Assessment of eligibility criteria in renal cell carcinoma trials evaluating systemic therapy.

OBJECTIVES: To characterise the restrictiveness of eligibility criteria in contemporary renal cell carcinoma (RCC) trials, using recommendations from the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO)-Friends of Cancer Research (FCR) initiative. METHODS: vPhase I-III trials assessing systemic therapies in patients with RCC starting between 30 June 2012 and 30 June 2022 were identified. Eligibility criteria regarding brain metastases, prior or concurrent malignancies, hepatitis B virus (HBV) or hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection, and human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection were identified and stratified into three groups: exclusion, conditional inclusion, and not reported. Descriptive statistics were used to determine the frequency of eligibility criteria. Fisher's exact test or chi-square test were used to calculate their associations with certain trial characteristics. RESULTS: A total of 423 RCC trials were initially identified of which 112 (26.5%) had sufficient accessible information. Exclusion of patients with HIV infection, HBV/HCV infection, brain metastases, and prior or concurrent malignancies were reported in 74.1%, 53.6%, 33.0%, and 8.0% of trials, respectively. In the context of HIV and HBV/HCV infection, patients were largely excluded from trials evaluating immunotherapy (94.4% and 77.8%, respectively). In addition, brain metastases were excluded in trials assessing targeted therapy (36.4%), combined therapy (33.3%), and immunotherapy (22.2%). Exclusion of patients with prior or concurrent malignancies was less frequently reported, accounting for 9.1%, 8.3%, and 5.6% targeted therapy, combined therapy and immunotherapy trials, respectively. CONCLUSION: A substantial proportion of RCC trials utilise restrictive eligibility criteria, excluding patients with fairly prevalent comorbidities. Implementing the ASCO-FCR recommendations will ensure resulting data are more inclusive and aligned with patient populations in the real-world.

Race/Ethnicity and Gender Representation in Hematology and Oncology Editorial Boards: What is the State of Diversity?

INTRODUCTION: Women and underrepresented groups in medicine hold few academic leadership positions in the field of hematology/oncology. In this study, we assessed gender and race/ethnicity representation in editorial board positions in hematology/oncology journals. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Editorial leadership board members from 60 major journals in hematology and oncology were reviewed; 54 journals were included in the final analysis. Gender and race/ethnicity were determined based on publicly available data for Editor-in-Chief (EiC) and Second-in-Command (SiC) (including deputy, senior, or associate editors). Descriptive statistics and chi-squared were estimated. In the second phase of the study, editors were emailed a 4-item survey to self-identify their demographics. RESULTS: Out of 793 editorial board members, 72.6% were men and 27.4% were women. Editorial leadership were non-Hispanic white (71.1%) with Asian editorial board members representing the second largest majority at 22.5%. Women comprised only 15.9% of the EiC positions (90% White and 10% Asian). Women were about half as likely to be in the EiC position compared with men [pOR 0.47 (95% CI, 0.23-0.95, P = .03)]. Women represented 28.3% of SiC editorial positions. Surgical oncology had the lowest female representation at 2.3%. CONCLUSION: Women and minorities are significantly underrepresented in leadership roles on Editorial Boards in hematology/oncology journals. Importantly, the representation of minority women physicians in EiC positions is at an inexorable zero.

Real-World Outcomes of Latinx Versus Non-Latinx Patients Treated With First-Line Immunotherapy for Metastatic Renal-Cell Carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: There are limited data regarding the impact of ethnicity among patients receiving immune checkpoint inhibitors. We evaluated real-world outcomes between Latinx and non-Latinx patients with metastatic renal-cell carcinoma (mRCC) treated with first-line nivolumab/ipilimumab within 2 different healthcare settings. METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis of patients with mRCC who received nivolumab/ipilimumab within the Los Angeles County Department of Health Services (LAC-DHS), a safety-net healthcare system, and the City of Hope Comprehensive Cancer Center (COH), a tertiary oncology center, between January 1, 2015 and December 31, 2021. Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were determined using the Kaplan-Meier method and covariates were adjusted using multivariate Cox proportional hazards regression. RESULTS: Of 94 patients, 40 patients (43%) were Latinx while the remainder were non-Latinx (44 pts [46%] White, 7 pts [7%] Asian, and 3 pts [3%] Other). Fifty (53%) and 44 (47%) patients received their care at COH and LAC-DHS, respectively. Most Latinx patients (95%) were treated at LAC-DHS, and most non-Latinx patients (89%) were treated at COH. Pooled analysis by ethnicity demonstrated significantly shorter PFS in Latinx versus non-Latinx patients (10.1 vs. 25.2 months, hazard ratios [HR] 3.61, 95% CI 1.96-6.66, P ≤ .01). Multivariate analysis revealed a HR of 3.41 (95% CI 1.31-8.84; P = .01). At a median follow-up of 11.0 months, the median OS was not reached in either arm at the time of data cutoff. CONCLUSION: Latinx patients with mRCC had a shorter PFS treated with frontline nivolumab/ipilimumab compared to their non-Latinx counterparts. No difference was observed in OS although these data were immature. Larger studies are needed to further interrogate the social and economic determinants of ethnicity on clinical outcomes in mRCC.

Twelve-Month Follow-up of the Immune Response After COVID-19 Vaccination in Patients with Genitourinary Cancers: A Prospective Cohort Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Vaccinations against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) have had a transformative impact on morbidity and mortality. However, the long-term impact of vaccination on patients with genitourinary cancers is currently unknown. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This study aimed to assess seroconversion rates in patients with genitourinary cancers receiving COVID-19 vaccination. Patients with prostate cancer, renal cell carcinoma, or urothelial cancer who had not been vaccinated for COVID-19 were included. Blood samples were obtained at baseline and after 2, 6, and 12 months of one dose of an FDA-approved COVID-19 vaccine. Antibody titer analysis was performed using the SCoV-2 Detect IgG ELISA assay, and the results were reported as immune status ratio (ISR). A paired t-test was used for comparison of ISR values between timepoints. In addition, T-cell receptor (TCR) sequencing was performed to assess for differences in TCR repertoire 2 months after vaccination. RESULTS: Out of 133 patients enrolled, 98 baseline blood samples were collected. At 2-, 6-, and 12-month time points 98, 70, and 50 samples were collected, respectively. Median age was 67 (IQR, 62-75), with the majority of patients diagnosed with prostate (55.1%) or renal cell carcinoma (41.8%). Compared to baseline (0.24 [95% CI, 0.19-0.31]) a significant increase in the geometric mean ISR values was observed at the 2-month timepoint (5.59 [4.76-6.55]) (P < .001). However, at the 6-month timepoint, a significant decrease in the ISR values was observed (4.66 [95% CI, 4.04-5.38]; P < .0001). Notably, at the 12-month timepoint, the addition of a booster dose resulted in an absolute increase in the ISR values compared to those who did not receive a booster dose (P = .04). CONCLUSIONS: Only a minority of patients with genitourinary cancers did not ultimately achieve satisfactory seroconversion after receiving commercial COVID-19 vaccination. Cancer type or treatment rendered did not appear to affect the immune response mounted after vaccination.

Perceptions of COVID-19 Vaccination in Patients with Genitourinary Cancers: A Survey Study.

Since the approval of the COVID-19 vaccines, their safety and efficacy has been widely demonstrated in patients with cancer. However, there remain patients with reservations regarding vaccination. We aimed to assess genitourinary cancer patients' perceptions of the vaccines as well as barriers and influencers of decision-making through the completion of a questionnaire. While vaccine-associated concerns were observed, most patients with genitourinary cancers were willing to receive the vaccine. Moving forward, differing strategies could be considered to enhance patient education on the utility of vaccination in the setting of cancer and beyond.

Discrepancies between genitourinary cancer patients' and clinicians' characterization of the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status.

BACKGROUND: Patient-reported outcomes have been used to assess treatment effectiveness and actively engage patients in their disease management. This study was designed to describe the patient-reported performance status (PS) and the provider-reported PS. METHODS: Patients with metastatic genitourinary cancers were recruited from a single cancer center before the initiation of a new line of treatment. PS (Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group [ECOG]), quality of life (Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-General), and distress (Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Anxiety and Depression) were self-reported by patients. Clinical data (eg, age, sex, diagnosis, and physician-reported ECOG PS) were extracted from medical records. Multivariate analysis was used to determine the association between PS, quality of life, and psychological symptoms. RESULTS: One hundred forty-five patients were enrolled (76.6% male, 70.3% White, 81.4% married, and 76.6% well educated). The median age was 67 years; 66.9% were diagnosed with renal cell carcinoma, 20.0% were diagnosed with urothelial carcinoma, and 13.1% were diagnosed with prostate cancer. Clinicians more frequently classified patients' ECOG PS as 0 in comparison with the patients themselves (92.4% vs 64.1%; P = .001). Higher clinician-reported ECOG PS was associated with poorer physical and functional well-being and higher rates of depression (P < .01), whereas higher patient-reported ECOG PS was associated with worse psychosocial outcomes (P < .01). CONCLUSIONS: Discrepancies were noted between the patient- and provider-reported ECOG PS, with clinicians overestimating the ECOG PS in comparison with the patients themselves. This study's findings suggest that patients incorporate their social and emotional well-being into their PS score in addition to their physical well-being. This information is not immediately accessible to most clinicians from just a standard patient interview and likely accounts for the overestimation of the patients' ECOG PS by the clinicians.

Infigratinib in upper tract urothelial carcinoma versus urothelial carcinoma of the bladder and its association with comprehensive genomic profiling and/or cell-free DNA results.

BACKGROUND: Infigratinib (BGJ398) is a potent and selective fibroblast grown factor receptor 1 to 3 (FGFR1-3) inhibitor with significant activity in patients with advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma bearing FGFR3 alterations. Given the distinct biologic characteristics of upper tract urothelial carcinoma (UTUC) and urothelial carcinoma of the bladder (UCB), the authors examined whether infigratinib had varying activity in these settings. METHODS: Eligible patients had metastatic urothelial carcinoma with activating FGFR3 mutations and/or fusions. Comprehensive genomic profiling was performed on formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded tissues. Blood was collected for cell-free DNA analysis using a 600-gene panel. Patients received infigratinib at a dose of 125 mg orally daily (3 weeks on/1 week off) until disease progression or intolerable toxicity occurred. The overall response rate (ORR; partial response [PR] plus complete response [CR]) and disease control rate (DCR; CR plus PR plus stable disease [SD]) were characterized. RESULTS: A total of 67 patients were enrolled; the majority (70.1%) had received ≥2 prior antineoplastic therapies. In 8 patients with UTUC, 1 CR and 3 PRs were observed (ORR, 50%); the remaining patients achieved a best response of SD (DCR, 100%). In patients with UCB, 13 PRs were observed (ORR, 22%), and 22 patients had a best response of SD (DCR, 59.3%). Notable differences in genomic alterations between patients with UTUC and those with UCB included higher frequencies of FGFR3-TACC3 fusions (12.5% vs 6.8%) and FGFR3 R248C mutations (50% vs 11.9%), and a lower frequency of FGFR3 S249C mutations (37.5% vs 59.3%). CONCLUSIONS: Differences in the cumulative genomic profile were observed between patients with UTUC and those with UCB in the current FGFR3-restricted experience, underscoring the distinct biology of these diseases. These results support a planned phase 3 adjuvant study predominantly performed in this population.

Reliability and validity of the Turkish version of the Diabetes Distress Scale for type 2 diabetes and distress levels of the participants

Background/aim: Studies have shown an increased depression rate in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) compared to the normal population. It is now acknowledged that patients suffer from distress rather than depression. Our aim was to validate the Turkish version of the Diabetes Distress Scale (DDS) and to show distress levels of the participants. Materials and methods: The scale was translated from English to Turkish by the authors and translated back to English. Between August 2015 and January 2016 all the patients who were referred to the T2DM Clinic of Istanbul Medeniyet University were screened, and eligible patients were recruited. For calculating internal consistency Cronbach's alpha coefficient was used. Results: A total of 205 patients [120 females (58.5%), 85 males (41.5%)] were included. Cronbach's alpha coefficient was 0.874, showing internal consistency. The Spearman Brown correlation coefficient was calculated between the first 9 and second 8 questions as 0.884. Thetotal variances were explained at a level of 66.2% with 4 factors. Sixty-three patients (30%) had a score of ≥3, indicating diabetic distress. Correlation analysis showed a significant correlation between total score and HbA1c levels (r = 0.152 and P = 0.038). Conclusion: The Turkish version of the DDS for type 2 diabetes is a reliable tool for assessment of distress levels.

Biopsychosocial distress and clinical outcome in metastatic renal cell carcinoma.

OBJECTIVE: Limited research exists examining the biopsychosocial experience of patients diagnosed with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC), a disease commonly associated with a poor prognosis. The purpose of this study was to describe rates and types of distress in mRCC patients and explore the relationship between distress and overall survival. METHOD: A cohort of 102 patients with mRCC treated at a single institution was assessed by a touch screen-based instrument comprising 22 core items spanning physical, practical, functional, and emotional domains. Association between biopsychosocial distress and clinicopathologic criteria was interrogated. Overall survival was compared between patients with low distress versus high distress.ResultHigh rates of distress (20.7%) were found among patients newly diagnosed with mRCC. Among those domains contributing to distress, pain, fatigue, and financial comorbidity were the most commonly reported by patients with mRCC. A trend toward poorer overall survival in those patients with high distress versus low distress was observed among mRCC patients.Significance of resultsBased on data from a relatively large sample of patients, this study provides the first specific insights into the potential impact of biopsychosocial distress and outcomes among patients with mRCC.

Assessment of distress and quality of life in rare cancers.

OBJECTIVE: Rare cancers are a heterogeneous group of conditions that can be associated with emotional and physical impairments. In view of the dearth of research in this area, we investigated the quality of life and prevalence of distress in a cohort of patients diagnosed with a rare cancer, classified by the RARECARE definition. METHODS: A cohort of rare cancer patients, treated in a Brazilian public cancer center, was assessed for distress (Distress Thermometer), anxiety/depression (Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale), and quality of life (Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General Version). Descriptive statistics were generated, and multivariate analyses were used to identify factors associated with distress, anxiety/depression, and quality of life. RESULTS: A total of 137 patients (52.6% male, mean age of 50 years; range 18-90) were identified. Nearly half (49.6%) of patients reported high levels of distress, with 19.7% endorsing anxiety and 15.3% depression. In multivariate analysis, demographic and clinical variables associated with worse psychosocial outcomes included younger age (P < 0.05), female gender (P < 0.01), advanced disease stage (P < 0.01), and engagement in active therapy (P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Patients diagnosed with rare cancer reported poorer psychosocial outcomes and impaired quality of life when compared to the general population of cancer patients. Certain demographic groups (eg, women and younger patients) may benefit from targeted psychosocial interventions.

Adjuvant treatment in renal cell carcinoma.

In parallel with advances in the treatment of metastatic renal cell carcinoma (RCC), multiple adjuvant treatments have been tested for RCC. Adjuvant approaches now extend beyond conventional immunotherapies, such as interferon alfa and interleukins, to targeted therapies and immune checkpoint inhibitors. Most treatment approaches before the targeted treatment era did not improve patient outcomes, or study results were mixed. For example, a recent study found that disease-free survival was longer with sunitinib than with placebo in high-risk clear cell RCC, which led to the regulatory approval of sunitinib. However, another large study of adjuvant sunitinib in a slightly different patient population did not confirm these results. Ongoing studies of targeted treatments and immune checkpoint inhibitors may clarify the effectiveness of these agents in the near future. This review presents a comprehensive, chronologic examination of studies addressing adjuvant treatment in RCC, focusing on the key differences between similar approaches. It also discusses the future of adjuvant treatment in RCC.

Advances in treatment of metastatic renal cell carcinoma.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Multiple agents, including vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) inhibitors and mammalian target of rapamycin inhibitors have been approved over the past decade for the treatment of metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). Here, we focus on nivolumab, cabozantinib, and lenvatinib plus everolimus, agents that have recently emerged with positive clinical data leading to 'Food and Drug Administration approval or pending approval in mRCC. We also review the development of novel agents of interest showing promise in mRCC as part of combination therapy'. RECENT FINDINGS: Nivolumab and cabozantinib both offer improved survival over everolimus in the second-line treatment of mRCC. Lenvatinib plus everolimus has similarly shown encouraging survival benefits in a phase II trial for the second-line setting. Novel combinations in mRCC, including dual immune checkpoint blockade, VEGF and programmed death 1 inhibition, VEGF and vaccine therapy, dual angiogenic blockade, and VEGF-directed therapy with nanoparticle-containing camptothecin have shown promising activity in early-phase trials. SUMMARY: Multiple promising agents are available in the treatment of mRCC. The appropriate sequencing of agents in the treatment of mRCC may become further elucidated by future studies that prospectively analyze potential biomarkers to identify patients who will derive the greatest benefit from VEGF, mammalian target of rapamycin, or checkpoint inhibitors.

Renal Cell Carcinoma of Variant Histology: New Biologic Understanding Leads to Therapeutic Advances.

Renal cell carcinoma (RCC) is one of the 10 most commonly diagnosed solid tumors. Most RCCs are histologically defined as clear cell, comprising approximately 75% of diagnoses. However, the remaining RCC cases are composed of a heterogeneous combination of diverse histopathologic subtypes, each with unique pathogeneses and clinical features. Although the therapeutic approach to both localized and metastatic RCCs has dramatically changed, first with the advent of antiangiogenic targeted therapies and more recently with the approval of immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI)-based combinations, these advances have primarily benefited the clear cell RCC patient population. As such, there remains critical gaps in the optimization of treatment regimens for patients with non-clear cell, or variant, RCC histologies. Herein, we detail recent advances in understanding the biology of RCC with variant histology and how such findings have guided novel clinical studies investigating precision oncology approaches for these rare subtypes. Among the most common variant histology RCCs are papillary RCC, comprising approximately 15%-20% of all diagnoses. Although a histopathologically diverse subset of tumors, papillary RCC is canonically associated with amplification of the MET protooncogene; recently completed and ongoing trials have investigated MET-directed therapies for this patient population. Finally, we discuss the unique biology of RCC with sarcomatoid dedifferentiation and the recent clinical findings detailing its paradoxical sensitivity to ICIs.

Prevalence of Dietary Modification and Supplement Use in Patients with Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Receiving Systemic Therapy.

Many patients diagnosed with cancer adopt dietary changes and supplement use, and a growing body of evidence suggests that such modifications can affect outcomes to cancer therapy. We sought to assess the prevalence of these practices and the surrounding physician-patient dialogue among patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma. An online survey was administered by Kidney Cancer Research Alliance (KCCure), interrogating dietary modification patterns, supplement usage, out-of-pocket expenditure related to supplements, and patients' views toward alternative medicine practices. Patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma receiving combination therapy were actively solicited. In total, 289 unique responses were collected. The most common first-line treatments were nivolumab/ipilimumab (32.4%) and axitinib/pembrolizumab (13.1%). Within the cohort, 147 (50.9%) started using supplements following diagnosis of renal cell carcinoma; the most utilized supplements were probiotics, cannabidiol (CBD) oil/marijuana, and Vitamin C, reported by 70 (47.6%), 61 (41.4%), and 54 (36.7%), respectively. Dietary modifications following cancer diagnosis were reported by 101 (34.9%) respondents, of which 19.8% followed the Mediterranean diet and 18.8% adopted a ketogenic diet. Most respondents (71.3%) noted that they consistently report supplement usage to their physicians. A substantial proportion of patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma utilize dietary modification and supplements as an adjunct to antineoplastic therapy. Considering the widespread adoption of these practices and the reported effects on cancer treatment, it is crucial for healthcare providers to engage in discussions with patients regarding supplement use.

Barriers to Clinical Trial Implementation Among Community Care Centers.

Importance: While an overwhelming majority of patients diagnosed with cancer express willingness to participate in clinical trials, only a fraction will enroll onto a research protocol. Objective: To identify critical barriers to trial enrollment to translate findings into actionable practice changes that increase cancer clinical trial enrollment. Design, Setting, and Participants: This survey study included designated site contacts at oncology practices with teams who were highly involved with the Association of Community Cancer Centers (ACCC) Community Oncology Research Institute (ACORI) clinical trials activities, all American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO)-ACCC collaboration pilot sites, and/or sites providing care to at least 25% African American and Hispanic residents. To determine participation trends among health care practices in oncology-focused research, identify barriers to clinical trial implementation and operation, and establish unmet needs for cancer clinics interested in trial participation, a 34-question survey was designed. Survey questions were defined within 3 categories: cancer center demographic characteristics, clinical trial characteristics, and referral practices. The survey was distributed through email and was open from June 20 through October 5, 2022. Main Outcomes and Measures: Participation in and barriers to conducting oncology trials in different community oncology settings. Results: The survey was distributed to 100 cancer centers, with completion by 58 centers (58%) across 25 states. Fifty-two centers (88%) reported that they conduct therapeutic clinical trials, of which 33 (63%) were from urban settings, 11 (21%) were from suburban settings, and 8 (15%) were from rural settings. Only 25% of rural practices (2 of 8) offered phase 1 trials, compared with 67% of urban practices (22 of 33) (P = .01). Respondents noted challenges in conducting research, including patient recruitment (27 respondents [52%]), limited staffing (27 [52%]), and nonrelevant trials for their patient population (25 [48%]). Among sites not offering therapeutic trials, barriers to research conduct included limited infrastructure, funding, and staffing. Most centers (46 of 58 [79%]) referred patients to outside centers for clinical trial enrollment, particularly in the context of late-stage disease and/or disease progression. Only 17 of these sites (37%) had established protocols for patient follow-up subsequent to outside referral. Conclusions and Relevance: In this national survey study of barriers to clinical trial implementation, most sites offered therapeutic trials, but there were significant disparities in trial availability across care settings. Furthermore, fundamental deficiencies in trial support infrastructure limited research activity, including within programs currently conducting research as well as at sites interested in future clinical research opportunities. These results identify crucial unmet needs for oncology clinics to effectively offer clinical trials to patients seeking care.

Outcomes With Combination Pembrolizumab and Axitinib in Second and Further Line Treatment of Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma.

INTRODUCTION: Combination immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) and vascular endothelial growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitors (VEGF-R-TKI), including pembrolizumab/axitinib, are approved for first-line treatment of metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). Pembrolizumab/axitinib is associated with superior progression free survival (PFS), objective response rate (ORR), and overall survival over sunitinib. However, to date, the activity and safety of pembrolizumab/axitinib in later lines of therapy has not been reported. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Clinical data of consecutive patients receiving pembrolizumab/axitinib in the second-line or beyond for mRCC at Yale-New Haven Hospital were retrospectively collected. Best objective response was assessed using RECIST 1.1 criteria. Kaplan-Meier function was used to analyze survival. RESULTS: Thirty-eight patients were included. Median age was 64, 92.1% had clear cell mRCC, 18.4% had sarcomatoid dedifferentiation; 94.7% had prior ICI and 39.5% had prior VEGF-R-TKI. Pembrolizumab/axitinib was administered as second-line therapy in 21 (55.5%) patients, third-line in 5 (13.2%) and beyond in 12 (30.2%). Adverse events (AEs) occurred in 86.8% of patients. Grade 3-4 AEs attributed to pembrolizumab and axitinib were seen in 18.4% and 6.4% of patients, respectively. No grade 5 AEs occurred. At a median follow up of 17.1 months, median PFS was 9.7 months (95% CI, 4.1-15.3). Amongst 36 response evaluable patients, the ORR was 25.0% (all partial) and disease control rate (including stable disease for at least 6 months) was 66.6%. The most frequent treatment sequence was first-line nivolumab/ipilimumab followed by second-line pembrolizumab/axitinib (n = 17, 44.7%); among this cohort, median PFS with pembrolizumab/axitinib was 11.1 (95% CI, 8.4-13.7) months, with an ORR of 31.4%. CONCLUSION: Combination pembrolizumab/axitinib among previously treated mRCC patients has activity, with AE rates comparable to those reported in the first line. Prospective studies evaluating ICI-VEGF-R-TKI combinations beyond first-line are warranted to identify the most beneficial treatment sequencing in mRCC.

Genomic and Clinical Prognostic Factors in Patients With Advanced Urothelial Carcinoma Receiving Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors.

BACKGROUND: Recently data suggest that telomerase reverse transcripatase (TERT) promoter mutations portend superior outcomes with immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) therapy in mUC. In our retrospective analysis from 2 tertiary cancer centers, we assessed the predictive role of TERT mutations along with other parameters. METHODS: Patient registries were queried for patients treated with ICI for mUC with available genomic and clinical data. Select clinical and laboratory parameters, in addition to primary tumor site, histology, treatment modality, and setting were recorded. Tumor mutational burden (TMB), and mutational status of TERT, CDKN2A, CDKN2B, TMB, TP53, RB1, KMT2D, ARID1A, ERBB2, KDM6A, PIK3CA, FGFR3, and ATM were noted. Univariate analysis of significance concerning overall response rate (ORR), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS) was conducted. RESULTS: In total, 113 patients were found to meet inclusion criteria. In our study, ORR was 55%, median PFS was 5.1 months (0.2-71.8), and median OS was 13.4 months (0.2-84.8). On univariate analysis, female sex, NLR>5, and ATM mutation were associated with inferior PFS and OS, whereas upper tract primary disease and ECOG score ≥ 2 were associated with worse OS. On multivariate analysis, NLR >5 was associated with worse PFS and OS whereas upper tract primary disease, albumin <3.4 g/dL, hemoglobin <10 g/dL and ATM mutation were significantly associated with worse OS on multivariate analysis. No significant differences were seen in ORR, PFS, or OS regarding TERT promoter mutations. CONCLUSION: TERT promoter mutations were not significantly associated with any difference in outcome in patients treated with ICI.

Targeting STAT3 in tumor-associated antigen-presenting cells as a strategy for kidney and bladder cancer immunotherapy.

Introduction: Immune checkpoint blockade (ICB) improved clinical outcomes in renal and bladder cancer patients, but the response rates remain limited especially in metastatic disease. While STAT3 transcription factor is well-known master regulator of tumor immune evasion, little is known about the role of STAT3 in the resistance of renal or bladder cancers to immunotherapy. Methods: To better understand immune alterations associated with ICB resistance, we assessed blood biomarkers in renal cancer patients classified as responders or non-responders to first line nivolumab/ipilimumab immunotherapy. Results: We observed that non-responders showed elevated levels of proinflammatory mediators, such as IL-1RA, IL-6, IL-8 and to lesser extent IL-10, which are associated with STAT3 activation and tumor immunosuppression. In addition, we found STAT3 activation primarily in circulating myeloid immune cells such as tolerogenic MDSCs. To assess whether STAT3 inhibition within these cell subsets can promote antitumor immune responses and/or enhance sensitivity to ICB in vivo, we used an original antisense oligonucleotide (ASO) strategy for myeloid-cell selective STAT3 knockdown (CpG-STAT3ASO). Our results in syngeneic models of renal and bladder cancers in mice demonstrated potent antitumor activity of CpG-STAT3ASO alone in contrast to PD1 blockade alone in both models. The CpG-STAT3ASO/anti-PD1 combination improved therapeutic efficacy especially against bladder tumors. Therapeutic efficacy correlated with activation of dendritic cells (DCs) and M1 macrophages in the tumor microenvironment, reduced percentages of regulatory T cells (Tregs) and the expansion of CD8 T cells in both tumor models. Discussion/Conclusion: Our study underscores the potential of using myeloid-cell targeted CpG-STAT3 inhibitors for genitourinary cancer therapy to disrupt tolerogenic signaling, restore immune cell activity and sensitivity to immune checkpoint inhibitors and/or T cell-based immunotherapies.

Characterization of papillary and clear cell renal cell carcinoma through imaging mass cytometry reveals distinct immunologic profiles.

Objective: To characterize and further compare the immune cell populations of the tumor microenvironment (TME) in both clear cell and papillary renal cell carcinoma (RCC) using heavy metal-labeled antibodies in a multiplexed imaging approach (imaging mass cytometry). Materials and methods: Formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded (FFPE) baseline tumor tissues from metastatic patients with clear cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC) and papillary renal cell carcinoma (pRCC) were retrospectively requisitioned from an institutional biorepository. Pretreated FFPE samples from 33 RCC patients (10 ccRCC, 23 pRCC) were accessioned and stained for imaging mass cytometry (IMC) analysis. Clinical characteristics were curated from an institutional RCC database. FFPE samples were prepared and stained with heavy metal-conjugated antibodies for IMC. An 11-marker panel of tumor stromal and immune markers was used to assess and quantify cellular relationships in TME compartments. To validate our time-of-flight (CyTOF) analysis, we cross-validated findings with The Cancer Genome Atlas Program (TCGA) analysis and utilized the CIBERSORTx tool to examine the abundance of main immune cell types in pRCC and ccRCC patients. Results: Patients with ccRCC had a longer median overall survival than did those with pRCC (67.7 vs 26.8 mo, respectively). Significant differences were identified in the proportion of CD4+ T cells between disease subtypes (ccRCC 14.1%, pRCC 7.0%, p<0.01). Further, the pRCC cohort had significantly more PanCK+ tumor cells than did the ccRCC cohort (24.3% vs 9.5%, respectively, p<0.01). There were no significant differences in macrophage composition (CD68+) between cohorts. Our results demonstrated a significant correlation between the CyTOF and TCGA analyses, specifically validating that ccRCC patients exhibit higher levels of CD4+ T cells (ccRCC 17.60%, pRCC 15.7%, p<0.01) and CD8+ T cells (ccRCC 17.83%, pRCC 11.15%, p<0.01). The limitation of our CyTOF analysis was the large proportion of cells that were deemed non-characterizable. Conclusions: Our findings emphasize the need to investigate the TME in distinct RCC histological subtypes. We observed a more immune infiltrative phenotype in the TME of the ccRCC cohort than in the pRCC cohort, where a tumor-rich phenotype was noted. As practical predictive biomarkers remain elusive across all subtypes of RCC, further studies are warranted to analyze the biomarker potential of such TME classifications.