Second-line therapy for refractory renal-cell carcinoma

2012 ◽  
Vol 83 (1) ◽  
pp. 112-122 ◽  
Author(s):  
Fable Zustovich ◽  
Giuseppe Lombardi ◽  
Ornella Nicoletto ◽  
Davide Pastorelli
Keyword(s):  
Renal Cell Carcinoma ◽  
Cell Carcinoma ◽  
Renal Cell ◽  
Second Line ◽  
Second Line Therapy ◽  
Line Therapy

Third-line therapy in metastatic renal cell carcinoma: Results from the International mRCC Database Consortium.

2015 ◽  
Vol 33 (7_suppl) ◽  
pp. 430-430 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daniel Yick Chin Heng ◽  
Connor Wells ◽  
Frede Donskov ◽  
Brian I. Rini ◽  
Jae-Lyun Lee ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Renal Cell Carcinoma ◽  
Targeted Therapy ◽  
Cell Carcinoma ◽  
Renal Cell ◽  
Second Line ◽  
Second Line Therapy ◽  
Therapy Initiation ◽  
Line Therapy ◽  
Third Line Therapy ◽  
Third Line

430 Background: Third-line targeted therapy efficacy in metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) is not well characterized and many funding bodies do not provide reimbursement for it. Methods: The International mRCC Database Consortium (IMDC) consists of consecutive patient series from 25 cancer centers. It was queried for specific sequences of targeted therapy and third-line therapy. Kaplan Meier estimates were used for survival. Cox proportional hazards models were used to adjust hazard ratios for confounders. Patients that stopped second-line therapy were divided into two groups: those that went onto third-line therapy and those did not. Results: 4,050 patients were treated with first-line targeted therapy, of which 2,011 (49.6%) had second-line therapy and 879 (21.7%) had third-line targeted therapy. The most common third-line therapies were everolimus 25%, sorafenib 14%, sunitinib 13%, temsirolimus 11%, pazopanib 10%, and axitinib 6%. IMDC prognostic groups at third-line therapy initiation were 6% favorable risk, 67% intermediate risk, and 27% poor risk. Overall response rate for third-line therapy was 10.5% and 50.9% had stable disease in those patients that were evaluable. Median PFS was 5.1 months (95% CI, 4.5-5.7) and median OS from third-line therapy initiation was 12.0 months (95% CI, 10.7-12.9). Patients stopping second-line therapy that move on to third-line therapy vs. those that do not receive third line therapy have a median OS from stopping second-line therapy of 13.1 vs. 2.3 mons (p<0.0001). When adjusted for second-line IMDC prognostic criteria and KPS at second-line treatment cessation, patients who do receive third-line therapy have a HR of death of 0.41 (95% CI, 0.32-0.52; p<0.0001) compared to those that do not receive third-line therapy. This may be in part due to patient selection. To further limit bias, when excluding patients that live less than 3 months after second-line therapy cessation, the adjusted HR was similar. Conclusions: Third-line targeted therapy has demonstrated activity and is prevalent in use. Further studies are required to determine appropriate sequencing.

Abstract 901: Plasma proteins characterize second-line therapy response in progressive renal cell carcinoma

2014 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sebastian Hölters ◽  
Lothar Bergmann ◽  
Viktor Grünwald ◽  
Ulrich Keilholz ◽  
Carsten Ohlmann ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Renal Cell Carcinoma ◽  
Cell Carcinoma ◽  
Renal Cell ◽  
Plasma Proteins ◽  
Therapy Response ◽  
Second Line ◽  
Second Line Therapy ◽  
Line Therapy

Everolimus Versus Axitinib as Second-line Therapy in Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma: Experience From Institut Gustave Roussy

2017 ◽  
Vol 15 (6) ◽  
pp. e1081-e1088 ◽  
Author(s):  
Annalisa Guida ◽  
Laurence Albiges ◽  
Lisa Derosa ◽  
Yohann Loriot ◽  
Christophe Massard ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Renal Cell Carcinoma ◽  
Cell Carcinoma ◽  
Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma ◽  
Renal Cell ◽  
Second Line ◽  
Second Line Therapy ◽  
Line Therapy

Clinical Benefit of Everolimus as Second-Line Therapy in Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma: The French Retrospective SECTOR Study

2016 ◽  
Vol 14 (6) ◽  
pp. e595-e607 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stéphane Oudard ◽  
Florence Joly ◽  
Lionnel Geoffrois ◽  
Brigitte Laguerre ◽  
Nadine Houede ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Renal Cell Carcinoma ◽  
Cell Carcinoma ◽  
Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma ◽  
Clinical Benefit ◽  
Renal Cell ◽  
Second Line ◽  
Second Line Therapy ◽  
Line Therapy

scholarly journals A prospective, open-label, interventional study protocol to evaluate treatment efficacy of nivolumab based on serum-soluble PD-L1 concentration for patients with metastatic and unresectable renal cell carcinoma

BMJ Open ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (12) ◽  
pp. e030522
Author(s):  
Yukari Bando ◽  
Nobuyuki Hinata ◽  
Takashi Omori ◽  
Masato Fujisawa
Keyword(s):  
Renal Cell Carcinoma ◽  
Overall Survival ◽  
Cell Carcinoma ◽  
Renal Cell ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Power Calculation ◽  
Second Line ◽  
Second Line Therapy ◽  
Line Therapy

IntroductionNivolumab has been proven to prolong overall survival as a second-line therapy for patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC) in a phase III clinical trial. However, versatile biomarkers have not been established to predict the efficacy of nivolumab against target disease.Methods and analysisAfter registration, screening test and serum-soluble programmed cell death 1-ligand 1 (sPD-L1) measurement will be performed by using the ELISA; patients will be grouped into high sPD-L1 or low sPD-L1 groups. Nivolumab (240 mg every 2 weeks by intravenous drip infusion) will be administered to each participant. For this prospective study, statistical power calculation indicated that 48 participants with metastatic or unresectable RCC are needed to assess the efficacy of this method. The participants must be at the age of at least 20 years at the time of informed consent and require second-line therapy after failure of first-line therapy or discontinuation due to adverse effects. All data will be collected in our institution. The primary endpoint is progression-free survival, and secondary endpoints are overall survival and objective response rate. In this protocol, we will examine sPD-L1 as a promising predictive marker.Ethics and disseminationThis protocol was approved by the Kobe University Clinical Research Ethical Committee (C180067). Findings of this study will be widely disseminated through conference presentations, reports, factsheets and academic publications; further generalisation will also be discussed.Trial registration numberUMIN000027873.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document