Functional Evaluation and Nephrotoxicity Assessment of Human Renal Proximal Tubule Cells on a Chip.

An in vitro human renal proximal tubule model that represents the proper transporter expression and pronounced epithelial polarization is necessary for the accurate prediction of nephrotoxicity. Here, we constructed a high-throughput human renal proximal tubule model based on an integrated biomimetic array chip (iBAC). Primary human renal proximal tubule epithelial cells (hRPTECs) cultured on this microfluidic platform were able to form a tighter barrier, better transporter function and more sensitive nephrotoxicity prediction than those on the static Transwell. Compared with the human immortalized HK2 model, the hRPTECs model on the chip gained improved apical-basolateral polarization, barrier function and transporter expression. Polymyxin B could induce nephrotoxicity not only from the apical of the hRPTECs, but also from the basolateral side on the iBAC. However, other chemotherapeutic agents, such as doxorubicin and sunitinib, only induced nephrotoxicity from the apical surface of the hRPTECs on the iBAC. In summary, our renal proximal tubule model on the chip exhibits improved epithelial polarization and membrane transporter activity, and can be implemented as an effective nephrotoxicity-screening toolkit.

Survival outcomes and independent response assessment with nivolumab plus ipilimumab versus sunitinib in patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma: 42-month follow-up of a randomized phase 3 clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: The extent to which response and survival benefits with immunotherapy-based regimens persist informs optimal first-line treatment options. We provide long-term follow-up in patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma (aRCC) receiving first-line nivolumab plus ipilimumab (NIVO+IPI) versus sunitinib (SUN) in the phase 3 CheckMate 214 trial. Survival, response, and safety outcomes with NIVO+IPI versus SUN were assessed after a minimum of 42 months of follow-up. METHODS: Patients with aRCC were enrolled from October 16, 2014, through February 23, 2016. Patients stratified by International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium (IMDC) risk and region were randomized to nivolumab (3 mg/kg) plus ipilimumab (1 mg/kg) every 3 weeks for four doses, followed by nivolumab (3 mg/kg) every 2 weeks; or SUN (50 mg) once per day for 4 weeks (6-week cycle). Primary endpoints: overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), and objective response rate (ORR) per independent radiology review committee in IMDC intermediate-risk/poor-risk patients. Secondary endpoints: OS, PFS, and ORR in the intention-to-treat (ITT) population and safety. Favorable-risk patient outcomes were exploratory. RESULTS: Among ITT patients, 550 were randomized to NIVO+IPI (425 intermediate/poor risk; 125 favorable risk) and 546 to SUN (422 intermediate/poor risk; 124 favorable risk). Among intermediate-risk/poor-risk patients, OS (HR, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.55-0.80) and PFS (HR, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.62-0.90) benefits were observed, and ORR was higher (42.1% vs 26.3%) with NIVO+IPI versus SUN. In ITT patients, both OS benefits (HR, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.61-0.86) and higher ORR (39.1% vs 32.6%) were observed with NIVO+IPI versus SUN. In favorable-risk patients, HR for death was 1.19 (95% CI, 0.77-1.85) and ORR was 28.8% with NIVO+IPI versus 54.0% with SUN. Duration of response was longer (HR, 0.46-0.54), and more patients achieved complete response (10.1%-12.8% vs 1.4%-5.6%) with NIVO+IPI versus SUN regardless of risk group. The incidence of treatment-related adverse events was consistent with previous reports. CONCLUSIONS: NIVO+IPI led to improved efficacy outcomes versus SUN in both intermediate-risk/poor-risk and ITT patients that were maintained through 42 months' minimum follow-up. A complete response rate >10% was achieved with NIVO+IPI regardless of risk category, with no new safety signals detected in either arm. These results support NIVO+IPI as a first-line treatment option with the potential for durable response. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02231749.

Investigating the cytotoxic and apoptotic effects of sunitinib upon K-562 chronic myelogenous leukemia cell line and assessment of gene profiling.

OBJECTIVE: Tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) which efficiently inhibit BCR-ABL are highly effective for clinical treatment of chronic myeloid leukemia (CML), but development of resistance to TKIs is a big challenge to treatment. Sunitinib is a multitargeted TKI targeting vascular endothelial growth factor receptor and is defined a safe and effective candidate target, but its effect on other signaling pathways is unknown. To investigate the cytotoxic and apoptotic effect of sunitinib in CML cell model K-562 on JAK-STAT signaling pathway components, suppressor genes and oncogenes, hematopoiesis-related genes, cell cycle and VEGF pathway components, and mRNA level expression changes was aimed. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Sunitinib's effective dose cytotoxic IC50 was determined by trypan blue and WST-1 cell proliferation assay tests. Expression levels of target genes were determined by quantitative reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction simultaneously after sunitinib application. Protein expression analysis was determined by "WesternBreeze Chromogenic Kit-Anti-Rabbit" based on the principles of the application kit by Western blot analysis. RESULTS: Assessing the cytotoxicity of K-562 cells following sunitinib treatment revealed that sunitinib decreased cell proliferation in a time- and dose-dependent manner. According to the sunitinib inhibition curve, IC50 dose was calculated as 3.5 µM at 48th h for K-562 cells and apoptosis assays pointed that sunitinib induces apoptotic cell death of leukemic cells at moderate levels. CONCLUSION: Our study supports that sunitinib might be used as a novel therapeutic target to trigger apoptosis in CML cells which in turn might accelerate therapeutic response in regard to inhibiting oncogenes and enhancing tumor suppressors in cooperation with cell cycle regulatory genes.

A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Nivolumab and Ipilimumab Versus Sunitinib in First-Line Intermediate- to Poor-Risk Advanced Renal Cell Carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: The treatment paradigm of advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC) has changed rapidly in recent years. In first-line treatment of intermediate- to poor-risk patients, the CheckMate 214 study demonstrated a significant survival advantage for nivolumab and ipilimumab versus sunitinib. The high cost of combined immune-modulating agents warrants an understanding of the combination's value by considering both efficacy and cost. The objective of this study was to estimate the cost-effectiveness of nivolumab and ipilimumab compared with sunitinib for first-line treatment of intermediate- to poor-risk advanced RCC from the U.S. payer perspective. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A Markov model was developed to compare the costs and effectiveness of nivolumab and ipilimumab with those of sunitinib in the first-line treatment of intermediate- to poor-risk advanced RCC. Health outcomes were measured in life-years and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). Drug costs were based on Medicare reimbursement rates in 2017. We extrapolated survival beyond the trial closure using Weibull distribution. Model robustness was addressed in univariable and probabilistic sensitivity analyses. RESULTS: The total mean cost per-patient of nivolumab and ipilimumab versus sunitinib was $292,308 and $169,287, respectfully. Nivolumab and ipilimumab generated a gain of 0.978 QALYs over sunitinib. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) for nivolumab and ipilimumab was $125,739/QALY versus sunitinib. CONCLUSION: Our analysis established that the base case ICER in the model for nivolumab and ipilimumab versus sunitinib is below what some would consider the upper limit of the theoretical willingness-to-pay threshold in the U.S. ($150,000/QALY) and is thus estimated to be cost-effective. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: This article assessed the cost-effectiveness of nivolumab and ipilimumab versus sunitinib for treatment of patients with intermediate- to poor-risk metastatic kidney cancer, from the U.S. payer perspective. It would cost $125,739 to gain 1 quality-adjusted life-year with nivolumab and ipilimumab versus sunitinib in these patients.

Longitudinal Assessment of Vascular Function With Sunitinib in Patients With Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Sunitinib, used widely in metastatic renal cell carcinoma, can result in hypertension, left ventricular dysfunction, and heart failure. However, the relationships between vascular function and cardiac dysfunction with sunitinib are poorly understood. METHODS AND RESULTS: In a multicenter prospective study of 84 metastatic renal cell carcinoma patients, echocardiography, arterial tonometry, and BNP (B-type natriuretic peptide) measures were performed at baseline and at 3.5, 15, and 33 weeks after sunitinib initiation, correlating with sunitinib cycles 1, 3, and 6. Mean change in vascular function parameters and 95% confidence intervals were calculated. Linear regression models were used to estimate associations between vascular function and left ventricular ejection fraction, longitudinal strain, diastolic function (E/e'), and BNP. After 3.5 weeks of sunitinib, mean systolic blood pressure increased by 9.5 mm Hg (95% confidence interval, 2.0-17.1; P=0.02) and diastolic blood pressure by 7.2 mm Hg (95% confidence interval, 4.3-10.0; P<0.001) across all participants. Sunitinib resulted in increases in large artery stiffness (carotid-femoral pulse wave velocity) and resistive load (total peripheral resistance and arterial elastance; all P<0.05) and changes in pulsatile load (total arterial compliance and wave reflection). There were no statistically significant associations between vascular function and systolic dysfunction (left ventricular ejection fraction and longitudinal strain). However, baseline total peripheral resistance, arterial elastance, and aortic impedance were associated with worsening diastolic function and filling pressures over time. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma, sunitinib resulted in early, significant increases in blood pressure, arterial stiffness, and resistive and pulsatile load within 3.5 weeks of treatment. Baseline vascular function parameters were associated with worsening diastolic but not systolic function.