Recent therapeutic advances in urothelial carcinoma: A paradigm shift in disease management.

Management of first-line advanced urothelial carcinoma (UC) has consisted during the past three decades in the administration of platinum-based chemotherapy followed by observation. Despite moderate to high response rates to first-line treatment, most patients will relapse shortly after and the outcomes with subsequent therapies are poor with 5-year overall survival rates of 5% in the pre-immunotherapy era. Nonetheless, recent therapeutic developments including the paradigm shift of first-line maintenance therapy with avelumab after response or stabilization on platinum-based chemotherapy, along with the incorporation of new drug classes in further lines of treatment such as antibody drug-conjugates and fibroblast growth factor receptor inhibitors have reshaped the field leading to better outcomes in this patient population. This article reviews the current state of the art with an overview on UC management, recent advances, and the upcoming strategies currently in development in advanced UC with an insight into the biology of this disease.

Epithelial-to-Mesenchymal Transition Mediates Resistance to Maintenance Therapy with Vinflunine in Advanced Urothelial Cell Carcinoma.

In the phase II MAJA trial, maintenance therapy with vinflunine resulted in longer progression-free survival compared to best supportive care in advanced urothelial cell carcinoma (aUCC) patients who did not progress after first-line platinum-based chemotherapy. However, despite an initial benefit observed in some patients, unequivocal resistance appears which underlying mechanisms are presently unknown. We have performed gene expression and functional enrichment analyses to shed light on the discovery of these underlying resistance mechanisms. Differential gene expression profile of eight patients with poor outcome and nine with good outcome to vinflunine administered in the MAJA trial were analyzed. RNA was isolated from tumor tissue and gene expression was assessed by microarray. Differential expression was determined with linear models for microarray data. Gene Set Enrichment Analysis (GSEA) was used for the functional classification of the genes. In vitro functional studies were performed using UCC cell lines. Hierarchical clustering showed a differential gene expression pattern between patients with good and poor outcome to vinflunine treatment. GSEA identified epithelial-to-mesenchymal transition (EMT) as the top negatively enriched hallmark in patients with good outcome. In vitro analyses showed that the polyphenol curcumin downregulated EMT markers and sensitized UCC cells to vinflunine. We conclude that EMT mediates resistance to vinflunine and suggest that the reversion of this process could enhance the effect of vinflunine in aUCC patients.

Adjuvant Sorafenib for Renal Cell Carcinoma at Intermediate or High Risk of Relapse: Results From the SORCE Randomized Phase III Intergroup Trial.

PURPOSE: SORCE is an international, randomized, double-blind, three-arm trial of sorafenib after surgical excision of primary renal cell carcinoma (RCC) found to be at intermediate or high risk of recurrence. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We randomly assigned participants (2:3:3) to 3 years of placebo (arm A), 1 year of sorafenib followed by 2 years of placebo (arm B), or 3 years of sorafenib (arm C). The initial sorafenib dose was 400 mg twice per day orally, amended to 400 mg daily. The primary outcome analysis, which was revised as a result of external results, was investigator-reported disease-free survival (DFS) comparing 3 years of sorafenib versus placebo. RESULTS: Between July 2007 and April 2013, we randomly assigned 1,711 participants (430, 642, and 639 participants in arms A, B, and C, respectively). Median age was 58 years, 71% of patients were men, 84% had clear cell histology, 53% were at intermediate risk of recurrence, and 47% were at high risk of recurrence. We observed no differences in DFS or overall survival in all randomly assigned patients, patients with high risk of recurrence, or patients with clear cell RCC only. Median DFS was not reached for 3 years of sorafenib or for placebo (hazard ratio, 1.01; 95% CI, 0.83 to 1.23; P = .95). We observed nonproportional hazards; the restricted mean survival time (RMST) was 6.81 years for 3 years of sorafenib and 6.82 years for placebo (RMST difference, 0.01 year; 95% CI, -0.49 to 0.48 year; P = .99). Despite offering treatment adaptations, more than half of participants stopped treatment by 12 months. Grade 3 hand-foot skin reaction was reported in 24% of participants on sorafenib. CONCLUSION: Sorafenib should not be used as adjuvant therapy for RCC. Active surveillance remains the standard of care for patients at intermediate or high risk of recurrence after nephrectomy and is the appropriate control of our current international adjuvant RCC trial, RAMPART.

Immunotherapy Combinations and Sequences in Urothelial Cancer: Facts and Hopes.

Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) have emerged as a novel therapeutic strategy that achieves significant clinical benefit in several tumor types, including urothelial cancer. Overall, these agents have shown objective response rates of around 20% to 23%, which indicates that a significant proportion of patients do not benefit from immunotherapy when given as monotherapy. Moreover, despite an initial response to therapy and an improvement in the median duration of response compared with chemotherapy, still only half of the patients develop long-term maintained remissions. Active research is ongoing in several fields, aiming to increase the number of patients that benefit from ICI, and this research is largely based on the development of biomarkers for personalized immunotherapy and novel combinations of ICI with other agents. This article will review ongoing efforts to develop combinations of ICI with other therapeutic strategies in patients with urothelial cancer, including chemotherapy, targeted agents, other immunotherapy strategies, and radiotherapy.

Radium-223 Dichloride in Combination with Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor-Targeting Therapy in Advanced Renal Cell Carcinoma with Bone Metastases.

Purpose: This study investigates the biologic activity of radium-223 with VEGF-targeted therapy in patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma (aRCC) and bone metastases.Patients and Methods: Fifteen treatment-naïve patients (n = 15) received pazopanib 800 mg orally once daily, and 15 previously treated patients received sorafenib 400 mg orally twice daily. Radium-223 55 kilobecquerel/kg was administered concurrently every 4 weeks for up to six infusions in both cohorts. The primary endpoint was decline in bone turnover markers (Procollagen I Intact N-Terminal, N-telopeptide, C-telopeptide, osteocalcin, and bone-specific alkaline phosphatase) compared with baseline. Secondary endpoints included safety, rate of symptomatic skeletal event (SSE) and time to first SSE, objective response rate, change in analgesic use, and quality of life. Exploratory analysis of tumor genomic alterations was performed.Results: Of the 30 patients enrolled, 83% had IMDC intermediate- or poor-risk disease, 33% had liver metastases, and 83% had a history of SSE prior to enrollment. No dose-limiting toxicity was observed. All bone turnover markers significantly declined from baseline at week 8 and 16. Forty percent of patients experienced treatment-related grade ≥3 adverse events. Response rates were 15% and 18% per RECIST v1.1 and bone response was 50% and 30% per MD Anderson criteria, in the pazopanib and sorafenib cohort, respectively. Median SSE-free interval was 5.8 months and not reached, respectively. Analgesic use remained stable over the study time.Conclusions: Radium-223 combined with VEGF-targeted therapy is biologically active and safe. Randomized-controlled trials are needed to define the role of radium-223 in aRCC with skeletal metastases. Clin Cancer Res; 24(17); 4081-8. ©2018 AACR.

Impact of Primary Tumor Location on Survival from the European Organization for the Research and Treatment of Cancer Advanced Urothelial Cancer Studies.

PURPOSE: The prognostic relevance of primary location of urothelial carcinoma on survival has been poorly investigated. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We used prospectively collected data from 3 European Organization for the Research and Treatment of Cancer advanced urothelial carcinoma studies, including 30924 (methotrexate, vinblastine, doxorubicin and cisplatin vs high dose methotrexate, vinblastine, doxorubicin and cisplatin), 30986 (methotrexate, carboplatin and vinblastine vs gemcitabine and cisplatin in patients who were not candidates for cisplatin) and 30987 (gemcitabine and cisplatin-paclitaxel vs gemcitabine and cisplatin in candidates for cisplatin). Patients were grouped by primary tumor location as those with bladder cancer or upper tract urothelial carcinoma. Progression-free and overall survival was tested by tumor location using Cox proportional hazard regression stratified by study and treatment using 2-sided α = 0.05. RESULTS: Of the 1,039 patients 878 (85.3%) and 161 (14.7%) had bladder cancer and upper tract urothelial carcinoma, respectively. Patients with bladder cancer had better performance status and were more likely to be male (p = 0.008 and <0.074, respectively). By a median followup of 4.8 years (IQR 4.0-6.7) 733 patients had died and 925 had experienced disease progression. Overall and progression-free survival did not differ significantly between bladder and upper tract urothelial carcinoma cases (p = 0.3 and 0.7, respectively), even after adjusting for the effects of Bajorin risk group by each tumor location. When upper tract urothelial carcinoma was considered separately, patients with primary ureteral tumors had better overall survival than patients with primary bladder cancer (OR = 0.74, p = 0.047). However, this association did not remain significant after adjusting for Bajorin risk group (p = 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Primary tumor location had no impact on progression-free or overall survival in patients with locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma treated with platinum based combination chemotherapy.

The evolving role of enzalutamide on the treatment of prostate cancer.

The field of prostate cancer has witnessed incredible progress in the last decade, owing to the approval of multiple survival-prolonging treatments for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). Enzalutamide is a nonsteroidal androgen receptor inhibitor that targets multiple steps in the androgen receptor signaling axis. It has been approved for the treatment of mCRPC both in the postdocetaxel and in the chemotherapy-naive settings. We summarize the milestones in the development of enzalutamide in patients with prostate cancer. Special focus is placed on the results of the STRIVE Phase II clinical trial comparing head to head enzalutamide and bicalutamide in patients with nonmetastatic and mCRPC who have failed androgen deprivation and in other ongoing trials in the same setting and in earlier disease phases.

Sequential targeted therapy after pazopanib therapy in patients with metastatic renal cell cancer: efficacy and toxicity.

INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND: Patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) in whom first-line therapies have failed might derive clinical benefit with sequential targeted agents. Limited data are available on the efficacy and toxicity of subsequent therapies after disease progression during pazopanib therapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with mRCC who received subsequent systemic treatment after pazopanib treatment failure were identified across 7 institutions. Pazopanib was given as first-line therapy in 28 patients and after cytokines therapy in 7 patients. Clinical outcome and toxicity analyses of 2 sequential treatment options (anti-vascular endothelial growth factor [VEGF] or mammalian target of rapamycin inhibitor [mTORi]) is presented. RESULTS: Subsequent therapy was anti-VEGF in 22 patients and mTORi in 13. One patient who received bevacizumab and temsirolimus combination was excluded. VEGF-targeted therapies included sorafenib (n = 10), sunitinib (n = 3), bevacizumab (n = 2), cediranib (n = 4) and cabozantinib (n = 3). Patients treated with mTORi received everolimus. Median progression-free survival was 5.6 months from the start of subsequent therapy with anti-VEGF and 2.4 months with mTORi (P = .009). Overall survival (OS) was not significantly different (P = .68). Clinical benefit (including partial response and stable disease) on subsequent therapy was observed in 15 patients (64%) and 4 patients (31%) of anti-VEGF- and everolimus-treated patients, respectively (P = .021). CONCLUSION: In this retrospective study, targeting VEGF was an effective strategy after disease progression during pazopanib treatment, although OS was not different among patients treated with VEGF or mTORi.

Angiogenesis inhibitor therapies for advanced renal cell carcinoma: toxicity and treatment patterns in clinical practice from a global medical chart review.

The aim of this study was to assess the treatment patterns and safety of sunitinib, sorafenib and bevacizumab in real-world clinical settings in US, Europe and Asia. Medical records were abstracted at 18 community oncology clinics in the US and at 21 tertiary oncology centers in US, Europe and Asia for 883 patients ≥ 18 years who had histologically/cytologically confirmed diagnosis of advanced RCC and received sunitinib (n=631), sorafenib (n=207) or bevacizumab (n=45) as first-line treatment. No prior treatment was permitted. Data were collected on all adverse events (AEs) and treatment modifications, including discontinuation, interruption and dose reduction. Treatment duration was estimated using Kaplan-Meier analysis. Demographics were similar across treatment groups and regions. Median treatment duration ranged from 6.1 to 10.7 months, 5.1 to 8.5 months and 7.5 to 9.8 months for sunitinib, sorafenib and bevacizumab patients, respectively. Grade 3/4 AEs were experienced by 26.0, 28.0 and 15.6% of sunitinib, sorafenib and bevacizumab patients, respectively. Treatment discontinuations occurred in 62.4 (Asia) to 63.1% (US) sunitinib, 68.8 (Asia) to 90.0% (Europe) sorafenib, and 66.7 (Asia) to 81.8% (US) bevacizumab patients. Globally, treatment modifications due to AEs occurred in 55.1, 54.2 and 50.0% sunitinib, sorafenib and bevacizumab patients, respectively. This study in a large, global cohort of advanced RCC patients found that angiogenesis inhibitors are associated with high rates of AEs and treatment modifications. Findings suggest an unmet need for more tolerable agents for RCC treatment.

A retrospective analysis of two different sequences of therapy lines for advanced kidney cancer.

BACKGROUND/AIM: the ideal sequence of targeted agents for advanced kidney cancer is still unknown. In the present study we assessed the clinical benefit of two different sequential approaches, namely sorafenib, an inhibitor of mammalian target of rapamycin (mTORi) and sunitinib, or sunitinib (an mTORi) and sorafenib. PATIENTS AND METHODS: we retrospectively reviewed the outcome of 40 advanced kidney cancer patients treated with one of the two above sequences. RESULTS: a total of 26 patients were treated with the sequence sorafenib-mTORi-sunitinib and 14 with the sequence sunitinib-mTORi-sorafenib. The actuarial overall median progression-free survival (PFS) in the sorafenib-mTORi-sunitinib group and in the sunitinib-mTORi-sorafenib group were 21.9 and 22.8 months, respectively (log-rank test: p=0.928). In the sorafenib-mTORi-sunitinib group, patients in first-, second- and third-line therapy experienced PFS of 11.7, 5.1 and 9.1 months, respectively, while in the sunitinib-mTORi-sorafenib group PFS was 14.4, 4.3, and 3.9 months, respectively. CONCLUSION: Our results suggest there is no significant difference between the two sequence modalities.

Vinflunine: drug safety evaluation of this novel synthetic vinca alkaloid.

INTRODUCTION: Vinca alkaloid agents have been widely used in several different types of malignancies. However, cancer cells, ultimately, develop resistance to these agents. Therefore, the development of new agents with improved efficacy is warranted. Recently, a new synthetic vinca alkaloid, vinflunine, was developed through the addition of two fluor molecules by superacidic chemistry. AREAS COVERED: The authors describe the development of the new vinca alkaloid vinflunine from preclinical studies to the late-stage clinical trials, highlighting the most important clinical and safety data of vinflunine. In vitro and in vivo studies have shown a superior efficacy of vinflunine over other vinca alkaloids and with an improved safety profile. Early clinical trials have demonstrated a significant activity of vinflunine against different malignancies. Phase III trials showed that vinflunine increases survival in patients with advanced transitional cell carcinoma of the urothelium (TCCU) tract treated in the second-line and is as effective as docetaxel in second-line NSCLC. EXPERT OPINION: Vinflunine is currently approved in Europe for the treatment of second-line TCCU and is currently being developed in other malignancies. It has been shown to have predictable and manageable adverse effects, such as neutropenia, anemia, constipation and fatigue.

A new patient-focused approach to the treatment of metastatic renal cell carcinoma: establishing customized treatment options.

What's known on the subject? and What does the study add? • Six targeted agents--sorafenib, sunitinib, pazopanib, bevacizumab, temsirolimus and everolimus--have been approved for the treatment of advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC) based on evidence from large randomized controlled trials (RCTs). However, no head-to-head trials have been conducted to evaluate the relative efficacy of these agents in this setting. • Patient populations included in clinical trials do not accurately reflect the wider population of patients with RCC, as certain subgroups, such as the elderly or those with co-morbidities, are typically under-represented. • The optimum choice of therapy should be based on patient characteristics, nature of disease, and history and aims of therapy; however, there is currently no clear guidance for physicians in this decision-making process. • A patient-focussed schema has been developed that acknowledges nine different patient-, disease-, and treatment-related factors relevant to clinical decision-making, and provides a visual indication of the strength of evidence with which a particular agent can be recommended for use in specific subgroups. • To demonstrate the applicability of this tool, a review of all available evidence (published articles, congress presentations and personal communications) for sorafenib in RCC was conducted by a panel of experts, findings from which showed that sorafenib can be recommended for use in various subgroups of differing age, prognosis, performance status, tumour burden and distribution, treatment history and co-morbidity. • This patient-focussed approach has broad application and can be used to assess other agents and tumour types. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) show that six targeted agents--sorafenib, sunitinib, temsirolimus, everolimus, bevacizumab and pazopanib--improve outcome in advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC). The populations enrolled in the pivotal phase III studies differed, and, to date, no head-to-head comparisons allow us to judge relative efficacy and tolerability. Populations recruited to RCTs under-represent certain patient subtypes, notably the elderly and those with comorbidities. Choosing the agent most appropriate in a specific case requires that we take into account the characteristics of the patient, the nature of their disease, and the history and aims of therapy. Data from expanded access programmes and clinical experience may be as relevant as the results of RCTs when making this difficult decision. To show how different sources of data can be integrated, we propose a schema that acknowledges nine patient-, disease-, and treatment-related factors relevant to clinical decision-making and provides an easily understood visual indication of the strength with which a particular agent can be recommended for use in specific subgroups of patients. As an example, we show how this tool shows the suitability of sorafenib in RCC subpopulations of differing age, prognosis, performance status, tumour burden and distribution, treatment history, and comorbidity. This patient-focused approach has broad application to other agents and tumour types.

Long-term stable disease in metastatic renal cell carcinoma: sorafenib sequenced to sunitinib and everolimus: a case study.

Long-term stabilization of advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC) by the sequence of sorafenib monotherapy followed by sunitinib and everolimus treatments in a man with multiple metastases is reported. A 66-year-old man was diagnosed with advanced RCC in 2005. The patient initially underwent nephrectomy, but subsequently the disease metastasized to the lung, lymph nodes, and pancreas. The patient received sorafenib 400 mg bid in a clinical trial. He experienced minimal and manageable adverse events and achieved stable disease (SD), which was maintained with sorafenib therapy for nearly 3 years before the development of liver metastases. The patient was then prescribed sunitinib, with which he also experienced SD for 1.2 years until disease progression prompted the initiation of third-line everolimus therapy, resulting in SD for another 8 months. The patient lived with stabilized RCC for 4.6 years with the use of these three sequential targeted therapies. First-line sorafenib monotherapy achieved a durable stable response and subsequent use of sunitinib and then everolimus permitted a return to SD after disease progression. The patient experienced minimal toxicity from the regimen, suggesting that it can be safely administered to elderly patients.

Experience with sorafenib and adverse event management.

Sorafenib was the first multikinase inhibitor to be approved for use in renal cell cancer (RCC) in the US (2005) and in Europe (2006). In the Treatment Approaches in Renal Cell Cancer Global Evaluation Trial (TARGET), sorafenib showed a significant progression-free survival advantage over placebo in patients with advanced RCC. Incidence rates of adverse events were significantly higher with sorafenib than with placebo. Management of adverse events is an essential component of care to prevent negative impact on patient quality of life and dose modification of sorafenib therapy. This report, based on an expert panel discussion held in February 2009, presents recommendations for the management of skin rash, hand-foot skin reaction, diarrhea, and hypertension, and strategies to help lessen the frequency and severity of these events. In addition, general recommendations for dose modifications are discussed. The goal of these management recommendations is to optimize sorafenib therapy for advanced RCC.

A phase II trial of first-line sorafenib in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma unwilling to receive or with early intolerance to immunotherapy: SOGUG Study 06-01.

AIMS: Our aim was to evaluate first-line treatment of metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) with sorafenib in patients unwilling to receive immunotherapy or with early intolerance to immunotherapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients had clear-cell mRCC with good or intermediate risk status, were unsuited to cytokine therapy due to preference or intolerance (based on <4 weeks prior immunotherapy) and had not received antiangiogenic agents. Patients received sorafenib 400 mg twice daily until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS). RESULTS: Twenty-six evaluable patients were enrolled at six centres between March and July 2006. The most common metastatic sites were lung and bone; nine patients had one or two metastatic lesions. Median PFS was 7.5 months (95% confidence interval [CI] 5.1-17.5) and overall survival (OS) 15.4 months (95% CI 12.9-17.4). Among 21 patients evaluable for response, 19 (90.5%) experienced disease control (including one complete response; four partial responses; 14 stable disease). The majority of adverse events were grade 1-2 (87.3%). The most common were asthenia (53.0%) and diarrhoea (50.0%). CONCLUSION: In patients with mRCC who were unwilling to receive or intolerant to immunotherapy, treatment with sorafenib led to a high rate of disease control with toxicities that were generally mild and manageable. The PFS achieved in this essentially treatment-naïve population compares favourably with that obtained in the randomised first-line phase II study.

Expert opinion on the use of first-line sorafenib in selected metastatic renal cell carcinoma patients.

The incidence of renal cell carcinoma is increasing globally. Targeted agents offer treatment options that were not available less than a decade ago. However, it is important to carefully select therapy for each individual patient, weighing both the drug efficacy and tolerability profile and patient-related factors, such as adherence, age and comorbidities. Based on our clinical experience in treating patients with renal cell carcinoma, this article offers our opinions on factors that characterize patients for whom sorafenib may serve as a viable first-line therapeutic option.

Activity of a multitargeted chemo-switch regimen (sorafenib, gemcitabine, and metronomic capecitabine) in metastatic renal-cell carcinoma: a phase 2 study (SOGUG-02-06).

BACKGROUND: Maximum tolerated dose (MTD) chemotherapy followed by metronomic chemotherapy (low doses given on a frequent schedule) acts on tumour vascular endothelial cells by increasing the anti-tumour effect of anti-angiogenic agents. This multicentre, phase 2 study investigated the effectiveness of MTD gemcitabine combined with metronomic capecitabine plus the multikinase inhibitor sorafenib for the treatment of metastatic renal-cell carcinoma (RCC). METHODS: Patients were enrolled at eight centres across Spain between Dec 13, 2006, and April 17, 2008. Patients were aged 18 years or older, had confirmed metastatic RCC with clear-cell histology, had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1, had not undergone previous therapy, and were unsuitable for, or intolerant to, immunotherapy. Treatment consisted of intravenous gemcitabine 1000 mg/m(2) (days 1 and 8), oral capecitabine 500 mg/m(2) twice a day (final dose after adjustment, days 1-14), and oral sorafenib 400 mg twice a day (days 1-21), for six cycles, followed by sorafenib monotherapy (at the investigator's discretion if clinical benefit was maintained). The primary endpoint was median progression-free survival (PFS) analysed in a population of all patients who received treatment. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00496301. FINDINGS: 44 patients enrolled in the study, 40 of whom received treatment. Median PFS for these patients was 11.1 months (95% CI 7.9-17.1). A partial response was achieved in 20 patients, and stable disease in 17 patients. Most adverse events were grade 1 or 2. Grade 3 adverse events were fatigue or asthenia (n=9), hand-foot skin reaction (n=11), mucositis (n=3), diarrhoea (n=2), infection (n=2), and allergic reaction, hypertension, and rash (all n=1). Grade 3 haematological toxicity was noted in nine patients. One death due to pulmonary embolism was reported as grade 5 dyspnoea possibly related to study drug. INTERPRETATION: PFS and response rates were greater than those previously observed with gemcitabine and capecitabine or sorafenib monotherapy in patients with metastatic RCC. Adverse events were manageable in most patients. These findings provide preliminary confirmation of the synergistic activity of the chemo-switch concept seen in preclinical studies, and merit further exploration. FUNDING: Spanish Oncology Genitourinary Group (SOGUG).

Experience with sorafenib and the elderly patient.

Renal cell carcinoma primarily affects older individuals. Approximately half of all new renal cell carcinoma diagnoses are made in persons 65 years of age or older. Devising a treatment plan for the elderly patient population requires special consideration. Age-related physiological, cognitive, and social characteristics of elderly patients may influence each stage of patient care. Until recently, treatment options were limited for elderly patients with renal cell carcinoma. Sorafenib is the first multikinase inhibitor approved for use in renal cell carcinoma in the United States and Europe. In the phase III Treatment Approaches in Renal Cell Cancer Global Evaluation Trial, sorafenib significantly extended progression-free survival in patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma, regardless of age. Incidence rates of adverse events were not significantly higher in elderly patients receiving sorafenib than in younger patients. Thus, sorafenib represents an important treatment option for elderly patients with renal cell carcinoma. This report describes particular considerations for physicians to be aware of when choosing a treatment regimen for their elderly patients with renal cell carcinoma and offers recommendations on how to integrate specific management strategies into clinical practice that will optimize the use of sorafenib in the elderly. The strategies focus on patient selection, assessment of quality of life, management of adverse events, and appropriate dose modifications. The goal of these recommendations is to maximize the clinical benefit of sorafenib in the elderly patient population through appropriate use.

Recommendations from the Spanish Oncology Genitourinary Group for the treatment of metastatic renal cancer.

For almost the last two decades, interleukin-2 and interferon-alpha have been the only systemic treatment options available for metastatic renal cell carcinoma. However, in recent years, five new targeted therapies namely sunitinib, sorafenib, temsirolimus, everolimus and bevacizumab have demonstrated clinical activity in these patients. With the availability of new targeted agents that are active in this disease, there is a need to continuously update the treatment algorithm of the disease. Due to the important advances obtained, the Spanish Oncology Genitourinary Group (SOGUG) has considered it would be useful to review the current status of the disease, including the genetic and molecular biology factors involved, the current predicting models for development of metastases as well as the role of surgery, radiotherapy and systemic therapies in the early- or late management of the disease. Based on this previous work, a treatment algorithm was developed.