Immune checkpoint inhibitors plus tyrosine kinase inhibitors combination in the first-line setting of metastatic clear cell renal cell carcinoma: A meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials.

2020 ◽  
Vol 38 (6_suppl) ◽  
pp. 704-704
Author(s):  
Maria Cruz Martin Soberón ◽  
Alberto Carretero-González ◽  
Guillermo de Velasco ◽  
Lucia Carril ◽  
Daniel Castellano

704 Background: ICIs + TKIs have shown to improve outcomes in treatment-naïve metastatic clear-cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC). We aimed to analize the efficacy of all combinations published including the subgroup analysis based on age, sex and IMDC prognostic factors score. Methods: We searched published RCTs in MEDLINE and EMBASE comparing ICIs + TKIs vs TKIs in 1L metastatic ccRCC. Outcomes selected to assess efficacy were progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS) and objective response rate (ORR) in the intent-to-treat population. Hazard ratios (HR) for PFS and OS, and relative risk (RR) for ORR with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were used as efficacy measures. Subgroup-based meta-analysis was afterwards performed according to randomized-effect model. Results: We identified two eligible RCTs of ICIs + TKIs (avelumab [avelu] or pembrolizumab [pembro] + axitinib [axi]) versus TKIs (sunitinib). Combined sample size was 1,747 patients (avelu + axi arm 442 patients; pembro + axi arm 432 patients; sunitinib arm 873 patients). Globally, three outcomes favored the combination. Improved HRs for PFS (0.69), OS (0.64) and ORR (1.81) were found for combination (Table). Regarding subgroup analysis HRs for PFS were favorable for combination in male (0.665) and female (0.66). Benefit in combination arms was confirmed in terms of age < 65 years (0.68) and ≥ 65 years (0.66). Intermediate and poor IMDC subgroups showed statistically significant benefit for combination (HR 0.68 and 0.56), whereas PFS in favorable group (0.68) was not statistically significant. Conclusions: ICIs + TKIs combination therapy has consistently demonstrated to be superior in terms of OS, PFS and ORR in 1L ccRCC to TKIs alone. We hereby confirm statistically significant benefit per subgroups except for favorable IMDC subgroup.[Table: see text]

2014 ◽  
Vol 32 (4_suppl) ◽  
pp. 425-425 ◽  
Author(s):  
Francisco Emilio Vera-Badillo ◽  
Arnoud Templeton ◽  
Alberto Ocana ◽  
Paulo deGouveia ◽  
Priya Aneja ◽  
...  

425 Background: Clinical data supporting the efficacy of systemic therapy in non-clear cell renal cell carcinoma (non-ccRCC) are limited and based on retrospective analyses, expanded access programs and single arm phase II trials. Therefore the optimal treatment for this subgroup remains uncertain. Methods: A systematic review of electronic databases was conducted to identify publications evaluating the outcomes of patients with non-ccRCC (excluding those with sarcomatoid tumors) treated with different systemic approaches (immunotherapy, chemotherapy, targeted agents, small molecules). The primary endpoint was response rate and secondary endpoints were median progression free (PFS) and overall survival (OS). Where possible, data were pooled in a meta-analysis using the Mantel-Haenszel random-effect modeling. For studies comprising of unselected patients, outcomes of those with non-ccRCC were compared with clear cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC). Results: Forty-nine studies comprising 7,799 patients were included: 471 patients were enrolled on studies conducted exclusively in non-ccRCC and 7,328 patients on studies of unselected renal cell carcinoma. Among these, 903 (12%) had non-ccRCC and 6,425 (88%) had ccRCC. For non-ccRCC, overall response rate, median PFS and median OS were 9%, 7.9 and 13.4 months, respectively. By comparison, the overall response rate for ccRCC was 15% (Risk Ratio for response [RR] 0.67, 95% CI 0.52-0.86, p=0.002). This association was independent of type of treatment administered. Among the different novel agents (bevacizumab, lenalidomide, linefanib, sorafenib, sunitinib, pazopanib, everolimus and temsirolimus), sunitinib was significantly less efficacious in non-ccRCC than ccRCC (RR 0.56, 95% CI 0.42-0.72), but there was no significant difference in response rates for sorafenib (RR 0.64, 95% CI 0.31-1.35) or other agents (RR 1.10, 95% CI 0.50-2.44), However, confidence intervals were wide. Results of further analyses will be presented at the meeting. Conclusions: Patients with non-ccRCC have lower response rates than those with ccRCC, but the absolute difference between them is modest. Further study of targeted therapy in non-ccRCC is warranted.


2012 ◽  
Vol 61 (2) ◽  
pp. 258-268 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. Rose Brannon ◽  
Scott M. Haake ◽  
Kathryn E. Hacker ◽  
Raj S. Pruthi ◽  
Eric M. Wallen ◽  
...  

2020 ◽  
Vol 38 (6_suppl) ◽  
pp. 685-685 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas E. Hutson ◽  
M Dror Michaelson ◽  
Timothy M. Kuzel ◽  
Neeraj Agarwal ◽  
Ana M. Molina ◽  
...  

685 Background: Non-clear cell renal cell carcinoma (nccRCC) is an umbrella term that encompasses multiple RCC histological subtypes, including papillary, chromophobe, and undetermined RCC. Both increased expression of the vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) and dysregulation of the mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) pathway occur in nccRCC. Lenvatinib (LEN) is a multitarget tyrosine kinase inhibitor that inhibits the VEGF receptor and other targets; everolimus (EVE) is a mTOR inhibitor. LEN + EVE is approved for the treatment of patients with advanced RCC following 1 prior antiangiogenic therapy. This phase 2 study examined the efficacy and tolerability of LEN + EVE in patients with nccRCC. Methods: This single-arm, multicenter, phase 2 trial assessed the safety and efficacy of LEN (18 mg once daily) + EVE (5 mg once daily) in patients with unresectable advanced or metastatic nccRCC who had not received any chemotherapy for advanced disease. The primary objective was objective response rate (ORR) as assessed by investigators using RECIST v1.1. Secondary objectives included progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and safety assessments. Results: At the time of data cutoff (July 17, 2019), 31 patients with nccRCC (papillary, n = 20; chromophobe, n = 9; unclassified, n = 2) were enrolled and treated. The ORR was 25.8% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 11.9–44.6%); 8 patients achieved a partial response (PR; papillary, n = 3; chromophobe, n = 4; unclassified, n = 1) and no patients had a complete response (CR). The median duration of response was not reached. Additionally, 18 patients (58.1%) had stable disease (SD) and the clinical benefit rate (CR + PR + durable SD [duration ≥ 23 weeks]) was 61.3% (95% CI: 42.2–78.2%). The median PFS was 9.23 months (95% CI: 5.49- not estimable [NE]) and median OS was 15.64 months (95% CI: 9.23–NE). The safety profile observed in this study was similar to the established profile of the study drug combination (LEN + EVE). Conclusions: The combination of LEN + EVE showed promising antitumor activity as first-line therapy in patients with advanced nccRCC. The ORR was 25.8%, which compares favorably to historical reports with EVE monotherapy. Clinical trial information: NCT02915783.


2021 ◽  
Vol 11 ◽  
Author(s):  
Haixiang Shen ◽  
Jin Liu ◽  
Shiming Chen ◽  
Xueyou Ma ◽  
Yufan Ying ◽  
...  

BackgroundTumor-associated macrophages (TAMs) are the major immune cells in tumor microenvironment. The prognostic significance of TAMs has been confirmed in various tumors. However, whether TAMs can be prognostic factors in clear cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC) is unclear. In this study, we aimed to clarify the prognostic value of TAMs in ccRCC.MethodsWe searched PubMed, Embase, and the Web of Science for relevant published studies before December 19, 2020. Evidence from enrolled studies were pooled and analyzed by a meta-analysis. Hazard ratios (HRs) and odd ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were computed to evaluate the pooled results.ResultsBoth of high CD68+ TAMs and M2-TAMs were risk factors for poor prognosis in ccRCC patients. The pooled HRs indicated that elevated CD68+ TAMs correlated with poor OS and PFS (HR: 3.97, 95% CI 1.39–11.39; HR: 5.73, 95% CI 2.36–13.90, respectively). For M2-TAMs, the pooled results showed ccRCC patients with high M2-TAMs suffered a worse OS and shorter PFS, with HR 1.32 (95% CI 1.16–1.50) and 1.40 (95% CI 1.14–1.72), respectively. Also, high density of TAMs was associated with advanced clinicopathological features in ccRCC.ConclusionsTAMs could be potential biomarkers for prognosis and novel targets for immunotherapy in ccRCC. Further researches are warranted to validate our results.


Oncoscience ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 1 (2) ◽  
pp. 117-131 ◽  
Author(s):  
Apostolos Zaravinos ◽  
Myrtani Pieri ◽  
Nikos Mourmouras ◽  
Natassa Anastasiadou ◽  
Ioanna Zouvani ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document