Application of the International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium and Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center Risk Models in Patients with Metastatic Non-Clear Cell Renal Cell Carcinoma: A Multi-Institutional Retrospective Study Using the Korean Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Registry

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.

Download Full-text

STAT-3 and Β-catenin expression in metastatic clear cell renal cell carcinoma (mRCC).

Journal of Clinical Oncology ◽

10.1200/jco.2016.34.2_suppl.583 ◽

2016 ◽

Vol 34 (2_suppl) ◽

pp. 583-583

Author(s):

Aline Fusco Fares ◽

Isabela Cunha ◽

Daniel Vilarim Araujo ◽

Leonardo de Azevedo Boente ◽

Daniel Garcia ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Renal Cell Carcinoma ◽

Cell Carcinoma ◽

Systemic Therapy ◽

Renal Cell ◽

Clear Cell ◽

Antiangiogenic Therapy ◽

Prognostic Scores ◽

Cancer Center ◽

Cell Renal Cell Carcinoma ◽

Prognostic Criteria

583 Background: In mRCC, there are no prospectively validated biomarkers to guide the treatment and therapy decision is based on prognostic scores and histology. STAT-3 and Wnt/b-cateninare cell proliferation pathways and have already been related to prognostic in renal cell carcinoma. Objective: to evaluate the role of STAT-3 and b-catenin expression as prognostic biomarkers in clear cell mRCC. Methods: 684 medical records of renal cell carcinoma patients treated at AC Camargo Cancer Center from 2007 to 2015 were reviewed. 86 out of 684 patients fulfilled the study criteria: metastatic clear cell carcinoma, no sarcomatoid features, previous systemic therapy, previous nephrectomy and available tumor specimens from metastatic site. Pathological samples were arranged in a TMA. The number of positive stainings cells for each antibody in each core was categorized as low positive or negative versus highly positive expression. Results: We had available tissue blocks from 47 tumors. 32/45 patients (71,1%) had highly positive membrane b-catenin and none of the patients was positive for nuclear b-catenin. 27 /45 (60%) were categorized as low positive or negative STAT-3. There was no statistically significant association between STAT-3 and b-catenin expression with clinical prognostic criteria (MSKCC and Heng criteria). In the multivariate analysis, KPS < 80% (p = 0.02; HR: 2.7), time from nephrectomy to metastasis < 1 year (p = 0.04; HR: 2.1), no hypothyroidism (p = 0.05; HR: 2.4) and MSKCC criteria (p = 0.02; HR: 2.5) were confirmed as negative prognostic factors. Associative analysis showed that none of the patients with negative membrane b-catenin had response to systemic therapy (p=0.02). OS was 35.5 months (IC 22.2-48.8) and PFS was 12.5 months (IC 10.0-14.0). Conclusions: in our cohort, STAT-3 and B-catenin expression are not associated with the prognostic criteria (MSKCC and Heng). The loss of B-catenin expression is associated to a worse response rate to antiangiogenic therapy in metastatic clear cell renal cancer. [Table: see text]

Download Full-text

Impact of disagreement between the IMDC and MSKCC risk groups on prognosis in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma.

Journal of Clinical Oncology ◽

10.1200/jco.2019.37.7_suppl.556 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 37 (7_suppl) ◽

pp. 556-556

Author(s):

Shingo Hatakeyama ◽

Toshiaki Tanaka ◽

Yoshinori Ikehata ◽

Naoki Fujita ◽

Hayato Yamamoto ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Renal Cell Carcinoma ◽

Cell Carcinoma ◽

Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma ◽

Renal Cell ◽

Risk Group ◽

Cancer Center ◽

Risk Models ◽

K Value ◽

Number Of Patients ◽

The Impact

556 Background: As the clinical implication of the risk group disagreement between the risk models remains unclear, we aimed to investigate the impact of the risk group disagreement between the Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center (MSKCC) and the International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium (IMDC) models on prognosis. Methods: We retrospectively evaluated 176 patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) who were treated with tyrosine kinase inhibitors as first-line therapy in five hospitals between October 2008 and August 2018. The risk group classification differences between the MSKCC and the IMDC models were evaluated using criteria of agreement (identical risk group in both the MSKCC and IMDC models) and disagreement (not identical risk group in both the MSKCC and IMDC models). The agreement of risk stratification between the MSKCC and IMDC models was evaluated using Cohen’s k coefficient. Oncological outcomes were compared between the agreement and disagreement groups. Results: The number of patients with agreement, upgrade, and downgrade was 135/176 (77%), 39/176 (22%), and 2/176 (1.1%), respectively. Of 41 patients with disagreement, reclassification from the MSKCC-intermediate to the IMDC-poor-risk group was most frequent (n = 34/176, 19%). The Cohen’s k coefficient for agreement of the two risk models was substantial with k value of 0.613 ( P < 0.001). Significantly poorer prognosis was observed in patients with disagreement than in those with agreement. Conclusions: Disagreement between the MSKCC and IMDC models may have a negative impact on prognosis in patients with mRCC. Further study is necessary to validate our findings.

Download Full-text

Randomized Phase III Trial of Temsirolimus and Bevacizumab Versus Interferon Alfa and Bevacizumab in Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma: INTORACT Trial

Journal of Clinical Oncology ◽

10.1200/jco.2013.50.5305 ◽

2014 ◽

Vol 32 (8) ◽

pp. 752-759 ◽

Cited By ~ 134

Author(s):

Brian I. Rini ◽

Joaquim Bellmunt ◽

Jill Clancy ◽

Kongming Wang ◽

Andreas G. Niethammer ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Renal Cell Carcinoma ◽

Combination Therapy ◽

Cell Carcinoma ◽

Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma ◽

Renal Cell ◽

Clear Cell ◽

Objective Response ◽

Interferon Alfa ◽

Phase Iii ◽

Cancer Center

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.

Download Full-text