New frontiers against sorafenib resistance in renal cell carcinoma: From molecular mechanisms to predictive biomarkers.

Renal cell carcinoma (RCC) is a highly vascularized tumor and prone to distant metastasis. Sorafenib is the first targeted multikinase inhibitor and first-line chemical drug approved for RCC therapy. In fact, only a small number of RCC patients benefit significantly from sorafenib treatment, while the growing prevalence of sorafenib resistance has become a major obstacle for drug therapy effectivity of sorafenib. The molecular mechanisms of sorafenib resistance in RCC are not completely understood by now. Herein, we comprehensively summarize the underlying mechanisms of sorafenib resistance and molecular biomarkers for predicting sorafenib responsiveness. Moreover, we outline strategies suitable for overcoming sorafenib resistance and prospect potential approaches for identifying biomarkers associated with sorafenib resistance in RCC, which contributes to guide individualized and precision drug therapy.

PD-L1 and VEGFR-2 expression in synchronous metastatic renal cell carcinoma treated with targeted therapy following cytoreductive nephrectomy.

OBJECTIVES: Few studies have independently investigated the population of patients with synchronous metastatic renal cell carcinoma (smRCC). In this study, we evaluated programmed death protein-ligand 1 (PD-L1) and vascular endothelial growth factor receptor 2 (VEGFR-2) expression in primary tumor tissue of smRCC. METHODS: A total of 96 patients with smRCC who were treated with cytoreductive nephrectomy followed by targeted therapy from January 2006 to January 2013 were identified. PD-L1 and VEGFR-2 expression were evaluated by immunohistochemistry. Kaplan-Meier and Cox methods were used for analysis. RESULTS: PD-L1 and VEGFR-2 protein immunopositivity were observed in 39.6% (38 of 96) and 58.3% (56 of 96) of patients, respectively. A significant correlation was detected between VEGFR-2 and PD-L1 expression (P = 0.030). Based on PD-L1 and VEGFR-2 expression, patients with intermediate-risk disease (n = 63) were divided into 4 subgroups including patients who were PD-L1 (+) VEGFR-2 (+) (n = 21), PD-L1 (+) VEGFR-2 (-) (n = 11), PD-L1 (-) VEGFR-2 (+) (n = 15) and PD-L1 (-) VEGFR-2 (-) (n = 16). Compared to the PD-L1 (-) VEGFR-2 (+), PD-L1 (+) VEGFR-2 (+) and PD-L1 (-) VEGFR-2 (-) groups, patients in the PD-L1 (+) VEGFR-2 (-) group had shorter progression-free survival (median, 9.0 vs. 20.0, 16.0 and 15.5 months, P < 0.05) and overall survival (median, 14.0 vs. 33.0, 24.0 and 26.5 months, P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Intermediate-risk smRCC patients with PD-L1-positive and VEGFR-2-negative expression who were treated with targeted therapy following cytoreductive nephrectomy had poor prognoses. We suggest that other treatments beyond sunitinib or sorafenib may be explored in this subgroup.

Arterial Spin Labeled Perfusion MRI for the Evaluation of Response to Tyrosine Kinase Inhibition Therapy in Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma.

Background Tumor perfusion may inform therapeutic response and resistance in metastatic renal cell carcinoma (RCC) treated with antiangiogenic therapy. Purpose To determine if arterial spin labeled (ASL) MRI perfusion changes are associated with tumor response and disease progression in metastatic RCC treated with vascular endothelial growth factor receptor (VEGFR) tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs). Materials and Methods In this prospective study (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00749320), metastatic RCC perfusion was measured with ASL MRI before and during sunitinib or pazopanib therapy between October 2008 and March 2014. Objective response rate (ORR) and progression-free survival (PFS) were calculated. Perfusion was compared between responders and nonresponders at baseline, at week 2, after cycle 2 (12 weeks), after cycle 4 (24 weeks), and at disease progression and compared with the ORR by using the Wilcoxon rank sum test and with PFS by using the log-rank test. Results Seventeen participants received sunitinib (mean age, 59 years ± 7.0 [standard deviation]; 11 men); 11 participants received pazopanib (mean age, 63 years ± 6.6; eight men). Responders had higher baseline tumor perfusion than nonresponders (mean, 404 mL/100 g/min ± 213 vs 199 mL/100 g/min ± 136; P = .02). Perfusion decreased from baseline to week 2 (-53 mL/100 g/min ± 31; P < .001), after cycle 2 (-65 mL/100 g/min ± 25; P < .001), and after cycle 4 (-79 mL/100 g/min ± 15; P = .008). Interval reduction in perfusion at those three time points was not associated with ORR (P = .63, .29, and .27, respectively) or PFS (P = .28, .27, and .32). Perfusion increased from cycle 4 to disease progression (51% ± 11; P < .001). Conclusion Arterial spin labeled perfusion MRI may assist in identifying responders to vascular endothelial growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitors and may help detect early evidence of disease progression in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma. © RSNA, 2020 Online supplemental material is available for this article. See also the editorial by Goh and De Vita in this issue.

Final Overall Survival Results from a Phase 3 Study to Compare Tivozanib to Sorafenib as Third- or Fourth-line Therapy in Subjects with Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma.

Tivozanib is a potent and selective inhibitor of the VEGF receptor. In an open-label, randomized phase 3 trial, we compared tivozanib to sorafenib in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) who had received two or three prior therapies. We have previously reported that the study met its primary endpoint, demonstrating an improvement in progression-free survival with tivozanib versus sorafenib (5.6 mo vs 3.9 mo; hazard ratio [HR] 0.73, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.56-0.94; p=0.016). The current report reflects the final assessment of overall survival, showing no difference between treatment with tivozanib and sorafenib (HR 0.97, 95% CI 0.75-1.24). Given its activity and distinct tolerability profile, tivozanib represents a treatment option for patients with previously treated mRCC. PATIENT SUMMARY: We show that tivozanib, a targeted therapy, can delay tumor growth relative to an already approved targeted therapy (sorafenib) in patients with kidney cancer who have received two or three prior treatments. No difference in survival was observed.

Association between tyrosine-kinase inhibitor induced hypertension and treatment outcomes in metastatic renal cancer.

BACKGROUND: Tyrosine-kinase inhibitor (TKI) drugs have been considered first line treatment for metastatic renal cell cancer (RCC) for over a decade. TKI-induced hypertension is a common adverse-event in patients treated for metastatic RCC. AIM: This study was aimed at investigating an association between TKI-induced hypertension and treatment outcomes for metastatic RCC patients. METHODS AND RESULTS: Retrospective data pertaining to patients with histologically or radiologically confirmed metastatic RCC treated with sunitinib, pazopanib, sorafenib, axitinib or cabozantinib between June 2012 and May 2019 were evaluated. Clinical information and serial blood pressure measurements were extracted from medical records for each patient. We compared objective response rate, progression-free survival (PFS), and 12-month survival between TKI-induced hypertension (TIH) and non-TIH groups using χ2 and Mann-Whitney tests. Out of 72 patients screened, 52 met study eligibility criteria. The median age at diagnosis was 61 years (range: 42-85 years) with a clear male predominance. The majority of patients had a history of nephrectomy with clear cell pathology. Almost all patients were on first-line TKI therapy with sunitinib or pazopanib. Median follow-up was 11 months. About half of patients developed TKI-induced hypertension (grade 2-3). In the TIH group 82% were commenced on an antihypertensive agent. Median PFS measured 30.5 weeks for TIH group compared to 22.2 weeks for non-TIH (P = .05). The 6 month and 12 month survival rates for TIH were 82% and 56%, respectively, as compared to 76% and 44% for non-TIH. CONCLUSION: The occurrence of TKI-induced hypertension was found to be a positive prognostic factor for progression in patients with metastatic RCC.

The impact of cytoreductive nephrectomy on survival outcomes in patients treated with tyrosine kinase inhibitors for metastatic renal cell carcinoma in a real-world cohort.

BACKGROUND: Tyrosine kinase inhibitor therapy (TKI) has changed the treatment paradigm of metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). The recent CARMENA and SURTIME trials challenged the role of the cytoreductive nephrectomy (CN). OBJECTIVE: To assess the impact of CN prior to TKI therapy in patients with mRCC in a real-world setting. METHODS: Overall, 262 consecutive patients with mRCC were treated with CN plus TKI or TKI only at our institution between 2000 and 2016. Patients with prior immunotherapy or metastasectomy were excluded. Multiple imputation and inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) were performed to account for missing values and imbalances between the treatment groups, respectively. Unadjusted and adjusted Kaplan-Meier estimates were used to determine differences in progression-free (PFS), overall (OS), and cancer-specific survival (CSS). RESULTS: Overall, 104 (40%) patients received CN before TKI treatment. Most frequent first line therapy was Sunitinib (66%), followed by Sorafenib (20%) and Pazopanib (10%). After adjustment with IPTW, there was no difference in PFS, CSS, and OS (all P > 0.05) between the treatment groups. In subgroup analyses, CSS was improved when CN was performed in patients with sarcomatoid features and clear cell histology (P = 0.04 and P = 0.03) and PFS was improved in patients with clear cell histology when CN was performed [0.04]). CN did not improve OS in any subgroup analysis. CONCLUSION: The role of CN remains controversial. We found no difference in survival outcomes between patients treated with and without CN before TKI therapy. However, CN was associated with improved survival in specific patient subgroups. Tailored, individualized treatment is key to further improve oncological outcomes for mRCC.

Bone metastasis is associated with poor prognosis in metastatic papillary renal cell carcinoma patients treated with first agent angiogenesis inhibitors.

OBJECTIVE: Papillary renal cell carcinoma (papRCC) is a rare (10%-15%) subtype of renal cancer. Few prognostic biomarkers have been described in metastatic papRCC (m-papRCC) patients treated with vascular endothelial growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitors (VEGFR-TKIs). We aimed to study the prognostic impact of bone metastases (BM) on response rate, progression-free and overall survival (PFS and OS) in patients with m-papRCC treated with first agent VEGFR-TKIs. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A multicentric, retrospective analysis of patient records was conducted. BM were detected by computed tomography and/or bone scintigraphy. The International Metastatic RCC Database Consortium (IMDC) score was calculated at start of first agent VEGFR-TKI treatment. RESULTS: Forty-nine patients were included. Best objective response was partial response in 20%, stable disease in 60% and early progressive disease in 20% of patients. Median PFS (mPFS) was 6.0 months and median OS (mOS) 14.0 months after start of first agent VEGFR-TKI. The IMDC score correlated with mOS: 77.5 months in good, 17.0 months in intermediate and 8.0 months in poor risk patients (P = 0.002). Patients with BM had a poorer outcome compared to patients without BM: mPFS was 4.0 vs. 7.0 months (P = 0.006) and mOS 7.5 vs. 19.0 months (P = 0.002). On bivariate analysis, the presence of BM was independently associated with PFS (P = 0.02) and OS (P = 0.049), independent of the IMDC risk groups. CONCLUSION: In m-papRCC patients treated with first agent VEGFR-TKIs, the presence of BM is an unfavorable prognostic factor, associated with shorter PFS and OS.

Novel Predictive Models of Early Death Less Than 1 Year in Patients With Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma After Treatment With First-line Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitors.

BACKGROUND: We aimed to develop a modified International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium (IMDC) model that can predict early death less than 1 year in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) after receiving first-line tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs). PATIENTS AND METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed records of patients with mRCC treated with first-line TKIs at our institution between 2007 and 2012. The primary endpoint was the rate of early death within 1 year after first-line TKI administration. We determined statistically significant factors predicting early death by performing multiple logistic regression. The modified IMDC model 1 was developed using new variables in addition to the risk criteria of the IMDC model, and model 2 was developed using new variables irrespective of the risk classification of IMDC model. RESULTS: Early mortality within 1 year of first-line TKI treatment was 19.7% (n = 98) in 462 patients. Although the C-index of the IMDC model for early death was 0.655, the C-index of model 1, which includes 5 variables (previous nephrectomy, body mass index, multiple metastases, previous metastasectomy, and serum albumin level) in addition to the Heng criteria, was 0.823. The C-index of model 2, which includes 7 variables (hemoglobin, neutrophil level, and the 5 variables of model 1) was 0.822. Of note, there was no significant difference in net reclassification index between the 2 models. CONCLUSION: This is the first study suggesting novel prediction models for early death less than 1 year in patients with mRCC treated with first-line TKI.

Recent advances in the systemic treatment of metastatic non-clear cell renal cell carcinomas.

There is still no standard treatment for non-clear cell renal cell carcinomas. Sunitinib is the most examined drug because of its effectiveness in retrospective studies and clinical trials, and is the preferred first-line drug in the National Comprehensive Cancer Network guideline. Temsirolimus is an option as a first-line drug, especially for poor-risk non-clear cell renal cell carcinoma patients. Everolimus, pazopanib, axitinib and nivolmab might also be viable options. Clinical trials are still required to gather evidence regarding non-clear cell renal cell carcinoma treatment. Because each non-clear cell renal cell carcinoma has a different genetic background and molecular features, specific treatment for each non-clear cell renal cell carcinoma should be established. From the results of a Japanese multicenter study, tyrosine kinase inhibitors might be better used for metastatic papillary renal cell carcinoma in both first- and second-line settings. Both tyrosine kinase inhibitors and mammalian target of rapamicin inhibitors are effective for metastatic chromophobe renal cell carcinoma, but the preferred first-line drug has not been determined. Platinum-based chemotherapies are currently recommended for metastatic collecting duct carcinoma, and anti-angiogenic drugs are effective in some cases. Tyrosine kinase inhibitors, especially sunitinib, appear to be effective for X11.2 translocation renal cell carcinoma among the microphthalmia-associated transcription family of translocation renal cell carcinomas. Evidence is still lacking regarding the treatment for other rare non-clear cell renal cell carcinomas. Appropriate sequential therapies using antivascular endothelial growth factor therapies, mammalian target of rapamicin inhibitors and immuno-oncology drugs should be established for each non-clear cell renal cell carcinoma.

Prognostic Markers for Refined Stratification of IMDC Intermediate-Risk Metastatic Clear Cell Renal Cell Carcinoma Treated with First-Line Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitor Therapy.

BACKGROUND: Patients in the International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium (IMDC) intermediate-risk group have heterogeneous prognoses and thus may benefit from improved risk stratification. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to analyze inflammatory parameters such as C-reactive protein (CRP) and neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) as prognostic markers for IMDC intermediate-risk patients. METHODS: Patients with metastatic clear cell renal cell carcinoma (n = 71) with IMDC intermediate risk who received tyrosine kinase inhibitors as first-line therapy were included in this retrospective study. Multivariate Cox regression analyses were performed to identify prognostic factors for overall survival (OS). RESULTS: As first-line systemic therapy, 46 (65%), 19 (27%), and 6 (8%) patients received sunitinib, sorafenib, and pazopanib, respectively. An IMDC prognostic score of 1 and 2 were observed in 34 (48%) and 37 (52%) patients, respectively. Mean CRP level was 1.06 mg/dL, and mean NLR was 3.0. Multivariate Cox regression revealed several factors significantly associated with poor OS, including NLR ≥ 3 (vs NLR < 3; hazard ratio [HR] 2.57; p = 0.0228), CRP level ≥ 1 mg/dL (vs CRP < 1 mg/dL; HR 2.89; p = 0.0279), and two or more metastatic organs (vs one organ; HR 3.77; p = 0.0008). Using these risk factors, patients were stratified into the following three risk categories: F0 (no prognostic factors; n = 20), in which the median OS (mOS) was not achieved; F1 (1 prognostic factor; n = 31), in which the mOS was 31 months; and F2-3 (2 or 3 prognostic factors; n = 20) in which the mOS was 13 months (log-rank p < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: CRP, NLR, and the number of metastatic organs were independent prognostic factors in IMDC intermediate-risk patients.

Serum Alpha1-Globulin as a Novel Prognostic Factor in Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Treated with Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitors.

BACKGROUND: Serum protein fraction (SPF) is a common parameter reflecting the nutritional and inflammatory status of the human body. However, its role in patients with cancer, particularly those treated with targeted agents, is unknown. OBJECTIVE: We conducted this study to explore the prognostic value of SPF in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) treated with tyrosine kinase inhibitors and its association with clinical characteristics. METHODS: Patients with mRCC (n = 213) who initiated first-line sunitinib or sorafenib systemic therapy for metastatic disease between March 2007 and June 2017 at Zhongshan Hospital, Fudan University, were retrospectively included in our analysis. Clinical and pathological data were collected. SPF was measured by capillary electrophoresis. Prognostic factors of overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were analyzed using the Cox proportional hazards model. Correlation was estimated with Spearman's correlation coefficient. RESULTS: Among all SPF components, high α1-globulin was an independent prognostic factor for OS and PFS (dichotomized by median, hazard ratio [HR] 2.356; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.399-3.966, p = 0.001; and HR 1.994; 95% CI 1.360-2.923, p < 0.001, respectively). In our cohort, α1-globulin showed better predictive value for OS than the International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium (IMDC) model (C-index 0.682 vs. 0.597; p = 0.005). Moreover, serum α1-globulin was positively correlated with International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) grade (r = 0.237; p < 0.001), tumor size (r = 0.242; p < 0.001), initial tumor/node/metastasis (TNM) stage (r = 0.185; p = 0.007), and IMDC risk group (r = 0.485; p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: High serum α1-globulin correlates with high tumor load. Serum α1-globulin is an independent prognostic factor of OS and PFS in mRCC and demonstrates better predictive value for OS than does the IMDC model.

Testicular metastasis from renal cell carcinoma after nephrectomy and on tyrosine kinase inhibitors therapy: Case report and review.

Renal cell carcinoma has extremely heterogeneous presentation at the diagnosis: it may present as a confined organ disease, locally advanced, metastatic to locoregional lymph nodes or with single or multiple systemic metastases. Since chemotherapy and radiation therapy have not demonstrated efficacy either in primary therapy or in neo-adjuvant or adjuvant therapy for renal clear cell carcinoma, targeted agents like tirosine kinase inhibitors were developed and are largely used in locally advanced and metastatic renal cell carcinoma. Here, we present a rare case of ipsilateral renal cell carcinoma testicle metastasis, after radical nephrectomy and during tyrosine kinase inhibitors therapy. In addition, a retrospective search in PubMed, ScienceDirect, and Web of Science database on testicular metasteses from renal cell carcinoma under tyrosine kinase inhibitors therapy was performed.

Genetic Variants of VEGFA and FLT4 Are Determinants of Survival in Renal Cell Carcinoma Patients Treated with Sorafenib.

Molecular markers of sorafenib efficacy in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) are not available. The purpose of this study was to discover genetic markers of survival in patients with mRCC treated with sorafenib. Germline variants from 56 genes were genotyped in 295 patients with mRCC. Variant-overall survival (OS) associations were tested in multivariate regression models. Mechanistic studies were conducted to validate clinical associations. VEGFA rs1885657, ITGAV rs3816375, and WWOX rs8047917 (sorafenib arm), and FLT4 rs307826 and VEGFA rs3024987 (sorafenib and placebo arms combined) were associated with shorter OS. FLT4 rs307826 increased VEGFR-3 phosphorylation, membrane trafficking, and receptor activation. VEGFA rs1885657 and rs58159269 increased transcriptional activity of the constructs containing these variants in endothelial and RCC cell lines, and VEGFA rs58159269 increased endothelial cell proliferation and tube formation. FLT4 rs307826 and VEGFA rs58159269 led to reduced sorafenib cytotoxicity. Genetic variation in VEGFA and FLT4 could affect survival in sorafenib-treated patients with mRCC. These markers should be examined in additional malignancies treated with sorafenib and in other angiogenesis inhibitors used in mRCC. SIGNIFICANCE: Clinical and mechanistic data identify germline genetic variants in VEGFA and FLT4 as markers of survival in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma.

SWITCH II: Phase III randomized, sequential, open-label study to evaluate the efficacy and safety of sorafenib-pazopanib versus pazopanib-sorafenib in the treatment of advanced or metastatic renal cell carcinoma (AUO AN 33/11).

PURPOSE: This trial compared the sequential therapy with the multikinase inhibitor sorafenib (So) followed by pazopanib (Pa) or vice versa in advanced/metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) patients. METHODS: This multicenter, randomized phase 3 study assessed the sequential use of So-Pa versus Pa-So in patients with mRCC without prior systemic therapy. Pts were randomized to So 2 × 400 mg/day followed by Pa 1 × 800 mg/day in case of progression or intolerable toxicity or vice versa. Primary endpoint was total PFS (tPFS), defined as time from randomization to progression, or death during second-line therapy. Key secondary endpoints included overall survival (OS), first-line PFS, disease control rate (DCR) and safety. RESULTS: A total of 377 pts were randomized (So-Pa, n = 189; Pa-So, n = 188). Recruitment of a total 544 pts was calculated, but actual accrual rate turned out to be lower than expected. The primary endpoint median tPFS was 8.6 mo (95% CI 7.7-10.2) for So-Pa and 12.9 mo (95% CI 10.8-15.2) for Pa-So with a hazard ratio (HR) of 1.36 (upper limit of one-sided 95% CI 1.68), which exceeded a predefined HR <1.225 as a one-sided 95% confidence interval. Non-inferiority of So-Pa regarding tPFS was not met. Secondary endpoints displayed marked statistical differences in favor of Pa-So in first-line PFS and DCR but not for OS and 2nd-line PFS. Side effect profiles were consistent with known toxicities of the respective multikinase-inhibitor including diarrhea, fatigue, hand-foot skin reaction and hypertension. CONCLUSIONS: Non-inferiority of the primary endpoint tPFS could not be demonstrated for So-Pa. The results for first-line PFS and DCR favored the Pa-So sequence. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT01613846, www.clinicaltrials.gov.

The Effectiveness of Sorafenib over Other Targeted Agents in the Second-Line Treatment of Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma: a Meta-Analysis.

The aim of the study was to perform a meta-analysis to compare the therapeutic effects and adverse events (AEs) of sorafenib in second-line treatments of metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). We searched online electronic databases: Pubmed, Embase, Cochrane library updated on November 2017.Trials of the effectiveness of sorafenib in second-line treatments of advanced RCC were included, of which the main outcomes were objective response rate (ORR), progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS) and grade 3/4 AE. Other TAs significantly reduced the risk of PFS compared to sorafenib with respect to second-line treatment (HR = 0.74; 95% CI, 0.65-0.83; p < 0.00001). No significant differences were, however, found in patients in terms of the ORR (HR = 1.82; 95% CI, 0.98-3.35; p = 0.06). Frequencies of the most common toxicities were overall similar and adverse events differed only in sensitivity analysis in rash with exclusion of other TAs (HR = 0.16; 95% CI, 0.05-0.52; p = 0.002). Overall survival was not debated between groups. In patients with mRCC, second-line sorafenib is associated with similar ORR as other target agents. While, sorafenib did not demonstrate a PFS advantage compared with other target agents, suggests sorafenib may not benefit patients with mRCC. Tolerability due to toxicities is similar compared sorafenib with other target agents. Further characterization of the RCC oncogenic pathway, and the ongoing clinical trials should help optimize the treatment option for second-line therapy of advanced renal cell carcinoma.

Symptomatic treatment of brain metastases in renal cell carcinoma with sorafenib.

Brain metastasis is synchronous to the diagnosis of renal cell carcinoma (RCC). The prognosis of brain metastasis in RCC with the current treatment options is dismissal. Therefore, we present a case of an elderly female patient with RCC showing a partial response of brain metastasis after 18 months of 600 mg once daily sorafenib treatment who underwent right-sided nephrectomy. Further, withdrawal of sorafenib resulted in psychiatric changes along with increased metastasis lesions, which were recovered upon resuming the treatment, proposing that oral sorafenib can be used safely and efficiently for treatment of brain metastasis in advanced RCC.

Sorafenib in combination with gemcitabine plus cisplatin chemotherapy in metastatic renal collecting duct carcinoma: A prospective, multicentre, single-arm, phase 2 study.

BACKGROUND: Collecting duct carcinoma (CDC) is a rare type of renal cancer with a poor prognosis. As there are no standard guidelines for the management of metastatic CDC (mCDC), we evaluated the efficacy and safety of combined therapies of sorafenib, gemcitabine, plus cisplatin in patients with mCDC. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A prospective, multicentre, single-arm, open-label, phase 2 trial (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT01762150) that enrolled 26 mCDC patients with no prior systemic chemotherapy. Patients were treated with sorafenib (400 mg orally, twice daily) combined with chemotherapy (gemcitabine 1000 mg/m2, intravenously for 30-60 min on days 1 and 8, plus cisplatin 25 mg/m2, intravenously on days 1-3, repeated every 28 days for 4 cycles), until disease progression, unacceptable toxicity, or study discontinuation for any other reason. The primary end-points were progression-free survival (PFS) and 6-month PFS rate. RESULTS: The 6-month PFS rate was 65%, and the median PFS was 8.8 months (95% confidence interval [CI]: 6.7-10.9) with a median overall survival of about 12.5 months (95% CI: 9.6-15.4). The objective response rate was 30.8%, and the disease control rate was 84.6%. The treatment was generally well tolerated. Major grade 3/4 toxicities included leucopenia (26.9%), thrombocytopenia (23.1%), anaemia (11.5%) and palmar-plantar erythrodysesthesia (7.7%). CONCLUSIONS: Though the combination of sorafenib and chemotherapy demonstrated a similar outcome as that of the previously reported regimens in patients with mCDC, this combination may be a suitable option for patients who have low Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status or less metastatic sites.

[Comparison of efficacy between sorafenib and sunitinib as first-line therapy for metastatic renal cell carcinoma and analyze prognostic factors for survival].

Objective: To investigate the efficacy and drug related adverse reactions of sorafenib and sunitinib as first-line tyrosine-kinase inhibitors (TKIs) for patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) and analyze the clinical prognostic factor for survival. Methods: The data of 271 patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma who had complete clinicopathological data were retrospectively analyzed, including 174 cases in sorafenib group and 97 cases in sunitinib group, to access patients' overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). Prognostic values of all characteristics were determined by using univariate and multivariate Cox regression models. Results: The objective response rates (ORR) of the sorafenib and sunitinib groups were 14.9% and 19.6%, respectively, and the disease control rates (DCR) were 85.1% and 88.6%, respectively. No significant difference was found between the sorafenib and sunitinib group in ORR (P=0.325) or DCR (P=0.408). The most common grade 3 to 4 adverse events in the sorafenib group were hand-foot syndrome (6.7%), diarrhea (2.3%), and rash (2.3%). The most common grade 3 to 4 adverse events in the sunitinib group were neutropenia (6.2%), hand-foot syndrome (6.2%), and thrombocytopenia (4.6%). During the follow-up, 97 cases death occurred and 81 cases disease progression occurred in sorafenib group. The median PFS was 12 months (95% CI: 9-15 months), and the median OS was 25 months (95% CI: 21-29 months) in sorafenib group. While 74 cases death occurred and 40 cases disease progression occurred in sunitinib group, the median PFS was 12 months (95% CI: 10-12 months) and the median OS was 23 months (95% CI: 20-32 months) in sunitinib group. No significant difference was found between the sorafenib and the sunitinib group in PFS (P=0.771) or OS (P=0.548). Multivariate analysis showed Fuhrman grades (HR=1.358, 95%CI: 1.004-1.835), number of metastatic sites (HR=1.550, 95%CI: 1.143-2.101) and MSKCC risk grade (Intermediate risk group: HR=1.621, 95%CI: 1.117-2.232; Poor risk group: HR=2.890, 95%CI: 1.942-4.298) were independent prognostic factors for PFS. Fuhrman grades (HR=2.135, 95%CI: 1.533-2.974), number of metastatic sites (HR=1.774, 95%CI: 1.279-2.461) and MSKCC risk grade (Intermediate risk group: HR=1.415, 95%CI: 1.002-1.998; Poor risk group: HR=3.161, 95%CI: 2.065-4.838) were independent prognostic factors for OS. Conclusions: The results of this study indicate that sorafenib and sunitinib are both effective as the first-line TKIs for mRCC patients and sorafenib has comparable efficacy to sunitinib. But they have differences in the incidence of adverse effects. Fuhrman grades, number of metastatic sites and MSKCC risk grade are independent prognostic factors for mRCC patients.

Monocarboxylate transporters MCT1 and MCT4 are independent prognostic biomarkers for the survival of patients with clear cell renal cell carcinoma and those receiving therapy targeting angiogenesis.

BACKGROUND: Prognostic biomarkers for patients with clear cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC), particularly those receiving therapy targeting angiogenesis, are not well established. In this study, we examined the correlations of monocarboxylate transporter 1 (MCT1) and MCT4, 2 critical transporters for glycolytic metabolism, with various clinicopathological parameters as well as survival of patients with ccRCC and those treated with vascular endothelial growth factor receptor (VEGFR) inhibitors. METHODS: A cohort of 150 ccRCC patients were recruited into this study. All patients underwent radical or partial nephrectomy as the first-line treatment, and 38 received targeted therapy (sorafenib or sunitinib) after the surgery. Expression levels of MCT1, MCT4, and CD34 were examined by immunohistochemistry. Correlations between MCT1 or MCT4 expression and different clinicopathological parameters or patient survival were analyzed among all as well as patients receiving targeted therapy. RESULTS: MCT1 or MCT4 expression did not significantly correlate with sex, age, tumor diameter, microvascular density, tumor staging, pathological Furmann grade, or MSKCC (P>0.05). High expression of either MCT1 or MCT4 significantly correlated with reduced overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) among the total cohort of ccRCC patients. For patients receiving targeted therapy, high expression of either MCT1 or MCT4 significantly correlated with reduced PFS, but not OS. Both conditions were independent prognostic biomarkers for reduced PFS among all patients or those receiving targeted therapy. CONCLUSION: MCT1 and MCT4 are prognostic biomarkers for patients with ccRCC or those receiving targeted therapy. High expression of these 2 proteins predicts reduced PFS in these patients.