NCCN Guidelines® Insights: Kidney Cancer, Version 2.2024.

The NCCN Guidelines for Kidney Cancer provide multidisciplinary recommendations for diagnostic workup, staging, and treatment of patients with renal cell carcinoma (RCC). These NCCN Guidelines Insights focus on the systemic therapy options for patients with advanced RCC and summarize the new clinical data evaluated by the NCCN panel for the recommended therapies in Version 2.2024 of the NCCN Guidelines for Kidney Cancer.

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.

Comparative Effectiveness of Front-Line Ipilimumab and Nivolumab or Axitinib and Pembrolizumab in Metastatic Clear Cell Renal Cell Carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Treatment of metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) is rapidly evolving with new combination therapies demonstrating improved response rates and survival. There are no head-to-head prospective trials comparing an immunotherapy doublet with an immunotherapy/tyrosine-kinase inhibitor-based combination. We compare real-world outcomes in patients treated with axitinib/pembrolizumab (axi/pembro) or ipilimumab/nivolumab (ipi/nivo). The primary endpoints were overall-survival (OS) and real-world progression-free survival (rwPFS). PATIENTS AND METHODS: We used a de-identified database to select patients diagnosed with clear cell mRCC and treated with front-line axi/pembro or ipi/nivo from 2018 to 2022. Analyses are adjusted using propensity score-based inverse probability of treatment weighting, balancing age, gender, insurance, race, IMDC risk, and nephrectomy status. We compared survival by treatment groups using weighted and unweighted Kaplan-Meier curves with log-rank tests and weighted Cox proportional hazards regressions. RESULTS: We included a total of 1506 patients with mRCC who received frontline axi/pembro (n = 547) or ipi/nivo (n = 959). Median follow-up time was 20.0 months (range: 0.2-47.6). Baseline demographics were similar between the 2 cohorts. Adjusted median OS for the full population was 28.9 months for axi/pembro and was 24.3 months for ipi/nivo (P = .09). Twenty-four-month survival was 53.8% for axi/pembro treated patients and 50.2% for ipi/nivo treated patients. rwPFS was 10.6 months for axi/pembro treated patients and 6.9 months for ipi/nivo treated patients. Treatment with axi/pembro conferred improved survival in the IMDC favorable risk strata, with no significant difference in survival observed within the full cohort. CONCLUSIONS: In this retrospective, real-world study of patients treated with front-line combination therapy, patients with IMDC favorable risk disease had better survival when treated with axi/pembro compared to ipi/nivo. However, survival for the entire population and the 24-month median overall survival were not statistically different between treatment groups. Longer follow-up is necessary to discern any emerging significant differences.

Flutamide With or Without PROSTVAC in Non-metastatic Castration Resistant (M0) Prostate Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Before 2018, there was no standard of care for non-metastatic (M0) castration resistant prostate cancer nmCRPC. Androgen receptor antagonists (ARAs) were commonly used sequentially nmCRPC. METHODS: This was a multicenter, randomized clinical trial comparing the ARA flutamide+/-PROSTVAC, a pox viral vaccine targeting PSA that includes T-cell co-stimulatory molecules. Eligible men had negative CT and Tc99 bone scans, and rising PSA on ADT. Previous treatment with ARA was a stratification factor. Patients were also evaluated for antigen-specific immune responses using intracellular cytokine staining. RESULTS: Thirty-three patients randomized to flutamide and 31 to flutamide+vaccine. The median age was 71.8 and 69.8 years, respectively. The median time to treatment failure after a median potential follow-up of 46.7 months was, 4.5 months (range 2-70) for flutamide alone vs. 6.9 months (2.5-40; P = .38) with flutamide+vaccine. Seven patients in each arm had a >50% PSA response. Antigen-specific responses were similar in both arms (58% of patients in flutamide alone and 56% in flutamide+vaccine). The treatments were well tolerated. The most common side effect > grade 2 was injection site reaction seen in 29/31 vaccine patients which were self-limiting. CONCLUSION: The combination of flutamide+PROSTVAC did not improve outcomes in men with nmCRPC compared with flutamide alone. (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT00450463).

The Role of Cytoreductive Nephrectomy in Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma: A Real-World Multi-Institutional Analysis.

PURPOSE: The role of cytoreductive nephrectomy (CN) in metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) was challenged by the results of the CARMENA trial. Here we evaluate the role of CN in mRCC patients, including those receiving modern therapies. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We included patients with synchronous mRCC between 2011-2020 from the de-identified nationwide Flatiron Health database. We evaluated 3 groups: systemic therapy alone, CN followed by systemic therapy (up-front CN [uCN]) and systemic therapy followed by CN (deferred CN [dCN]). The primary outcome was median overall survival (mOS) in patients receiving systemic therapy alone vs uCN. Secondary outcome was overall survival in patients receiving uCN vs dCN. First-treatment, landmark and time-varying covariate analyses were conducted to overcome immortal time bias. Weighted Kaplan-Meier curves, log-rank tests and Cox proportional hazards regressions were used to assess the effect of therapy on survival. RESULTS: Of 1,910 patients with mRCC, 972 (57%) received systemic therapy, 605 (32%) received uCN, 142 (8%) dCN and 191 (10%) CN alone; 433 (23%) patients received immunotherapy-based therapy. The adjusted mOS was significantly improved in first-treatment, landmark and time-varying covariate analysis (mOS 26.6 vs 14.6 months, 36.3 vs 21.1 months and 26.1 vs 12.2 months, respectively) in patients undergoing CN. Among patients receiving CN and systemic therapy, the timing of systemic therapy relative to CN was not significantly related to overall survival (HR=1.0, 95% CI 0.76-1.32, p=0.99). CONCLUSIONS: Our findings support an oncologic role for CN in select mRCC patients. In patients receiving both CN and systemic therapy, the survival benefit compared to systemic alone was similar for up-front and deferred CN.

Safety of neoadjuvant chemotherapy in patients with muscle-invasive bladder cancer and malignant ureteric obstruction.

OBJECTIVES: To determine whether patients with carcinoma invading bladder muscle (MIBC) and ureteric obstruction can safely receive cisplatin-based neoadjuvant chemotherapy (C-NAC), and to determine whether such patients require relief of obstruction with a ureteric stent or percutaneous nephrostomy prior to beginning C-NAC. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We performed a single-institution retrospective analysis of MIBC patients receiving C-NAC and falling into three groups: no ureteric obstruction (NO); relieved ureteric obstruction (RO); and unrelieved ureteric obstruction (URO). To address whether patients with obstruction can safely receive C-NAC, we compared patients with NO to those with RO, with the primary outcome of premature chemotherapy discontinuation. To investigate whether patients with obstruction should have the obstruction relieved prior to NAC, we compared RO to URO patients using a primary composite outcome of grade ≥ 3 adverse events, premature chemotherapy discontinuation, dose reduction, or dose interruption. The primary outcomes were compared using multivariable logistic regression. Sensitivity analyses were performed for the RO vs URO comparison, in which patients with only mild degrees of obstruction were excluded from the URO group. RESULTS: A total of 193 patients with NO, 49 with RO, and 35 with URO were analysed. There were no statistically significant differences between those with NO and those with RO in chemotherapy discontinuation (15% vs 22%; P = 0.3) or any secondary outcome. There was no statistically significant difference between those with RO and URO in the primary composite outcome (51% vs 53%; P = 1) or any secondary outcome. CONCLUSION: Patients with ureteric obstruction can safely receive C-NAC. Relief of obstruction was not associated with increased safety of C-NAC delivery.

The past, present, and future of pT0 in bladder cancer clinical trials.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Since the establishment of neoadjuvant chemotherapy as the standard of care for patients with muscle invasive bladder cancer, the pathologic absence of disease, denoted pT0, was found to be predictive of improved overall survival. Accordingly, it has been used in clinical trials as an optimal surrogate outcome measure, even in contemporary nonchemotherapeutic interventions. We review the role of pT0 as a catalyst for change in trial design and its suitability to facilitate more efficient and timely results. In addition, we explore the present and future of cT0, the clinical absence of disease, in defining treatment response and enabling bladder-sparing management options. RECENT FINDINGS: The use of pT0 as a surrogate has provided initial results for the efficacy of immunotherapy in the neoadjuvant space. In combination with molecular markers, pT0 has improved our ability to identify treatment responders and its clinical counterpart, cT0, has been integrated into multiple trials to redefine postneoadjuvant chemotherapy management algorithms. SUMMARY: The use of pT0 as a surrogate endpoint in bladder cancer trials has improved clinical trial design, defined efficacy of emerging therapeutics, and has the potential to redefine the postneoadjuvant treatment management for patients seeking bladder-sparing options.

Cystoscopy and Systematic Bladder Tissue Sampling in Predicting pT0 Bladder Cancer: A Prospective Trial.

PURPOSE: Concern for discordance between clinical staging and final pathology drives current management of patients deemed appropriate candidates for radical cystectomy. Therefore, we set out to prospectively investigate reliability and shortcomings of cystoscopic evaluation in radical cystectomy candidates. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients undergoing radical cystectomy for urothelial carcinoma were enrolled in a prospective single-arm study to evaluate reliability of Systematic Endoscopic Evaluation in predicting pT0 urothelial carcinoma (NCT02968732). Systematic Endoscopic Evaluation consisted of cystoscopy and tissue sampling at the time of radical cystectomy. Systematic Endoscopic Evaluation results were compared to radical cystectomy pathology. The primary end point was the negative predictive value of Systematic Endoscopic Evaluation findings in predicting radical cystectomy pathology. RESULTS: A total of 61 patients underwent Systematic Endoscopic Evaluation and radical cystectomy. Indications included muscle invasive bladder cancer in 42 (68.9%) and high risk nonmuscle invasive bladder cancer in 19 (31.1%). In all, 38 (62.3%, 90.5% of patients with muscle invasive bladder cancer) received neoadjuvant chemotherapy. On Systematic Endoscopic Evaluation, 31 (50.8%) patients demonstrated no visual nor biopsy-based evidence of disease (seeT0), yet 16/31 (51.6%) harbored residual disease (>pT0), including 8 (8/31, 25.8%) with residual ≥pT2 disease upon radical cystectomy. The negative predictive value of Systematic Endoscopic Evaluation predicting a pT0 bladder was 48.4% (CI 30.2-66.9), which was below our prespecified hypothesis. Therefore, the trial was stopped for futility. CONCLUSIONS: Approximately 1 of 4 patients with seeT0 at the time of radical cystectomy harbored residual muscle invasive bladder cancer. These prospective data definitively confirm major limitations of endoscopic assessment for pT0 bladder cancer. Future work should focus on novel imaging and biomarker strategies to optimize evaluations before radical cystectomy for improved decision making regarding bladder preservation.

Sporadic Angiomyolipomas Growth Kinetics While on Everolimus: Results of a Phase II Trial.

PURPOSE: Everolimus decreases tumor volume of renal angiomyolipomas in patients with tuberous sclerosis. No prospective data are available regarding the effect of everolimus on the growth kinetics in patients with sporadic angiomyolipomas. We sought to determine the safety and efficacy of everolimus in the volumetric reduction of sporadic angiomyolipomas. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This multi-institutional, prospective, phase II trial, enrolled patients with 3 cm or larger sporadic angiomyolipomas who were candidates for surgical resection or percutaneous angioembolization. Patients received 10 mg everolimus daily for 4 planned 28-day cycles. Response was defined as a 25% or greater volumetric reduction of patient angiomyolipoma. Baseline, 4, 6 and 12-month volumetric analyses were performed using magnetic resonance imaging. Everolimus was discontinued in those with less than 25% volumetric reduction after 4 cycles. Those with 25% or greater volumetric reduction received 2 additional cycles. The primary outcomes were the efficacy of everolimus in the volumetric reduction of angiomyolipomas by 25% or more, and the safety and tolerability of everolimus. RESULTS: Overall 20 patients were enrolled at 5 centers. Of these patients 11 (55%) completed 4 cycles and 7 (35%) completed 6 cycles. Efficacy was demonstrated, with 10 of 18 (55.6%) patients exhibiting a 25% or greater reduction in tumor volume at 4 months (median 58.5%) and 10 of 14 (71.4%) patients exhibiting a 25% or greater reduction in tumor volume at 6 months (median 58.2%). Four (20%) patients were withdrawn due to protocol defined toxicities and 8 (40%) self-withdrew from the study due to side effects. CONCLUSIONS: Everolimus was effective in causing volumetric reduction of angiomyolipomas by 25% or greater in most patients but was associated with a high rate of treatment discontinuation.

Efficacy of Split Schedule Versus Conventional Schedule Neoadjuvant Cisplatin-Based Chemotherapy for Muscle-Invasive Bladder Cancer.

Neoadjuvant cisplatin-based chemotherapy (NAC; 70 mg/m2) is standard of care for muscle-invasive bladder carcinoma (MIBC). Many patients (pts) cannot receive cisplatin because of renal impairment, and administration of cisplatin 35 mg/m2 on day 1 + 8 or 1 + 2 (i.e., split schedule) is a commonly used alternative. In this retrospective analysis, we compared complete (pT0) and partial (

Update on perioperative systemic therapy for urothelial carcinoma.

Level 1 evidence supports cisplatin-based neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) in muscle-invasive urothelial bladder cancer (MIUBC). Recent data from small prospective trials with neoadjuvant immune checkpoint inhibitors are encouraging, but long-term follow-up is required. Randomized trials have failed to accrue a sufficient number of patients and have not demonstrated a survival benefit with adjuvant chemotherapy in MIUBC, but for those with high-risk features at surgery, adjuvant cisplatin-based therapy is appropriate. In upper tract urothelial carcinoma, several retrospective trials and one recent phase 2 prospective trial support the use of NAC, and a randomized trial with adjuvant chemotherapy demonstrated improved disease- and metastasis-free survival and a trend toward improved overall survival.

Impact of tumor microenvironment composition on therapeutic responses and clinical outcomes in cancer.

The tumor microenvironment (TME) plays an important role in cancer growth and progression. Paradoxically, the TME is capable of acting as both a potential barrier and facilitator of tumor proliferation by affecting various processes including local growth resistance, immune system interactions, and the formation of distant metastases. This important interaction between cancer cells and their local environment, composed of immune cells, angiogenic cells, lymphatic endothelial cells and cancer-associated fibroblasts is paramount to determine a cancer cell's ability to grow and ultimately metastasize. It is essential to understand this complex interplay in order to define treatment modalities to target the TME as part of anti-cancer therapy.

Evolving landscape of the treatment of metastatic clear cell renal cell carcinoma.

The management of advanced clear cell renal cell carcinoma (RCC) has evolved over the past decade with the introduction of targeted therapies and immune checkpoint inhibitors. Recently, studies of dual checkpoint inhibition and of vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) inhibition combined with checkpoint inhibition have shown promising results, adding newer options to the treatment armamentarium for advanced RCC. Specifically, therapies combining checkpoint inhibitors of different classes and combining VEGF inhibitors with checkpoint inhibitors have gained much interest, and results from studies of several other combinations are awaited. These and previously approved treatments offer multiple options to patients with advanced RCC. In this review, we discuss the efficacy and safety results from the pivotal trials of these therapies, how the trial data can guide selection of the most appropriate therapy, and how to consider sequencing therapies in the care of patients with advanced RCC.

Immune-Related Adverse Events as a Biomarker in Non-Melanoma Patients Treated with Programmed Cell Death 1 Inhibitors.

BACKGROUND: The programmed death 1 (PD-1) checkpoint inhibitors (CKIs) can lead to immune-related adverse events (irAEs). We sought to evaluate whether the development of irAEs correlates with treatment response in non-melanoma malignancies. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted a retrospective study of patients who received anti-PD-1 CKI monotherapy at Fox Chase Cancer Center. Endpoints included overall response rate (ORR), time to next therapy or death (TTNTD), and overall survival (OS). Fisher's exact tests and logistic regression models were used to determine the association between irAE incidence and ORR, and Kaplan-Meier curves with log-rank tests and Cox regression models were used for the comparison of TTNTD and OS. RESULTS: Between November 2011 and November 2016, 160 patients were treated with >1 dose of an anti-PD-1 CKI. Seventy-three (46%) were treated on a clinical trial. Immune-related adverse events were noted in 64 patients (40%), with steroids required in 36 (23%). Of the 142 patients evaluable for clinical response, 28 patients (20%) achieved a partial response at first scan. An association between irAEs and ORR was seen in clinical trial patients (p = .007), but not in non-trial patients (p = .13). When controlling for clinical trial participation and cancer type using multivariate analysis, low-grade irAEs had higher ORR (p = .017) and longer TTNTD (p = .008). No association between irAE incidence and OS was seen (p = .827). Immune-related adverse events that required steroid treatment were marginally associated with increased TTNTD (p = .05, hazard ratio 0.62) but were not associated with OS (p = .13). CONCLUSION: We demonstrate several positive associations between the development of irAEs and clinical outcomes in non-melanoma patients treated with PD-1 CKIs, for which further validation is required. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: This study evaluated whether the development of immune-related adverse events in non-melanoma patients treated with programmed cell death 1 checkpoint inhibitors correlates with improved clinical outcomes. The results indicate that for a subset of patients, in particular those with low-grade immune-related adverse events, immune-related adverse events predicted for an improved response rate and longer time to next therapy or death.

Integrating Immunotherapy Into the Management of Renal Cell Carcinoma.

Before 2005, systemic treatment of metastatic renal cell carcinoma (RCC) was limited to a few minimally effective options. Since then, new agents have emerged targeting the vascular endothelial growth factor and mTOR pathways, which has improved outcomes for patients. Options increased even further beginning in 2015 with 3 new agents, including the addition of nivolumab, the first immune checkpoint inhibitor to demonstrate improved survival in RCC. RCC has long been considered a malignancy with immunogenic potential, and nivolumab offers the potential for durable responses in some patients with a generally tolerable toxicity profile. With so many drugs available to clinicians and patients, properly integrating immune checkpoint blockade (ICB) into the treatment paradigm is challenging. Additionally, emerging research with other ICB agents, as well as ongoing trials of combination strategies, is likely to further impact clinical decision-making. This article attempts to provide some context to inform systemic treatment decisions in the current landscape, with a particular emphasis on the role of immunotherapy, outlines the ongoing immunotherapy research in RCC, and discusses how treatment may evolve.

Checkpoint Inhibitors for the Treatment of Renal Cell Carcinoma.

OPINION STATEMENT: The advent of checkpoint inhibitors has revolutionized systemic therapy for many malignancies, including renal cell carcinoma (RCC) where multiple PD-1, PD-L1, and CTLA-4 inhibitors have demonstrated responses and improved survival for patients in clinical trials. Durable benefit with manageable toxicity can be achieved with these agents-but unfortunately for only a minority of individuals. Efforts are ongoing to understand mechanisms driving the response and resistance to checkpoint inhibitors in order to personalize therapy and extend benefit to more patients. In particular, combination immunotherapy is an area of active study with multiple ongoing trials in RCC. Novel immunotherapeutic agents are being explored as well. Clinically, there are nuances related to the use of immunotherapy that are important to understand in order to provide optimal care to patients. Potential autoimmune toxicities are important to identify early so they can be best mitigated with immunosuppression, and careful review of imaging with clinical correlation is important to ensure responding patients are not taken off treatment prematurely due to "pseudo-progression." Lastly, although immunotherapy is an important new tool, it exists among other active agents in the treatment of RCC, and further study is needed to understand where it best fits in the treatment paradigm. In this article, we review the most recent data for immune checkpoint inhibitors in metastatic renal cell carcinoma and more broadly discuss the rapidly evolving landscape of immunotherapy in RCC, including combination immunotherapies.

Systemic therapy for bladder cancer finally comes into a new age.

Systemic therapy for bladder cancer, both localized muscle-invasive disease and metastatic disease, has seen minimal progress over the past two decades. Current approaches rely upon cytotoxic chemotherapy combinations aimed at increasing cure rates or achieving palliation and disease control, but these regimens are fraught with short- and long-term toxicities and outcomes remain suboptimal. The emergence of systemic immunotherapies that can provide durable remissions in subsets of patients with other malignancies has the potential to transform the field, and early phase trials have begun to demonstrate activity in some patients with metastatic bladder cancer. In this article, we review the current state of systemic therapy for bladder cancer and discuss the current literature and ongoing trials utilizing various immunotherapies.

Phase I study of the mTOR inhibitor ridaforolimus and the HDAC inhibitor vorinostat in advanced renal cell carcinoma and other solid tumors.

INTRODUCTION: Drugs inhibiting the mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) are approved in the treatment of renal cell carcinoma (RCC), but resistance inevitably emerges. Proposed escape pathways include increased phosphorylation of Akt, which can be down regulated by histone deacetylase (HDAC) inhibitors. We hypothesized that co-treatment with the mTOR inhibitor ridaforolimus and the HDAC inhibitor vorinostat may abrogate resistance in RCC. METHODS: This phase 1 study evaluated the co-administration of ridaforolimus and vorinostat in patients with advanced solid tumors. The primary objective was to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) in RCC patients. Although all solid tumors were allowed, prior cytotoxic chemotherapy was limited to 1 regimen. Using a modified 3 + 3 dose escalation design, various dose combinations were tested concurrently in separate cohorts. Efficacy was a secondary endpoint. RESULTS: Fifteen patients were treated at one of three dose levels, thirteen with RCC (10 clear cell, 3 papillary). Dosing was limited by thrombocytopenia. The MTD was determined to be ridaforolimus 20 mg daily days 1-5 with vorinostat 100 mg BID days 1-3 weekly, however late onset thrombocytopenia led to a lower recommended phase II dose: ridaforolimus 20 mg daily days 1-5 with vorinostat 100 mg daily days 1-3 weekly. Two patients, both with papillary RCC, maintained disease control for 54 and 80 weeks, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The combination of ridaforolimus and vorinostat was tolerable at the recommended phase II dose. Two patients with papillary RCC experienced prolonged disease stabilization, thus further study of combined HDAC and mTOR inhibition in this population is warranted.

Full Spectrum: Efficacy and Toxicity of Immunotherapy in Metastatic Melanoma

Metastatic melanoma is a devastating disease that has been increasing in incidence and until relatively recently had few effective treatment options. With the approval in 2011 of ipilimumab, a monoclonal antibody against cytotoxic T-lymphocyte associated protein 4 (CTLA-4), however, that has begun to change. Ipilimumab is an immune checkpoint inhibitor, a type of immunotherapy that can down-regulate inhibitory signals affecting T-cell activation to unleash more dramatic anti-tumoral responses and offer the possibility of deep and durable remissions in up to 20% of patients. Use of this and similar agents can lead to characteristic and varied immune-related adverse events (irAEs); however, experience has shown that these can be managed with patient education, early recognition, and judicious use of systemic steroids. Newer immune checkpoint inhibitors such as those that block PD-1 or PDL-1 have shown impressive results in early studies. Most recently, pembrolizumab, an anti-PD-1 antibody, was approved by the FDA for the treatment of patients with melanoma after progression on a CTLA-4 inhibitor and, if clinically relevant, a BRAF inhibitor. This supplement presents the case of a 60-year-old man with an enlarging right neck mass who was found to have disseminated metastatic melanoma. He was started on treatment with the CTLA-4 inhibitor ipilimumab (3 mg/kg intravenous). After the third dose, the patient developed grade 3 uveitis/retinitis and immune-mediated nephritis requiring hospitalization and systemic corticosteroids. Both conditions were considered irAEs secondary to ipilimumab. The patient recovered completely from all toxicities but did not receive further doses of ipilimumab. Nonetheless, the patient experienced a complete radiographic response and at time of writing was 19 months from diagnosis without evidence of disease.