Efficacy and Safety of First-line Systemic Therapy for Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis.

CONTEXT: Considerable advances have been made in the first-line treatment of metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC), with immunotherapy-based combinations including immunotherapy-tyrosine kinase inhibitors (IO-TKIs) and dual immunotherapy (IO-IO) favored. A lack of head-to-head clinical trials comparing these treatments means that there is uncertainty regarding their use in clinical practice. OBJECTIVE: To compare and rank the efficacy and safety of first-line systemic treatments for mRCC with a focus on IO-based combinations. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: MEDLINE (Ovid), EMBASE, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and abstracts of recent major scientific meetings were searched to identify the most up-to-date phase 3 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of first-line IO-based combinations for mRCC up to June 2021. A systematic review and network meta-analysis were completed using the Bayesian framework. Primary endpoints included overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). Secondary endpoints included the objective response rate (ORR), complete response (CR), grade 3-4 treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs), treatment-related drug discontinuation (TRDD), and health-related quality of life (HRQoL). The analysis was performed for the intention-to-treat (ITT) population as well as by clinical risk group. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: A total of six phase 3 RCTs were included involving a total of 5121 patients. Nivolumab plus cabozantinib (NIVO-CABO) had the highest likelihood of an OS benefit in the ITT population (surface under the cumulative ranking curve 82%). Avelumab plus axitinib (AVEL-AXI) had the highest likelihood of an OS benefit for patients with favorable risk (65%). Pembrolizumab plus AXI (PEMBRO-AXI) had the highest likelihood of an OS benefit for patients with intermediate risk (78%). PEMBRO plus lenvatinib (PEMBRO-LENV) had the highest likelihood of an OS benefit for patients with poor risk (89%). PEMBRO-LENV was associated with a superior PFS benefit across all risk groups (89-98%). Maximal ORR was achieved with PEMBRO-LENV (97%). The highest likelihood for CR was attained with NIVO plus ipilimumab (NIVO-IPI; 85%) and PEMBRO-LENV (83%). The highest grade 3-4 TRAE rate occurred with PEMBRO-LENV (95%) and NIVO-CABO (83%), but the latter was associated with the lowest TRDD rate (2%). By contrast, NIVO-IPI had the lowest grade 3-4 TRAE rate (6%) and the highest likelihood of TRDD (100%). HRQoL consistently favored NIVO-CABO (66-75%), PEMBRO-LENV (44-85%), and NIVO-IPI (65-93%) in comparison to the other treatments. CONCLUSIONS: IO-TKI drug combinations are associated with consistent improvements in clinically relevant outcomes for all mRCC risk groups. This benefit may be at the cost of higher TRAE rates; however, lower TRDD rates suggest a manageable side-effect profile. Longer follow-up is required to determine if the benefits of IO-TKIs will be sustained and if they should be favored in the first-line treatment of mRCC. PATIENT SUMMARY: Combination treatments based on immunotherapy agents continue to show meaningful benefits in the first-line treatment of metastatic kidney cancer. Our review and network meta-analysis shows that immunotherapy combined with another class of agents called tyrosine kinase inhibitors is promising. However, longer follow-up is needed for this treatment strategy to clarify if the benefits are long-lasting.

Real-World Outcomes of Oxaliplatin-Based Chemotherapy on R0 Resected Colonic Liver Metastasis.

INTRODUCTION: In resected colonic liver metastasis (CLM), randomized studies of oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy have demonstrated improvements in disease-free survival (DFS), but not overall survival (OS). Additionally, oxaliplatin regimens have not been compared to non-oxaliplatin chemotherapy. Despite limited evidence, perioperative chemotherapy is often used in the management of CLM. The primary aim of this study was to assess the impact of oxaliplatin chemotherapy regimens on OS in patients who have undergone resection of CLM in a real-world setting. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients who underwent resection of CLM in the provinces of Alberta and British Columbia, Canada, were identified from 1996 to 2016. Perioperative (pre- and/or post-) systemic therapy was categorized as oxaliplatin or non-oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy or no chemotherapy. The primary and secondary outcomes were OS and DFS, respectively. RESULTS: We identified 511 patients who underwent R0 resection of CLM. A significant difference in median OS was identified among the oxaliplatin, non-oxaliplatin, and no-chemotherapy groups of 100, 60, and 59 months, respectively (P = .009). In multivariate analysis, patients who received oxaliplatin regimens had a lower risk of death (hazard ratio, 0.68; 95% confidence interval, 0.51-0.92; P = .012), whereas the non-oxaliplatin chemotherapy group did not (hazard ratio, 0.88; 95% confidence interval, 0.65-1.20; P = .422) compared with no chemotherapy. CONCLUSIONS: In this multicenter, retrospective, population-based study, perioperative oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy was associated with improved OS in conjunction with R0 resection of CLM. Further studies should evaluate the optimal duration and sequencing of perioperative chemotherapy in relation to curative-intent surgical resection of CLM.

A real-world, population-based study of patterns of referral, treatment, and outcomes for advanced pancreatic cancer.

BACKGROUND: To describe patterns of referral, consultation, and treatment of advanced pancreatic cancer patients in a population-based health care system and to evaluate the impact of these factors on outcomes. METHODS: This is a retrospective analysis of population-based cancer data from the province of Alberta, Canada. We analyzed patients diagnosed with either locally advanced or metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma from 2009 to 2016 and evaluated their patterns of referral to a cancer center, consultation with oncology, and treatment with active anticancer therapies. Logistic regression models were constructed to determine the factors associated with referral, late oncology assessment, and late receipt of treatment. RESULTS: We identified 1621 pancreatic cancer patients. Median age was 70 years, 50% were men, and 51% had a Charlson index of 2+. Within this cohort, only 884 (54%) patients were referred to one of the provincial cancer centers. Adjusting for confounders in logistic regression models, older age and worse comorbidity scores were associated with nonreferral (both P < 0.01). In multivariable analysis among treated patients, the following factors were associated with improved overall survival, including younger age, earlier stage, and better comorbidity scores (all P < 0.01). Neither referral to consultation times nor consultation to treatment times correlated with outcomes. Importantly, nonreferred patients were more likely to use acute care services, including longer total duration of hospitalizations and more frequent visits with physician specialists. CONCLUSION: A significant proportion of patients with advanced pancreatic cancer were never referred to a cancer center. Nonreferred patients were more likely to utilize specific health care resources.

Impact of Postoperative Adjuvant Chemotherapy Following Long-course Chemoradiotherapy in Stage II Rectal Cancer.

OBJECTIVES: Use of adjuvant chemotherapy (AC) following neoadjuvant chemoradiation (nCRT) is controversial in rectal cancer (RC). We assessed a multi-institutional database to determine if there was benefit from AC for pathologic stage II RC patients and whether the addition of oxaliplatin to fluoropyrimidine (OXAC) therapy impacted outcomes. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We included patients who underwent nCRT and had pathologic stage II (ypT3/4 ypN0) tumors. Disease-free survival and overall survival were assessed. Multivariate Cox models adjusting for age, sex, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group, high-risk features (pT4, poor differentiation, <12 nodes removed, lymphovascular/perineural invasion, or obstruction/perforation), and clinical stage were constructed. RESULTS: Of 485 patients, 73.6% received AC, of which 25.5% received OXAC. Patients receiving AC were younger (median age 61 vs. 64; P=0.003) and had higher rates of total mesorectal excision (81.5% vs. 78.9%; P=0.049), but had similar high-risk features, performance status, clinical stage, margin status, preoperative carcinoembryonic antigen, and nCRT regimen. In univariate analysis, overall survival was improved with fluoropyrimidine AC compared with no AC or OXAC (P=0.049), but not disease-free survival (P=0.33). In multivariate analysis, any AC, fluoropyrimidine AC, or OXAC did not improve outcomes. After stratifying patients by the presence of high-risk features, elevated carcinoembryonic antigen, margin status, or preoperative clinical stage, we did not identify a group with improved outcomes following AC. CONCLUSIONS: In this multi-institutional cohort of yp stage II RC patients, we failed to identify a group that derives benefit from AC following nCRT. The addition of oxaliplatin did not appear to improve outcomes when compared with fluoropyrimidine alone.

Prognosis of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma treated with sorafenib: a comparison of five models in a large Canadian database.

Several systems (tumor-node-metastasis [TNM], Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer [BCLC], Okuda, Cancer of the Liver Italian Program [CLIP], and albumin-bilirubin grade [ALBI]) were developed to estimate the prognosis of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) mostly prior to the prevalent use of sorafenib. We aimed to compare the prognostic and discriminatory power of these models in predicting survival for HCC patients treated with sorafenib and to identify independent prognostic factors for survival in this population. Patients who received sorafenib for the treatment of HCC between 1 January 2008 and 30 June 2015 in the provinces of British Columbia and Alberta, and two large cancer centers in Toronto, Ontario, were included. Survival was assessed using the Kaplan-Meier method. Multivariate Cox regression was used to identify predictors of survival. The models were compared with respect to homogeneity, discriminatory ability, monotonicity of gradients, time-dependent area under the curve, and Akaike information criterion. A total of 681 patients were included. 80% were males, 86% had Child-Pugh class A, and 37% of patients were East Asians. The most common etiology for liver disease was hepatitis B (34%) and C (31%). In all model comparisons, CLIP performed better while BCLC and TNM7 performed less favorably but the differences were small. The utility of each system in allocating patients into different prognostic groups varied, for example, TNM poorly differentiated patients in advanced stages (8.7 months (m) (95% CI 6.5-11.5) versus 8.4 m (95% CI 7.0-9.6) for stages III and IV, respectively) while ALBI had excellent discrimination of early grades (15.6 m [95% CI 13.0-18.4] versus 8.3 m [95% CI 7.0-9.2] for grades 1 and 2, respectively). On multivariate analysis, hepatitis C, alcoholism, and prior hepatic resection were independently prognostic of better survival (P < 0.01). In conclusion, none of the prognostic systems was optimal in predicting survival in sorafenib-treated patients with HCC. Etiology of liver disease should be considered in future models and clinical trial designs.