Targeted genomic landscape of metastases compared to primary tumours in clear cell metastatic renal cell carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: The genomic landscape of primary clear cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC) has been well described. However, little is known about cohort genomic alterations (GA) landscape in ccRCC metastases, or how it compares to primary tumours in aggregate. The genomic landscape of metastases may have biological, clinical, and therapeutic implications. METHODS: We collected targeted next-generation sequencing mutation calls from two independent cohorts and described the metastases GA landscape and descriptively compared it to the GA landscape in primary tumours. RESULTS: The cohort 1 (n = 578) consisted of 349 primary tumours and 229 metastases. Overall, the most common mutations in the metastases were VHL (66.8%), PBRM1 (41.87%), and SETD2 (24.7%). TP53 was more frequently mutated in metastases compared to primary tumours (14.85% versus 8.9%; p = 0.031). No other gene had significant difference in the cohort frequency of mutations between the metastases and primary tumours. Mutation burden was not significantly different between the metastases and primary tumours or between metastatic sites. The second cohort (n = 257) consisted of 177 primary tumours and 80 metastases. No differences in frequency of mutations or mutational burden were observed between primaries and metastases. CONCLUSIONS: These data support the theory that ccRCC primary tumours and metastases encompass a uniform distribution of common genomic alterations tested by next-generation sequencing targeted panels. This study does not address variability between matched primary tumours and metastases or the change in genomic alterations over time and after sequential systemic therapies.

The Clinical Presentation, Survival Outcomes, and Management of Patients With Renal Cell Carcinoma and Cardiac Metastasis Without Inferior Vena Cava Involvement: Results From a Pooled Clinical Trial Database and Systematic Review of Reported Cases.

BACKGROUND: Cardiac metastases from renal cell carcinoma (RCC) are uncommon and there are limited data regarding the presentation and outcomes of this population. The objective of this study was to evaluate the characteristics and outcomes of patients with RCC with cardiac metastasis without inferior vena cava (IVC) involvement. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted a pooled retrospective analysis of metastatic RCC patients treated in 4 clinical trials. Additionally, we conducted a systematic review of cases reported in the literature from 1973 to 2015. Patients with cardiac metastases from RCC without IVC involvement were included. Patient and disease characteristics were described. Additionally, treatments, response to therapy, and survival outcomes were summarized. RESULTS: Of 1765 metastatic RCC patients in the clinical trials database, 10 had cardiac metastases without IVC involvement. All patients received treatment with targeted therapy. There was 1 observed partial response (10%) and 6 patients showed stable disease (60%). The median progression-free survival was 6.9 months. The systematic review of reported clinical cases included 39 patients. In these patients, the most common cardiac site of involvement was the right ventricle (51%; n = 20). Patients were treated with medical (28%; n = 11) and/or surgical treatment (49%; n = 19) depending on whether disease was isolated (n = 13) or multifocal (n = 26). CONCLUSION: To our knowledge, this is the first series to report on the presentation and outcomes of patients with cardiac metastasis without IVC involvement in RCC. We highlight that although the frequency of patients with cardiac metastases without IVC involvement is low, these patients have a unique clinical presentation and warrant special multidisciplinary management.

Durable Clinical Benefit in Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Patients Who Discontinue PD-1/PD-L1 Therapy for Immune-Related Adverse Events.

The current standard of care for treatment of metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) patients is PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors until progression or toxicity. Here, we characterize the clinical outcomes for 19 mRCC patients who experienced an initial clinical response (any degree of tumor shrinkage), but after immune-related adverse events (irAE) discontinued all systemic therapy. Clinical baseline characteristics, outcomes, and survival data were collected. The primary endpoint was time to progression from the date of treatment cessation (TTP). Most patients had clear cell histology and received anti-PD-1/PD-L1 therapy as second-line or later treatment. Median time on PD-1/PD-L1 therapy was 5.5 months (range, 0.7-46.5) and median TTP was 18.4 months (95% CI, 4.7-54.3) per Kaplan-Meier estimation. The irAEs included arthropathies, ophthalmopathies, myositis, pneumonitis, and diarrhea. We demonstrate that 68.4% of patients (n = 13) experienced durable clinical benefit off treatment (TTP of at least 6 months), with 36% (n = 7) of patients remaining off subsequent treatment for over a year after their last dose of anti-PD-1/PD-L1. Three patients with tumor growth found in a follow-up visit, underwent subsequent surgical intervention, and remain off systemic treatment. Nine patients (47.4%) have ongoing irAEs. Our results show that patients who benefitted clinically from anti-PD-1/PD-L1 therapy can experience sustained beneficial responses, not needing further therapies after the initial discontinuation of treatment due to irAEs. Investigation of biomarkers indicating sustained benefit to checkpoint blockers are needed. Cancer Immunol Res; 6(4); 402-8. ©2018 AACR.

Change in Neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) in response to immune checkpoint blockade for metastatic renal cell carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: An elevated Neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) is associated with worse outcomes in several malignancies. However, its role with contemporary immune checkpoint blockade (ICB) is unknown. We investigated the utility of NLR in metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) patients treated with PD-1/PD-L1 ICB. METHODS: We examined NLR at baseline and 6 (±2) weeks later in 142 patients treated between 2009 and 2017 at Dana-Farber Cancer Institute (Boston, USA). Landmark analysis at 6 weeks was conducted to explore the prognostic value of relative NLR change on overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), and objective response rate (ORR). Cox and logistic regression models allowed for adjustment of line of therapy, number of IMDC risk factors, histology and baseline NLR. RESULTS: Median follow up was 16.6 months (range: 0.7-67.8). Median duration on therapy was 5.1 months (<1-61.4). IMDC risk groups were: 18% favorable, 60% intermediate, 23% poor-risk. Forty-four percent were on first-line ICB and 56% on 2nd line or more. Median NLR was 3.9 (1.3-42.4) at baseline and 4.1 (1.1-96.4) at week 6. Patients with a higher baseline NLR showed a trend toward lower ORR, shorter PFS, and shorter OS. Higher NLR at 6 weeks was a significantly stronger predictor of all three outcomes than baseline NLR. Relative NLR change by ≥25% from baseline to 6 weeks after ICB therapy was associated with reduced ORR and an independent prognostic factor for PFS (p < 0.001) and OS (p = 0.004), whereas a decrease in NLR by ≥25% was associated with improved outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Early decline and NLR at 6 weeks are associated with significantly improved outcomes in mRCC patients treated with ICB. The prognostic value of the readily-available NLR warrants larger, prospective validation.

Genomic correlates of response to immune checkpoint therapies in clear cell renal cell carcinoma.

Immune checkpoint inhibitors targeting the programmed cell death 1 receptor (PD-1) improve survival in a subset of patients with clear cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC). To identify genomic alterations in ccRCC that correlate with response to anti-PD-1 monotherapy, we performed whole-exome sequencing of metastatic ccRCC from 35 patients. We found that clinical benefit was associated with loss-of-function mutations in the PBRM1 gene (P = 0.012), which encodes a subunit of the PBAF switch-sucrose nonfermentable (SWI/SNF) chromatin remodeling complex. We confirmed this finding in an independent validation cohort of 63 ccRCC patients treated with PD-1 or PD-L1 (PD-1 ligand) blockade therapy alone or in combination with anti-CTLA-4 (cytotoxic T lymphocyte-associated protein 4) therapies (P = 0.0071). Gene-expression analysis of PBAF-deficient ccRCC cell lines and PBRM1-deficient tumors revealed altered transcriptional output in JAK-STAT (Janus kinase-signal transducers and activators of transcription), hypoxia, and immune signaling pathways. PBRM1 loss in ccRCC may alter global tumor-cell expression profiles to influence responsiveness to immune checkpoint therapy.

Third-line Targeted Therapy in Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma: Results from the International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium.

BACKGROUND: The use of third-line targeted therapy (TTT) in metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) is not well characterized and varies due to the lack of robust data to guide treatment decisions. This study examined the use of third-line therapy in a large international population. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the use and efficacy of targeted therapy in a third-line setting. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Twenty-five international cancer centers provided consecutive data on 4824 mRCC patients who were treated with an approved targeted therapy. One thousand and twelve patients (21%) received TTT and were included in the analysis. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Patients were analyzed for overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival using Kaplan-Meier curves, and were evaluated for overall response. Cox regression analyses were used to determine the statistical association between OS and the six factors included in the International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium (IMDC) prognostic model. Subgroup analysis was performed on patients stratified by their IMDC prognostic risk status. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: Everolimus was the most prevalent third-line therapy (27.5%), but sunitinib, sorafenib, pazopanib, temsirolimus, and axitinib were all utilized in over ≥9% of patients. Patients receiving any TTT had an OS of 12.4 mo, a progression-free survival of 3.9 mo, and 61.1% of patients experienced an overall response of stable disease or better. Patients not receiving TTT had an OS of 2.1 mo. Patients with favorable- (7.2%) or intermediate-risk (65.3%) disease had the highest OS with TTT, 29.9 mo and 15.5 mo, respectively, while poor-risk (27.5%) patients survived 5.5 mo. Results are limited by the retrospective nature of the study. CONCLUSIONS: TTT remains highly heterogeneous. The IMDC prognostic criteria can be used to stratify third-line patients. TTT use in favorable- and intermediate-risk patients was associated with the greatest OS. PATIENT SUMMARY: Patients with favorable- and intermediate-prognostic criteria disease treated with third-line targeted therapy have an associated longer overall survival compared with those with poor risk disease.