Benefit of Metastasectomy in Renal Cell Carcinoma: A Propensity Score Analysis.

INTRODUCTION: To quantify the magnitude of benefit of metastasectomy as compared to medical treatment alone in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: We therefore conducted a propensity score analysis of overall survival (OS) in 106 mRCC patients with metachronous metastasis, of whom 36 (34%) were treated with metastasectomy, and 70 (66%) with medical therapy alone. RESULTS: The most frequent metastasectomy procedures were lung resections (n = 13) and craniotomies (n = 6). Median time-to-progression after metastasectomy was 0.7 years (25th-75th percentile: 0.3-2.7). After a median follow-up of 6.2 years and 63 deaths, 5-year OS estimates were 41% and 22% in the metastasectomy and medical therapy group, respectively (log-rank P = .00007; Hazard ratio (HR) = 0.38, 95%CI: 0.21-0.68). Patients undergoing metastasectomy had a significantly higher prevalence of favorable prognostic factors, such as fewer bilateral lung metastases and longer disease-free intervals between nephrectomy and metastasis diagnosis. After propensity score weighting for these differences and adjusting for immortal time bias, the favorable association between metastasectomy and OS became much weaker (HR = 0.62, 95%CI: 0.39-1.00, P = .050). Propensity-score-weighted 5-year OS estimates were 24% and 20% in the metastasectomy and medical therapy group, respectively (log-rank P = .001). In exploratory analyses, the benefit of metastasectomy was confined to patients who achieved complete resection of all known metastases. CONCLUSION: Within the limitations of an observational study, these findings support the concept of metastasectomy being associated with an OS benefit in mRCC patients. Metastasectomies not achieving complete resection of all known lesions are likely without OS benefit.

C-Reactive Protein (CRP) Levels in Immune Checkpoint Inhibitor Response and Progression in Advanced Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: A Bi-Center Study.

BACKGROUND: Biomarkers for predicting response to immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) are scarce and often lack external validation. This study provides a comprehensive investigation of pretreatment C-reactive protein (CRP) levels as well as its longitudinal trajectories as a marker of treatment response and disease outcome in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) undergoing immunotherapy with anti PD-1 or anti PD-L1 agents. METHODS: We performed a retrospective bi-center study to assess the association between baseline CRP levels and anti PD-(L)1 treatment outcomes in the discovery cohort (n = 90), confirm these findings in an external validation cohort (n = 101) and explore the longitudinal evolution of CRP during anti PD-(L)1 treatment and the potential impact of dynamic CRP changes on treatment response and disease outcome in the discovery cohort. Joint models were implemented to evaluate the association of longitudinal CRP trajectories and progression risk. Primary treatment outcomes were progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS), while the objective response rate (ORR) was a secondary outcome, respectively. RESULTS: In the discovery cohort, elevated pretreatment CRP levels emerged as independent predictors of worse PFS (HR per doubling of baseline CRP = 1.37, 95% CI: 1.16-1.63, p < 0.0001), worse OS (HR per doubling of baseline CRP = 1.42, 95% CI: 1.18-1.71, p < 0.0001) and a lower ORR ((odds ratio (OR) of ORR per doubling of baseline CRP = 0.68, 95% CI: 0.51-0.92, p = 0.013)). In the validation cohort, pretreatment CRP could be fully confirmed as a predictor of PFS and OS, but not ORR. Elevated trajectories of CRP during anti PD-(L)1 treatment (adjusted HR per 10 mg/L increase in CRP = 1.22, 95% CI: 1.15-1.30, p < 0.0001), as well as a faster increases of CRP over time (HR per 10 mg/L/month faster increase in CRP levels = 13.26, 95% CI: 1.14-154.54, p = 0.039) were strong predictors of an elevated progression risk, whereas an early decline of CRP was significantly associated with a reduction in PFS risk (HR = 0.91, 95% CI: 0.83-0.99, p = 0.036), respectively. CONCLUSION: These findings support the concept that CRP should be further explored by future prospective studies as a simple non-invasive biomarker for assessing treatment benefit during anti PD-(L)1 treatment in advanced NSCLC.

Estimation versus measurement of the glomerular filtration rate for kidney function assessment in patients with cancer undergoing cisplatin-based chemotherapy.

Glomerular filtration rate (GFR) assessment is indicated before every administration of cisplatin. The optimal modality for this purpose [GFR measurement by urinary Creatinine Clearance (uCrCl) versus GFR estimation (eGFR) by the CKD-EPI formula versus both] is unclear. We investigated whether eGFR only is safe in this setting. Paired uCrCl and eGFR determinations from 470 cisplatin cycles from 121 patients were analyzed [median age: 55 years; most frequent tumor site: genitourinary (45%); palliative treatment: n = 41 (34%)]. Primary endpoint was the proportion of cycles with uCrCl < 50 ml/min/1.73m2 and eGFR ≥ 50 ml/min/1.73m2 (i.e. a "false negative" result when only determining eGFR). The primary endpoint occurred in 8 of 470 cisplatin cycles (1.7%, 95%CI 0.5-2.9). In all 8 events, uCrCl was lower than eGFR (mean uCrCl vs. eGFR: 43 versus 112 ml/min/1.73m2). The uCrCl was re-measured in all patients, and showed normal results in all but 1 patient. None of these events precluded the administration of cisplatin at the planned date, and no subsequent cases of acute nephrotoxicity occurred. Overall agreement between uCrCl and eGFR was low, with qualitative analysis suggesting frequent incompliance with 24-h urine collection. We conclude that an eGFR is sufficient for assessing kidney function in patients with cancer undergoing cisplatin therapy.