Search

Background In metastatic urothelial carcinoma (mUC), predictive biomarkers that correlate with response to immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) are lacking. Here, we interrogated genomic and clinical features associated with response to ICIs in mUC. Methods Sixty two mUC patients treated with ICI who had targeted tumour sequencing were studied. We examined associations between candidate biomarkers and clinical benefit (CB, any objective reduction in tumour size) versus no clinical benefit (NCB, no change or objective increase in tumour size). Both univariable and multivariable analyses for associations were conducted. A comparator cohort of 39 mUC patients treated with taxanes was analysed by using the same methodology. Results Nine clinical and seven genomic factors correlated with clinical outcomes in univariable analysis in the ICI cohort. Among the 16 factors, neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) ≥5 (OR = 0.12, 95% CI, 0.01–1.15), visceral metastasis (OR = 0.05, 95% CI, 0.01–0.43) and single-nucleotide variant (SNV) count Conclusions This three-factor model includes genomic (SNV count >9) and clinical (NLR

BACKGROUND: Metastatic urothelial carcinoma (mUC) is a genomically diverse disease with known alterations in the mTOR pathway and tyrosine kinases including FGFR. We investigated the efficacy and safety of combination treatment with everolimus and pazopanib (E/P) in genomically profiled patients with mUC. METHODS: mUC patients enrolled on a Phase I dose escalation study and an expansion cohort treated with E/P were included. The primary end point was objective response rate (ORR); secondary end points were safety, duration of response (DOR), progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). Patients were assessed for mutations and copy number alterations in 300 relevant cancer-associated genes using next-generation sequencing and findings were correlated with outcomes. Time-to-event data were estimated with Kaplan-Meier methods. RESULTS: Of the 23 patients enrolled overall, 19 had mUC. ORR was 21% (one complete response (CR), three partial responses (PR), eight with stable disease (SD). DOR, PFS and OS were 6.5, 3.6, and 9.1 months, respectively. Four patients with clinical benefit (one CR, two PR, one SD) had mutations in TSC1/TSC2 or mTOR and a 5th patient with PR had a FGFR3-TACC3 fusion. CONCLUSIONS: Combination therapy with E/P is safe in mUC and select patients with alterations in mTOR or FGFR pathways derive significant clinical benefit.

Programmed cell death-1 (PD-1) is a recognized immune checkpoint. It is frequently upregulated on the T cells that infiltrate tumors, providing an inhibitory signal, which may facilitate immune escape. Blocking antibodies have been developed to interrupt the interaction of PD-1 with its ligands PD-L1/PD-L2, with the goal of increasing the host antitumor immune response. Initial results have been encouraging, with durable responses in both treatment-naive and pretreated patients, along with an acceptable toxicity profile. This tolerability makes PD-1 blockade an excellent potential partner for combination strategies with the approved targeted agents, such as tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) and anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) antibodies, as well as other investigational immune checkpoint inhibitors or agonist antibodies that may costimulate an immune response. PD-L1 expression on tumor cells and tumor-infiltrating immune cells is also being evaluated as a predictive biomarker of response to treatment. This review summarizes the biological basis, preclinical studies, ongoing trials, and future challenges associated with targeting the PD-1 pathway in renal cell carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Limited data exist on outcomes for metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) patients treated with multiple lines of therapy. Benchmarks for survival are required for patient counselling and clinical trial design.METHODS: Outcomes of mRCC patients from the International mRCC Database Consortium database treated with 1, 2, or 3+ lines of targeted therapy (TT) were compared by proportional hazards regression. Overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were calculated using different population inclusion criteria.RESULTS: In total, 2705 patients were treated with TT of which 57% received only first-line TT, 27% received two lines of TT, and 16% received 3+ lines of TT. Overall survival of patients who received 1, 2, or 3+ lines of TT were 14.9, 21.0, and 39.2 months, respectively, from first-line TT (PCONCLUSIONS: Patients who are able to receive more lines of TT live longer. Survival benchmarks provide context and perspective when interpreting and designing clinical trials.

There are many active drugs to treat metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) patients who progress through their first-line vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) inhibitor. Many clinicians choose a second-line VEGF inhibitor based on the type of response to first-line VEGF inhibitor, without data supporting this practice. This study was conducted to determine the association of response to second-line VEGF inhibitor with response to first-line VEGF inhibitor. All mRCC patients in participating centers of the International mRCC Database Consortium who were treated from January 2004 through June 2011 with a second-line VEGF inhibitor after failure of a different first-line VEGF inhibitor were retrospectively identified. The primary outcome is objective response rate (ORR) and the secondary outcome is progression-free survival (PFS) in each line of therapy. Of 1,602 total database patients, 464 patients received a first- and second-line VEGF inhibitor. The ORR to first-line therapy was 22 %, and the ORR to second-line therapy was 11 %. The ORR to second-line therapy was not different among patients achieving partial response versus stable disease versus progressive disease to first-line therapy (14 % vs. 10 % vs. 11 %, respectively; chi-squared trend test p = 0.17). The median PFS on first-line VEGF-targeted therapy was 7.5 months (95 % CI, 6.6-8.1), and the median PFS on second-line VEGF inhibitor was 3.9 months (95 % CI, 3.6-4.5). There was no correlation between first-line and second-line PFS (Pearson correlation coefficient 0.025; p = 0.59). The clinical response to a second-line VEGF inhibitor is not dependent on response to the first-line VEGF-inhibitor. Further studies are needed to define clinical parameters that predict response to second-line therapy to optimize the sequence of VEGF-targeted therapy in metastatic RCC patients.

A 57-year-old woman presented to the emergency department at a community hospital with a 2-month history of fatigue and right-sided flank and abdominal pain. Noncontrast CT of the abdomen and pelvis revealed a 9.1 cm right renal mass.Contrast CT of the chest, abdomen and pelvis, MRI of the abdomen and pelvis with gadolinium, radionuclide bone scan, lung nodule biopsy, complete blood count, comprehensive metabolic profile, and measurement of serum lactate dehydrogenase.Stage IV, T3bN0M1 clear cell renal cell carcinoma, with an associated tumor thrombus extending into the vena cava.The patient was treated with neoadjuvant sunitinib, which resulted in a marked response in the primary tumor and metastatic lesions as well as regression of the tumor thrombus well into the renal vein. Thus, laparoscopic radical nephrectomy was feasible and was achieved without hemorrhagic or wound healing complications. One month after surgery, she had evidence of disease progression in the lung and a periaortic lymph node. She was restarted on sunitinib with resultant disease stabilization, but discontinued the drug owing to toxicity. Eight months after cessation of sunitinib, she received a dendritic cell vaccine. She remains alive without evidence of disease progression 2 years after her diagnosis.