Cabozantinib (C) in combination with nivolumab (N) and ipilimumab (I) (CaNI) for advanced renal cell carcinoma with variant histology (aRCCVH).

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. TPS4592-TPS4592
Author(s):  
Bradley Alexander McGregor ◽  
Wanling Xie ◽  
Mehmet Asim Bilen ◽  
David A. Braun ◽  
Wenxin Xu ◽  
...  

TPS4592 Background: Despite advances in therapy of clear cell renal cell carcinoma, outcomes for patients with aRCCVH remain poor and these patients have typically been excluded from pivotal phase III studies. COSMIC-313 (NCT03937219) exploring C/N/I vs N/I excludes those with aRCCVH. Given responses seen with C as well as N/I in aRCCVH, there is reason to explore this triplet combination in this population. Methods: NCT04413123 is single arm phase 2 trial multi-institutional study involving Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Winship Cancer Institute, Karmanos Cancer Center, University of California in San Diego and University of Texas Southwestern. The primary objective is to assess the objective response rate (ORR) by investigator-assessed Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) Version 1.1 of C in combination with N/I in aRCCVH. Key secondary endpoints are progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS) and toxicity by Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) version 5. Mandatory pretreatment biopsy (unless medically infeasible) is required for correlative analysis to define the composition and transcriptional states of tumor and immune cells within the aRCCVH microenvironment in addition to determining the number and state of tumor-infiltrating T cell clones in aRCCVH and relation to response. Any variant histology is allowed, including clear-cell RCC with over 80% sarcomatoid features. Patients may be treatment naïve or received prior therapy including up to one anti-vascular endothelial growth factor agent not including C; prior therapy with immune checkpoint inhibitors is exclusionary. All International Metastatic RCC Database Consortium risk classifications are allowed; patients should have adequate organ function with performance status 0-1. C will be administered at a starting dose of 40 mg daily. N will be dosed at 3 mg/kg with I 1 mg/kg every 3 weeks followed by maintenance N 480 mg IV every 4 weeks and will be continued until progressive disease or unacceptable toxicity. C can be reduced to. 20 mg daily or 20 mg every other day as needed for toxicity. Dose reductions of N or I are not permitted but delays up to 12 weeks are allowed; N may be continued without I if toxicity can be directly attributed to I. Radiographic imaging is performed at baseline with first scheduled assessment at 12 weeks then every 8 weeks thereafter. A one-stage design is employed to enroll 40 eligible patients, which provides 93% power at 1-sided alpha of 0.09 to distinguish an ORR of 40% versus 20%. 12 or more responses are required to deem treatment promising. Seven of the planned 40 patients have been enrolled as of 2/1/2021. Clinical trial information: NCT04413123.

2014 ◽  
Vol 32 (8) ◽  
pp. 752-759 ◽  
Author(s):  
Brian I. Rini ◽  
Joaquim Bellmunt ◽  
Jill Clancy ◽  
Kongming Wang ◽  
Andreas G. Niethammer ◽  
...  

PurposeTo prospectively determine the efficacy of combination therapy with temsirolimus plus bevacizumab versus interferon alfa (IFN) plus bevacizumab in metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC).Patients and MethodsIn a randomized, open-label, multicenter, phase III study, patients with previously untreated predominantly clear-cell mRCC were randomly assigned, stratified by prior nephrectomy and Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center prognostic group, to receive the combination of either temsirolimus (25 mg intravenously, weekly) or IFN (9 MIU subcutaneously thrice weekly) with bevacizumab (10 mg/kg intravenously, every 2 weeks). The primary end point was independently assessed progression-free survival (PFS).ResultsMedian PFS in patients treated with temsirolimus/bevacizumab (n = 400) versus IFN/bevacizumab (n = 391) was 9.1 and 9.3 months, respectively (hazard ratio [HR], 1.1; 95% CI, 0.9 to 1.3; P = .8). There were no significant differences in overall survival (25.8 ν 25.5 months; HR, 1.0; P = .6) or objective response rate (27.0% ν 27.4%) with temsirolimus/bevacizumab versus IFN/bevacizumab, respectively. Patients receiving temsirolimus/bevacizumab reported significantly higher overall mean scores in the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy–Kidney Symptom Index (FKSI) –15 and FKSI-Disease Related Symptoms subscale compared with IFN/bevacizumab (indicating improvement); however, no differences in global health outcome measures were observed. Treatment-emergent all-causality grade ≥ 3 adverse events more common (P < .001) with temsirolimus/bevacizumab were mucosal inflammation, stomatitis, hypophosphatemia, hyperglycemia, and hypercholesterolemia, whereas neutropenia was more common with IFN/bevacizumab. Incidence of pneumonitis with temsirolimus/bevacizumab was 4.8%, mostly grade 1 or 2.ConclusionTemsirolimus/bevacizumab combination therapy was not superior to IFN/bevacizumab for first-line treatment in clear-cell mRCC.


2019 ◽  
Vol 37 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. TPS4595-TPS4595 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nizar M. Tannir ◽  
Neeraj Agarwal ◽  
Sumanta K. Pal ◽  
Maria Nirvana Formiga ◽  
Jun Guo ◽  
...  

TPS4595 Background: Bempegaldesleukin (NKTR-214) is a CD122-preferential IL-2 pathway agonist that stimulates proliferation and activation of tumor antigen-specific CD8+ T cells and natural killer cells within the tumor microenvironment and increases PD-1/PD-L1 expression. These properties make bempegaldesleukin (NKTR-214) a potentially promising agent for combination therapy with checkpoint inhibitors that target and inhibit the PD-1/PD-L1 pathway. In phase 1 studies, NKTR-214 plus nivolumab demonstrated encouraging objective response rates (ORR) in first-line renal cell carcinoma (RCC) and an acceptable safety profile. Immunotherapy with NKTR-214 plus nivolumab may lead to greater clinical benefit than tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs), standard-of-care agents, in this patient population. Methods: This multicenter, randomized, open-label phase 3 study (NCT03729245) will evaluate the efficacy and safety of bempegaldesleukin (NKTR-214) plus nivolumab compared with investigator’s choice of TKI (sunitinib or cabozantinib) in patients with previously untreated advanced or metastatic RCC with clear cell component. Exclusion criteria include active brain metastasis and autoimmune disease. Approximately 600 patients will be randomized in a 1:1 ratio, stratified by PD-L1 status (≥1% vs < 1% or indeterminate), International Metastatic RCC Database Consortium prognostic score (1-2 [intermediate risk] vs 3-6 [poor risk]); and TKI (sunitinib or cabozantinib; cabozantinib percentage to be capped at 50%). Combination therapy will consist of bempegaldesleukin (NKTR-214) 0.006 mg/kg intravenously (IV) every 3 weeks (Q3W) plus nivolumab 360 mg IV Q3W until progression or death or maximum of 2 years. TKI therapy will consist of sunitinib 50 mg orally once daily (QD) for 4 weeks followed by 2 weeks off or cabozantinib 60 mg orally QD. Primary objectives are ORR by blinded independent central radiology (BICR) assessment and overall survival. Secondary objectives are progression-free survival by BICR, safety, predictive value of PD-L1 expression, and quality of life. Enrollment is ongoing. Clinical trial information: NCT03729245.


2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Matthew D. Tucker ◽  
Landon C. Brown ◽  
Yu-Wei Chen ◽  
Chester Kao ◽  
Nathan Hirshman ◽  
...  

Abstract Background The identification of biomarkers to select patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) most likely to respond to combination immunotherapy (IO) is needed. We sought to investigate an association of the baseline neutrophil-to-eosinophil ratio (NER) with outcomes to nivolumab plus ipilimumab for patients with mRCC. Methods We performed a retrospective review of patients with clear cell mRCC treated with nivolumab plus ipilimumab from Vanderbilt-Ingram Cancer Center and Duke Cancer Institute. Patients with prior receipt of immunotherapy and those without available baseline complete blood count with differential were excluded. Patients were divided into groups by the median baseline NER and analyzed for overall survival (OS), progression free survival (PFS), and objective response rate (ORR). Patients were also divided by median baseline neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) and analyzed for clinical outcome. Further analyses of patients above/below the median NER and NLR were performed in subgroups of IMDC intermediate/poor risk, IMDC favorable risk, and treatment naïve patients. Results A total of 110 patients were included: median age was 61 years and 75% were treatment naïve. The median NER (mNER) at baseline was 26.4. The ORR was 40% for patients with <mNER compared to 21.8% among patients with >mNER (OR 2.39, p = 0.04). The median PFS for patients with <mNER was significantly longer at 8.6 months (mo) compared to 3.2 mo for patients with >mNER (HR 0.50, p < 0.01). Median OS was not reached (NR) for patients with <mNER compared with 27.3 mo for patients with >mNER (HR 0.31, p < 0.01). The median NLR (mNLR) was 3.42. While patients with <mNLR showed improvement in OS (HR 0.42, p = 0.02), PFS and ORR did not differ compared with patients in the >mNLR group. Conclusions A lower baseline NER was associated with improved clinical outcomes (PFS, OS, and ORR) in patients with mRCC treated with nivolumab plus ipilimumab, and prospective validation of the baseline NER as a predictive biomarker for response to immunotherapy-based combinations in mRCC is warranted.


2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (6_suppl) ◽  
pp. 341-341
Author(s):  
Matthew D Tucker ◽  
Katy Beckermann ◽  
Kristin Kathleen Ancell ◽  
Kerry Schaffer ◽  
Renee McAlister ◽  
...  

341 Background: Neutrophilia is known to be associated with worse prognosis in metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC); however, less is known about the role of eosinophils in the response to immunotherapy (IO). We investigated the association of the baseline neutrophil to eosinophil ratio (NER) with outcomes to IO-based combination treatment in mRCC. Methods: Patients with mRCC treated with ipilimumab plus nivolumab, pembrolizumab plus axitinib, or avelumab plus axitinib at the Vanderbilt-Ingram Cancer Center were retrospectively identified. Patients on >10mg prednisone and patients with prior IO were excluded. Baseline NER (at time of first IO) and association with progression free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and objective response rate (ORR) were investigated. Data cutoff was 9/1/2020. Analysis for PFS and OS was performed using the log-rank test and Mantel-Haenszel method, and analysis of the odds ratio for ORR was performed using Fischer’s exact test. Results: Sixty-one patients were identified: 89% clear cell histology, 74% prior nephrectomy, 69% IMDC intermediate risk, and 72% treatment-naïve. Patients with baseline NER < median (N=31) had improved clinical outcomes compared to patients with baseline NER > median (N=30) (Table). Improvement in PFS by NER was maintained when stratified by anti-PD-1/CTLA-4 and anti-PD(L)-1/VEGF (p= 0.0062 and p= 0.049); however, differences in OS and ORR were no longer significant. The median baseline NER among patients with partial response (PR) was significantly lower at 22.7 (95% CI 18.9-31.1) vs. 51.6 (95% CI 39.5-93.1) among those with progressive disease (PD) (p= 0.0054). For comparison, the median neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio was not significantly different between PR (2.60) and PD (3.84, p= 0.056). Conclusions: Patients with a low baseline NER treated with IO-based combinations had improved clinical outcomes compared to patients with a high baseline NER. Additional investigation of this parameter in larger cohorts is warranted. [Table: see text]


2018 ◽  
Vol 36 (8) ◽  
pp. 757-764 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Cella ◽  
Bernard Escudier ◽  
Nizar M. Tannir ◽  
Thomas Powles ◽  
Frede Donskov ◽  
...  

Purpose In the phase III METEOR trial ( ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01865747), 658 previously treated patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma were randomly assigned 1:1 to receive cabozantinib or everolimus. The cabozantinib arm had improved progression-free survival, overall survival, and objective response rate compared with everolimus. Changes in quality of life (QoL), an exploratory end point, are reported here. Patients and Methods Patients completed the 19-item Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy–Kidney Symptom Index (FKSI-19) and the five-level EuroQol (EQ-5D-5L) questionnaires at baseline and throughout the study. The nine-item FKSI–Disease-Related Symptoms (FKSI-DRS), a subset of FKSI-19, was also investigated. Data were summarized descriptively and by repeated-measures analysis (for which a clinically relevant difference was an effect size ≥ 0.3). Time to deterioration (TTD) was defined as the earlier of date of death, radiographic progressive disease, or ≥ 4-point decrease from baseline in FKSI-DRS. Results The QoL questionnaire completion rates remained ≥ 75% through week 48 in each arm. There was no difference over time for FKSI-19 Total, FKSI-DRS, or EQ-5D data between the cabozantinib and everolimus arms. Among the individual FKSI-19 items, cabozantinib was associated with worse diarrhea and nausea; everolimus was associated with worse shortness of breath. These differences are consistent with the adverse event profile of each drug. Cabozantinib improved TTD overall, with a marked improvement in patients with bone metastases at baseline. Conclusion In patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma, relative to everolimus, cabozantinib generally maintained QoL to a similar extent. Compared with everolimus, cabozantinib extended TTD overall and markedly improved TTD in patients with bone metastases.


2020 ◽  
Vol 38 (1) ◽  
pp. 63-70 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bradley A. McGregor ◽  
Rana R. McKay ◽  
David A. Braun ◽  
Lillian Werner ◽  
Kathryn Gray ◽  
...  

PURPOSE In this multicenter phase II trial, we evaluated atezolizumab combined with bevacizumab in patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC) with variant histology or any RCC histology with ≥ 20% sarcomatoid differentiation. PATIENTS AND METHODS Eligible patients may have received previous systemic therapy, excluding prior bevacizumab or checkpoint inhibitors. Patients underwent a baseline biopsy and received atezolizumab 1,200 mg and bevacizumab 15 mg/kg intravenously every 3 weeks. The primary end point was overall response rate (ORR) by RECIST version 1.1. Additional end points were progression-free survival (PFS), toxicity, biomarkers of response as determined by programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) status, and on-therapy quality-of-life (QOL) metrics using the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy Kidney Symptom Index-19 and the Brief Fatigue Inventory. RESULTS Sixty patients received at least 1 dose of either study agent; the majority (65%) were treatment naïve. The ORR for the overall population was 33% and 50% in patients with clear cell RCC with sarcomatoid differentiation and 26% in patients with variant histology RCC. Median PFS was 8.3 months (95% CI, 5.7 to 10.9 months). PD-L1 status was available for 36 patients; 15 (42%) had ≥ 1% expression on tumor cells. ORR in PD-L1–positive patients was 60% (n = 9) v 19% (n = 4) in PD-L1–negative patients. Eight patients (13%) developed treatment-related grade 3 toxicities. There were no treatment-related grade 4-5 toxicities. QOL was maintained throughout therapy. CONCLUSION In this study, atezolizumab and bevacizumab demonstrated safety and resulted in objective responses in patients with variant histology RCC or RCC with ≥ 20% sarcomatoid differentiation. This regimen warrants additional exploration in patients with rare RCC, particularly those with PD-L1–positive tumors.


2020 ◽  
Vol 38 (34) ◽  
pp. 4064-4075
Author(s):  
Tim Eisen ◽  
Eleni Frangou ◽  
Bhavna Oza ◽  
Alastair W.S. Ritchie ◽  
Benjamin Smith ◽  
...  

PURPOSE SORCE is an international, randomized, double-blind, three-arm trial of sorafenib after surgical excision of primary renal cell carcinoma (RCC) found to be at intermediate or high risk of recurrence. PATIENTS AND METHODS We randomly assigned participants (2:3:3) to 3 years of placebo (arm A), 1 year of sorafenib followed by 2 years of placebo (arm B), or 3 years of sorafenib (arm C). The initial sorafenib dose was 400 mg twice per day orally, amended to 400 mg daily. The primary outcome analysis, which was revised as a result of external results, was investigator-reported disease-free survival (DFS) comparing 3 years of sorafenib versus placebo. RESULTS Between July 2007 and April 2013, we randomly assigned 1,711 participants (430, 642, and 639 participants in arms A, B, and C, respectively). Median age was 58 years, 71% of patients were men, 84% had clear cell histology, 53% were at intermediate risk of recurrence, and 47% were at high risk of recurrence. We observed no differences in DFS or overall survival in all randomly assigned patients, patients with high risk of recurrence, or patients with clear cell RCC only. Median DFS was not reached for 3 years of sorafenib or for placebo (hazard ratio, 1.01; 95% CI, 0.83 to 1.23; P = .95). We observed nonproportional hazards; the restricted mean survival time (RMST) was 6.81 years for 3 years of sorafenib and 6.82 years for placebo (RMST difference, 0.01 year; 95% CI, −0.49 to 0.48 year; P = .99). Despite offering treatment adaptations, more than half of participants stopped treatment by 12 months. Grade 3 hand-foot skin reaction was reported in 24% of participants on sorafenib. CONCLUSION Sorafenib should not be used as adjuvant therapy for RCC. Active surveillance remains the standard of care for patients at intermediate or high risk of recurrence after nephrectomy and is the appropriate control of our current international adjuvant RCC trial, RAMPART.


2010 ◽  
Vol 28 (13) ◽  
pp. 2137-2143 ◽  
Author(s):  
Brian I. Rini ◽  
Susan Halabi ◽  
Jonathan E. Rosenberg ◽  
Walter M. Stadler ◽  
Daniel A. Vaena ◽  
...  

Purpose Bevacizumab is an antibody that binds vascular endothelial growth factor and has activity in metastatic renal cell carcinoma (RCC). Interferon alfa (IFN-α) is the historic standard initial treatment for RCC. A prospective, randomized, phase III trial of bevacizumab plus IFN-α versus IFN-α monotherapy was conducted. Patients and Methods Patients with previously untreated, metastatic clear cell RCC were randomly assigned to receive either bevacizumab (10 mg/kg intravenously every 2 weeks) plus IFN-α (9 million units subcutaneously three times weekly) or the same dose and schedule of IFN-α monotherapy in a multicenter phase III trial. The primary end point was overall survival (OS). Secondary end points were progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate, and safety. Results Seven hundred thirty-two patients were enrolled. The median OS time was 18.3 months (95% CI, 16.5 to 22.5 months) for bevacizumab plus IFN-α and 17.4 months (95% CI, 14.4 to 20.0 months) for IFN-α monotherapy (unstratified log-rank P = .097). Adjusting on stratification factors, the hazard ratio was 0.86 (95% CI, 0.73 to 1.01; stratified log-rank P = .069) favoring bevacizumab plus IFN-α. There was significantly more grade 3 to 4 hypertension (HTN), anorexia, fatigue, and proteinuria for bevacizumab plus IFN-α. Patients who developed HTN on bevacizumab plus IFN-α had a significantly improved PFS and OS versus patients without HTN. Conclusion OS favored the bevacizumab plus IFN-α arm but did not meet the predefined criteria for significance. HTN may be a biomarker of outcome with bevacizumab plus IFN-α.


2013 ◽  
Vol 31 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 4522-4522
Author(s):  
Kimryn Rathmell ◽  
Samira A Brooks ◽  
Angela Rose Brannon ◽  
Joel S Parker ◽  
Jennifer C Fisher ◽  
...  

4522 Background: The objective of this study is to create a molecular tool that can be applied widely to clinical specimens using existing transcript signatures for use in clinical risk prediction of clear cell Renal Cell Carcinoma (ccRCC) to improve personalized disease management. Methods: We developed a 34-gene subtype predictor to classify clear cell tumors according to two subtypes, clear cell A (ccA) or B (ccB). The training set consisted of 72 ccRCC microarray-analyzed tumor samples that had previously been classified by unsupervised clustering and logical analysis of data (LAD). The predictor was developed from a panel of genes significantly expressed in ccA and ccB tumors and associated with prognosis. The prognostic value of the algorithm was corroborated in RNA-sequencing data from 379 ccRCC samples from The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) and further validated using the NanoString platform with a cohort of 163 archival fixed samples collected at the University of North Carolina. Results: Risk associated molecular subtypes, ccA and ccB, were classified in TCGA and NanoString cohorts. Subtype classification showed significant prognostic outcomes for overall survival (p<.001), cancer-specific survival (p=.003), and recurrence-free survival (p<.05) and remained significant in multivariate analyses that included age at diagnosis, gender, ethnicity, pathologic stage, and histologic grade. A prognostic model was built for overall and recurrence-free survival for non-metastatic ccRCC patients within the context of subtype and clinical characteristics. Conclusions: The ccA and ccB subtypes significantly added prognostic information to clinical parameters, particularly for non-metastatic ccRCC patients.The subtypes can be used for future analyses involving risk for developing metastatic disease and cancer-specific outcomes. This research was supported with a grant from the American Association for Cancer Research, and the UNC Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center Cancer Cell Biology Training Grant.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document