PD-1 directed immunotherapy alters Tfh and humoral immune responses to seasonal influenza vaccine.

Anti-programmed death-1 (anti-PD-1) immunotherapy reinvigorates CD8 T cell responses in patients with cancer but PD-1 is also expressed by other immune cells, including follicular helper CD4 T cells (Tfh) which are involved in germinal centre responses. Little is known, however, about the effects of anti-PD-1 immunotherapy on noncancer immune responses in humans. To investigate this question, we examined the impact of anti-PD-1 immunotherapy on the Tfh-B cell axis responding to unrelated viral antigens. Following influenza vaccination, a subset of adults receiving anti-PD-1 had more robust circulating Tfh responses than adults not receiving immunotherapy. PD-1 pathway blockade resulted in transcriptional signatures of increased cellular proliferation in circulating Tfh and responding B cells compared with controls. These latter observations suggest an underlying change in the Tfh-B cell and germinal centre axis in a subset of immunotherapy patients. Together, these results demonstrate dynamic effects of anti-PD-1 therapy on influenza vaccine responses and highlight analytical vaccination as an approach that may reveal underlying immune predisposition to adverse events.

Genomic ancestry in kidney cancer: Correlations with clinical and molecular features.

INTRODUCTION: Genetic ancestry (GA) refers to population hereditary patterns that contribute to phenotypic differences seen among race/ethnicity groups, and differences among GA groups may highlight unique biological determinants that add to our understanding of health care disparities. METHODS: A retrospective review of patients with renal cell carcinoma (RCC) was performed and correlated GA with clinicopathologic, somatic, and germline molecular data. All patients underwent next-generation sequencing of normal and tumor DNA using Memorial Sloan Kettering-Integrated Mutation Profiling of Actionable Cancer Targets, and contribution of African (AFR), East Asian (EAS), European (EUR), Native American, and South Asian (SAS) ancestry was inferred through supervised ADMIXTURE. Molecular data was compared across GA groups by Fisher exact test and Kruskal-Wallis test. RESULTS: In 953 patients with RCC, the GA distribution was: EUR (78%), AFR (4.9%), EAS (2.5%), SAS (2%), Native American (0.2%), and Admixed (12.2%). GA distribution varied by tumor histology and international metastatic RCC database consortium disease risk status (intermediate-poor: EUR 58%, AFR 88%, EAS 74%, and SAS 73%). Pathogenic/likely pathogenic germline variants in cancer-predisposition genes varied (16% EUR, 23% AFR, 8% EAS, and 0% SAS), and most occurred in CHEK2 in EUR (3.1%) and FH in AFR (15.4%). In patients with clear cell RCC, somatic alteration incidence varied with significant enrichment in BAP1 alterations (EUR 17%, AFR 50%, SAS 29%; p = .01). Comparing AFR and EUR groups within The Cancer Genome Atlas, significant differences were identified in angiogenesis and inflammatory pathways. CONCLUSION: Differences in clinical and molecular data by GA highlight population-specific variations in patients with RCC. Exploration of both genetic and nongenetic variables remains critical to optimize efforts to overcome health-related disparities.

Atezolizumab plus cabozantinib versus cabozantinib monotherapy for patients with renal cell carcinoma after progression with previous immune checkpoint inhibitor treatment (CONTACT-03): a multicentre, randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Immune checkpoint inhibitors are the standard of care for first-line treatment of patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma, yet optimised treatment of patients whose disease progresses after these therapies is unknown. The aim of this study was to determine whether adding atezolizumab to cabozantinib delayed disease progression and prolonged survival in patients with disease progression on or after previous immune checkpoint inhibitor treatment. METHODS: CONTACT-03 was a multicentre, randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial, done in 135 study sites in 15 countries in Asia, Europe, North America, and South America. Patients aged 18 years or older with locally advanced or metastatic renal cell carcinoma whose disease had progressed with immune checkpoint inhibitors were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive atezolizumab (1200 mg intravenously every 3 weeks) plus cabozantinib (60 mg orally once daily) or cabozantinib alone. Randomisation was done through an interactive voice-response or web-response system in permuted blocks (block size four) and stratified by International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium risk group, line of previous immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy, and renal cell carcinoma histology. The two primary endpoints were progression-free survival per blinded independent central review and overall survival. The primary endpoints were assessed in the intention-to-treat population and safety was assessed in all patients who received at least one dose of study drug. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04338269, and is closed to further accrual. FINDINGS: From July 28, 2020, to Dec 27, 2021, 692 patients were screened for eligibility, 522 of whom were assigned to receive atezolizumab-cabozantinib (263 patients) or cabozantinib (259 patients). 401 (77%) patients were male and 121 (23%) patients were female. At data cutoff (Jan 3, 2023), median follow-up was 15·2 months (IQR 10·7-19·3). 171 (65%) patients receiving atezolizumab-cabozantinib and 166 (64%) patients receiving cabozantinib had disease progression per central review or died. Median progression-free survival was 10·6 months (95% CI 9·8-12·3) with atezolizumab-cabozantinib and 10·8 months (10·0-12·5) with cabozantinib (hazard ratio [HR] for disease progression or death 1·03 [95% CI 0·83-1·28]; p=0·78). 89 (34%) patients in the atezolizumab-cabozantinib group and 87 (34%) in the cabozantinib group died. Median overall survival was 25·7 months (95% CI 21·5-not evaluable) with atezolizumab-cabozantinib and was not evaluable (21·1-not evaluable) with cabozantinib (HR for death 0·94 [95% CI 0·70-1·27]; p=0·69). Serious adverse events occurred in 126 (48%) of 262 patients treated with atezolizumab-cabozantinib and 84 (33%) of 256 patients treated with cabozantinib; adverse events leading to death occurred in 17 (6%) patients in the atezolizumab-cabozantinib group and nine (4%) in the cabozantinib group. INTERPRETATION: The addition of atezolizumab to cabozantinib did not improve clinical outcomes and led to increased toxicity. These results should discourage sequential use of immune checkpoint inhibitors in patients with renal cell carcinoma outside of clinical trials. FUNDING: F Hoffmann-La Roche and Exelixis.

Prognostic Factors for Survival in Patients Undergoing Surveillance After Cytoreductive Nephrectomy.

PURPOSE: The clinical course of patients being placed on surveillance in a cohort of systemic therapy-naïve patients who undergo cytoreductive nephrectomy is not well documented. Thus, we evaluated the clinical course of patients placed on surveillance following cytoreductive nephrectomy and identified predictors of survival. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this large single-institution study, we retrospectively analyzed metastatic renal cell carcinoma patients who underwent cytoreductive nephrectomy followed by surveillance. Predictors of survival were evaluated using the Kaplan-Meier method with a log-rank test. Patients were risk stratified based on IMDC (International mRCC Database Consortium) and number of metastatic sites (Rini score), with IMDC score ≤1 and ≤2 metastatic organ sites considered favorable risk. Primary end point was systemic therapy-free survival. Secondary end points included intervention-free survival, cancer-specific survival, and overall survival. RESULTS: Median systemic therapy-free survival was 23.6 months (95% CI: 15.1-40.6), intervention-free survival was 11.8 months (95% CI: 8.0-18.4), cancer-specific survival was 54.2 months (95% CI: 46.2-71.4), and overall survival 52.4 months (95% CI: 40.3-66.8). Favorable-risk patients compared to unfavorable-risk patients had longer systemic therapy-free survival (50.6 vs 11.1 months, P < .01), survival (25.2 vs 7.3, P < .01), and cancer-specific survival (71.4 vs 46.2 months, P = .02). CONCLUSIONS: Using risk stratification based on IMDC and number of metastatic sites, surveillance in favorable-risk patients can be utilized for a period without the initiation of systemic therapy. This approach can delay patients' exposure to the side effects of systemic therapy.

LITESPARK-012: pembrolizumab plus lenvatinib with or without belzutifan or quavonlimab for advanced renal cell carcinoma.

Combination treatment with immunotherapy agents and/or vascular endothelial growth factor tyrosine kinase inhibitors are a standard of care for patients with advanced clear cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC). Novel therapeutic combinations that include the hypoxia-inducible factor 2α inhibitor belzutifan and the cytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated protein 4 inhibitor quavonlimab are being investigated for their potential to further improve patient outcomes. This protocol describes the rationale and design of the randomized, phase III LITESPARK-012 study, which will evaluate the efficacy and safety of pembrolizumab plus lenvatinib with or without belzutifan or quavonlimab as first-line treatment for advanced ccRCC. Results from this study may support triplet combination therapies as a potential new standard of care for advanced ccRCC. Clinical trial registry: NCT04736706 (ClinicalTrials.gov).

Evolving biological associations of upfront cytoreductive nephrectomy in metastatic renal cell carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Systemic responses to cytoreductive nephrectomy (CN) in the management of metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) are variable and difficult to anticipate. The authors aimed to determine the association of CN with modifiable International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium (IMDC) risk factors and oncological outcomes. METHODS: Consecutive patients with mRCC referred for potential CN (2009-2019) were reviewed. The primary outcome was overall survival (OS); variables of interest included undergoing CN and the baseline number of modifiable IMDC risk factors (anemia, hypercalcemia, neutrophilia, thrombocytosis, and reduced performance status). For operative cases, the authors evaluated the effects of IMDC risk factor dynamics, measured 6 weeks and 6 months after CN, on OS and postoperative treatment disposition. RESULTS: Of 245 treatment-naive patients with mRCC referred for CN, 177 (72%) proceeded to surgery. The CN cases had fewer modifiable IMDC risk factors (P = .003), including none in 71 of 177 patients (40.1%); fewer metastases (P = .011); and higher proportions of clear cell histology (P = .012). In a multivariable analysis, surgical selection, number of IMDC risk factors, metastatic focality, and histology were associated with OS. Total risk factors changed for 53.8% and 57.2% of the patients from the preoperative period to 6 weeks and 6 months after CN, respectively. Adjusted for preoperative IMDC risk scores, an increase in IMDC risk factors at 6 weeks and 6 months was associated with adverse OS (hazard ratio [HR], 1.57; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.13-2.19; P = .007; HR, 2.52; 95% CI, 1.74-3.65; P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: IMDC risk factors are dynamic clinical variables that can improve after upfront CN in select patients, and this suggests a systemic benefit of cytoreduction, which may confer clinically meaningful prognostic implications.

Correlative serum biomarker analyses in the phase 2 trial of lenvatinib-plus-everolimus in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: No biomarkers have been established to predict treatment efficacy in renal cell carcinoma (RCC). In an exploratory retrospective analysis of a Phase 2 study, we constructed composite biomarker scores (CBSs) to predict progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) in patients with metastatic RCC randomised to receive lenvatinib-plus-everolimus. METHODS: Of 40 biomarkers tested, the 5 most strongly associated with PFS (HGF, MIG, IL-18BP, IL-18, ANG-2) or OS (TIMP-1, M-CSF, IL-18BP, ANG-2, VEGF) were used to make a 5-factor PFS-CBS or OS-CBS, respectively. A 2-factor CBS was generated with biomarkers common to PFS-CBS and OS-CBS. Patients were divided into groups accordingly (5-factor-CBS high: 3-5, CBS-low: 0-2; 2-factor-CBS high: 1-2, CBS-low: 0). RESULTS: PFS/OS with lenvatinib-plus-everolimus were significantly longer in the 5-factor CBS-high group versus the CBS-low group (P = 0.0022/P < 0.0001, respectively). In the CBS-high group, PFS/OS were significantly longer with lenvatinib-plus-everolimus versus everolimus (P < 0.001/P = 0.0079, respectively); PFS was also significantly longer with lenvatinib-plus-everolimus versus lenvatinib (P = 0.0046). The 5-factor-CBS had a predictive role in PFS and OS after multivariate analysis. Similar trends were observed with the 2-factor-CBS for PFS (i.e., lenvatinib-plus-everolimus versus everolimus). CONCLUSIONS: The 5-factor CBS may identify patients with metastatic RCC who would benefit from lenvatinib-plus-everolimus versus everolimus; additional validation is required. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: The clinical trial registration number is NCT01136733.

Prognosis of Incidental Brain Metastases in Patients With Advanced Renal Cell Carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) management guidelines recommend brain imaging if clinically indicated and the rate of occult central nervous system (CNS) metastasis is not well-defined. Early detection could have major therapeutic implications, because timely interventions may limit morbidity and mortality. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A retrospective review was performed to characterize patients with mRCC incidentally diagnosed with asymptomatic brain metastases during screening for clinical trial participation at Gustave Roussy and Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center. Descriptive statistics and time-to-event methods were used to evaluate the cohort. RESULTS: Across 68 clinical trials conducted between 2001 and 2019 with a median 14.1-month follow-up, 72 of 1,689 patients (4.3%) with mRCC harbored occult brain metastases. The International Metastatic RCC Database Consortium (IMDC) risk status was favorable (26%), intermediate (61%), and poor (13%), and 86% of patients had ≥2 extracranial sites of disease, including lung metastases in 92% of patients. CNS involvement was multifocal in 38.5% of patients, and the largest brain metastasis was >1 cm in diameter in 40% of the cohort. Localized brain-directed therapy was pursued in 93% of patients, predominantly radiotherapy. Median overall survival was 10.3 months (range, 7.0-17.9 months), and the 1-year overall survival probability was 48% (95% CI, 37%-62%). IMDC risk and number or size of lesions did not correlate with survival (log-rank, P=.3, P=.25, and P=.067, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: This large multi-institutional mRCC cohort study identified occult brain metastasis in a notable proportion of patients (4.3%) and highlights that the risk of asymptomatic CNS involvement extends to those with favorable risk features per IMDC risk assessment. These data provide rationale for brain screening in patients with advanced RCC.

A qualitative framework of non-selection factors for cytoreductive nephrectomy.

PURPOSE: Cytoreductive nephrectomy (CN) benefits a subset of patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC), however proper patient selection remains complex and controversial. We aim to characterize urologists' reasons for not undertaking a CN at a quaternary cancer center. METHODS: Consecutive patients with mRCC referred to MSKCC urologists for consideration of CN between 2009 and 2019 were included. Baseline clinicopathologic characteristics were used to compare patients selected or rejected for CN. The reasons cited for not operating and the alternative management strategies recommended were extrapolated. Using an iterative thematic analysis, a framework of reasons for rejecting CN was designed. Kaplan-Meier estimates tested for associations between the reasons for not undertaking a CN and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: Of 297 patients with biopsy-proven mRCC, 217 (73%) underwent CN and 80 (27%) did not. Median follow-up of patients alive at data cut-off was 27.3 months. Non-operative patients were older (p = 0.014), had more sites of metastases (p = 0.008), harbored non-clear cell histology (p = 0.014) and reduced performance status (p < 0.001). The framework comprised seven distinct themes for recommending non-operative management: two patient-fitness considerations and five oncological considerations. These considerations were associated with OS; four of the oncological factors conferred a median OS of less than 12 months (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: We developed a framework of criteria by which patients were deemed unsuitable candidates for CN. These new insights provide a novel perspective on surgical selection, could potentially be applicable to other malignancies and possibly have prognostic implications.