Long-term responders to nivolumab in previously treated advanced renal cell carcinoma: a sub-analysis of meet-URO15 study.

BACKGROUND: Although nivolumab prolongs overall survival (OS) in pretreated patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC), underlining clinical and biological features of long-term responses are still to be determined. This study aims to investigate clinical and pathological characteristics of mRCC patients who achieved long-term responses during nivolumab treatment. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective analysis was performed on mRCC patients receiving nivolumab as second or further therapy line between May 2016 and January 2019 in 34 Italian Oncology Centres. Outcome assessments and logistic regression were performed to evaluate factors influencing long-term responses. RESULTS: A total of 571 patients with a median age of 61 years (range 17-85) were included in the analysis. With a median follow-up of 22.1 (1.0-89.0) months, 23.1% of patients were 2-year progression-free on treatment with nivolumab, hence they were categorized as long-term responders. Baseline characteristics, including age, gender, and histology, were similar between long- and short-term responders. Karnofsky Performance Status ≥ 80% was significantly associated with long-term response (p = 0.02), while bone metastases (p = 0.03), International mRCC Database Consortium intermediate-poor risk (p < 0.01) and Neutrophil-to-Lymphocyte Ratio ≥ 3.2 (p = 0.02) were associate with short-term responses. Long-term responders exhibited a median progression-free survival of 55.0 months versus 4.0 months of the short-term responders. The median OS was not reached in long-term responders while it was 17.0 months for short*term responders. CONCLUSION: This retrospective analysis sheds light on factors associated with long-term response to nivolumab in mRCC. Understanding these clinical features will be essential for selecting patients who may mostly benefit from immunotherapy.

Prognostic value of type of prior TKI in pretreated metastatic renal cell carcinoma patients receiving nivolumab.

Aim: To define the prognostic significance of first-line TKI in mRCC patients receiving nivolumab.Materials and methods: A total of 571 mRCC patients who received ≥second line nivolumab were included in this subanalysis. The correlation between prior TKI (sunitinib vs. pazopanib) and overall response rate (ORR), disease control rate, progression-free survival and overall survival were investigated. Additionally, the impact of TKI choice according to the International Metastatic RCC Database Consortium prognostic score was examined.Results: There was no significant difference between sunitinib and pazopanib groups in terms of mPFS, mOS, overall response rate and disease control rate. Moreover, no difference between sunitinib and pazopanib was found according to the International Metastatic RCC Database Consortium prognostic score.Conclusion: There is no conclusive evidence favoring pazopanib or sunitinib treatment before initiating nivolumab therapy in metastatic renal cell carcinoma patients.

[Box: see text].

Time to strategy failure and treatment beyond progression in pretreated metastatic renal cell carcinoma patients receiving nivolumab: post-hoc analysis of the Meet-URO 15 study.

Background: Immunotherapies exhibit peculiar cancer response patterns in contrast to chemotherapy and targeted therapy. Some patients experience disease response after initial progression or durable responses after treatment interruption. In clinical practice, immune checkpoint inhibitors may be continued after radiological progression if clinical benefit is observed. As a result, estimating progression-free survival (PFS) based on the first disease progression may not accurately reflect the actual benefit of immunotherapy. Methods: The Meet-URO 15 study was a multicenter retrospective analysis of 571 pretreated metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) patients receiving nivolumab. Time to strategy failure (TSF) was defined as the interval from the start of immunotherapy to definitive disease progression or death. This post-hoc analysis compared TSF to PFS and assess the response and survival outcomes between patients treatated beyond progression (TBP) and non-TBP. Moreover, we evaluated the prognostic accuracy of the Meet-URO score versus the International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium (IMDC) score based on TSF and PFS. Results: Overall, 571 mRCC patients were included in the analysis. Median TSF was 8.6 months (95% CI: 7.0 - 10.1), while mPFS was 7.0 months (95% CI: 5.7 - 8.5). TBP patients (N = 93) had significantly longer TSF (16.3 vs 5.5 months; p < 0.001) and overall survival (OS) (34.8 vs 17.9 months; p < 0.001) but similar PFS compared to non-TBP patients. In TBP patients, a median delay of 9.6 months (range: 6.7-16.3) from the first to the definitive disease progression was observed, whereas non-TBP patients had overlapped median TSF and PFS (5.5 months). Moreover, TBP patients had a trend toward a higher overall response rate (33.3% vs 24.3%; p = 0.075) and disease control rate (61.3% vs 55.5%; p = 0.31). Finally, in the whole population the Meet-URO score outperformed the IMDC score in predicting both TSF (c-index: 0.63 vs 0.59) and PFS (0.62 vs 0.59). Conclusion: We found a 2-month difference between mTSF and mPFS in mRCC patients receiving nivolumab. However, TBP patients had better outcomes, including significantly longer TSF and OS than non-TBP patients. The Meet-URO score is a reliable predictor of TSF and PFS.

Sodium levels and immunotherapy efficacy in mRCC patients with bone metastases: sub analysis of Meet-Uro 15 study.

Background: Immune-checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have significantly improved metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) prognosis, although their efficacy in patients with bone metastases (BMs) remains poorly understood. We investigated the prognostic role of natremia in pretreated RCC patients with BMs receiving immunotherapy. Materials and methods: This retrospective multicenter study included RCC patients with BMs receiving nivolumab as second-line therapy or beyond. Inclusion criteria involved baseline sodium levels (pre-ICI) and sodium levels after 4 weeks of nivolumab initiation (post-ICI). The population was divided into two groups based on the median value, and response rates, progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS) were assessed. Results: Among 120 eligible patients, those with pre-treatment sodium levels ≥140 mEq/L showed longer OS (18.7 vs. 12.0 months, p=0.04). Pre-treatment sodium levels ≥140 mEq/L were associated with better OS compared to levels <140 mE/L (18.7 vs. 12.0, p=0.04). Post-treatment sodium levels ≥140 mEq/L were associated with improved PFS (9.6 vs. 3.2 months) and OS (25.1 vs. 8.8 months) (p=0.05 and p<0.01, respectively). Patients with consistent sodium levels ≥140 mEq/L at both time points exhibited the best outcomes compared to those with lower values (PFS 11.5 vs. 3.3 months and OS 42.2 vs. 9.0 months, respectively, p<0.01). Disease control rate was significantly higher in the latter group (p<0.01). Multivariate analysis confirmed the prognostic significance of sodium levels. Conclusion: Elevated sodium levels (≥140 mEq/L) pre- and post-ICI treatment correlate with better survival outcomes in mRCC patients with BMs. This finding suggests sodium level assessment as a potential prognostic factor in these patients and warrants further investigation, particularly in combination immunotherapy settings.