How Immunotherapy Has Redefined the Treatment Paradigm of Metastatic or Locally Advanced Muscle-Invasive Urothelial Bladder Carcinoma.

In the past decade, the therapeutic arsenal for metastatic bladder cancer has expanded considerably, with the development of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs), antibody-drug conjugates such as enfortumab vedotin, and anti-fibroblast growth factor receptor agents. Clinical trials evaluating ICIs as neoadjuvants, adjuvants, or first- or second-line treatments have produced conflicting results. However, first-line therapeutic strategies have been redefined by the recent publication of results from two clinical trials: CheckMate-901, which demonstrated the superiority of combined treatment with nivolumab and chemotherapy in extending overall survival, and EV-302, which demonstrated that combined treatment with pembrolizumab and enfortumab vedotin reduced the risk of death by 53%. In this review, we discuss the role of ICIs, alone or in combination, in bladder cancer management in the metastatic and adjuvant settings in 2024, considering the latest published trials. The potential role of ICIs as neoadjuvants is also discussed.

Cost-effectiveness of avelumab first-line maintenance therapy for adult patients with locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma in France.

BACKGROUND: This study evaluated the cost-effectiveness of avelumab first-line (1L) maintenance therapy plus best supportive care (BSC) versus BSC alone for adults with locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma (la/mUC) that had not progressed following platinum-based chemotherapy in France. METHODS: A three-state partitioned survival model was developed to assess the lifetime costs and effects of avelumab plus BSC versus BSC alone. Data from the phase 3 JAVELIN Bladder 100 trial (NCT02603432) were used to inform estimates of clinical and utility values considering a 10-year time horizon and a weekly cycle length. Cost data were estimated from a collective perspective and included treatment acquisition, administration, follow-up, adverse event-related hospitalization, transport, post-progression, and end-of-life costs. Health outcomes were measured in quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and life-years gained. Costs and clinical outcomes were discounted at 2.5% per annum. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were used to compare cost-effectiveness and willingness to pay in France. Uncertainty was assessed using a range of sensitivity analyses. RESULTS: Avelumab plus BSC was associated with a gain of 2.49 QALYs and total discounted costs of €136,917; BSC alone was associated with 1.82 QALYs and €39,751. Although avelumab plus BSC was associated with increased acquisition costs compared with BSC alone, offsets of -€20,424 and -€351 were observed for post-progression and end-of-life costs, respectively. The base case analysis ICER was €145,626/QALY. Sensitivity analyses were consistent with the reference case and showed that efficacy parameters (overall survival, time to treatment discontinuation), post-progression time on immunotherapy, and post-progression costs had the largest impact on the ICER. CONCLUSIONS: This analysis demonstrated that avelumab plus BSC is associated with a favorable cost-effectiveness profile for patients with la/mUC who are eligible for 1L maintenance therapy in France.

Clinical and Biological Differences between Upper Tract Carcinoma and Bladder Urothelial Cancer, Including Implications for Clinical Practice.

Upper tract urothelial carcinoma (UTUC) is a rare disease included, along with the much more frequent urothelial bladder cancer (BUC), in the family of urothelial carcinomas (UCs). However, while UTUCs and BUCs share several features, their epidemiological, clinical, pathological, and biological differences must be considered to establish an optimal therapeutic strategy. This review examines the clinical differences between UTUC and BUC, as well as the main results obtained by molecular screening of the two diseases. The findings of clinical trials, performed in peri-operative and metastatic settings and assessing systemic treatments in UC, are summarised. A comparison of the data obtained for UTUC and BUC suggests improved therapeutic approaches, both in regards to routine practice and future drug development.

Comprehensive analyses of immune tumor microenvironment in papillary renal cell carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Papillary renal cell carcinoma (pRCC) is the most common non-clear cell RCC, and associated with poor outcomes in the metastatic setting. In this study, we aimed to comprehensively evaluate the immune tumor microenvironment (TME), largely unknown, of patients with metastatic pRCC and identify potential therapeutic targets. METHODS: We performed quantitative gene expression analysis of TME using Microenvironment Cell Populations-counter (MCP-counter) methodology, on two independent cohorts of localized pRCC (n=271 and n=98). We then characterized the TME, using immunohistochemistry (n=38) and RNA-sequencing (RNA-seq) (n=30) on metastatic pRCC from the prospective AXIPAP trial cohort. RESULTS: Unsupervised clustering identified two "TME subtypes", in each of the cohorts: the "immune-enriched" and the "immune-low". Within AXIPAP trial cohort, the "immune-enriched" cluster was significantly associated with a worse prognosis according to the median overall survival to 8 months (95% CI, 6 to 29) versus 37 months (95% CI, 20 to NA, p=0.001). The two immune signatures, Teff and JAVELIN Renal 101 Immuno signature, predictive of response to immune checkpoint inhibitors (CPI) in clear cell RCC, were significantly higher in the "immune-enriched" group (adjusted p<0.05). Finally, five differentially overexpressed genes were identified, corresponding mainly to B lymphocyte populations. CONCLUSION: For the first time, using RNA-seq and immunohistochemistry, we have highlighted a specific immune TME subtype of metastatic pRCC, significantly more infiltrated with T and B immune population. This "immune-enriched" group appears to have a worse prognosis and could have a potential predictive value for response to immunotherapy, justifying the confirmation of these results in a cohort of metastatic pRCC treated with CPI and in combination with targeted therapies. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02489695.

First-in-human phase Ib trial of M9241 (NHS-IL12) plus avelumab in patients with advanced solid tumors, including dose expansion in patients with advanced urothelial carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: In preclinical studies, combining M9241 (a novel immunocytokine containing interleukin (IL)-12 heterodimers) with avelumab (anti-programmed death ligand 1 antibody) resulted in additive or synergistic antitumor effects. We report dose-escalation and dose-expansion results from the phase Ib JAVELIN IL-12 trial investigating M9241 plus avelumab. METHODS: In the dose-escalation part of JAVELIN IL-12 (NCT02994953), eligible patients had locally advanced or metastatic solid tumors; in the dose-expansion part, eligible patients had locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma (UC) that had progressed with first-line therapy. Patients received M9241 at 4, 8, 12, or 16.8 µg/kg every 4 weeks (Q4W) plus avelumab 10 mg/kg every 2 weeks (Q2W, dose levels (DLs) 1-4) or M9241 16.8 µg/kg Q4W plus avelumab 800 mg once a week for 12 weeks followed by Q2W (DL5/dose expansion). Primary endpoints for the dose-escalation part were adverse events (AEs) and dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs), and those for the dose-expansion part were confirmed best overall response (BOR) per investigator (Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors V.1.1) and safety. The dose-expansion part followed a two-stage design; 16 patients were enrolled and treated in stage 1 (single-arm part). A futility analysis based on BOR was planned to determine whether stage 2 (randomized controlled part) would be initiated. RESULTS: At data cut-off, 36 patients had received M9241 plus avelumab in the dose-escalation part. All DLs were well tolerated; one DLT occurred at DL3 (grade 3 autoimmune hepatitis). The maximum-tolerated dose was not reached, and DL5 was declared the recommended phase II dose, considering an observed drug-drug interaction at DL4. Two patients with advanced bladder cancer (DL2 and DL4) had prolonged complete responses. In the dose-expansion part, no objective responses were recorded in the 16 patients with advanced UC; the study failed to meet the criterion (≥3 confirmed objective responses) to initiate stage 2. Any-grade treatment-related AEs occurred in 15 patients (93.8%), including grade ≥3 in 8 (50.0%); no treatment-related deaths occurred. Exposures for avelumab and M9241 concentrations were within expected ranges. CONCLUSIONS: M9241 plus avelumab was well tolerated at all DLs, including the dose-expansion part, with no new safety signals. However, the dose-expansion part did not meet the predefined efficacy criterion to proceed to stage 2.

Combinations of Anti-Angiogenic Agents and Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors in Renal Cell Carcinoma: Best Option?

Over the past decade, major advances have been made in the treatment of advanced and metastatic renal cell carcinomas, specifically clear cell carcinomas. For many years the optimal approach was sequential; thus, monotherapies [principally tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs)] targeting angiogenesis until toxicity or progressive disease developed. The rationale was the common mechanisms of action of the targeting agents and avoidance of the risk of overlapping toxicities. Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) are effective monotherapies, and combinations thereof with anti-angiogenic agents were thus later considered. Synergistic interactions were reported in vitro. Clinical efficacy was evident in three pivotal phase III trials with axitinib-pembrolizumab, cabozantinib-nivolumab, and lenvatinib-pembrolizumab combinations. Two other combinations showed interesting results but did not improve overall survival. However, the data aided our understanding of the new therapeutic approaches. A combination of the ICIs nivolumab and ipilimumab was the first to evidence better progression-free and overall survival compared to sunitinib in patients with intermediate or unfavourable prognoses as evaluated by the International mRCC Database Consortium (IMDC). Here we focus on the TKI-ICI combinations, emphasising the rationale of their use and the clinical results. To date, no biomarker facilitating the selection of an optimal treatment by disease and patient status has been reported.

Therapeutic Management of Metastatic Clear Cell Renal Cell Carcinoma: A Revolution in Every Decade.

Clear cell renal cell carcinoma (RCC) oncogenesis is mainly driven by VHL gene inactivation, leading to overexpression of vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF). The use of tyrosine-kinase inhibitors (TKIs) directed against VEGF and its receptor (VEGFR) revolutionised the management of metastatic renal cancer in the 2000s. The more recent development of next-generation TKIs such as cabozantinib or lenvatinib has made it possible to bypass some of the mechanisms of resistance to first-generation anti-VEGFR TKIs. During the decade 2010-2020, the development of immune checkpoint blockade (ICB) therapies revolutionised the management of many solid cancers, including RCC, in first- and subsequent-line settings. Dual ICB or ICB plus anti-VEGFR TKI combinations are now the standard of care for patients with advanced clear cell RCC. To optimise these combination therapies while preserving patient quality of life, escalation and de-escalation strategies are being evaluated in prospective randomised trials, based on patient selection according to their prognosis risk. Finally, new therapeutic approaches, such as targeting hypoxia-inducible factor (HIF) and the development of innovative treatments using antibody-drug conjugates (ADCs), CAR-T cells, or radiopharmaceuticals, are all potential candidates to improve further patient survival.

Feasibility of robotic-assisted partial nephrectomy for complete remission of metastatic renal cell carcinoma after long exposure to immune checkpoint inhibitors (UroCCR-106).

Immune checkpoint inhibitors used for metastatic clear cell renal cell carcinoma treatment show significant rates of complete response on metastatic sites. Feasibility of delayed surgery on primitive tumors remains questionable, especially regarding conservative procedures. We present here the first reported case of robotic-assisted partial nephrectomy (RAPN) and concomitant metastasectomy after long exposure to immunotherapy. We performed an imperative salvage RAPN and metastasectomy in a 79-year-old woman with history of right radical nephrectomy for oligometastatic clear cell renal cell carcinoma, previous open partial nephrectomy and ablative treatment on the remaining left kidney. In fact, after complete response on the metastatic sites, the patient experienced progression on the solitary kidney despite immunotherapy. This limited experience of RAPN and metastasectomy after long exposure to immunotherapy appears to be feasible safe and efficient both on the oncological and functional point of view.

Molecular characterization of renal cell carcinoma tumors from a phase III anti-angiogenic adjuvant therapy trial.

Multigene assays can provide insight into key biological processes and prognostic information to guide development and selection of adjuvant cancer therapy. We report a comprehensive genomic and transcriptomic analysis of tumor samples from 171 patients at high risk for recurrent renal cell carcinoma post nephrectomy from the S-TRAC trial (NCT00375674). We identify gene expression signatures, including STRAC11 (derived from the sunitinib-treated population). The overlap in key elements captured in these gene expression signatures, which include genes representative of the tumor stroma microenvironment, regulatory T cell, and myeloid cells, suggests they are likely to be both prognostic and predictive of the anti-angiogenic effect in the adjuvant setting. These signatures also point to the identification of potential therapeutic targets for development in adjuvant renal cell carcinoma, such as MERTK and TDO2. Finally, our findings suggest that while anti-angiogenic adjuvant therapy might be important, it may not be sufficient to prevent recurrence and that other factors such as immune response and tumor environment may be of greater importance.

An Evaluation of Cabozantinib for the Treatment of Renal Cell Carcinoma: Focus on Patient Selection and Perspectives.

Cabozantinib is an oral tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) with activity against several receptors involved in the angiogenesis pathway, including vascular endothelial growth factor receptor (VEGFR), c-MET and AXL. The antiangiogenic properties of cabozantinib led to its use as a monotherapy for the treatment of metastatic renal cell cancer (RCC), and quickly resulted in this treatment becoming part of the standard of care for these tumors. Since the advent of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs), new standards of care have emerged in first-line settings, involving dual ICI or ICI-VEGF-TKI (including ICI-cabozantinib) combination treatments, and leading to a more complex algorithm of care. Cabozantinib remains an option in second-line settings and is still a first-line standard of care treatment in cases where the use of ICIs is contraindicated. This review focuses on the selection of patients who may benefit most from cabozantinib therapy, including those with bone and brain metastases and those with a non-clear cell RCC histology. The need to consider disease-related symptoms, comorbidities, age, drug interactions and biomarker analyses in the choice of therapeutic strategy is also highlighted. Finally, the perspectives for the use of cabozantinib in RCC treatment are discussed.

Final Results of Neoadjuvant Atezolizumab in Cisplatin-ineligible Patients with Muscle-invasive Urothelial Cancer of the Bladder.

BACKGROUND: Neoadjuvant immunotherapies hold promise in muscle-invasive bladder cancer (MIBC). OBJECTIVE: To report on 2-yr disease-free (DFS) and overall (OS) survival including novel tissue-based biomarkers and circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) in the ABACUS trial. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: ABACUS was a multicenter, single-arm, neoadjuvant, phase 2 trial, including patients with MIBC (T2-4aN0M0) who were ineligible for or refused neoadjuvant cisplatin-based chemotherapy. INTERVENTION: Two cycles of atezolizumab were given prior to radical cystectomy. Serial tissue and blood samples were collected. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: The primary endpoints of pathological complete response (pCR) rate and dynamic changes to T-cell biomarkers were published previously. Secondary outcomes were 2-yr DFS and OS. A biomarker analysis correlated with relapse-free survival (RFS) was performed, which includes FOXP3, major histocompatibility complex class I, CD8/CD39, and sequential ctDNA measurements. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: The median follow-up time was 25 mo (95% confidence interval [CI] 25-26). Ninety-five patients received at least one cycle of atezolizumab. Eight patients did not undergo cystectomy (only one due to disease progression). The pCR rate was 31% (27/88; 95% CI 21-41). Two-year DFS and OS were 68% (95% CI 58-76) and 77% (95% CI 68-85), respectively. Two-year DFS in patients achieving a pCR was 85% (95% CI 65-94). Baseline PD-L1 and tumor mutational burden did not correlate with RFS (hazard ratio [HR] 0.60 [95% CI 0.24-1.5], p = 0.26, and 0.72 [95% CI 0.31-1.7], p = 0.46, respectively). RFS correlated with high baseline stromal CD8+ (HR 0.25 [95% CI 0.09-0.68], p = 0.007) and high post-treatment fibroblast activation protein (HR 4.1 [95% CI 1.3-13], p = 0.01). Circulating tumor DNA positivity values at baseline, after neoadjuvant therapy, and after surgery were 63% (25/40), 47% (14/30), and 14% (five/36), respectively. The ctDNA status was highly prognostic at all time points. No relapses were observed in ctDNA-negative patients at baseline and after neoadjuvant therapy. The lack of randomization and exploratory nature of the biomarker analysis are limitations of this work. CONCLUSIONS: Neoadjuvant atezolizumab in MIBC is associated with clinical responses and high DFS. CD8+ expression and serial ctDNA levels correlated with outcomes, and may contribute to personalized therapy in the future. PATIENT SUMMARY: We showed that bladder cancer patients receiving immunotherapy followed by cystectomy have good long-term outcomes. Furthermore, we found that certain biological features can predict patients who might have particular benefit from this therapy.

Effect of prior immunotherapy on the efficacy of chemotherapy in advanced non-small cell lung cancer: A retrospective study.

BACKGROUND: The effect of the sequential combination of chemotherapy and immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) remains unclear. Here, we evaluated the efficacy of different chemotherapy regimens administered after ICIs in advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), compared to the same regimens administered without previous ICIs. METHODS: We retrospectively included all patients treated between 2015 and 2019 for an advanced NSCLC, receiving a salvage chemotherapy just after ICI (CAI group) comparing them to ICI naive patients (CWPI group) undergoing the same chemotherapy at Bordeaux University Hospital. The primary outcome was the time to treatment discontinuation (TTD), and secondary endpoints were overall survival (OS) and overall response rate (ORR). RESULTS: A total of 152 patients were included, with 34/23 (CAI/CWPI) receiving paclitaxel/bevacizumab (PB), 24/11 paclitaxel (P), 27/12 gemcitabine (G) and 6/15 pemetrexed (PE). Characteristics were comparable, except for CAI treated with PB (more patients with an ECOG PS ≤1 [p <0.001]). Median number of lines received was higher in CAI for all groups. There was no difference between CAI and CWPI for TTD, OS and ORR. However, PB was associated with a nonsignificant increase in OS in the CAI group (HR = 0.65; 95% CI: 0.38-1.2, p = 0.17]. CONCLUSION: Our data showed no difference in TTD, OS and ORR regardless of chemotherapy, but a trend towards an increased OS with PB when given after an ICI, while patients received chemotherapy later in the CAI group. This suggests that a sequential combination of ICI followed by chemotherapy could be an interesting strategy in advanced NSCLC for selected patients.

Development of an evidence-based reference framework for care coordination with a focus on the micro level of integrated care: A mixed method design study combining scoping review of reviews and nominal group technique.

BACKGROUND: Because of the limits in conceptualisation of care coordination linked to a large array of care coordination models and definitions available, a care coordination framework is needed with a particular focus on the micro level. OBJECTIVE: To develop an evidence-based reference framework for person-centred care coordination interventions based on international validated definitions. METHODS: This two-step mixed-methods study included first, a scoping review of reviews focus on the impact of care coordination interventions and then, a nominal group technique. The scoping review aimed at identifying the components of the four dimensions of the framework (contexts, activities, actors and tools, and effects). The nominal group technique was to select the relevant components of the dimension 'activities' of the reference framework. RESULTS: The scoping review selected 52 articles from the 1407 retrieved at first. The nominal group selected the 66 most relevant activities from the 159 retrieved in the literature (28 activities of care organisation, 24 activities of care, and 14 activities of facilitation). CONCLUSION: This operational framework focused on care coordination at the micro level, is a useful and innovative tool, applicable in any clinical condition, and in any health care system for describing, implementing and evaluating care coordination programmes.

First-Line Treatment of Metastatic Clear Cell Renal Cell Carcinoma: What Are the Most Appropriate Combination Therapies?

The development of antiangiogenic treatments, followed by immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI), has significantly changed the management of metastatic clear cell renal cell cancer. Several phase III trials show the superiority of combination therapy, dual immunotherapy (ICI-ICI) or ICI plus tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKI) of the vascular endothelium growth factor (VEGF) over sunitinib monotherapy. The question is therefore what is the best combination for a given patient? A strategy based on the International Metastatic Database Consortium (IMDC) classification is currently recommended with pembrolizumab + axitinib, cabozantinib + nivolumab, and lenvatinib + pembrolizumab (for all patients) or nivolumab + ipilimumab (for patients with intermediate or poor risk), which are the first-line treatment standards of care. However, several issues remain unresolved and require further investigation, such as the PD-L1 status, the relevance of possible options based on the patient's profile, and consideration of second-line and subsequent treatments.

Combining immune checkpoint inhibitors with chemotherapy in advanced solid tumours: A review.

The use of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs), especially anti-programmed cell death 1 (PD1) and anti-programmed cell death ligand 1 (PD-L1), has changed practices in oncology, becoming a new standard of care in first or subsequent lines for several cancer subtypes. Recent data have highlighted the ability of standard chemotherapy to enhance immunogenicity and/or to break immunoresistance of the tumour and its microenvironment, leading to a rationale for the use of ICIs in combination with the standard chemotherapy regimen to improve efficacy of cancer treatment. Here, we propose to review randomised clinical trials evaluating concomitant administration of ICIs and chemotherapy, to assess clinical efficacy and safety profiles in advanced solid tumours. Association of these two modes of action on treatments has shown improved overall survival and better objective response rates than standard chemotherapy, especially in first-line treatment of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and for PD1/PD-L1 enriched tumours, highlighting a potential synergistic effect of this treatment combination in certain tumour types. However, improved survival results with the use of anti-PD-L1 avelumab as a maintenance schedule for bladder cancer raises the question of the most appropriate approach between sequential and concomitant administration of chemoimmunotherapy. To date, no trials have compared in a head-to-head protocol the administration of concomitant chemoimmunotherapy with chemotherapy, used for tumour debulking, followed by administration of ICIs. Regarding the tolerance profile, no new safety signals were found with the combination tested to date. Interestingly, recent results have shown an improved Progression Free survival 2 (PFS2) (defined as the progression after the next line of therapy) in head-and-neck cancers or NSCLC after a first-line pembrolizumab-chemotherapy combination, suggesting a potential long-lasting effect of ICIs when used in combination in the first-line setting.

Baseline co-medications may alter the anti-tumoural effect of checkpoint inhibitors as well as the risk of immune-related adverse events.

PURPOSE: As gut microbiota composition is an important determinant of response to immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs), we examined the effect of various co-medications known for their interaction with microbiota, when given at ICI initiation. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We identified patients with advanced cancer treated with ICI between May 2015 and September 2017 in our institution. Co-medications given within 1 month before or 1 month after the first administration of ICI were reviewed from medical records. Survival data were analysed with univariable Cox regression, and the combined effect of multiple factors was assessed with factor analysis of mixed data (FAMD). The impact of co-medications on immune-related adverse events (irAEs) occurrence was also assessed. RESULTS: A total of 635 patients were included. Psychotropic drugs (41%), proton pump inhibitors (PPIs; 38%), angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors and/or angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs; 32%), glucocorticoids (26%), antibiotics (24%), statins (21%) and morphine (20%) were the most prescribed co-medications. Baseline use of antibiotics, glucocorticoids >10 mg/day, PPIs, psychotropic drugs, morphine and insulin was associated with significantly shortened overall survival and decreased tumour response, whereas coadministration of statins, ACEs and/or ARBs, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, aspirin and oral antidiabetic drugs did not impact patient outcomes. Treatments that altered the response to ICI were also associated with a decreased incidence of irAEs. FAMD revealed the respective weight of each factor or co-medication on the oncological outcomes. CONCLUSION: Co-medications must be carefully assessed at the time of ICI initiation and clinicians aware of their possible deleterious effect, notably for PPIs, glucocorticoids, antibiotics and psychotropic drugs.

Experimental and computational modeling for signature and biomarker discovery of renal cell carcinoma progression.

BACKGROUND: Renal Cell Carcinoma (RCC) is difficult to treat with 5-year survival rate of 10% in metastatic patients. Main reasons of therapy failure are lack of validated biomarkers and scarce knowledge of the biological processes occurring during RCC progression. Thus, the investigation of mechanisms regulating RCC progression is fundamental to improve RCC therapy. METHODS: In order to identify molecular markers and gene processes involved in the steps of RCC progression, we generated several cell lines of higher aggressiveness by serially passaging mouse renal cancer RENCA cells in mice and, concomitantly, performed functional genomics analysis of the cells. Multiple cell lines depicting the major steps of tumor progression (including primary tumor growth, survival in the blood circulation and metastatic spread) were generated and analyzed by large-scale transcriptome, genome and methylome analyses. Furthermore, we performed clinical correlations of our datasets. Finally we conducted a computational analysis for predicting the time to relapse based on our molecular data. RESULTS: Through in vivo passaging, RENCA cells showed increased aggressiveness by reducing mice survival, enhancing primary tumor growth and lung metastases formation. In addition, transcriptome and methylome analyses showed distinct clustering of the cell lines without genomic variation. Distinct signatures of tumor aggressiveness were revealed and validated in different patient cohorts. In particular, we identified SAA2 and CFB as soluble prognostic and predictive biomarkers of the therapeutic response. Machine learning and mathematical modeling confirmed the importance of CFB and SAA2 together, which had the highest impact on distant metastasis-free survival. From these data sets, a computational model predicting tumor progression and relapse was developed and validated. These results are of great translational significance. CONCLUSION: A combination of experimental and mathematical modeling was able to generate meaningful data for the prediction of the clinical evolution of RCC.

The impact of sarcopenia on the efficacy and safety of immune checkpoint inhibitors in patients with solid tumours.

BACKGROUND: Evidence suggests that sarcopenia is a significant predictive factor of worst outcomes and treatment-associated toxicities in patients with metastatic solid tumours. The aim of this study was to explore the relationship between low muscle mass and clinical outcomes and immune-related severe toxicities (IrST) in patients treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs). METHODS: A retrospective cohort of 261 consecutive metastatic solid tumour patients treated with ICIs were included in our study. Low muscle mass was defined as skeletal muscle index <41 cm2/m2 for females and <43 cm2/m2 for males if body mass index (BMI) <25 kg/m2 or <53 cm2/m2 if BMI ≥ 25 kg/m2. Severe toxicities (ST), including grade III-IV toxicities and side effects leading to treatment interruption, were recorded. RESULTS: The majority of patients (n = 179; 69%) included in this study had metastatic lung cancer. The prevalence of low muscle mass was 47%. The median progression-free survival (PFS) was 32.2 weeks for low muscle mass patients and 24.3 weeks for non-low muscle mass patients (adjusted HR, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.60-1.055; p = 0.11). For low muscle mass and non-low muscle mass lung cancer patients, median PFS was 24.0 weeks and 18.8 weeks (adjusted HR, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.50-0.98; p = 0.04) and median overall survival was 50.7 weeks and 41.1 weeks (adjusted HR, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.54-1.10, p = 0.15) respectively. Immune-related severe toxicities occurred in 3.3% and 9.4% of low muscle mass and non-low muscle mass patients respectively (adjusted OR, 0.69; 95% CI: 0.31-1.49; p = 0.35). CONCLUSION: No difference in outcomes and safety was observed for low muscle mass and non-low muscle mass patients treated with ICIs.

Sunitinib Alone or After Nephrectomy for Patients with Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma: Is There Still a Role for Cytoreductive Nephrectomy?

BACKGROUND: The CARMENA trial in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) demonstrated that treatment with sunitinib alone was noninferior to cytoreductive nephrectomy (CN) followed by sunitinib (nephrectomy⬜sunitinib). OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to provide updated overall survival (OS) outcomes of CARMENA and assess whether some subgroups may still benefit from upfront CN. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: CARMENA was a phase III trial in 450 patients with mRCC enrolled from 2009 to 2017. INTERVENTION: Patients in the intention-to-treat population received nephrectomy⬜sunitinib (standard of care [SOC]; n = 226) or sunitinib alone (n = 224). OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Primary endpoint was OS, assessed using an updated data cut-off (October 2018; median OS event-free follow-up, 36.6 mo). Patients were reclassified by risk using International Metastatic RCC Database Consortium (IMDC) criteria. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: Sunitinib alone was noninferior to nephrectomy⬜sunitinib (hazard ratio [HR], 0.97; 95% confidence interval, 0.79⬜1.19; p = 0.8) and demonstrated longer median OS (19.8 mo vs 15.6 mo, respectively). For patients with two or more IMDC risk factors, OS was significantly longer with sunitinib alone than with nephrectomy⬜sunitinib (31.2 mo vs 17.6 mo, respectively; HR, 0.65; p = 0.03). For patients with one IMDC risk factor, OS was longer for nephrectomy⬜sunitinib versus sunitinib alone although not significantly (31.4 mo vs 25.2 mo; HR, 1.30; p = 0.2). The post hoc nature of the subgroup analyses may limit their interpretation. CONCLUSIONS: Sunitinib alone was noninferior compared with nephrectomy⬜sunitinib, suggesting that CN should not be considered SOC in patients with mRCC requiring systemic treatment. Certain subgroups, including patients with one IMDC risk factor, may still benefit from upfront CN. PATIENT SUMMARY: We assessed the survival of patients with metastatic kidney cancer in a clinical trial. Patients treated with sunitinib on its own had the same survival as patients who had surgery before sunitinib treatment. We conclude that surgery may not be necessary for some patients with metastatic kidney cancer.