Sunitinib for Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma: Real-World Data from the STAR-TOR Registry and Detailed Literature Review.

INTRODUCTION: We evaluated the effectiveness and safety profile of the tyrosine kinase inhibitor sunitinib in patients with advanced or metastatic renal cell carcinoma (a/mRCC) in a real-world setting. METHODS: We analyzed data of adult a/mRCC patients treated with sunitinib. Data were derived from the German non-interventional post-approval multicenter STAR-TOR registry (NCT00700258). Progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and adverse events (AEs) were evaluated using descriptive statistics and survival analyses for the entire cohort and patient subgroups. RESULTS: A total of 116 study sites recruited 702 patients treated with sunitinib (73.1% male; median age 68.0 years; median Karnofsky index 90%) between November 2010 and May 2020. The most frequent histological subtype was clear cell RCC (81.6%). Sunitinib was administered as first-line treatment in 83.5%, as second line in 11.7%, and as third line or beyond in 4.8% of the patients. Drug-related AEs and serious AEs were reported in 66.3% and 13.9% of the patients, respectively (most common AE: gastrointestinal disorders; 39.7% of all patients). CONCLUSIONS: This study adds further real-world evidence of the persisting relevance of sunitinib for patients with a/mRCC who cannot receive or tolerate immune checkpoint inhibitors. The study population includes a high proportion of patients with unfavorable MSKCC poor-risk score, but shows still good PFS and OS results, while the drug demonstrates a favorable safety profile. The STAR-TOR registry is also registered in the database of US library of medicine (NCT00700258).

Real-world outcomes in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma according to risk factors: the STAR-TOR registry.

Aim: Examine outcomes in sunitinib-treated patients by International Metastatic RCC Database Consortium (IMDC) or Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center (MSKCC) risk factors. Patients & methods: Patients enrolled in STAR-TOR registry (n = 327). End points included overall survival, progression-free survival and objective response rate. Results: Overall survival was similar for IMDC 0 versus 1 (p = 0.238) or 2 versus ≥3 (p = 0.156), but different for MSKCC (0 vs 1, p = 0.037; 2 vs ≥3, p = 0.001). Progression-free survival was similar for IMDC 2 versus 3 (p = 0.306), but different for MSKCC (p = 0.009). Objective response rate was different for IMDC 1 (41.9%) and 2 (29.5%) and similar for MSKCC 1 (34.4%) and 2 (31.0%). Conclusion: Outcome data varied according to IMDC or MSKCC. MSKCC model accurately stratify patients into risk groups. Clinical trial registration: NCT00700258 (ClinicalTrials.gov).

Effect of comorbidities/comedications on sunitinib outcomes for metastatic renal cell carcinoma: the STAR-TOR registry.

Aim: Examine the effects of baseline hypertension (HTN) and statin or proton pump inhibitor (PPI) use on sunitinib treatment outcomes in STAR-TOR, a real-world registry. Materials & methods: Presence or absence of HTN and use or nonuse of statins or PPIs were determined at registry entry. End points included overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). Results: Data were from 557 patients. Presence or absence of HTN did not affect OS or PFS. PFS (median [95% CI]) was longer in statin users (9.4 [6.5-13.6] months) versus nonusers (6.9 [5.7-8.2] months) (p = 0.0442). OS was shorter in PPI users (20.2 [14.9-28.3] months) versus nonusers (25.7 [22.7-33.0] months) (p = 0.0212). Conclusion: Comorbidities and comedications may affect real-world sunitinib treatment outcomes. Clinical Trial Registration: NCT00700258 (ClinicalTrials.gov).

Consensus paper: current state of first- and second-line therapy in advanced clear-cell renal cell carcinoma.

The therapy of advanced (clear-cell) renal cell carcinoma (RCC) has recently experienced tremendous changes. Several new treatments have been developed, with PD-1 immune-checkpoint inhibition being the backbone of therapy. Diverse immunotherapy combinations change current first-line standards. These changes also require new approaches in subsequent lines of therapy. In an expert panel, we discussed the new treatment options and how they change clinical practice. While first-line immunotherapies introduce a new level of response rates, data on second-line therapies remains poor. This scenario poses a challenge for clinicians as guideline recommendations are based on historical patient cohorts and agents may lack the appropriate label for their in guidelines recommended use. Here, we summarize relevant clinical data and consider appropriate treatment strategies.

The European Medicines Agency Review of Brentuximab Vedotin (Adcetris) for the Treatment of Adult Patients With Relapsed or Refractory CD30+ Hodgkin Lymphoma or Systemic Anaplastic Large Cell Lymphoma: Summary of the Scientific Assessment of the Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use.

BACKGROUND: On October 25, 2012, a conditional marketing authorization valid throughout the European Union (EU) was issued for brentuximab vedotin for the treatment of adult patients with relapsed or refractory CD30+ Hodgkin lymphoma (HL) and for the treatment of adult patients with relapsed or refractory systemic anaplastic large cell lymphoma (sALCL). For HL, the indication is restricted to treatment after autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) or after at least two previous therapies when ASCT or multiagent chemotherapy is not a treatment option. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Brentuximab vedotin is an antibody-drug conjugate (ADC) composed of a CD30-directed monoclonal antibody (recombinant chimeric IgG1) that is covalently linked to the antimicrotubule agent monomethyl auristatin E (MMAE). Binding of the ADC to CD30 on the cell surface initiates internalization of the MMAE-CD30 complex, followed by proteolytic cleavage that releases MMAE. The recommended dose is 1.8 mg/kg administered as an intravenous infusion over 30 minutes every 3 weeks. RESULTS: Brentuximab vedotin as a single agent was evaluated in two single-arm studies. Study SG035-003 included 102 patients with relapsed or refractory HL. An objective response was observed in 76 patients (75%), with complete remission in 34 (33%). Study SG035-004 included 58 patients with relapsed or refractory sALCL. An objective response was observed in 50 patients (86%), with complete remission in 34 (59%). The most frequently observed toxicities were peripheral sensory neuropathy, fatigue, nausea, diarrhea, neutropenia, vomiting, pyrexia, and upper respiratory tract infection. CONCLUSION: The present report summarizes the scientific review of the application leading to approval in the EU. The detailed scientific assessment report and product information, including the summary of the product characteristics, are available on the European Medicines Agency website (http://www.ema.europa.eu). IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Brentuximab vedotin was approved in the European Union for the treatment of adult patients with relapsed or refractory CD30+ Hodgkin lymphoma or systemic anaplastic large cell lymphoma. For Hodgkin lymphoma, brentuximab vedotin should only be used after autologous stem cell transplantation or following at least two prior therapies when transplantation or multiagent chemotherapy is not a treatment option. In two studies involving 160 patients, partial or complete responses were observed in the majority of patients. Although there was no information on the survival of patients treated in the studies at the time of approval, the responses were considered a clinically relevant benefit.

Everolimus in metastatic renal cell carcinoma after failure of initial anti-VEGF therapy: final results of a noninterventional study.

BACKGROUND: Data are limited regarding routine use of everolimus after initial vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF)-targeted therapy. The aim of this prospective, noninterventional, observational study was to assess efficacy and safety of everolimus after initial VEGF-targeted treatment in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) in routine clinical settings. METHODS: Everolimus was administered per routine clinical practice. Patients with mRCC of any histology from 116 active sites in Germany were included. The main objective was to determine everolimus efficacy in time to progression (TTP). Progression-free survival (PFS), treatment duration, tumor response, adherence to everolimus regimen, treatment after everolimus, and safety were also assessed. RESULTS: In the total population (N = 334), median follow-up was 5.2 months (range, 0-32 months). Median treatment duration (safety population, n = 318) was 6.5 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 5-8 months). Median TTP and median PFS were similar in populations investigated. In patients who received everolimus as second-line treatment (n = 211), median (95% CI) TTP was 7.1 months (5-9 months) and median PFS was 6.9 months (5-9 months). Commonly reported adverse events (safety population, n = 318) were dyspnea (17%), anemia (15%), and fatigue (12%). Limitations of the noninterventional design should be considered. CONCLUSIONS: This study reflects routine clinical use of everolimus in a large sample of patients with mRCC. Favorable efficacy and safety were seen for everolimus after previous therapy with one VEGF-targeted agent. Results of this study confirm everolimus as one of the standard options in second-line therapy for patients with mRCC. Novartis study code, CRAD001LD27: VFA registry for noninterventional studies ( http://www.vfa.de/de/forschung/nisdb/).

Everolimus in metastatic renal cell carcinoma after failure of initial vascular endothelial growth factor receptor-tyrosine kinase inhibitor (VEGFr-TKI) therapy: results of an interim analysis of a non-interventional study.

BACKGROUND: Everolimus is approved for treatment of anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF)-refractory patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). Clinical trials rarely mirror treatment reality. Thus, a broader evaluation of everolimus is valuable for routine use. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A German multicenter non-interventional study documented mRCC patients starting everolimus after failure of initial VEGF-targeted therapy. Primary endpoint was effectiveness, defined as time to progression (TTP) according to investigator assessment (time from first dose to progression). RESULTS: Of 382 documented patients, 196 were included in this interim analysis. In the efficacy population (n = 165), median TTP was 7.0 months (95% confidence interval (CI) 5.1-9.0). Among patients with < or ≥ 6 months of previous VEGF-targeted therapy, median TTP was 6.6 months (95% CI 3.8-not estimable) and 7.4 months (95% CI 4.6-9.6), respectively. Most common adverse events were anemia (13%) and dyspnea (14%). Physicians assessed high tolerance and documented high adherence to everolimus therapy (approximately 97%). CONCLUSION: In routine clinical practice, everolimus is effective, as measured by median TTP (longer than median progression-free survival in RECORD-1 trial), and well tolerated. Our results support everolimus use in anti-VEGF-refractory patients with mRCC.

Nivolumab Switch Maintenance Therapy After Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitor Induction in Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma: A Randomized Clinical Trial by the Interdisciplinary Working Group on Renal Tumors of the German Cancer Society (NIVOSWITCH; AIO-NZK-0116ass).

BACKGROUND: The role of immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) maintenance therapy in metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) is undefined. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether switch maintenance therapy with nivolumab improves clinical outcomes in patients with mRCC with tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) sensitivity. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This open-label phase 2 trial randomized patients with a partial response or stable disease after 10-12-wk TKI induction therapy to either TKI or nivolumab maintenance. Key inclusion criteria were measurable disease, clear cell histology, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (ECOG PS) 0-2, and adequate organ function. INTERVENTION: Intravenous nivolumab 8 × 240 mg every 2 wk, followed by 480 mg every 4 wk or sunitinib 50 mg (4-2 regimen) or pazopanib 800 mg once daily orally. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSES: The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS). Secondary endpoints were the objective response rate (ORR; Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors v1.1), progression-free survival (PFS), safety (Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events v4.03), and patient-reported outcomes (Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy Kidney Symptom Index). The Kaplan-Meier method, two-sided log-rank tests, and Cox regression models were used for statistical analysis. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: Maintenance therapy was nivolumab for 25 patients (51.0%) and TKI for 24 (48.9%). The median age was 65 yr (range 35-79). Nine patients (18.4%) were female, 31 (63.3%) had ECOG PS of 0, and 15 (30.6%) had favorable risk. OS data are immature (17 deaths, 34.7%). The ORR was 20.0% (n = 5) for nivolumab and 52.2% (n = 12) for TKI. PFS was worse with nivolumab (hazard ratio 2.57, 95% confidence interval 1.36-4.89; p = 0.003). Grade ≥3 adverse events occurred in 14 patients (56.0%) with nivolumab and 17 (70.8%) with TKI. A major limitation is early termination of our study. CONCLUSIONS: TKI treatment achieved superior ORR and PFS in comparison to nivolumab maintenance therapy. Our data do not indicate a role for nivolumab switch maintenance in mRCC. PATIENT SUMMARY: Patients with metastatic kidney cancer who experienced a tumor response or disease stabilization after a short period of targeted treatment with a tyrosine kinase inhibitor did not benefit from a switch to the immunotherapy drug nivolumab. Patients who continued their original treatment achieved better responses and a longer time without disease progression. This trial is registered on EudraCT as 2016-002170-13 and on ClinicalTrials.gov as NCT02959554.

Results of a phase II trial of S-1 as first-line treatment of metastatic pancreatic cancer (CESAR-study group).

PURPOSE: S-1, an oral fluoropyrimidine derivative, has previously demonstrated anticancer efficacy in pancreatic cancer (PC), predominantly in Asian populations. This study evaluated the antitumor effect and safety of S-1 in Caucasian patients with metastatic PC. METHODS: Chemotherapy-naïve patients received S-1 orally at 30 mg/m(2) twice daily (BID) for 2 weeks, repeated every 3 weeks. Primary endpoint was ORR. Secondary endpoints included PFS, OS and safety assessment. The trial had a Simon's two-stage design with 22 patients evaluable for efficacy in stage 1 and an additional 18 patients in stage 2, if ≥3/22 patients had a confirmed response at the first stage. RESULTS: Three out of 27 patients showed PR, however, detection of asymptomatic brain metastases in one of them prevented this study from proceeding to stage 2. The median PFS and OS for all patients was 3.5 and 9.1 months, respectively. The median duration of disease control for patients with SD or PR (n = 17) was 4.3 months. S-1 was well tolerated; fatigue was the most frequent grade 3/4 adverse event. CONCLUSIONS: Efficacy data of PFS and OS are at least comparable to gemcitabine, the current standard of care. S-1 is active in Caucasian patients with metastatic PC.

The dual PI3K/mTOR inhibitor NVP-BGT226 induces cell cycle arrest and regulates Survivin gene expression in human pancreatic cancer cell lines.

The phosphatidylinositol-3-kinase (PI3K) pathway is one of the most commonly activated signaling pathways in pancreatic cancer and is a target of interest for new therapeutic approaches. NVP-BGT226 is a novel dual class PI3K/mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) inhibitor that has entered Phase I/II clinical trials. We analyzed the effect of NVP-BGT226 (10-100 nM) on the pancreatic cell lines Panc-1, BxPc-3, AsPC-1 and MiaPaCa-2 in regard to cell viability, induction of apoptosis, cell cycle, and expression of the antiapoptotic genes Survivin, MCL-1, BCL-2 and BCL-xL. Cell viability decreased within 24-72 h after exposure to about 50% compared to untreated control cells in a concentration- but not time-dependent manner. Cell cycle analysis revealed that NVP-BGT226 induced predominantly G0/G1 cell cycle arrest. Additionally, real-time RT-PCR and Western blot analysis showed a remarkable decrease of Survivin expression. Originally designed as a dual inhibitor, there was only a significant inhibition of p-mTOR. In summary, the dual PI3K/mTOR inhibitor NVP-BGT226 induces G0/G1 arrest and acts, at least, partially via downregulation of Survivin.

GLUT1 expression patterns in different Hodgkin lymphoma subtypes and progressively transformed germinal centers.

BACKGROUND: Increased glycolytic activity is a hallmark of cancer, allowing staging and restaging with 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose-positron-emission-tomography (PET). Since interim-PET is an important prognostic tool in Hodgkin lymphoma (HL), the aim of this study was to investigate the expression of proteins involved in the regulation of glucose metabolism in the different HL subtypes and their impact on clinical outcome. METHODS: Lymph node biopsies from 54 HL cases and reactive lymphoid tissue were stained for glucose transporter 1 (GLUT1), lactate dehydrogenase A (LDHA) and lactate exporter proteins MCT1 and MCT4. In a second series, samples from additional 153 HL cases with available clinical data were stained for GLUT1 and LDHA. RESULTS: Membrane bound GLUT1 expression was frequently observed in the tumor cells of HL (49% of all cases) but showed a broad variety between the different Hodgkin lymphoma subtypes: Nodular sclerosing HL subtype displayed a membrane bound GLUT1 expression in the Hodgkin-and Reed-Sternberg cells in 56% of the cases. However, membrane bound GLUT1 expression was more rarely observed in tumor cells of lymphocyte rich classical HL subtype (30%) or nodular lymphocyte predominant HL subtype (15%). Interestingly, in both of these lymphocyte rich HL subtypes as well as in progressively transformed germinal centers, reactive B cells displayed strong expression of GLUT1. LDHA, acting downstream of glycolysis, was also expressed in 44% of all cases. We evaluated the prognostic value of different GLUT1 and LDHA expression patterns; however, no significant differences in progression free or overall survival were found between patients exhibiting different GLUT1 or LDHA expression patterns. There was no correlation between GLUT1 expression in HRS cells and PET standard uptake values. CONCLUSIONS: In a large number of cases, HRS cells in classical HL express high levels of GLUT1 and LDHA indicating glycolytic activity in the tumor cells. Although interim-PET is an important prognostic tool, a predictive value of GLUT1 or LDHA staining of the primary diagnostic biopsy could not be demonstrated. However, we observed GLUT1 expression in progressively transformed germinal centers and hyperplastic follicles, explaining false positive results in PET. Therefore, PET findings suggestive of HL relapse should always be confirmed by histology.

[Interdisciplinary recommendations for the treatment of advanced renal cell carcinoma]. / Interdisziplinäre Empfehlungen zur Behandlung des fortgeschrittenen Nierenzellkarzinoms.

In the treatment of advanced renal cell carcinoma, anti-VEGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKI) have been replaced mostly by immunotherapy combinations with checkpoint inhibitors (CPI), especially in first line therapy. Due to these novel therapies, the prognosis of patients has been improved further. In pivotal studies a median overall survival of 3-4 years has been achieved. TKI monotherapy remains important for patients with low risk, a contraindication against immunotherapy and with regard to the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic.Selection of the correct first line therapy is difficult to answer because there are two CPI-TKI combinations and one CPI-combination. Temsirolimus and the combination bevacizumab + interferon alfa have become less important. In second line therapy, nivolumab and cabozantinib have demonstrated superior overall survival compared to everolimus. Furthermore, the combination of lenvatinib + everolimus and axitinib are approved treatment options in the second line and further settings. TKI are an option as well, but they have lower supporting evidence. Everolimus has been replaced in the second line setting by these new options. Biomarkers are not available. The German S3 guideline has been updated recently to give better orientation in clinical practice.The question of the optimal sequence is still unanswered. Most second line options were evaluated after failure of anti-VEGF-TKI, but these are only applicable for a minority of patients.The purpose of an interdisciplinary expert meeting in november 2020 was to debate which criteria should influence the therapy. The members discussed several aspects of treating patients with advanced or metastatic RCC, including the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. As in previous years, the experts intended to provide recommendations for clinical practice. The results are presented in this publication.

A Prospectivly Randomized Phase-II Trial of Axitinib versus Everolimus as Second-Line Therapy in Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma (BERAT Study).

INTRODUCTION: Inhibition of neo-angiogenesis is a cornerstone of medical treatment in metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). While 1st line therapies were previously dominated by inhibitors of the vascular endothelial growth factor axis, 2nd line options were less clearly defined. We investigated the role of everolimus (EVE) or a tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) in 2nd line treatment of mRCC patients. METHODS: Key inclusion criteria were measurable mRCC, ECOG 0-1, IMDC risk: good or intermediate and adequate organ function. Patients who progressed on or were intolerant to bevacizumab + interferon were subject for randomization between TKI and EVE treatment. Cross-over occurred at time of progression during 2nd line treatment. Improvement of 2nd line progression-free survival (PFS) rate (PFR) at 6 months from 50% to 65% was the primary endpoint. Secondary endpoints were PFS, total PFS, objective response rate (ORR), overall survival (OS), safety, and patient reported outcomes. RESULTS: In 2012-2015, a total of 22 patients were included. The study was stopped for poor accrual. Ten patients (46%) were randomized to receive 2nd line treatment with EVE (n = 5) or axitinib (n = 4)/sunitinib (n = 1). ECOG 0 was recorded in 20% (EVE) and 60% (TKI). Severe adverse events occurred in approx. 60% in each arm. ORR was 1/5 (20%) for TKI and 0/5 (0%) for EVE. PFR at 6 months was 20% in each arm. Median PFS was 3.7 months (EVE) and 2.2 months (TKI) (hazard ratio [HR] 1.0 [95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.26-3.85]). The OS was comparable between arms HR 1.12 (95% CI: 0.27-4.61). CONCLUSION: The rapid change of the treatment landscape, the limited use of bevacizumab and interferon in 1st line and the duration of 1st line treatment jeopardized BERAT trial recruitment. The small number of patients is a major limitation of our trial. Our observation indicated the poor prognosis in progressive patients and the limited efficacy of TKI or mTOR inhibitors in 2nd line treatment.

Defining the critical hurdles in cancer immunotherapy.

Scientific discoveries that provide strong evidence of antitumor effects in preclinical models often encounter significant delays before being tested in patients with cancer. While some of these delays have a scientific basis, others do not. We need to do better. Innovative strategies need to move into early stage clinical trials as quickly as it is safe, and if successful, these therapies should efficiently obtain regulatory approval and widespread clinical application. In late 2009 and 2010 the Society for Immunotherapy of Cancer (SITC), convened an "Immunotherapy Summit" with representatives from immunotherapy organizations representing Europe, Japan, China and North America to discuss collaborations to improve development and delivery of cancer immunotherapy. One of the concepts raised by SITC and defined as critical by all parties was the need to identify hurdles that impede effective translation of cancer immunotherapy. With consensus on these hurdles, international working groups could be developed to make recommendations vetted by the participating organizations. These recommendations could then be considered by regulatory bodies, governmental and private funding agencies, pharmaceutical companies and academic institutions to facilitate changes necessary to accelerate clinical translation of novel immune-based cancer therapies. The critical hurdles identified by representatives of the collaborating organizations, now organized as the World Immunotherapy Council, are presented and discussed in this report. Some of the identified hurdles impede all investigators; others hinder investigators only in certain regions or institutions or are more relevant to specific types of immunotherapy or first-in-humans studies. Each of these hurdles can significantly delay clinical translation of promising advances in immunotherapy yet if overcome, have the potential to improve outcomes of patients with cancer.

Downregulation of STAT3 signaling induces apoptosis but also promotes anti-apoptotic gene expression in human pancreatic cancer cell lines.

Signal transducer and activator of transcription 3 (STAT3) is a key regulator of cytokine signaling pathways that regulates gene expression. In pancreatic cancer, constitutive activation of STAT3 contributes to oncogenesis by preventing apoptosis through upregulation of anti-apoptotic proteins. We have examined the inhibition of STAT3 as a potential therapeutic approach in pancreatic cancer. siRNA targeting STAT3 was used to evaluate the role of STAT3 in modulating the expression of Survivin/BIRC5 and BCL-xL in the pancreatic cancer cell lines PANC-1 and BxPC-3 and induction of apoptosis. Expression of STAT3, Survivin/BIRC5, and BCL-xL on mRNA and protein level was measured by real-time RT-PCR and Western blot analysis 24, 48, and 72 h after transfection. STAT3 downregulation resulted in a decrease of cell viability in both cell lines and induced apoptosis in BxPC-3 cells. Despite significant inhibition of STAT3, the expression of the anti-apoptotic genes Survivin/BIRC5 and BCL-xL were not subsequently downregulated. Even more, the cell line BxPC-3 shows a significant increase of Survivin/BIRC5 and BCL-xL mRNA after 48-72 h as a result of STAT3 downregulation. Inactivation of STAT3 in pancreatic cancer cell lines induces apoptosis but also may promote the expression of anti-apoptotic genes.

Clinical efficacy of immunochemotherapy with fludarabine, epirubicin and rituximab in the treatment for chronic lymphocytic leukaemia and prolymphocytic leukaemia.

Despite some considerable progress in the therapy for chronic lymphocytic leukaemia (CLL) owing to fludarabine-based regimens and rituximab, no curative treatment is available so far. We conducted an explorative phase II study in patients with CLL, prolymphocytic leukaemia (PLL) and leukaemic lymphoplasmacytic lymphoma (LL) with the combination of fludarabine, epirubicin and rituximab (FER) to improve the complete remission (CR) rate and progression-free survival (PFS). Fludarabine 25 mg/m(2) was administered i.v. on days 1-5 and epirubicin 25 mg/m(2) i.v. on days 4 and 5, and rituximab was added at a dose of 375 mg/m(2) i.v. day 1 in the first cycle and at a dose of 500 mg/m(2) in all consecutive cycles. Patients exhibiting responsive disease after FER were eligible to receive maintenance therapy of up to 12 cycles of rituximab 375 mg/m(2) bimonthly. Forty-four patients (38 CLL, 4 PLL and 2 LL) with a median age of 65 yrs (43-84 yrs) were evaluable. Seventeen patients with CLL had stage Binet C, 14 Binet B and seven symptomatic or rapid progressive stage Binet A. Cytogenetic features showed normal karyotype in nine cases, an isolated deletion (del) 13q in 12 patients, trisomy 12 in 7, del 11 in two and del 17p in 4. Half of the patients (48%) had mutated IgVH genes. Treatment with FER achieved an overall response rate of 95%, including 63% CRs and 32% PRs. Haematological toxicity was considerable. After a median follow-up period of 34 months (range: 8-84 months), median PFS was 61 months and overall survival was yet not reached. All patients with PLL and LL achieved CR. The data support the high efficacy of the combination of rituximab with chemotherapy (FE) and are suggestive of possible benefit with rituximab maintenance therapy for PFS and DFS.

Pathology and systemic therapy of non-clear cell renal cell carcinoma: an overview.

Introduction: Non-clear cell renal cell carcinoma (nccRCC) represents a highly heterogenous group of kidney cancer entities. As most clinical trials predominantly include patients with clear cell RCC (ccRCC), nccRCC treatment guidelines are mainly extrapolated from recommendations in ccRCC. Here, we review and elucidate current data on the pathologic classification and treatment of nccRCC.Areas covered: This article gives an overview of the WHO classification of RCC, showing the histological diversity of nccRCC and focusing particularly on entities first characterized since 2016, their specific molecular behavior and their role as indicators for hereditary cancer syndromes. In this context, we discuss the available data on nccRCC treatment oprtions such as tyrosine kinase inhibitors, mammalian target of rapamycin inhibitors, cytotoxic chemotherapy, and immune checkpoint inhibitors.Expert opinion: Although nccRCCs are relatively uncommon, entities of this type account for a subgroup of up to 20-25% of all RCCs. Advances in histopathology and molecular genetics, together with evidence gained from retrospective and prospective clinical data, have improved understanding of these tumors in recent years. Nevertheless, selective trials of current and novel therapies including new targeted agents in patients with nccRCC are urgently needed to further improve treatment guidelines.

[Sunitinib--from paradigm shift to standard treatment of metastatic renal cell carcinoma]. / Sunitinib - vom Paradigmenwechsel zu einem Therapiestandard beim metastasierten Nierenzellkarzinom (mRCC).

Targeted therapies have led to a paradigm shift in the treatment of metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). The multi-kinase inhibitor Sunitinib was rapidly established as a new standard in first-line therapy. Sunitinib was systematically developed in a comprehensive study program starting with phase II studies in second-line therapy, progressing to a phase III study of first-line therapy and ending with broad application in clinical practice. The prognosis for patients with mRCC has significantly improved with the introduction of the multi-kinase inhibitor: Sunitinib has doubled progression-free survival and quadrupled the response rate compared to Interferon alpha. This benefit is supported by more than 2 years overall survival in the Sunitinib arm of the study. In combination with the consistent results of the international Sunitinib Expanded Access Program, the substance possesses a broad evidence base on extensive practical application in all patient populations. This is also reflected in the recommendations of national and international professional associations. Sunitinib is the most frequently applied drug for mRCC in Germany.

[Outlook: Future therapy of renal cell carcinoma]. / Ausblick: Therapie des Nierenzellkarzinoms von morgen.

Targeted therapies have fundamentally altered the therapy of metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). Sunitinib today is an internationally recommended reference standard in first-line therapy; other drugs such as Temsirolimus, Everolimus, Bevacizumab (in combination with Interferon-alpha) and Sorafenib are part of the therapeutic arsenal. Practitioners thus have now more and better therapeutic options at hand, leading to a significantly improved prognosis for mRCC patients. Numerous ongoing research activities aim at the improvement of the benefits of the new compounds in the metastatic situation or application earlier in the course of the disease. Key aspects of future development in RCC are the optimization of the current therapy options by developing new targeted therapies, the search for the best combinations and sequences including the role of nephrectomy and the assessment in the adjuvant or neo-adjuvant setting. The following contribution provides an overview of ongoing studies, thus giving insight into the future therapy of RCC.

[What is new in the diagnosis and therapy of renal cell carcinoma?] / Was ist neu bei der Diagnostik und Therapie des Nierenzellkarzinoms?

Renal cell carcinomas (RCC) include different tumor entities, of which clear cell RCC is the most common tumor with approx. 75 % followed by the papillary RCC with 10-15 %. RCC are increasingly being diagnosed incidental in the context of abdominal diagnostics from other indications using sonography or cross-sectional imaging.The prognosis of metastatic RCC has improved significantly due to new therapy options, especially through the use of immune checkpoint inhibitors (IO). In the first line, combination therapies of the tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) axitinib with the PD-1 antibody pembrolizumab or the PDL-1 antibody avelumab apply regardless of the risk profile and histological entity, as well as the combination of the CTLA4 antibody ipilimumab with the PD-1 antibody nivolumab in patients with intermediate and high risk as new standards in therapy. The combinations lead to a higher response rate and longer survival. In the second line and subsequent lines, there is no evidence-based data after combination therapies, but drugs can be used that were not yet part of the first-line therapy.