure an optimal clinical care, while minimizing the burden for the patients and their families. This guideline is based on evidence from the international vHL literature and extensive research of geno- and phenotypic characteristics, disease progression and surveillance effect in the national Danish vHL cohort. We included the views and preferences of the Danish vHL patients, ensured consensus among Danish experts and compared with international recommendations. RECOMMENDATIONS: vHL can be diagnosed on clinical criteria, only; however, in most cases the diagnosis can be supported by identification of a pathogenic or likely pathogenic variant in VHL. Surveillance should be initiated in childhood in persons with, or at risk of, vHL, and include regular examination of the retina, CNS, inner ear, kidneys, neuroendocrine glands, and pancreas. Treatment of vHL manifestations should be planned to optimize the chance of cure, without unnecessary sequelae. Most manifestations are currently treated by surgery. However, belzutifan, that targets HIF-2α was recently approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for adult patients with vHL-associated RCC, CNS hemangioblastomas, or PNETs, not requiring immediate surgery. Diagnostics, surveillance, and treatment of vHL can be undertaken successfully by experts collaborating in multidisciplinary teams. Systematic registration, collaboration with patient organisations, and research are fundamental for the continuous improvement of clinical care and optimization of outcome with minimal patient inconvenience.

Outcomes of patients with advanced non-clear cell renal cell carcinoma treated with first-line immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy.

BACKGROUND: Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) have demonstrated impressive activity in metastatic clear-cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC) and have become standard treatment options for patients with advanced disease. Data supporting the effectiveness of ICI-based therapy in advanced non-clear cell RCC (nccRCC) is more limited. METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis using the International Metastatic RCC Database Consortium (IMDC) to evaluate the outcomes of patients with advanced nccRCC. Patients were classified into three groups based on first-line therapy: ICI-based therapy (monotherapy or combination), vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) inhibitor monotherapy, or mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) inhibitor monotherapy. The primary outcome was overall survival (OS). Secondary outcomes were time to treatment failure (TTF) and objective response rate (ORR). We used the Kaplan-Meier method to compare OS and TTF between treatment groups and Cox proportional hazards models to adjust for prognostic covariates. RESULTS: We identified a total of 1145 patients with metastatic nccRCC. The most common subtype was papillary RCC (54.9%). For first-line therapy, 74.3% received VEGF monotherapy, 15% received mTOR monotherapy, and 10.7% received ICI-based therapy. Median OS in the ICI group was 28.6 months, versus 16.4 months in the VEGF group and 12.2 months in the mTOR group. Median TTF in the ICI group was 6.9 months, versus 5.0 months in the VEGF group and 3.9 months in the mTOR group. ORR was 27.2% in the ICI group, 14.5% in the VEGF group, and 9% in the mTOR group. After adjusting for the IMDC risk group, histological subtype, and age, the hazard ratio for OS was 0.57 (95% CI 0.42-0.78, p < 0.0001) for ICI versus VEGF and 0.50 (95% CI 0.36-0.71, p < 0.0001) for ICI versus mTOR. CONCLUSIONS: In advanced nccRCC, first-line ICI-based treatment appears to be associated with improved OS compared to VEGF and mTOR targeted therapy. These results should be confirmed in prospective randomised trials.

Imaging Response to Contemporary Immuno-oncology Combination Therapies in Patients With Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma.

Importance: The association between treatment with first-line immuno-oncology (IO) combination therapies and physician-assessed objective imaging response among patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) remains uncharacterized. Objective: To compare the likelihood of objective imaging response (ie, complete or partial response) to first-line IO combination ipilimumab-nivolumab (IOIO) therapy vs approved IO with vascular endothelial growth factor inhibitor (IOVE) combination therapies among patients with mRCC. Design, Setting, and Participants: This multicenter international cohort study was nested in routine clinical practice. A data set from the International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium (IMDC) was used to identify consecutive patients with mRCC who received treatment with IO combination therapies between May 30, 2013, and September 9, 2021. A total of 899 patients with a histologically confirmed diagnosis of mRCC who received treatment with a first-line IOVE or IOIO regimen and had evaluable responses were included. Exposures: Best overall response to first-line IO combination therapy based on Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors, version 1.1. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was the difference in treating physician-assessed objective imaging response based on the type of first-line IO combination therapy received. Secondary outcomes included the identification of baseline characteristics positively associated with objective imaging response and the association of objective imaging response with overall survival. Results: Among 1085 patients with mRCC who received first-line IO combination therapies, 899 patients (median age, 62.8 years [IQR, 55.9-69.2 years]; 666 male [74.2%]) had evaluable responses. A total of 794 patients had information available on IMDC risk classification; of those, 127 patients (16.0%) had favorable risk, 442 (55.7%) had intermediate risk, and 225 (28.3%) had poor risk. With regard to best overall response among all participants, 37 patients (4.1%) had complete response, 344 (38.3%) had partial response, 315 (35.0%) had stable disease, and 203 (22.6%) had progressive disease. Corresponding median overall survival was not estimable (95% CI, 53.3 months to not estimable) among patients with complete response, 55.9 months (95% CI, 44.1 months to not estimable) among patients with partial response, 48.1 months (95% CI, 33.4 months to not estimable) among patients with stable disease, and 13.0 months (95% CI, 8.4-18.1 months) among patients with progressive disease (log rank P < .001). Treatment with IOVE therapy was found to be independently associated with an increased likelihood of obtaining response (OR, 1.89; 95% CI, 1.26-2.81; P = .002) compared with IOIO therapy. The presence of lung metastases (odds ratio [OR], 1.49; 95% CI, 1.01-2.20), receipt of cytoreductive nephrectomy (OR, 1.59; 95% CI, 1.04-2.43), and favorable IMDC risk (OR, 1.93; 95% CI, 1.10-3.39) were independently associated with an increased likelihood of response. Conclusions and Relevance: In this study, treatment with IOVE therapy was associated with significantly increased odds of objective imaging response compared with IOIO therapy. The presence of lung metastases, receipt of cytoreductive nephrectomy, and favorable IMDC risk were associated with increased odds of experiencing objective imaging response. These findings may help inform treatment selection, especially in clinical contexts associated with high-volume multisite metastatic disease, in which obtaining objective imaging response is important.

Early reduction in spectral dual-layer detector CT parameters as favorable imaging biomarkers in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma.

OBJECTIVES: To associate the early change in DL-CT parameters and HU with survival outcomes and treatment response in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). METHODS: DL-CT scans were performed at baseline and after 1 month of checkpoint immunotherapy or tyrosine kinase inhibitor therapy. Scans were reconstructed to conventional CT and DL-CT series, and used for assessment of HU, iodine concentration (IC), and the effective atomic number (Zeffective) in the combined RECISTv.1.1 target lesions. The relative changes, defined as ΔIC(combined), ΔZeffective(combined), and ΔHU(combined), were associated with progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and objective response rate (ORR). The reduction in the sum of diameters of target lesions ≥ 30% after 1 month was associated with OS, PFS, and ORR. RESULTS: Overall, 115 and 104 mRCC patients were included at baseline and 1 month, respectively. Median IC(combined) decreased from 2.3 to 1.2 mg/ml (p < 0.001), Zeffective(combined) from 8.5 to 8.0 (p < 0.001), and HU(combined) from 86.0 to 64.00 HU (p < 0.001). After multivariate adjustments, the largest reductions in ΔIC(combined) (HR 0.47, 95% CI: 0.24-0.94, p = 0.033) and ΔZeffective(combined) (HR = 0.43, 95% CI: 0.21-0.87, p = 0.019) were associated with favorable OS; the largest reduction in ΔZeffective(combined) was associated with higher response (OR = 2.79, 95% CI: 1.12-6.94, p = 0.027). The largest reduction in ΔHU(combined) was solely associated with OS in univariate analysis (HR 0.45, 95% CI: 0.23-0.91). Reduction in SOD ≥ 30% at 1 month was not associated with outcomes (p > 0.075). CONCLUSIONS: Early reductions at 1 month in ΔIC(combined) and ΔZeffective(combined) are associated with favorable outcomes in patients with mRCC. This information may reassure physicians and patients about treatment strategy. KEY POINTS: • Early reductions following 1 month of therapy in spectral dual-layer detector CT-derived iodine concentration and the effective atomic number (Zeffective) are independent biomarkers for better overall survival in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma. • Early reduction after 1 month of therapy in the effective atomic number (Zeffective) is an independent imaging biomarker for better treatment response metastatic renal cell carcinoma.

Outcome and prognosis after adrenal metastasectomy: nationwide study.

BACKGROUND: Data regarding adrenal metastasectomy are limited. Here, clinical outcomes, safety, and prognostic factors in patients undergoing adrenal metastasectomy were evaluated in a large nationwide study. METHODS: Patients undergoing adrenal metastasectomy between 2000 and 2018 were identified in the Danish National Pathology Registry. Medical records were reviewed to confirm eligibility and to collect clinical data. The primary outcome was overall survival (OS). Cox multivariable regression analyses were? adjusted for baseline factors. RESULTS: In total, 435 patients underwent adrenal metastasectomy; the primary cancer origins were renal (n = 195, 45 per cent), lung (n = 121, 28 per cent), colorectal (n = 50, 11 per cent), and other (n = 69, 16 per cent). The median (interquartile range; i.q.r.) age was 66 (59-71) years, and 280 (64 per cent) were men. The 5-year OS was 31 per cent. The 30-day mortality was 1.8 per cent. Complications were more frequent and severe in patients who underwent open surgery compared with laparoscopic surgery (Clavien-Dindo III-V, 31.5 per cent versus 11.8 per cent respectively, P < 0.001). Factors associated with poor survival included non-radical pR2 resection (hazard ratio (HR) 3.57, 95 per cent c.i. 1.96 to 6.48), tumour size more than 50 mm (HR 1.79, 95 per cent c.i. 1.26 to 2.52), lung cancer origin (HR 1.77, 95 per cent c.i. 1.31 to 2.40), open surgical approach (HR 1.33, 95 per cent c.i. 1.04 to 1.71), presence of extra-adrenal metastases (HR 1.31, 95 per cent c.i. 1.01 to 1.71), and increasing Charlson co-morbidity index factors (HR 1.14 per one-point increase, 95 per cent c.i. 1.03 to 1.27). CONCLUSION: Adrenal metastasectomy is safe and may result in long-term survival in a subset of patients. Non-radical resection, large tumour size, lung cancer origin, open approach, presence of extra-adrenal metastases, and co-morbidity were associated with inferior outcomes.