Clinico-Pathological Features Influencing the Prognostic Role of Body Mass Index in Patients With Advanced Renal Cell Carcinoma Treated by Immuno-Oncology Combinations (ARON-1).

BACKGROUND: Obesity has been associated with improved response to immunotherapy in cancer patients. We investigated the role of body mass index (BMI) in patients from the ARON-1 study (NCT05287464) treated by dual immuno-oncology agents (IO+IO) or a combination of immuno-oncology drug and a tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKI) as first-line therapy for metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Medical records of patients with documented mRCC treated by immuno-oncology combinations were reviewed at 47 institutions from 16 countries. Patients were assessed for overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (OS), and overall clinical benefit (OCB), defined as the sum of the rate of partial/complete responses and stable disease. Univariate and multivariate analyses were used to explore the association of variables of interest with survival. RESULTS: A total of 675 patients were included; BMI was >25 kg/m2 in 345 patients (51%) and was associated with improved OS (55.7 vs. 28.4 months, P < .001). The OCB of patients with BMI >25 kg/m2 versus those with BMI ≤25 kg/m2 was significantly higher only in patients with nonclear cell histology (81% vs. 65%, P = .011), and patients with liver metastases (76% vs. 58%, P = .007), Neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio >4 (77% vs 62%, P = .022) or treated by nivolumab plus ipilimumab (77% vs. 64%, P = .044). In the BMI ≤25 kg/m2 subgroup, significant differences were found between patients with NLR >4 versus ≤4 (62% vs. 82%, P = .002) and patients treated by IO+IO versus IO+TKIs combinations (64% vs. 83%, P = .002). CONCLUSION: Our study suggests that the prognostic significance and the association of BMI with treatment outcome varies across clinico-pathological mRCC subgroups.

Current Status of Predictive Biomarker Development in Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: In this review, we analyze the current state of research in development of new biomarkers that may be useful in managing metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) setting. RECENT FINDINGS: Combining tumor-based biomarkers (gene expression profile) and blood-based biomarkers (ctDNA, cytokines) would be helpful in acquiring information regarding RCC and might be significant in the decision-making process. Renal cell carcinoma (RCC) is the sixth most frequently diagnosed neoplasm in men and tithe in women, making it responsible for 5% and 3% of all diagnosed cancers respectively. Metastatic stage represents a non-negligible percentage at diagnosis and is characterized by poor prognosis. Despite clinical features and prognostic score could guide clinicians in therapeutic approach of this disease, biomarkers predictive of response to treatment remain an unmet need.

Clinical outcomes of volume of disease on patients receiving enzalutamide versus abiraterone acetate plus prednisone as first-line therapy for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer.

Background: Androgen receptor signaling inhibitors (ARSis) abiraterone acetate (AA) plus prednisone and enzalutamide (Enza), are currently the most administered first-line treatments for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). AA and Enza have shown similar overall survival (OS) benefits and there is no consensus upon the best option for mCRPC first-line treatment. Volume of disease may represent a useful biomarker to predict response to therapy in such patients. Objectives: In this study, we seek to evaluate the impact of volume of disease on patients treated with first-line AA versus Enza for mCRPC. Design and methods: We retrospectively evaluated a cohort of consecutive patients with mCRPC categorized by volume of disease [high volume (HV) or low volume (LV) per E3805 criteria] at ARSi onset and treatment type (AA or Enza), assessing OS and radiographic progression-free survival (rPFS), from therapy start, as co-primary endpoints. Results: Of the 420 patients selected, 170 (40.5%) had LV and received AA (LV/AA), 76 (18.1%) LV and had Enza (LV/Enza), 124 (29.5%) HV and were given AA (HV/AA), and 50 (11.9%) HV and received Enza (HV/Enza). Among patients with LV, OS was significantly longer when treated with Enza [57.2 months; 95% confidence interval (CI): 52.1-62.2 months] versus AA (51.6 months; 95% CI, 42.6-60.6 months; p = 0.003). Consistently, those with LV receiving Enza showed increased rPFS (40.3 months; 95 CI, 25.0-55.7 months) than those having AA (22.0 months; 95% CI, 18.1-26.0 months; p = 0.004). No significant difference in OS or rPFS was observed in those with HV treated with AA versus Enza (p = 0.51 and p = 0.73, respectively). In multivariate analysis of patients with LV, treatment with Enza was independently associated with better prognosis than AA. Conclusion: Within the intrinsic limitations of a retrospective design and small population, our report suggests that volume of disease could be a useful predictive biomarker for patients starting first-line ARSi for mCRPC.

The Role of CT Imaging in Characterization of Small Renal Masses.

Small renal masses (SRM) are increasingly detected incidentally during imaging. They vary widely in histology and aggressiveness, and include benign renal tumors and renal cell carcinomas that can be either indolent or aggressive. Imaging plays a key role in the characterization of these small renal masses. While a confident diagnosis can be made in many cases, some renal masses are indeterminate at imaging and can present as diagnostic dilemmas for both the radiologists and the referring clinicians. This review focuses on CT characterization of small renal masses, perhaps helping us understand small renal masses. The following aspects were considered for the review: (a) assessing the presence of fat, (b) assessing the enhancement, (c) differentiating renal tumor subtype, and (d) identifying valuable CT signs.

nmCRPC, a look in the continuous care of prostate cancer patients: state of art and future perspectives.

Non-metastatic castration resistant prostate cancer (nmCRPC) is a clinical setting defined as confirmed rising levels of PSA in patients treated with ADT but without detectable metastases on conventional imaging with computerized tomography (CT) and technetium-99 m scintigraphy. Men with nmCRPC and a PSA doubling time (PSADT) ≤ 10 months are considered at high risk of rapidly developing metastases with a consequent possible impact on survival. Three recent phase III trials have demonstrated, in this setting, the efficacy of adding a next-generation androgen receptor targeted agent (ARTA) to ADT in respect to ADT only, in delaying the development of metastases (metastasis-free survival, MFS) and prolong overall survival. The magnitude of clinical benefit of these agents was even more meaningful if considering the low incidence of drug related adverse events. Our review described the latest advances in the management of nmCRPC, deriving from the pivotal clinical trials, SPARTAN, PROSPER and ARAMIS, in order to support clinicians to optimally manage these patients. Of note, the emergence of novel, more accurate, next-generation imaging techniques (including Ga PSMA-PET/CT), as well as eventual future tumor biomarkers, is modifying the entity and definition of the nmCRPC setting, with a consequent impact on patient's diagnosis and management.

Clinical impact of volume of disease and time of metastatic disease presentation on patients receiving enzalutamide or abiraterone acetate plus prednisone as first-line therapy for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer.

BACKGROUND: Metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer remains a challenging condition to treat. Among the available therapeutic options, the androgen receptor signaling inhibitors abiraterone acetate plus prednisone (AA) and enzalutamide (Enza), are currently the most used first-line therapies in clinical practice. However, validated clinical indicators of prognosis in this setting are still lacking. In this study, we aimed to evaluate a prognostic model based on the time of metastatic disease presentation (after prior local therapy [PLT] or de-novo [DN]) and disease burden (low volume [LV] or high-volume [HV]) at AA/Enza onset for mCRPC patients receiving either AA or Enza as first-line. METHODS: A cohort of consecutive patients who started AA or Enza as first-line treatment for mCRPC between January 1st, 2015, and April 1st, 2019 was identified from the clinical and electronic registries of the 9 American and European participating centers. Patients were classified into 4 cohorts by the time of metastatic disease presentation (PLT or DN) and volume of disease (LV or HV; per the E3805 trial, HV was defined as the presence of visceral metastases and/or at least 4 bone metastases of which at least 1 out the axial/pelvic skeleton) at AA/Enza onset. The endpoint was overall survival defined as the time from AA or Enza initiation, respectively, to death from any cause or censored at the last follow-up visit, whichever occurred first. RESULTS: Of the 417 eligible patients identified, 157 (37.6%) had LV/PLT, 87 (20.9%) LV/DN, 64 (15.3%) HV/PLT, and 109 (26.1%) HV/DN. LV cohorts showed improved median overall survival (59.0 months; 95% CI, 51.0-66.9 months) vs. HV cohorts (27.5 months; 95% CI, 22.8-32.2 months; P = 0.0001), regardless of the time of metastatic presentation. In multivariate analysis, HV cohorts were confirmed associated with worse prognosis compared to those with LV (HV/PLT, HR = 1.87; p = 0.029; HV/DN, HR = 2.19; P = 0.002). CONCLUSION: Our analysis suggests that the volume of disease could be a prognostic factor for patients starting AA or Enza as first-line treatment for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer, pending prospective clinical trial validation.

Darolutamide Maintenance in Patients With Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer With Nonprogressive Disease After Taxane Treatment (SAKK 08/16).

PURPOSE: To assess the efficacy and safety of darolutamide maintenance after successful taxane chemotherapy in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Swiss Group for Clinical Cancer Research (SAKK) 08/16 is a randomized phase II study. Patients with mCRPC who received prior androgen-receptor pathway inhibitors (ARPIs) and subsequently had nonprogressive disease on a taxane were randomly assigned to darolutamide 600 mg twice a day or placebo twice a day. The primary end point was radiographic progression-free survival (rPFS) at 12 weeks. Secondary end points were rPFS, event-free survival, overall survival (OS), prostate-specific antigen (PSA) 50% response rate, and adverse events. RESULTS: Overall, 92 patients were recruited by 26 centers. Prior taxane was docetaxel in 93% and cabazitaxel in 7%. Prior ARPI was abiraterone in 60%, enzalutamide in 31%, and both in 9%. rPFS at 12 weeks was significantly improved with darolutamide (64.7% v 52.2%; P = .127). Median rPFS on darolutamide was 5.5 versus 4.5 months on placebo (hazard ratio [HR], 0.54; 95% CI, 0.32 to 0.91; P = .017), and median event-free survival was 5.4 versus 2.9 months (HR, 0.46; 95% CI, 0.29 to 0.73; P = .001). PSA 50% response rate was improved (22% v 4%; P = .014). Median OS for darolutamide was 24 versus 21.3 months for placebo (HR, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.3 to 1.26; P = .181). Treatment-related adverse events were similar in both arms. CONCLUSION: SAKK 08/16 met its primary end point, showing that switch maintenance with darolutamide after prior taxane chemotherapy and at least one ARPI resulted in a statistically significant but clinically modest rPFS prolongation with good tolerability. The median OS with darolutamide maintenance appears promising. Should these findings be confirmed in a larger trial, maintenance treatment could be a novel strategy in managing patients with mCRPC, especially those who responded well to prior ARPI.

Survival by Depth of Response and Efficacy by International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium Subgroup with Lenvatinib Plus Pembrolizumab Versus Sunitinib in Advanced Renal Cell Carcinoma: Analysis of the Phase 3 Randomized CLEAR Study.

BACKGROUND: The extent of tumor shrinkage has been deemed a predictor of survival for advanced/metastatic renal cell carcinoma (RCC), a disease with historically poor survival. OBJECTIVE: To perform an exploratory analysis of overall survival (OS) by tumor response by 6 mo, and to assess the efficacy and survival outcomes in specific subgroups. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: CLEAR was an open-label, multicenter, randomized, phase 3 trial of first-line treatment of advanced clear cell RCC. INTERVENTION: Patients were randomized 1:1:1 to lenvatinib 20 mg orally daily with pembrolizumab 200 mg intravenously once every 3 wk, lenvatinib plus everolimus (not included in this analysis), or sunitinib 50 mg orally daily for 4 wk on treatment/2 wk of no treatment. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Landmark analyses were conducted to assess the association of OS with tumor shrinkage and progressive disease status by 6 mo. Progression-free survival, duration of response, and objective response rate (ORR) were analyzed by the International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium (IMDC) risk subgroup and by the presence of target kidney lesions. Efficacy was assessed by an independent review committee as per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: Landmark analyses by tumor shrinkage showed that patients enrolled to lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab arm with a confirmed complete response or >75% target-lesion reduction by 6 mo had a 24-mo OS probability of ≥91.7%. A landmark analysis by disease progression showed that patients with no progression by 6 mo had lower probabilities of death in both arms. Patients with an IMDC risk classification of intermediate/poor had longer median progression-free survival (22.1 vs 5.9 mo) and a higher ORR (72.4% vs 28.8%) with lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab versus sunitinib. Similarly, results favored lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab in IMDC-favorable patients and those with/without target kidney lesions. Limitations of the study are that results were exploratory and not powered/stratified. CONCLUSIONS: Lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab showed improved efficacy versus sunitinib for patients with advanced RCC; landmark analyses showed that tumor response by 6 mo correlated with longer OS. PATIENT SUMMARY: In this report of the CLEAR trial, we explored the survival of patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma by assessing how well they initially responded to treatment. We also explored how certain groups of patients responded to treatment overall. Patients were assigned to cycles of either lenvatinib 20 mg daily plus pembrolizumab 200 mg every 3 wk or sunitinib 50 mg daily for 4 wk (followed by a 2-wk break). Patients who either had a "complete response" or had their tumors shrunk by >75% within 6 mo after starting treatment with lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab had better survival than those with less tumor reduction by 6 mo. Additionally, patients who had more severe disease (as per the International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium) at the start of study treatment survived for longer without disease progression with lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab than with sunitinib.

Pembrolizumab Plus Axitinib for Metastatic Papillary and Chromophobe Renal Cell Carcinoma: NEMESIA (Non Clear MEtaStatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Pembrolizumab Axitinib) Study, a Subgroup Analysis of I-RARE Observational Study (Meet-URO 23a).

Non-clear cell renal cell carcinoma (nccRCC) represents a heterogeneous histological group which is 20-25% of those with renal cell carcinoma (RCC). Patients with nccRCC have limited therapeutic options due to their exclusion from phase III randomized trials. The aim of the present study was to investigate the effectiveness and tolerability of pembrolizumabaxitinib combination in chromophobe and papillary metastatic RCC (mRCC) patients enrolled in the I-RARE (Italian Registry on rAre genitor-uRinary nEoplasms) observational ongoing study (Meet-URO 23). Baseline characteristics, objective response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR) and progression-free survival (PFS) and toxicities were retrospectively and prospectively collected from nccRCC patients treated in 14 Italian referral centers adhering to the Meet-Uro group, from December 2020 to April 2022. Only patients with chromophobe and papillary histology were considered eligible for the present pre-specified analysis. There were 32 eligible patients who received pembrolizumab-axitinib as first-line treatment, of whom 13 (40%) had chromophobe histology and 19 (60%) were classified as papillary RCC. The DCR was 78.1% whereas ORR was 43.7% (11 patients achieved stable disease and 14 patients obtained partial response: 9/19 papillary, 5/13 chromophobe). Six patients (18.7%) were primary refractory. Median PFS was 10.8 months (95%CI 1.7-11.5). Eleven patients (34.3%) interrupted the full treatment due to immune-related adverse events (irAEs): G3 hepatitis (n = 5), G3 hypophisitis (n = 1), G3 diarrhea (n = 1), G3 pancreatitis (n = 1), G3 asthenia (n = 1). Twelve patients (37.5%) temporarily interrupted axitinib only due to persistent G2 hand-foot syndrome or G2 hypertension. Pembrolizumab-axitinib combination could be an active and feasible first-line treatment option for patients with papillary or chromophobe mRCC.

Concomitant Drugs Prognostic Score in Patients With Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Receiving Ipilimumab and Nivolumab in the Compassionate Use Program in Italy: Brief Communication.

A concomitant drug-based score was developed by our group and externally validated for prognostic and predictive purposes in patients with advanced cancer treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs). The model considers the use of three classes of drugs within a month before initiating ICI, assigning score 1 for each between proton pump inhibitor and antibiotic administration until a month before immunotherapy initiation and score 2 in case of corticosteroid intake. In the present analysis, the drug score was validated in a prospective population of 305 patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma treated with ipilimumab plus nivolumab in the first-line setting. The value of the model in predicting overall survival and progression-free survival was statistically significant and clinically meaningful, with an overall survival rate at 12 months of 73% vs. 44% (P<0.0001), and median progression-free survival of 11.6 (95% CI: 9.1-14.1) months versus 4.8 (95% CI: 2.7-7.0) months (P=0.002), respectively, for patients belonging to the favorable group (score 0-1) versus the unfavorable (score 2-4). Further development will be represented by the gut microbiome analysis according to the drug-based model classification and to the outcome of patients to ICI therapy to demonstrate the link between drug exposure and immune sensitivity.

BONSAI-2 study: Nivolumab as therapeutic option after cabozantinib failure in metastatic collecting duct carcinoma patients.

BACKGROUND: The BONSAI phase II trial recently demonstrated the activity of cabozantinib in metastatic collecting duct patients. The outcomes of patients in this setting treated with immunotherapy as second-line is unknown. The aim of the present report was to describe outcomes of patients enrolled in the BONSAI trial that received nivolumab as second-line treatment. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We describe the oncological outcomes in terms of overall response rate, progression-free survival, overall survival and safety. We excluded patients that did not receive any second-line treatment or were treated with agents other than nivolumab. RESULTS: We identified five patients of whom one was excluded due to lack of data. Three patients obtained clinical benefit (one partial response, two stable disease); the second-line progression-free survival (nivolumab) ranged from 2.8 to 19.9 months to and second-line overall survival ranged from 5.1 to 26.5 months. No new safety signals were observed. CONCLUSIONS: Nivolumab may be considered as second-line therapy option after cabozantinib failure in selected metastatic collecting duct carcinoma patients.

Olaparib Efficacy in Patients with Metastatic Castration-resistant Prostate Cancer and BRCA1, BRCA2 or ATM Alterations Identified by Testing Circulating Tumor DNA.

PURPOSE: The phase III PROfound study (NCT02987543) evaluated olaparib versus abiraterone or enzalutamide (control) in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) with tumor homologous recombination repair (HRR) gene alterations. We present exploratory analyses on the use of ctDNA testing as an additional method to identify mCRPC patients with HRR gene alterations who may be eligible for olaparib treatment. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Plasma samples collected during screening in PROfound were retrospectively sequenced using the FoundationOne® Liquid CDx test for BRCA1, BRCA2 (BRCA) and ATM alterations in ctDNA. Only patients from Cohort A (BRCA/ATM-alteration positive by tissue testing) were evaluated. We compared clinical outcomes, including radiographic progression-free survival (rPFS) between the ctDNA subgroup and Cohort A. RESULTS: Of the 181 (73.9%) Cohort A patients who gave consent for plasma sample ctDNA testing, 139 (76.8%) yielded a result and BRCA/ATM alterations were identified in 111 (79.9%). Of these, 73 patients received olaparib and 38 received control. Patients' baseline demographics and characteristics, and the prevalence of HRR alterations were comparable to the Cohort A ITT population. rPFS was longer in the olaparib group versus control (median 7.4 vs. 3.5 months; hazard ratio [HR] 0.33; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.21-0.53; nominal P < 0.0001), which is consistent with Cohort A ITT population (HR 0.34 [95% CI, 0.25-0.47]). CONCLUSIONS: When tumor tissue testing is not feasible or has failed, ctDNA testing may be a suitable alternative to identify patients with mCRPC carrying BRCA/ATM alterations who may benefit from olaparib treatment.

A multicenter phase 2 single arm study of cabozantinib in patients with advanced or unresectable renal cell carcinoma pre-treated with one immune-checkpoint inhibitor: The BREAKPOINT trial (Meet-Uro trial 03).

BACKGROUND: First-line therapies based on immune-checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) significantly improved survival of metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) patients. Cabozantinib was shown to target kinases involved in immune-escape and to prolong survival in patients pre-treated with tyrosine-kinase-inhibitors (TKIs). The impact of ICIs combinations in first line on subsequent therapies is still unclear. METHODS: This is an open label, multicenter, single arm, phase II study designed to assess activity, safety and efficacy of cabozantinib in mRCC patients progressed after an adjuvant or first line anti-Programmed Death (PD)-1/PD-Ligand (PD-L) 1-based therapy. Primary endpoint was progression free survival (PFS), secondary endpoints were overall survival (OS), objective response rate (ORR) and safety. RESULTS: 31 patients were included in the analysis. After a median (m) follow-up of 11.9 months, mPFS was 8.3 months (90%CI 3.9-17.4) and mOS was 13.8 months (95%CI 7.7-29.0). ORR was 37.9% with an additional 13 patients achieving disease stability. Grade 3-4 adverse events occurred in 47% of patients, including more frequently creatine phosphokinase (CPK) serum level elevation, neutropenia, hyponatremia, diarrhea, hand-food syndrome, oral mucositis and hypertension. CONCLUSIONS: The BREAKPOINT trial met its primary endpoint showing that cabozantinib as second line therapy after ICIs was active in mRCC. Safety profile was manageable. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03463681 - A Study of CaBozantinib in Patients With Advanced or Unresectable Renal cEll cArcinoma (BREAKPOINT) - https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03463681.

Case report: Metastatic urothelial cancer with an exceptional response to immunotherapy and comprehensive understanding of the tumor and the tumor microenvironment.

Although immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) are increasingly used as second-line treatments for urothelial cancer (UC), only a small proportion of patients respond. Therefore, understanding the mechanisms of response to ICIs is critical to improve clinical outcomes for UC patients. The tumor microenvironment (TME) is recognized as a key player in tumor progression and the response to certain anti-cancer treatments. This study aims to investigate the mechanism of response using integrated genomic and transcriptomic profiling of a UC patient who was part of the KEYNOTE-045 trial and showed an exceptional response to pembrolizumab. Diagnosed in 2014 and receiving first-line chemotherapy without success, the patient took part in the KEYNOTE-045 trial for 2 years. She showed dramatic improvement and has now been free of disease for over 6 years. Recently described by Bagaev et al., the Molecular Functional (MF) Portrait was utilized to dissect genomic and transcriptomic features of the patient's tumor and TME. The patient's tumor was characterized as Immune Desert, which is suggestive of a non-inflamed microenvironment. Integrated whole-exome sequencing (WES) and RNA sequencing (RNA-seq) analysis identified an ATM mutation and high TMB level (33.9 mut/mb), which are both positive biomarkers for ICI response. Analysis further revealed the presence of the APOBEC complex, indicating the potential for use of APOBEC signatures as predictive biomarkers for immunotherapy response. Overall, comprehensive characterization of the patient's tumor and TME with the MF Portrait revealed important insights that could potentially be hypothesis generating to identify clinically useful biomarkers and improve treatment for UC patients.

FRACTION-RCC: nivolumab plus ipilimumab for advanced renal cell carcinoma after progression on immuno-oncology therapy.

BACKGROUND: The role and sequencing of combination immuno-oncology (IO) therapy following progression on or after first-line IO therapy has not been well-established. The Fast Real-time Assessment of Combination Therapies in Immuno-ONcology (FRACTION) program is an open-label, phase 2 platform trial designed to evaluate multiple IO combinations in patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma (aRCC) who progressed during or after prior IO therapy. Here, we describe the results for patients treated with nivolumab plus ipilimumab. For enrollment in track 2 (reported here), patients with histologically confirmed clear cell aRCC, Karnofsky performance status ≥70%, and life expectancy ≥3 months who had previously progressed after IO (anti-programmed death 1 (PD-1), anti-programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1), or anti-cytotoxic T-lymphocyte antigen 4 (CTLA-4)) therapy were eligible. Previous treatment with anti-CTLA-4 therapy plus anti-PD-1/PD-L1 therapy precluded eligibility for enrollment in the nivolumab plus ipilimumab arm. Patients were treated with nivolumab 3 mg/kg plus ipilimumab 1 mg/kg every 3 weeks for four doses, followed by nivolumab 480 mg every 4 weeks for up to 2 years or until progression, toxicity, or protocol-specified discontinuation. The primary outcome measures were objective response rate (ORR), duration of response (DOR), and progression-free survival (PFS) rate at 24 weeks. Secondary outcomes were safety and tolerability up to 2 years. Overall survival (OS) was a tertiary/exploratory endpoint. Overall, 46 patients were included with a median follow-up of 33.8 months. The ORR was 17.4% (95% CI, 7.8 to 31.4) with eight (17.4%) patients achieving partial response. Stable disease was achieved in 19 (41.3%) patients, while 14 (30.4%) had progressive disease. Median DOR (range) was 16.4 (2.1+ to 27.0+) months. The PFS rate at 24 weeks was 43.2%, and median OS was 23.8 (95% CI, 13.2 to not reached) months. Grade 3-4 immune-mediated adverse events were reported in seven (15.2%) patients. No treatment-related deaths were reported. Patients with aRCC treated with nivolumab plus ipilimumab may derive durable clinical benefit after progression on previous IO therapies, including heavily pretreated patients, with a manageable safety profile that was consistent with previously published safety outcomes. These outcomes contribute to the knowledge of optimal sequencing of IO therapies for patients with aRCC with high unmet needs. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02996110.

Optimal Choice of Adjuvant Treatment for Renal Cell Carcinoma Following Nephrectomy.

Renal cell carcinoma (RCC) is the fourteenth most common cancer worldwide. In about 55% of cases, it is diagnosed at a localised and/or locally advanced stage and therefore amenable to a curative approach. Although nephrectomy still represents the cornerstone of non-metastatic RCC (nmRCC) treatment, a relapse is observed in about 25-30% of patients undergoing curative surgery. Prognosis is drastically influenced by lymph nodal involvement. After the first disappointing results with a cytokine-based strategy, tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) were tested as adjuvant agents. Despite their efficacy in the metastatic setting, results in terms of disease-free survival (DFS) are not unequivocal and the overall survival (OS) benefit has not been demonstrated. Moreover, their toxicity profile induced a remarkable percentage of patients to discontinue the treatment. On the contrary, the KEYNOTE-564 trial showed the benefit of adjuvant pembrolizumab compared with placebo in terms of DFS with promising results in term of OS. Patients included were at intermediate or high risk of relapse, or patients with no evidence of disease after metastasectomy (M1 NED). The updated analysis presented at the American Society of Clinical Oncology Genito-Urinary (ASCO GU) 2022 confirmed the benefit of pembrolizumab versus placebo over time, although OS data are still immature. A longer follow-up and the several ongoing trials with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) will provide further data about adjuvant immuno-oncology (IO). Furthermore, the patients' selection based on clinical or biological features will be crucial in order to identify who benefits most from treatments.

The prognostic value of baseline and early variations of peripheral blood inflammatory ratios and their cellular components in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma treated with nivolumab: The Δ-Meet-URO analysis.

Background: Treatment choice for metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) patients is still based on baseline clinical and laboratory factors. Methods: By a pre-specified analysis of the Meet-URO 15 multicentric retrospective study enrolling 571 pretreated mRCC patients receiving nivolumab, baseline and early dynamic variations (Δ) of neutrophil, lymphocyte, and platelet absolute cell counts (ACC) and their inflammatory ratios (IR) were evaluated alongside their association with the best disease response and overall (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). Multivariable analyses on OS and PFS between baseline and Δ ACC and IR values were investigated with receiving operating curves-based cut-offs. Results: The analysis included 422 mRCC patients. Neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) increased over time due to consistent neutrophil increase (p < 0.001). Higher baseline platelets (p = 0.044) and lower lymphocytes (p = 0.018), increasing neutrophil Δ (p for time-group interaction <0.001), higher baseline IR values (NLR: p = 0.012, SII: p = 0.003, PLR: p = 0.003), increasing NLR and systemic immune-inflammatory index (SII) (i.e., NLR x platelets) Δ (p for interaction time-group = 0.0053 and 0.0435, respectively) were associated with disease progression. OS and PFS were significantly shorter in patients with baseline lower lymphocytes (p < 0.001 for both) and higher platelets (p = 0.004 and p < 0.001, respectively) alongside early neutrophils Δ (p = 0.046 and p = 0.033, respectively). Early neutrophils and NLR Δ were independent prognostic factors for both OS (p = 0.014 and p = 0.011, respectively) and PFS (p = 0.023 and p = 0.001, respectively), alongside baseline NLR (p < 0.001 for both) and other known prognostic variables. Conclusions: Early neutrophils and NLR Δ may represent new dynamic prognostic factors with clinical utility for on-treatment decisions.

Addition of Niraparib to Best Supportive Care as Maintenance Treatment in Patients with Advanced Urothelial Carcinoma Whose Disease Did Not Progress After First-line Platinum-based Chemotherapy: The Meet-URO12 Randomized Phase 2 Trial.

BACKGROUND: Platinum-based chemotherapy (PBCT) is the standard first-line treatment for advanced urothelial carcinoma (UC). Potential cross-sensitivity can be hypothesized between platinum drugs and poly-ADP ribose-polymerase (PARP) inhibitors. OBJECTIVE: To compare maintenance treatment with the PARP inhibitor niraparib plus best supportive care (BSC) versus BSC alone in patients with advanced UC without disease progression after first-line PBCT. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Meet-URO12 is a randomized, multicenter, open-label phase 2 trial. Patients with advanced UC, without disease progression after four to six cycles of PBCT, with Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status 0 or 1, were enrolled between August 2019 and March 2021. Randomization was stratified by ECOG performance status (0/1) and response to PBCT (objective response/stable disease). INTERVENTION: Patients were randomized (2:1) to experimental arm A (niraparib 300 or 200 mg daily according to body weight and baseline platelets, plus BSC) or control arm B (BSC alone). OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS). The analysis was performed on an intention-to-treat basis. The secondary endpoints reported in this primary analysis are progression-free rate at 6 mo and safety (adverse event rate). RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: Fifty-eight patients were randomized (39 in arm A and 19 in arm B). The median age was 69 yr, ECOG performance status was 0 in 66% and 1 in 34%; and the best response with chemotherapy was objective response in 55% and stable disease in 45%. The median PFS was 2.1 mo in arm A and 2.4 mo in arm B (hazard ratio 0.92; 95% confidence interval 0.49-1.75, p = 0.81). The 6-mo progression-free rates were 28.2% and 26.3%, respectively. The most common adverse events with niraparib were anemia (50%, grade [G]3 11%), thrombocytopenia (37%, G3-4 16%), neutropenia (21%, G3 5%), fatigue (32%, G3 16%), constipation (32%, G3 3%), mucositis (13%, G3 3%), and nausea (13%, G3 3%). The main limitation of the study is the small sample size: in March 2021, approval of maintenance avelumab for the same setting rendered randomization of patients in the control arm to BSC alone unethical, and accrual was stopped prematurely. CONCLUSIONS: Addition of maintenance niraparib to BSC after first-line PBCT did not demonstrate a significant improvement in PFS in patients with UC. These results do not support the conduction of a phase 3 trial with single agent niraparib in this population. PATIENT SUMMARY: In this trial, we tested the efficacy of niraparib as maintenance treatment in patients affected by advanced urothelial cancer after the completion of first-line chemotherapy. We could not demonstrate a significant improvement in progression-free survival with maintenance niraparib.

Long-Term Response to Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitors for Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma.

Background: Tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) prolong progression-free survival (PFS) in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC), some of which may achieve long-term responses. Herein, we report clinical and pathological characteristics of patients who achieved long-term responses during first-line TKI treatment. Methods: Patients receiving TKI as first-line therapy from January 2010 to December 2017 in seven Italian Oncology Centers were reviewed. Sixty-six patients were considered as long-term responders, as they remained progression-free for 36 months or more during TKI treatment. A logistic regression model was performed to evaluate the effect of each clinical-pathological variable on the probability of responding long-term. Results: A total of 335 patients with a median age of 66 years were included in the analysis. The median PFS and overall survival among the long-term responders was 70 and 106 months, respectively. At a landmark PFS analysis performed 36 months after the start of treatment, the median PFS was 34 months. Multivariate analysis from all patients identified previous nephrectomy, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status (ECOG PS) < 1, and lack of liver metastasis as favorable prognostic factors for long-term response. Female gender and lack of liver metastasis positively correlated with long-term responses in favorable-risk-score population, as well as ECOG PS < 1 in intermediate-poor risk score population. Patients Summary: Previous surgery, clinical condition, and lack of liver metastasis may predict long-term responses to tyrosine kinase inhibitors. Conclusions: TKIs can lead to a long-term response in a subset of patients with metastatic RCC. Previous nephrectomy, optimal performance status (ECOG PS = 0), and lack of liver metastasis may predict long-term responses.

Adjuvant atezolizumab versus placebo for patients with renal cell carcinoma at increased risk of recurrence following resection (IMmotion010): a multicentre, randomised, double-blind, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: The standard of care for locoregional renal cell carcinoma is surgery, but many patients experience recurrence. The objective of the current study was to determine if adjuvant atezolizumab (vs placebo) delayed recurrence in patients with an increased risk of recurrence after resection. METHODS: IMmotion010 is a randomised, double-blind, multicentre, phase 3 trial conducted in 215 centres in 28 countries. Eligible patients were patients aged 18 years or older with renal cell carcinoma with a clear cell or sarcomatoid component and increased risk of recurrence. After nephrectomy with or without metastasectomy, patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive atezolizumab (1200 mg) or placebo (both intravenous) once every 3 weeks for 16 cycles or 1 year. Randomisation was done with an interactive voice-web response system. Stratification factors were disease stage (T2 or T3a vs T3b-c or T4 or N+ vs M1 no evidence of disease), geographical region (north America [excluding Mexico] vs rest of the world), and PD-L1 status on tumour-infiltrating immune cells (<1% vs ≥1% expression). The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed disease-free survival in the intention-to-treat population, defined as all patients who were randomised, regardless of whether study treatment was received. The safety-evaluable population included all patients randomly assigned to treatment who received any amount of study drug (ie, atezolizumab or placebo), regardless of whether a full or partial dose was received. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03024996, and is closed to further accrual. FINDINGS: Between Jan 3, 2017, and Feb 15, 2019, 778 patients were enrolled; 390 (50%) were assigned to the atezolizumab group and 388 (50%) to the placebo group. At data cutoff (May 3, 2022), the median follow-up duration was 44·7 months (IQR 39·1-51·0). Median investigator-assessed disease-free survival was 57·2 months (95% CI 44·6 to not evaluable) with atezolizumab and 49·5 months (47·4 to not evaluable) with placebo (hazard ratio 0·93, 95% CI 0·75-1·15, p=0·50). The most common grade 3-4 adverse events were hypertension (seven [2%] patients who received atezolizumab vs 15 [4%] patients who received placebo), hyperglycaemia (ten [3%] vs six [2%]), and diarrhoea (two [1%] vs seven [2%]). 69 (18%) patients who received atezolizumab and 46 (12%) patients who received placebo had a serious adverse event. There were no treatment-related deaths. INTERPRETATION: Atezolizumab as adjuvant therapy after resection for patients with renal cell carcinoma with increased risk of recurrence showed no evidence of improved clinical outcomes versus placebo. These study results do not support adjuvant atezolizumab for treatment of renal cell carcinoma. FUNDING: F Hoffmann-La Roche and Genentech, a member of the Roche group.