Search

Introduction: Systemic and local therapies for patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) are often challenging despite the evolution of multimodal cancer therapies in the last decade. In this review, we will focus on recent multidisciplinary approaches for patients with mRCC., Areas Covered: Systemic therapies for patients with mRCC have been garnering attention particularly after the approval of immuno-oncology (IO) agents, including anti-programmed death 1/programmed death-ligand 1. IO combinations have significantly prolonged overall survival in patients with mRCC in the first-line setting. Regarding local therapies, cytoreductive nephrectomy (CN) has become less common in the post-Cancer du Rein Metastatique Nephrectomie et Antiangiogéniques (CARMENA) trial era, even though CN may still benefit selected patients with mRCC. In addition, metastasis-directed local therapies, namely metastasectomy or stereotactic radiotherapy, particularly for oligo-metastatic lesions or brain metastases, may have a prognostic impact. Several ablative techniques are also evolving while maintaining high local control rates with acceptable safety., Expert Opinion: Multimodal cancer therapies are essential for conquering complex cases of mRCC. Modern systemic therapies including IO-based combination therapy as well as local therapies including CN, metastasectomy, stereotactic radiotherapy, and ablative techniques appear to improve oncologic outcomes of patients with mRCC, although appropriate patient selection is indispensable.

Background: Lymphocytes are closely linked to mechanisms of action of immuno-oncology (IO) agents. We aimed to assess the prognostic significance of absolute lymphocyte count (ALC) in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC)., Patients and Methods: Using the International mRCC Database Consortium (IMDC), patients receiving first-line IO-based combination therapy were analysed. Baseline patient characteristics, objective response rates (ORRs), time to next treatment (TTNT), and overall survival (OS) were compared., Results: Of 966 patients included, 195 (20%) had lymphopenia at baseline, and they had a lower ORR (37% versus 45%; P < 0.001), shorter TTNT (10.1 months versus 24.3 months; P < 0.001), and shorter OS (30.4 months versus 48.2 months; P < 0.001). Among 125 patients with lymphopenia at baseline, 52 (42%) experienced ALC recovery at 3 months, and they had longer OS (not reached versus 30.4 months; P = 0.012). On multivariable analysis for OS, lymphopenia was an independent adverse prognostic factor (hazard ratio 1.68; P < 0.001). Incorporation of lymphopenia into the IMDC criteria improved OS prediction accuracy (C-index from 0.688 to 0.707)., Conclusions: Lymphopenia was observed in one-fifth of treatment-naive patients with mRCC and may serve as an indicator of unfavourable oncologic outcomes in the contemporary IO era., (Copyright © 2024 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Background: The role of cytoreductive nephrectomy (CN) has not yet been well characterized in the era of combination immunotherapy., Objective: To evaluate characteristics and outcomes for patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) who received immuno-oncology (IO)-based combination therapy according to CN status., Design, Setting, and Participants: Using the International mRCC Database Consortium (IMDC), patients with mRCC who received frontline IO-based combinations were included. Upfront CN was defined as CN up to 3 mo before diagnosis of metastatic disease but before systemic therapy initiation. Deferred CN was defined as CN after systemic therapy initiation., Outcomes Measurements and Statistical Analysis: Overall survival (OS) from initiation of systemic therapy was estimated via Cox proportional-hazards regression. A 12-mo landmark time and a time-varying covariate for CN status were used to mitigate potential bias., Results and Limitations: Of the 385 patients eligible for landmark analysis, 24, 182, and 179 underwent deferred CN, upfront CN, and no CN, respectively. Patients in the no CN subgroup were older (63 yr vs 57 yr in the deferred CN subgroup and 60 yr in the upfront CN subgroup; p = 0.001) and a higher proportion had bone metastases (44% vs 26% in the deferred CN subgroup and 23% in the upfront CN subgroup; p < 0.001). A lower proportion of patients in the upfront CN subgroup had IMDC poor risk (23% vs 43% in the no CN subgroup and 47% in the deferred CN subgroup; p < 0.001). On multivariable analysis, CN receipt was an independent favorable prognostic factor (hazard ratio 0.45, 95% confidence interval 0.26-0.78; p = 0.005). The study is limited by the lack of randomization and its retrospective nature., Conclusions: Despite changes in practice patterns with the advent of novel therapeutic agents, CN may still serve as an effective surgical intervention in carefully selected patients., Patient Summary: For patients with metastatic kidney cancer, surgery to remove the primary tumor was traditionally the treatment of choice, but immunotherapy drugs are now another option for these patients. We analyzed data for contemporary patients with metastatic kidney cancer who received combination immunotherapy as their first treatment. We found that in selected patients receiving immunotherapy, surgery to remove the primary tumor as well can result in better prognosis., (Copyright © 2023 European Association of Urology. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Background: The combination of immuno-oncology (IO) agents ipilimumab and nivolumab (IPI-NIVO) and vascular endothelial growth factor targeted therapies (VEGF-TT) combined with IO (IO-VEGF) are current standard of care first-line treatments for metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC)., Objective: To establish real-world clinical benchmarks for IO combination therapies based on the International mRCC Database Consortium (IMDC) criteria., Design, Setting, and Participants: Patients with mRCC who received first-line IPI-NIVO, IO-VEGF, or VEGF-TT from 2002 to 2021 were identified using the IMDC database and stratified according to IMDC risk groups., Outcome Measurements and Statistical Analysis: Overall survival (OS), time to next treatment (TTNT), and treatment duration (TD) were calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method and compared between IMDC risk groups within each treatment cohort by the log-rank test. The overall response rate (ORR) was calculated by physician assessment of the best overall response. The primary outcome was OS at 18 mo., Results and Limitations: In total, 728 patients received IPI-NIVO, 282 IO-VEGF, and 7163 VEGF-TT. The median follow-up times for patients remaining alive were 14.3 mo for IPI-NIVO, 14.9 mo IO-VEGF, and 34.4 mo for VEGF-TT. OS at 18 mo for favorable, intermediate, and poor risk was, respectively, 90%, 78%, and 50% for those receiving IPI-NIVO; 93%, 83%, and 74% for IO-VEGF; and 84%, 64%, and 28% for VEGF-TT. ORRs in favorable-, intermediate-, and poor-risk groups were 41.3%, 40.6%, and 33.0% for those receiving IPI-NIVO; 60.3%, 56.8%, and 40.9% for IO-VEGF; and 39.3%, 33.5%, and 20.9% for VEGF-TT, respectively. The IMDC model stratified patients into statistically distinct risk groups for the three endpoints of OS, TTNT, and TD within each treatment cohort. Limitations of this study were the retrospective design and short follow-up., Conclusions: This study demonstrated that the IMDC model continues to risk stratify patients with mRCC treated with contemporary first-line IO combination therapies and provided real-world survival benchmarks., Patient Summary: The International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium model continues to stratify patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma receiving modern combination treatments in the real-world setting., (Copyright © 2023 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: At present, the combination of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) or an ICI and a tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) are the main treatment options as first-line therapy for metastatic renal cell cancer (mRCC). Among them, pembrolizumab plus lenvatinib was recently launched in Japanese clinical practice., Area Covered: In this review, the efficacies and safety profiles of pembrolizumab plus lenvatinib for mRCC between Japanese and global populations are compared. In addition, lenvatinib is currently available for the treatment of not only mRCC but also of endometrial, thyroid, thymic, and hepatocellular cancers. We briefly summarized the characteristics of pembrolizumab plus lenvatinib or lenvatinib monotherapy for these malignancies. Finally, the characteristics of pembrolizumab plus lenvatinib for mRCC in the Japanese population are briefly elucidated., Expert Opinion: In order to develop optimal personalized treatment for mRCC patients, it is necessary for physicians who treat mRCC patients to possess in-depth knowledge of not only the efficacy and safety profile of the respective therapies but also of the interpatient heterogeneities between Japanese and global populations.

Purpose: Clinical trials have demonstrated higher complete response rates in the immuno-oncology-based combination arms than in the tyrosine kinase inhibitor arms in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma. We aimed to characterize real-world patients who experienced complete response to the contemporary first-line therapies., Materials and Methods: Using the International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium, response-evaluable patients who received frontline immuno-oncology-based combination therapy or tyrosine kinase inhibitor monotherapy were analyzed. Baseline characteristics of patients and post-landmark overall survival were compared based on best overall response, as per RECIST 1.1., Results: A total of 52 (4.6%) of 1,126 and 223 (3.0%) of 7,557 patients experienced complete response to immuno-oncology-based and tyrosine kinase inhibitor therapies, respectively ( P = . 005). An adjusted odds ratio for complete response achieved by immuno-oncology-based combination therapy (vs tyrosine kinase inhibitor monotherapy) was 1.56 (95% CI 1.11-2.17; P = . 009). Among patients who experienced complete response, the immuno-oncology-based cohort had a higher proportion of non-clear cell histology (15.9% and 4.7%; P = . 016), sarcomatoid dedifferentiation (29.8% and 13.5%; P = . 014), and multiple sites of metastases (80.4% and 50.0%; P < . 001) than the tyrosine kinase inhibitor cohort. Complete response was independently associated with post-landmark overall survival benefit in both the immuno-oncology-based and tyrosine kinase inhibitor cohorts, giving respective adjusted hazard ratios of 0.17 (95% CI 0.04-0.72; P = . 016) and 0.28 (95% CI 0.21-0.38; P < . 001)., Conclusions: The complete response rate was not as high in the real-world population as in the clinical trial population. Among those who experienced complete response, several adverse clinicopathological features were more frequently observed in the immuno-oncology-based cohort than in the tyrosine kinase inhibitor cohort. Complete response was an indicator of favorable overall survival.

The safety and effectiveness of pazopanib are related to plasma trough concentrations in renal cell carcinoma (RCC); however, data on pazopanib plasma trough concentrations with soft tissue sarcoma (STS) are limited. This study investigated the relationship between plasma trough concentrations and pazopanib safety in 45 Japanese patients with RCC or STS. Among the 33 patients included, the median pazopanib trough concentration was 37.5 (range, 12.1-67.6) µg/mL, which was not significantly different between Japanese RCC and STS patients. The plasma trough concentrations showed significant and positive correlations with aspartate aminotransferase and alanine aminotransferase values in blood samples taken for pharmacokinetic measurements after the administration. The incidence of pazopanib treatment discontinuation were significantly higher in RCC patients (p = 0.027). The primary reason for treatment discontinuation was hepatic dysfunction (5/6, 83.3%). Furthermore, this study revealed that pazopanib trough concentration was affected significantly by proton pump inhibitors but not by histamine 2-receptor blockers. In conclusion, the observed pazopanib trough levels and their safety in the Japanese RCC and STS populations in this study were similar to those of the global population. This is the first study to correlate the hepatotoxicity and pharmacokinetic property of pazopanib plasma trough levels by comparing Japanese patients with RCC or STS., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

Background: The Geriatric Nutritional Risk Index (GNRI) has been reported as a screening tool to assess the nutrition-related risk with mortality in older patients and those with the various diseases. However, the prognostic value of GNRI in metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) patients receiving nivolumab therapy remains unclear., Methods: Fifty-six consecutive patients with mRCC receiving nivolumab between September 2013 and August 2020 at our institution were retrospectively analyzed. The survival outcomes and prognostic factors associated with overall survival (OS) were statistically analyzed., Results: Thirteen and forty-three patients were classified with low (GNRI < 92) and high (GNRI ≥ 92) GNRI, respectively. Patients with low GNRI demonstrated significantly shorter OS ( P  = 0.0002) than those with high GNRI. In multivariate analysis, GNRI at the time of nivolumab ( P  = 0.008) was extracted as the predictor for OS in addition to Karnofsky performance status (KPS) ( P  = 0.016). Integration of the GNRI into the International Metastatic Renal Cell Cancer Database Consortium (IMDC) risk classification improved the c-index from 0.761 to 0.833 (combination of GNRI with IMDC risk classification) and to 0.778 (substitution of GNRI with KPS in IMDC risk classification)., Conclusions: GNRI was a significant prognostic biomarker in mRCC patients receiving nivolumab.

Objectives: To investigate the tumor shrinkage patterns of patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma treated with nivolumab monotherapy., Methods: Forty-four consecutive patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma treated with nivolumab monotherapy (81 metastatic and four primary lesions) between September 2013 and December 2020 were retrospectively analyzed. The tumor shrinkage rate of individual visceral and lymph node metastatic lesions and the primary site lesions treated with nivolumab monotherapy, as well as the association between overall survival and pretreatment tumor size, were statistically assessed., Results: Pretreatment tumor size for the total and individual target lesions, which included kidneys, lungs, pancreas, and lymph nodes, were not correlated with tumor shrinkage rate. The tumor shrinkage rate was found to have no significant association with pretreatment tumor size between any organ. In addition, there is no significant difference in tumor shrinkage rate between larger (>median value) and smaller (

Importance: The association between treatment with first-line immuno-oncology (IO) combination therapies and physician-assessed objective imaging response among patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) remains uncharacterized., Objective: To compare the likelihood of objective imaging response (ie, complete or partial response) to first-line IO combination ipilimumab-nivolumab (IOIO) therapy vs approved IO with vascular endothelial growth factor inhibitor (IOVE) combination therapies among patients with mRCC., Design, Setting, and Participants: This multicenter international cohort study was nested in routine clinical practice. A data set from the International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium (IMDC) was used to identify consecutive patients with mRCC who received treatment with IO combination therapies between May 30, 2013, and September 9, 2021. A total of 899 patients with a histologically confirmed diagnosis of mRCC who received treatment with a first-line IOVE or IOIO regimen and had evaluable responses were included., Exposures: Best overall response to first-line IO combination therapy based on Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors, version 1.1., Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was the difference in treating physician-assessed objective imaging response based on the type of first-line IO combination therapy received. Secondary outcomes included the identification of baseline characteristics positively associated with objective imaging response and the association of objective imaging response with overall survival., Results: Among 1085 patients with mRCC who received first-line IO combination therapies, 899 patients (median age, 62.8 years [IQR, 55.9-69.2 years]; 666 male [74.2%]) had evaluable responses. A total of 794 patients had information available on IMDC risk classification; of those, 127 patients (16.0%) had favorable risk, 442 (55.7%) had intermediate risk, and 225 (28.3%) had poor risk. With regard to best overall response among all participants, 37 patients (4.1%) had complete response, 344 (38.3%) had partial response, 315 (35.0%) had stable disease, and 203 (22.6%) had progressive disease. Corresponding median overall survival was not estimable (95% CI, 53.3 months to not estimable) among patients with complete response, 55.9 months (95% CI, 44.1 months to not estimable) among patients with partial response, 48.1 months (95% CI, 33.4 months to not estimable) among patients with stable disease, and 13.0 months (95% CI, 8.4-18.1 months) among patients with progressive disease (log rank P < .001). Treatment with IOVE therapy was found to be independently associated with an increased likelihood of obtaining response (OR, 1.89; 95% CI, 1.26-2.81; P = .002) compared with IOIO therapy. The presence of lung metastases (odds ratio [OR], 1.49; 95% CI, 1.01-2.20), receipt of cytoreductive nephrectomy (OR, 1.59; 95% CI, 1.04-2.43), and favorable IMDC risk (OR, 1.93; 95% CI, 1.10-3.39) were independently associated with an increased likelihood of response., Conclusions and Relevance: In this study, treatment with IOVE therapy was associated with significantly increased odds of objective imaging response compared with IOIO therapy. The presence of lung metastases, receipt of cytoreductive nephrectomy, and favorable IMDC risk were associated with increased odds of experiencing objective imaging response. These findings may help inform treatment selection, especially in clinical contexts associated with high-volume multisite metastatic disease, in which obtaining objective imaging response is important.

Introduction: Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have made an appearance in clinical practice, and the treatment outcome of metastatic renal cell cancer (mRCC) has dramatically improved as a result. Currently, most patients are treated with a combination of ICIs or a combination of ICI and tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs). These new therapeutic tools need to be organized and summarized in order to realize and advance personalized therapy for mRCC., Area Covered: In this review, the characteristics of five regimens (nivolumab plus ipilimumab, pembrolizumab plus axitinib, avelumab plus axitinib, and nivolumab plus cabozantinib and pembrolizumab plus lenvatinib) are briefly elucidated and their efficacies and safety profiles are compared. For ICI-unfit patients, the current choices are examined. In addition, the potential second-line regimens after these combination therapies are introduced as sequential treatment. Finally, in the future direction section, ongoing clinical trials are also introduced., Expert Opinion: ICIs are rapidly being introduced for the treatment of mRCC. Currently, most patients are treated with a combination of ICIs or a combination of ICI and TKIs. In order to develop optimal personalized treatment for our patients, it is necessary for the physicians who treat mRCC patients to possess in-depth knowledge of these new therapeutic tools.

Background: Limited data exist on the clinical effectiveness of second-line (2L) vascular endothelial growth factor (receptor) targeted inhibitor (VEGF(R)i) sunitinib after first-line (1L) immuno-oncology (IO) therapy for patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) in real-world settings., Methods: A retrospective cohort study among adult patients with mRCC treated with 2L sunitinib following 1L IO was conducted from select International mRCC Database Consortium (IMDC) centers. All analyses were performed overall and by 1L ipilimumab + nivolumab (IPI+NIVO) or 1L IO+VEGF(R)i. Median overall survival (mOS) and time-to-treatment discontinuation (mTTD) in 2L were estimated using Kaplan-Meier analysis. The 2L objective response rate (ORR) (complete/partial response) was reported., Results: Among 102 patients on 2L sunitinib, mean age was 61.3 years. IMDC risk scores at 2L initiation was available for 83 patients: 8 (9.6%) were favorable, 45 (54.2%) were intermediate, and 30 (36.1%) were poor risk. The 1L consisted of IPI+NIVO in 62 (60.8%), IO+VEGF(R)i therapy in 27 (26.5%), and IO monotherapy in 13 (12.7%) patients. Among all patients, mOS was 15.6 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 9.8-21.7), with a 1-year OS rate of 57.5% (95% CI, 45.2-68.0). mTTD was 5.4 months (95% CI, 4.2-7.2) and ORR was 22.5%., Conclusion: Despite availability of effective 1L therapies in recent years, 2L sunitinib continues to have clinical activity after failure of 1L IO. Further studies on optimal treatment sequencing after 1L IO progression are needed., (Copyright © 2021 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: Older adults with metastatic renal cell carcinoma(mRCC) are underrepresented in immune-checkpoint inhibitor(ICI) registration trials. Here we compare the efficacy of ICI treatments in older vs. younger adults with mRCC., Methods: Using the International mRCC Database Consortium(IMDC), patients treated with a PD(L)-1 based ICI were identified. Older adult was defined as ≥70-years at the time of treatment. Descriptive statistics were summarized in means, medians, and proportions. Effectiveness endpoints included overall survival (OS), time-to-treatment failure(TTF), time-to-next treatment(TNT), and overall response rate(ORR). Hazards ratios were adjusted(aHR) for IMDC risk factors, histology, line of treatment and older age., Results: Of 1427 included patients, 397(28%) were older adults. ICI was used as 1st line(1 L) in 40%, 2nd line(2 L) in 49% and 3rd line(3 L) in 11% of patients. In univariable analysis, older adults had inferior OS compared to younger adults(25.1 m vs. 30.8 m, p < 0.01). There were no significant differences in TTF (6.9 m vs. 6.9 m, p = 0.4) or TNT(9.1 m vs 10 m, p = 0.3) between groups. In multivariable analyses, older age was not independently associated with worse OS(aHR = 1.02, p = 0.8), TTF(aHR = 0.95, p = 0.6) or TNT(aHR = 0.93, p = 0.5). Older adults had a lower ORR compared to younger adults(24% vs. 31%, p = 0.01), which was mainly driven by responses in 1 L(31% vs. 44%, p = 0.02) and not observed in 2 L/3 L., Conclusions: After multivariable analyses, older adults with mRCC treated with ICI had no difference in OS, TTF or TNT when compared to younger adults. Our data support that chronological older age should not preclude patients from receiving ICI based therapies., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: The modified Glasgow prognostic score (mGPS), which incorporates serum albumin and C-reactive protein levels, reflects systemic inflammation and nutritional status. In this study, we evaluate the role of mGPS as a predictor of prognosis in metastatic renal cell carcinoma treated with nivolumab., Patients and Methods: Forty-five consecutive patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma receiving nivolumab therapy after tyrosine kinase inhibitor therapy between September 2013 and August 2019 at our institution were retrospectively analyzed. The prognostic factors associated with overall survival were statistically analyzed., Results: The median follow-up period was 26.4 months. The median progression-free survival and 1- and 3-year progression-free survival rates were 11.6 months, 48.9%, and 17.1%, respectively. The median overall survival and 1- and 3-year overall survival rates were not reached, 88.7%, and 62.3%, respectively. In multivariate analysis, mGPS at the time of nivolumab administration (P < .0001; hazard ratio [HR], 95.7; P = .0004 [Score 1 vs. 0]; HR, 98.9; P = .0002 [Score 2 vs. 0]; and HR, 1.03; P = .971 [Score 2 vs. 1]) was extracted as the strongest predictor for overall survival followed by duration from diagnosis to treatment (P = .0001), lactate dehydrogenase (P = .0005), and lymphocyte count (P = .021). Overall survival curves were distinctly separated between mGPS Score 0 and mGPS Score 1 + 2, with median overall survival periods being not reached and 32.4 months, respectively (P = .0004)., Conclusions: mGPS was the strongest significant prognostic biomarker in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma treated with nivolumab. This simple classification could be useful in clinical practice., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Importance: There exists considerable biological and clinical variability between histologic variants of metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). Data reporting on patterns of metastasis in histologic variants of mRCC are sparse., Objective: To characterize sites of metastasis and their association with survival across the 3 most common histologic variants of mRCC: clear cell (ccRCC), papillary (pRCC), and chromophobe (chrRCC)., Design, Setting, and Participants: In this multicenter, international cohort study, the International mRCC Database Consortium (IMDC) database was used to identify consecutive patients starting systemic therapy for mRCC between 2002 and 2019. Patients with mixed histologic subtype were excluded. Statistical analysis was performed from February to June 2020., Exposures: Data regarding histologic subtype and sites of metastatic involvement at the time of first systemic therapy initiation were collected., Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcomes were prevalence of metastatic site involvement and overall survival (OS) from time of systemic therapy initiation. Patients with multiple sites of metastatic involvement were included in analyses of all groups to which they had metastases., Results: A total of 10 105 patients were eligible for analysis. Median (interquartile range) age at diagnosis was 60 (53-67) years, 7310 (72.4%) were men and 8526 (84.5%) underwent nephrectomy. Of these, 9252 (92%) had ccRCC, 667 (7%) had pRCC, and 186 (2%) had chrRCC. The median number of sites of metastasis was 2 (range, 0-7). In ccRCC, the most common sites of metastasis were lung (70%; 6189 of 8804 patients [448 missing]), lymph nodes (45%; 3874 of 8655 patients [597 missing]), bone (32%; 2847 of 8817 patients [435 missing]), liver (18%; 1560 of 8804 [448 missing]), and adrenal gland (10%; 678 of 6673 patients [2579 missing]). Sites of metastasis varied between subtypes. Lung, adrenal, brain, and pancreatic metastases were more frequent in ccRCC, lymph node involvement was more common in pRCC, and liver metastases were more frequent in chrRCC. Median OS for ccRCC varied by site of metastatic involvement, ranging between 16 months (95% CI, 13.7-18.8 months) for the pleura and 50 months (95% CI, 41.1-55.5 months) for the pancreas. Compared with ccRCC, patients with pRCC tended to have lower OS, regardless of metastatic site., Conclusions and Relevance: Sites of metastatic involvement differ according to histologic subtype in mRCC and are associated with OS. These data highlight the clinical and biological variability between histologic subtypes of mRCC. Patterns of metastatic spread may reflect differences in underlying disease biology. Further work to investigate differences in immune, molecular, and genetic profiles between metastatic sites and histologic subtypes is encouraged.

Purpose: The controlling nutritional status (CONUT) score, consisting of albumin, lymphocytes and total cholesterol, is a validated, objective tool for nutritional assessment. Patients with advanced cancer frequently have malnutrition in association with cachexia and chronic inflammation. We explored the prognostic significance of the CONUT score in patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma receiving nivolumab., Materials and Methods: This retrospective study included 60 patients with stage IV renal cell carcinoma treated with nivolumab after failure of prior tyrosine kinase inhibitors at 2 cancer centers between 2016 and 2019. Associations of the CONUT score with progression-free survival, cancer specific survival and tumor shrinkage rate were assessed., Results: The median (range) CONUT score was 2 (0-10). During followup periods 29 and 14 patients exhibited disease progression and died of cancer, respectively. Both progression-free survival and cancer specific survival were significantly stratified by CONUT scores of 0 to 1, 2 to 4 and 5 or more (p=0.002). A CONUT score of 5 or more (versus score 0 to 1) was independently associated with unfavorable progression-free survival (HR 5.18, p=0.003) and cancer specific survival (HR 15.34, p=0.014), as was the absence of prior nephrectomy (HR 4.23, p=0.004 and HR 6.57, p=0.001, respectively). C-indices of the CONUT score for predicting progression-free survival and cancer specific survival were 0.694 and 0.737, respectively. The CONUT score was significantly associated with the best response to nivolumab with the median tumor shrinkage rate of -23%, +8% and +24% for CONUT scores of 0 to 1, 2 to 4 and 5 or more, respectively (p=0.021)., Conclusions: The CONUT score may be useful to predict the clinical outcomes and therapeutic response in patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma receiving nivolumab.

Background/aim: Tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKI) and immune-checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) are treatment options for metastatic renal cell cancer (mRCC). However, the treatment options after nivolumab are unclear., Patients and Methods: The medical records of 57 consecutive Japanese mRCC patients who underwent treatment with axitinib were reviewed. Among those, 17 patients received axitinib treatment after nivolumab and 40 patients received axitinib treatment after other chemotherapy regimens except nivolumab., Results: Of the 57 patients with mRCC, only 17 underwent axitinib therapy after nivolumab. Among these 17 patients, the objective response rate (ORR) and median tumor shrinkage rate were 56.3% and -30%, respectively. They were significantly better in patients who underwent axitinib therapy after nivolumab than after other therapies (p=0.026 and p=0.012, respectively). However, all 17 patients experienced some adverse events and nine patients (52.9%) required a dose reduction or axitinib treatment interruption., Conclusion: Axitinib therapy after the immune checkpoint inhibitor nivolumab showed good efficacy with a moderate risk of adverse events. Careful management by skilled professionals may be required., (Copyright© 2020, International Institute of Anticancer Research (Dr. George J. Delinasios), All rights reserved.)

Background: Accurate prediction of the prognosis of RCC using a single biomarker is challenging due to the genetic heterogeneity of the disease. However, it is essential to develop an accurate system to allow better patient selection for optimal treatment strategies. ARL4C, ECT2, SOD2, and STEAP3 are novel molecular biomarkers identified in earlier studies as survival-related genes by comprehensive analyses of 43 primary RCC tissues and RCC cell lines., Methods: To develop a prognostic model based on these multiple biomarkers, the expression of four biomarkers ARL4C, ECT2, SOD2, and STEAP3 in primary RCC tissue were semi-quantitatively investigated by immunohistochemical analysis in an independent cohort of 97 patients who underwent nephrectomy, and the clinical significance of these biomarkers were analyzed by survival analysis using Kaplan-Meier curves. The prognostic model was constructed by calculation of the contribution score to prognosis of each biomarker on Cox regression analysis, and its prognostic performance was validated., Results: Patients whose tumors had high expression of the individual biomarkers had shorter cancer-specific survival (CSS) from the time of primary nephrectomy. The prognostic model based on four biomarkers segregated the patients into a high- and low-risk scored group according to defined cut-off value. This approach was more robust in predicting CSS compared to each single biomarker alone in the total of 97 patients with RCC. Especially in the 36 metastatic RCC patients, our prognostic model could more accurately predict early events within 2 years of diagnosis of metastasis. In addition, high risk-scored patients with particular strong SOD2 expression had a much worse prognosis in 25 patients with metastatic RCC who were treated with molecular targeting agents., Conclusions: Our findings indicate that a prognostic model based on four novel biomarkers provides valuable data for prediction of clinical prognosis and useful information for considering the follow-up conditions and therapeutic strategies for patients with primary and metastatic RCC.

Background: The use of cytoreductive nephrectomy (CN) selectively for patients who show a favorable response to upfront systemic therapy may be an approach to select optimal candidates with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) who are most likely to benefit., Objective: We sought to characterize outcomes of deferred CN (dCN) after upfront sunitinib, outcomes relative to sunitinib alone, and outcomes of CN followed by sunitinib., Design, Setting, and Participants: We used the prospectively maintained International mRCC Database Consortium (IMDC) database to identify patients with newly diagnosed mRCC (2006-2018)., Intervention: Sunitinib alone, upfront CN followed by sunitinib, sunitinib followed by dCN., Outcome Measurements and Statistical Analysis: Outcomes were overall survival (OS) and time to sunitinib treatment failure (TTF). Kaplan-Meier and multivariable Cox regression analyses were performed; dCN was analyzed as a time-varying covariate to account for immortal time bias., Results and Limitations: We evaluated 1541 patients, of whom 651 (42%) received sunitinib alone, 805 (52%) underwent CN followed by sunitinib, and 85 (5.5%) received sunitinib followed by dCN, at a median of 7.8 mo from diagnosis. Median OS periods for patients treated with sunitinib alone, CN followed by sunitinib, and sunitinib followed by dCN were 10, 19, and 46 mo, respectively, while the median TTF values were 4, 8, and 13 mo, respectively. In multivariable regression analyses, sunitinib followed by dCN was significantly associated with improved OS (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.45, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.33-0.60, p < 0.001) and TTF (HR = 0.62, 95% CI 0.46-0.85, p = 0.003) versus sunitinib alone. Among CN-treated patients, sunitinib followed by dCN was associated with improved OS (HR = 0.52, 95% CI 0.39-0.70, p < 0.001) and TTF (HR = 0.71, 95% CI 0.56-0.90, p = 0.005) compared with upfront CN followed by sunitinib. In various sensitivity analyses, dCN remained significantly associated with improved OS and TTF., Conclusions: Patients who received dCN were carefully selected and achieved long OS. With these benchmark outcomes, optimal selection criteria need to be identified and confirmation of the role of dCN in a clinical trial is warranted., Patient Summary: We characterized benchmark survival outcomes for patients with metastatic kidney cancer treated with sunitinib alone, nephrectomy (kidney removal) followed by sunitinib, and sunitinib followed by nephrectomy. Patients who had their nephrectomy after an initial course of sunitinib had prolonged survival., (Copyright © 2020 European Association of Urology. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Background: Patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) may present with primary metastases (synchronous disease) or develop metastases during follow-up (metachronous disease). The impact of time to metastasis on patient outcome is poorly characterised., Objective: To characterise overall survival (OS) and time to treatment failure (TTF) based on time to metastasis in mRCC patients treated with targeted therapy (tyrosine kinase inhibitors [TKIs])., Design, Setting, and Participants: We used the International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium (IMDC) to compare synchronous (metastases within ≤3 mo of initial diagnosis of cancer) versus metachronous disease (evaluated by >3-12 mo, >1-2 yr, >2-7 yr, and >7 yr intervals)., Outcome Measurements and Statistical Analysis: OS and TFF were assessed using Kaplan-Meier curves. Cox multivariable regressions analyses (MVAs) were adjusted for baseline factors., Results and Limitations: Of 7386 patients with mRCC treated with first-line TKIs, 3906 (53%) and 3480 (47%) had synchronous and metachronous metastasis, respectively. More patients with synchronous versus metachronous disease had higher T stage (T1-2: 19% vs 34%), N1 disease (21% vs 6%), presence of sarcomatoid differentiation (15.8% vs 7.9%), Karnofsky performance status <80 (25.9% vs 15.1%), anaemia (62.5% vs 42.3%), elevated neutrophils (18.9% vs 10.9%), elevated platelets (21.6% vs 11.4%), bone metastases (40.4% vs 29.8%), and IMDC poor risk (40.6% vs 11.3%). Synchronous versus metachronous disease by intervals >3-12 mo, >1-2 yr, >2-7 yr, and >7 yr correlated with poor TTF (5.6 mo vs 7.3, 8.0, 10.8, and 13.3 mo, p <  0.0001) and poor OS (median 16.7 mo vs 23.8, 30.2, 34.8, and 41.7 mo, p <  0.0001). In MVAs, the adjusted hazard ratios (95% confidence intervals) were 1.00 (reference), 0.98 (0.90-1.06), 0.81 (0.73-0.91), 0.74 (0.68-0.81), and 0.60 (0.54-0.67), respectively, for OS (p <  0.0001), and 1.00 (reference), 0.99 (0.92-1.06), 0.98 (0.90-1.07), 0.83 (0.77-0.89), and 0.66 (0.60-0.72), respectively, for TTF (p <  0.0001). Data were collected retrospectively., Conclusions: Timing of metastases after initial RCC diagnosis may impact the outcomes from targeted therapy in mRCC., Patient Summary: We looked at the impact of the timing of metastatic outbreak on survival outcomes in kidney cancer patients treated with targeted therapy. We found that the longer time to metastatic development was associated with improved outcome., (Copyright © 2020 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Background: γ-Glutamyltransferase (GGT) is a marker of oxidative stress. Elevated serum GGT is linked to poor survival in various malignancies; however, there are no data on metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). Additionally, GGT expression in cancer tissues remains largely unknown., Objective: The present study was designed to determine the prognostic role of serum GGT in patients with mRCC and the association between systemic and local GGT levels., Patients and Methods: Pretherapeutic serum GGT and other clinicopathological parameters were retrospectively compared with overall survival (OS) in 146 consecutive patients with mRCC receiving tyrosine kinase inhibitor therapy. GGT expression was analyzed in 65 resected specimens using immunohistochemistry., Results: A total of 82 patients (56%) died during the follow-up period (median 34.9 months). Median OS was 16.0 months and 36.8 months in patients with elevated GGT levels and without elevated GGT, respectively (P < 0.001). On multivariable analysis, elevated serum GGT was an independent adverse prognostic factor (hazard ratio [HR] 4.04, P < 0.001), together with high neutrophils (HR 2.06, P = 0.041), low albumin (HR 2.00, P = 0.006), high lactate dehydrogenase (HR 2.68, P < 0.001), and high De Ritis ratio (HR 1.97, P = 0.004). Preoperative serum GGT levels were 29, 48, and 109 U/l in patients whose renal cancer cells showed negative to weak, moderate, and strong GGT expression, respectively (P = 0.004)., Conclusions: Elevated serum GGT was an unfavorable prognostic factor in mRCC, and overexpression of GGT in renal cancer cells might be responsible for elevation of serum GGT.

Background: Nivolumab, which has a promising anti-tumor efficacy and a manageable safety profile, has being rapidly introduced in metastatic renal cell cancer therapy in Japan. We evaluated the efficacy and adverse events of nivolumab in real world clinical practice in Japan., Methods: The medical records of 45 consecutive patients who started treatment with nivolumab, up to September 2018, were reviewed and statistically analyzed., Results: The median follow-up period was 22.3 months. The best responses were a complete response in three patients (8%), a partial response in 14 patients (36%), stable disease in 14 patients (36%), and progressive disease in eight patients (20%). The median progression-free survival period and 1 year progression-free survival rate were 14.9 months and 54.5%, respectively. The estimated overall survival period and 1-year and 2-year overall survival rates from initiation of nivolumab were not reached, and 91.1%, and 86.2%, respectively. Twenty-seven patients (60%) experienced adverse events including four (10%) severe adverse events (Grade 3 or 4). The most common adverse event was rash (n = 9, 20%). Five patients discontinued nivolumab therapy, because of an adverse event (Grade 3 diarrhea, one patient; Grade 2 fatigue, one patient; Grade 3 uveitis, two patients; and Grade 3 adrenal insufficiency, one patient)., Conclusions: Nivolumab has a relatively favorable efficacy and safety profile for Japanese metastatic renal cell cancer patients in clinical practice.

Background: In metastatic renal-cell carcinoma (mRCC), recent data have shown efficacy of first-line ipilimumab and nivolumab (ipi-nivo) as well as immuno-oncology (IO)/vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) inhibitor combinations. Comparative data between these strategies are limited., Objective: To compare the efficacy of ipi-nivo versus IO-VEGF (IOVE) combinations in mRCC, and describe practice patterns and effectiveness of second-line therapies., Design, Setting, and Participants: Using the International Metastatic Renal-cell Carcinoma Database Consortium (IMDC) dataset, patients treated with any first-line IOVE combination were compared with those treated with ipi-nivo., Intervention: All patients received first-line IO combination therapies., Outcome Measurements and Statistical Analysis: First- and second-line response rates, time to treatment failure (TTF), time to next treatment (TNT), and overall survival (OS) were analysed. Hazard ratios were adjusted for IMDC risk factors., Results and Limitations: In total, 113 patients received IOVE combinations and 75 received ipi-nivo. For IOVE combinations versus ipi-nivo, first-line response rates were 33% versus 40% (between-group difference 7%, 95% confidence interval [CI] -8% to 22%, p =  0.4), TTF was 14.3 versus 10.2 mo (p =  0.2), TNT was 19.7 versus 17.9 mo (p =  0.4), and median OS was immature but not statistically different (p = 0.17). Adjusted hazard ratios for TTF, TNT, and OS were 0.71 (95% CI 0.46-1.12, p =  0.14), 0.65 (95% CI 0.38-1.11, p =  0.11), and 1.74 (95% CI 0.82-3.68, p =  0.14), respectively. Sixty-four (34%) patients received second-line treatment. In patients receiving subsequent VEGF-based therapy, second-line response rates were lower in the IOVE cohort than in the ipi-nivo cohort (15% vs 45%; between-group difference 30%, 95% CI 3-57%, p =  0.04; n = 40), though second-line TTF was not significantly different (3.7 vs 5.4 mo; p =  0.4; n = 55). Limitations include the study's retrospective design and sample size., Conclusions: There were no significant differences in first-line outcomes between IOVE combinations and ipi-nivo. Most patients received VEGF-based therapy in the second line. In this group, second-line response rate was greater in patients who received ipi-nivo initially., Patient Summary: There were no significant differences in key first-line outcomes for patients with metastatic renal-cell carcinoma receiving immuno-oncology/vascular endothelial growth factor inhibitor combinations versus ipilimumab and nivolumab., (Copyright © 2019 European Association of Urology. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: In the present study, we explored the real-world efficacy of the immuno-oncology checkpoint inhibitor nivolumab and the tyrosine kinase inhibitor cabozantinib in the second-line setting., Methods: Using the International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium (imdc) dataset, a retrospective analysis of patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mrcc) treated with nivolumab or cabozantinib in the second line after prior therapy targeted to the vascular endothelial growth factor receptor (vegfr) was performed. Baseline characteristics and imdc risk factors were collected. Overall survival (os) and time to treatment failure (ttf) were calculated using Kaplan-Meier curves. Overall response rates (orrs) were determined for each therapy. Multivariable Cox regression analysis was performed to determine survival differences between cabozantinib and nivolumab treatment., Results: The analysis included 225 patients treated with nivolumab and 53 treated with cabozantinib. No significant difference in median os was observed: 22.10 months [95% confidence interval (ci): 17.18 months to not reached] with nivolumab and 23.70 months (95% ci: 15.52 months to not reached) with cabozantinib ( p = 0.61). The ttf was also similar at 6.90 months (95% ci: 4.60 months to 9.20 months) with nivolumab and 7.39 months (95% ci: 5.52 months to 12.85 months) with cabozantinib ( p = 0.20). The adjusted hazard ratio (hr) for nivolumab compared with cabozantinib was 1.30 (95% ci: 0.73 to 2.3), p = 0.38. When adjusted by imdc criteria and age, the hr was 1.32 (95% ci: 0.74 to 2.38), p = 0.35., Conclusions: Real-world imdc data indicate comparable os and ttf for nivolumab and cabozantinib. Both agents are reasonable therapeutic options for patients progressing after initial first-line vegfr-targeted therapy., Competing Interests: CONFLICT OF INTEREST DISCLOSURES We have read and understood Current Oncology’s policy on disclosing conflicts of interest, and we declare the following interests: FD declares research funding from Novartis, Pfizer, and Ipsen; TKC declares research funding from AstraZeneca, Bristol–Myers Squibb, Exelixis, Genentech, GlaxoSmithKline, Merck, Novartis, Peloton, Pfizer, Roche, Tracon Pharmaceuticals, and Eisai, and consulting or advisory fees from AstraZeneca, Bayer, Bristol–Myers Squibb, Cerulean, Eisai, Foundation Medicine, Exelixis Genentech/Roche, GlaxoSmithKline, Merck, Novartis, Peloton, Pfizer, and Prometheus Labs; BB declares honoraria from Amgen, Pfizer, Janssen, and Bayer, and was also an investigator on the European Clinical Trials Database 2011-006085-40/MetaSun trial supported by Pfizer; NA declares consulting fees from Pfizer, Exelixis, Argos, and Cerulean; RK declares honoraria from Novartis, Pfizer, and Bayer; TY declares remuneration for a lecture from Pfizer Japan and Novartis Pharma Japan; DYCH declares consulting fees from Pfizer, Novartis, Bristol–Myers Squibb, Janssen Pharmaceuticals, and Astellas Pharma; IDD is supported by an Australian National Health and Medical Research Council Practitioner Fellowship (APP1102604), and has received research funding from Astellas and Exelixis. The remaining authors have no conflicts to disclose.

Background: To the authors' knowledge, outcomes and prognostic tools have yet to be clearly defined in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) who are treated with immuno-oncology (IO) checkpoint inhibitors (programmed death-ligand 1 [PD-L1] inhibitors). In the current study, the authors aimed to establish IO efficacy benchmarks in patients with mRCC and update patient outcomes in each International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium (IMDC) prognostic class., Methods: A retrospective analysis was performed using the IMDC database with data from 38 centers. It included patients with mRCC who were treated with ≥1 line of IO. Overall response rates (ORRs), duration of treatment (DOT), and overall survival (OS) were calculated. Patients were stratified using IMDC prognostic factors., Results: A total of 687 patients (90% with clear cell and 10% with non-clear cell) were included. The ORR was 27% in evaluable patients (461 patients). In patients treated with first-line nivolumab and ipilimumab (49 patients), the combination of PD-L1 inhibitor and vascular endothelial growth factor inhibitor (72 patients), and PD-L1 inhibitor (51 patients), the ORR was 31%, 39%, and 40%, respectively, and the median DOT was 8.3 months, 14.7 months, and 8.3 months, respectively. The ORR for second-line, third-line, and fourth-line nivolumab was 22%, 24%, and 26%, respectively. The median DOT was 5.7 months, 6.2 months, and 8.3 months, respectively, in the second-line, third-line, and fourth-line settings. When segregated into IMDC favorable-risk, intermediate-risk, and poor-risk groups, the median OS rates for the first-line, second-line, third-line, and fourth-line treatment settings were not reached (NR), NR, and NR, respectively (P = .163); NR, 26.7 months, and 7.4 months, respectively (P < 0. 0001); 36.1 months, 28.2 months, and 11.1 months, respectively (P = .016); and NR, NR, and 6.7 months, respectively (P = .047)., Conclusions: The ORR was not found to deteriorate from the first-line to the fourth-line of IO therapy. In the second line through fourth line, the IMDC criteria appropriately stratified patients into favorable-risk, intermediate-risk, and poor-risk groups for OS., (© 2018 American Cancer Society.)

Background and Objective: Renal cell carcinoma (RCC) is the urological malignancy with the highest mortality rate and is increasing in incidence. The prognostic and predictive biomarkers are highly desired. This study aims to investigate the significance of superoxide dismutase 2 (SOD2) as a clinical biomarker in patients with renal cell carcinomas., Methods: A cohort of 97 patients with RCC was analyzed retrospectively using various clinical parameters and SOD2 expression by immunohistochemistry., Results: Cases with stronger SOD2 positivity of the tumor in comparison to the adjacent normal renal tubule by immunohistochemistry were categorized as high SOD2 and were associated with worse overall survivals (p= 0.005). In particular, in cases with metastatic RCC, high SOD2 expression in the tumors was significantly associated with a worse overall survival (p= 0.001), and the maximum critical risk. Treatment with current molecular targeting therapies did not improve the prognoses of cases with metastatic or recurrent RCC., Conclusions: High SOD2 expression can be predictive of a poor clinical outcome and be clinically useful in the follow-up of metastatic RCC. Therapeutics for metastatic RCCs require further improvement, such as supplementary administration of agents targeting mitochondrial SOD2.

Background: Pretreatment C-reactive protein (CRP) has been shown to be an independent prognostic factor for metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) treated with tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs). We further evaluated the early response of CRP after the initiation of TKIs., Methods: A total of 103 patients (80 men and 23 women) were treated with TKIs for mRCC from 2008-2013. Patients were divided into three groups according to their early CRP kinetics-patients whose baseline CRP levels were <10 mg/L (non-elevated), patients whose baseline CRP levels were ≥10 mg/L and had decreased by >20% at 4 weeks after the initiation of TKIs (early CRP responder), and the remaining patients (non-early CRP responder). The endpoints were progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS)., Results: The median follow-up period was 21 (interquartile range 10-34) months. The numbers of patients classified as non-elevated, early CRP responder, and non-early CRP responder were 62, 19, and 22, respectively. The 1-year PFS rates of patients in the non-elevated, early CRP responder, and non-early CRP responder groups were 50, 23, and 9.7%, respectively (p < 0.001). The 1-year OS rates of patients in these three groups were 79, 62, and 36%, respectively (p < 0.001). In multivariate analysis, the early CRP kinetics assessment was a significant independent factor for PFS and OS., Conclusions: Early CRP response at 4 weeks is predictive of survival for patients with mRCC treated with TKI.

Nivolumab is a fully human immunoglobulin (Ig) G4 antibody that selectively inhibits the programmed death 1 (PD-1) immune checkpoint molecule, and has recently been launched for the treatment of renal cell cancer (RCC) in Japan. Based on its promising anti-tumor efficacy and manageable safety profile demonstrated in the phase III Checkmate 025 trial, nivolumab therapy is rapidly being introduced in metastatic RCC clinical practice. The phase Ia study of atezolizumab, which is a humanized anti-PD-ligand 1 (PD-L1) monoclonal IgG1 antibody, also demonstrated excellent treatment results. The identification of biomarkers to predict the response and side-effects of checkpoint inhibitor therapy is thus urgently needed. In this review, we introduce the current candidate biomarkers of immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy. Based on the mechanism of efficacy, the number of neoantigens and expression of major histocompatibility complex molecules are strong candidate biomarkers. Despite the various interference factors, PD-L1 expression can be considered a potential biomarker. In terms of clinical factors, serum clinical factors and severity of adverse events are examined. Although further implementation in prospective studies is necessary, if validated, these biomarkers can be utilized to measure therapeutic response and design treatment strategies for metastatic RCC.

Objectives: To develop a stepwise diagnostic algorithm for fat-poor angiomyolipoma in small renal masses., Methods: Two cohorts of small renal masses <4 cm without an apparent fat component that was pathologically diagnosed were included: 153 cases (18 fat-poor angiomyolipomas/135 renal cell carcinomas) for model development and 71 cases (seven fat-poor angiomyolipomas/59 renal cell carcinomas/5 oncocytomas) for validation. Dynamic contrast-enhanced computed tomography, magnetic resonance imaging and clinical findings were analyzed. Based on multivariate analysis, we developed two prediction models for fat-poor angiomyolipoma, the computed tomography model and the computed tomography + magnetic resonance imaging model, and a stepwise algorithm that proposes the sequential use of computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging., Results: The computed tomography model, which was composed of female aged <50 years, high attenuation on unenhanced computed tomography, less enhancement than the normal renal cortex and homogeneity in the corticomedullary phase, differentiated tumors with none of the factors as the low angiomyolipoma-probability group, and the others were candidates for the computed tomography + magnetic resonance imaging model. The computed tomography + magnetic resonance imaging model, consisting of the first three factors of the computed tomography model, low signal intensity and absence of pseudocapsule on T2-weighted magnetic resonance imaging, re-stratified the tumors into low, intermediate and high angiomyolipoma-probability groups. The incidence of fat-poor angiomyolipoma in each group was 0%, 26% and 93%, respectively (area under the curve 0.981). External validation by two readers showed a high area under the curve (0.912 and 0.924) for each. The interobserver agreement was good (kappa score 0.77)., Conclusions: The present algorithm differentiates fat-poor angiomyolipoma in small renal masses with high accuracy by adding magnetic resonance imaging to computed tomography in selected patients., (© 2017 The Japanese Urological Association.)

Background: We hypothesized that changes in International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium (IMDC) prognostic category at start of second-line therapy (2L) for metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) might predict response., Objective: To assess outcomes of 2L according to type of therapy and change in IMDC prognostic category., Design, Setting, and Participants: We performed a retrospective review of the IMDC database for mRCC patients who received first-line (1L) VEGF inhibitors (VEGFi) and then 2L with VEGFi or mTOR inhibitors (mTORi). IMDC prognostic categories were defined before each line of therapy (favorable, F; intermediate, I; poor, P). Data were analyzed for 1516 patients, of whom 89% had clear cell histology., Intervention: All included patients received targeted therapy for mRCC., Outcome Measurements and Statistical Analysis: Overall survival (OS), time to treatment failure, and response to 2L were analyzed using Cox or logistic regression., Results and Limitations: At start of 2L, 60% of patients remained in the same prognostic category; 9.0% improved (3% I → F; 6% P → I); 31% deteriorated (15% F → I or P; 16% I → P). Patients with the same or better IMDC prognostic category had a longer time to treatment failure if they remained on VEGFi compared to those who switched to mTORi (adjusted hazard ratio [AHR] ranging from 0.33 to 0.78, adjusted p<0.05). Patients who deteriorated from F to I appeared more likely to benefit from switching to mTORi (median OS 16.5 mo, 95% confidence interval [CI] 12.0-19.0 for VEGFi; 20.2 mo, 95% CI 14.3-26.1 for mTORi; AHR 1.53, 95% CI 1.04-2.24; adjusted p=0.03)., Conclusions: Changes in IMDC prognostic category predict the subsequent clinical course for patients with mRCC and provide a rational basis for selection of subsequent therapy., Patient Summary: The pattern of treatment failure might help to predict what the next treatment should be for patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma., (Copyright © 2016 European Association of Urology. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Background: Sunitinib (SU) and pazopanib (PZ) are standards of care for first-line treatment of metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). However, how the efficacy of these drugs translates into effectiveness on a population-based level is unknown., Patients and Methods: We used the International mRCC Database Consortium (IMDC) to assess overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), response rate (RR) and performed proportional hazard regression adjusting for IMDC prognostic groups. Second-line OS (OS2) and second-line PFS (PFS2) were also evaluated., Results: We obtained data from 7438 patients with mRCC treated with either first-line SU (n = 6519) or PZ (n = 919) with an overall median follow-up of 40.4 months (95% confidence interval [CI] 39.2-42.1). There were no significant differences in IMDC prognostic groups (p = 0.36). There was no OS difference between SU and PZ (22.3 versus 22.6 months, respectively, p = 0.65). When adjusted for IMDC criteria, the hazard ratio (HR) of death for PZ versus SU was 1.03 (95% CI 0.92-1.17, p = 0.58). There was no PFS difference between SU and PZ (8.4 versus 8.3 months, respectively, p = 0.17). When adjusted for IMDC criteria, the HR for PFS for PZ versus SU was 1.08 (95% CI 0.981-1.19, p = 0.12). There was no difference in RR between SU and PZ (30% versus 28%, respectively, p = 0.15). We also found no difference in any second-line treatment between either post-SU or post-PZ groups for OS2 (13.1 versus 11 months, p = 0.27) and PFS2 (3.7 versus 5.0 months, p = 0.07)., Conclusions: We confirmed in real-world practice that SU and PZ have similar efficacy in the first-line setting for mRCC and do not affect outcomes with subsequent second-line treatment., (Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Renal cell carcinomas (RCC) have two types of cells for carbon metabolism and for cell signaling under nutrient-deprivation conditions, namely starvation-resistant and starvation-sensitive cells. Here, we evaluated the mitochondrial characteristics of these cell types and found that the resistant type possessed higher activities for both mitochondrial oxidative phosphorylation and glycolysis than the sensitive types. These higher activities were supported by the stored carbon, lipid and carbohydrate sources, and by a low level of mitochondrial reactive oxygen species (ROS) due to sustained SOD2 expression in the resistant RCC cells. In metastatic RCC cases, higher SOD2 expression was associated with a significantly shorter survival period. We found that treatment with the drugs etomoxir and buformin significantly reduced mitochondrial oxidative phosphorylation and induced cell death under glucose-deprivation conditions in starvation-resistant RCC cells. Our data suggest that inhibitory targeting of mitochondria might offer an effective therapeutic option for metastatic RCC that is resistant to current treatments.

Background: Sarcomatoid renal cell carcinoma is associated with poor prognosis. Data regarding outcome in the targeted therapy era are lacking., Patients and Methods: Clinical, prognostic, and treatment parameters in metastatic renal cell carcinoma patients with and without sarcomatoid histology treated with targeted therapy were retrospectively analyzed., Results: Two thousand two hundred eighty-six patients were identified (sRCC: n = 230 and non-sRCC: n = 2056). sRCC patients had significantly worse IMDC prognostic criteria compared with non-sRCC (11% vs. 19% favorable risk; 49% vs. 57% intermediate risk, and 40% vs. 24% poor risk; P < .0001). Time from original diagnosis to relapse (excluding synchronous metastatic disease) was shorter in the sRCC group (18.8 vs. 42.9 months; P < .0001). There was no significant difference in the incidence of central nervous system metastases (6%-8%) or underlying clear cell histology (87%-88%). More than 93% of patients received VEGF inhibitors as first-line therapy; objective response was less common in sRCC whereas primary refractory disease was more common (21% vs. 26% and 43% vs. 21%; P < .0001, for both). sRCC patients had significantly less use of second- (P = .018) and third-line (P < .0001) systemic therapy. The median progression-free survival (PFS)/overall survival (OS) was 4.5/10.4 months in sRCC patients and 7.8/22.5 months in non-sRCC patients (P < .0001 for both). Sarcomatoid histology was associated with a significantly worse PFS and OS after adjusting for individual IMDC risk factors in multivariable analysis (hazard ratio, 1.5; P < .0001 for both)., Conclusion: Patients with sRCC have a shorter time to relapse, worse baseline prognostic criteria, and worse clinical outcome with targeted therapy. Additional insight into the biology of sRCC is needed to develop alternative therapeutics., (Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Targeted therapies improve survival in metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). However, survival patterns can be divergent, and patients at the 2 extremes of the survival spectrum need to be characterized., Patients and Methods: Data from 2161 patients included in the International mRCC Database Consortium (IMDC) were analyzed. We identified patients on the basis of their duration of survival. Long-term survival (LTS) was defined as overall survival (OS) of ≥ 4 years, and short-term survival (STS) was defined as OS of ≤ 6 months from the start of targeted therapy. Baseline characteristics, including demographic, clinicopathologic, and laboratory data, were compared between LTS and STS. Treatment response by the RECIST criteria was summarized for the 2 survival groups., Results: A total of 152 patients experienced LTS and 218 experienced STS. Adverse clinical and laboratory prognostic factors previously described in the IMDC prognostic model were significantly more frequent in the STS group (P < .0001). In the LTS group, 138 patients (91%) had nonprogressive disease (non-PD) as best response to first-line targeted therapy, and 56 (60%) of 94 patients who received second-line therapy had non-PD. In the STS group, only 51 patients (23%) had non-PD on first-line therapy. None of 21 the patients who received second-line therapy had non-PD as best response. In LTS, the median duration of therapy was 23.6 months (range 0.4 to 81.8+ months) for first-line therapy and 11.5 months (range 0.6 to 45.7 months) for second-line therapy, compared to 2.0 and 0.8 months for the STS group, respectively., Conclusion: Baseline prognostic criteria and absence of PD after first and second-line targeted therapy may characterize long-term survival., (Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Previous prognostic models for second-line systemic therapy in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma have not been studied in the setting of targeted therapy. We sought to validate the International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium (IMDC) model in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma receiving next-line targeted therapy after progression on first-line targeted therapy., Methods: In this population-based study, we analysed patients who received second-line targeted therapy for metastatic renal cell carcinoma at 19 centres in Canada, USA, Greece, Japan, Singapore, South Korea, and Denmark. The primary endpoint was overall survival since the initiation of second-line therapy. We compared the prognostic performance of the IMDC model with the three-factor MSKCC model used for previously treated patients for overall survival since the start of second-line targeted therapy., Findings: Between Jan 1, 2005, and Nov 30, 2012, we included 1021 patients treated with second-line targeted therapy. Median overall survival since the start of second-line targeted therapy was 12·5 months (95% CI 11·3-14·3). Five of six predefined factors in the IMDC model (anaemia, thrombocytosis, neutrophilia, Karnofsky performance status [KPS] <80, and <1 year from diagnosis to first-line targeted therapy) were independent predictors of poor overall survival on multivariable analysis. The concordance index using all six prognostic factors (ie, also including hypercalcaemia) was 0·70 (95% CI 0·67-0·72) with the IMDC model and was 0·66 (95% CI 0·64-0·68) with the three-factor MSKCC model. When patients were divided into three risk categories using IMDC criteria, median overall survival was 35·3 months (95% CI 28·3-47·8) in the favourable risk group (n=76), 16·6 months (14·9-17·9) in the intermediate risk group (n=529), and 5·4 months (4·7-6·8) in the poor risk group (n=261)., Interpretation: The IMDC prognostic model can be applied to patients previously treated with targeted therapy, in addition to previously validated populations in first-line targeted therapy. The IMDC prognostic model in the second-line targeted therapy setting has an improved prognostic performance and is applicable to a more contemporary patient cohort than that of the three-factor MSKCC model., Funding: DF/HCC Kidney Cancer SPORE P50 CA101942-01, Kidney Cancer Research Network of Canada, Canadian Institute for Health Research, Trust Family, Loker Pinard, Michael Brigham, and Gerald DeWulf., (Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Renal cell cancer (RCC) is one of the most frequent primary sites for metastatic pancreatic tumors although metastatic tumors are rare among pancreatic malignant tumors. The purpose of this study is to disclose the characterization and treatment outcomes of pancreatic metastases from RCC., Methods: Of 262 patients with metastatic RCC treated at our hospital between 1999 and 2013, the data of 20 (7.6%) who simultaneously developed or subsequently acquired pancreatic metastases were retrospectively reviewed and statistically analyzed., Results: The median follow-up period from RCC diagnosis and pancreatic metastases was 13.4 years (inter-quartile range: IQR, 7.8-15.5 years) and 3.8 years (IQR, 2.1-5.5 years), respectively. Median duration from diagnosis of RCC to pancreatic metastasis was 7.8 years (IQR, 4.2-12.7 years). During this observation period, the estimated median overall survival (OS) time from the diagnosis of RCC to death or from pancreatic metastasis to death was not reached. The probability of patients surviving after pancreatic metastasis at 1, 3, and 5 years was 100, 87.7, and 78.9%, respectively. The estimated OS period from the diagnosis of metastases to death of the patients with pancreatic metastasis was significantly longer than that of the patients with non-pancreatic metastasis (median OS 2.7 years) (P < 0.0001). Surgical management for pancreatic metastasis was performed in 15 patients (75%). When the median follow-up period for these surgeries was 3.5 years (IQR, 1.9-5.2 years), the estimated median recurrence-free survival was 1.8 years. For the patients with multiple metastatic sites, molecularly targeted therapies were given to six (30%) patients. When the median follow-up period was 4.1 years (IQR, 3.0-4.4 years), no disease progression was observed., Conclusions: The pancreas is frequently the only metastatic site and metastasis typically occurs a long time after nephrectomy. The OS period of these patients is long and both surgical and medical treatment resulted in good outcomes.

Introduction/background: Approval of the mTOR inhibitors for the treatment of mRCC was based on efficacy in poor-risk patients in the first-line setting for temsirolimus and in vascular endothelial growth factor inhibitor-refractory patients for everolimus. We strove to characterize temsirolimus and everolimus use and effectiveness in the first-line setting., Patients and Methods: We performed a retrospective database analysis of mRCC patients who received mTOR inhibitors as first-line targeted therapy. The Kaplan-Meier product-limit method was used to estimate the distribution of progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS)., Results: We identified 127 mRCC patients who had received a first-line mTOR inhibitor. Temsirolimus was administered in 93 patients (73%) and everolimus in 34 patients (27%). The main reasons for choice of temsirolimus were poor-risk disease (38%), non-clear cell histology (27%), and clinical trial availability (15%), whereas clinical trial (82%) and non-clear cell histology (6%) drove everolimus selection. Of the temsirolimus and everolimus patients, 58% and 32% were poor-risk according to the International mRCC Database Consortium criteria, respectively. The median PFS and OS were 3.4 and 12.5 months and 4.8 and 15.9 months with temsirolimus and everolimus, respectively. Although limited by small numbers, this study characterizes a real-world, international experience with the use of mTOR inhibition in treatment-naive mRCC patients., Conclusion: Poor-risk RCC, non-clear cell histology, and clinical trials were the predominant reasons for mTOR inhibitor selection in the front-line setting. Because of the different patient populations in which they were administered, direct comparisons of the front-line efficacy of temsirolimus and everolimus cannot be made., (Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: The benefit of cytoreductive nephrectomy (CN) for overall survival (OS) is unclear in patients with synchronous metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) in the era of targeted therapy., Objective: To determine OS benefit of CN compared with no CN in mRCC patients treated with targeted therapies., Design, Setting, and Participants: Retrospective data from patients with synchronous mRCC (n=1658) from the International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium (IMDC) were used to compare 982 mRCC patients who had a CN with 676 mRCC patients who did not., Outcome Measurements and Statistical Analysis: OS was compared and hazard ratios (HRs) adjusted for IMDC poor prognostic criteria., Results and Limitations: Patients who had CN had better IMDC prognostic profiles versus those without (favorable, intermediate, or poor in 9%, 63%, and 28% vs 1%, 45%, and 54%, respectively). The median OS of patients with CN versus without CN was 20.6 versus 9.5 mo (p<0.0001). When adjusted for IMDC criteria to correct for imbalances, the HR of death was 0.60 (95% confidence interval, 0.52-0.69; p<0.0001). Patients estimated to survive <12 mo may receive marginal benefit from CN. Patients who have four or more of the IMDC prognostic criteria did not benefit from CN. Data were collected retrospectively., Conclusions: CN is beneficial in synchronous mRCC patients treated with targeted therapy, even after adjusting for prognostic factors. Patients with estimated survival times <12 mo or four or more IMDC prognostic factors may not benefit from CN. This information may aid in patient selection as we await results from randomized controlled trials., Patient Summary: We looked at the survival outcomes of metastatic renal cell carcinoma patients who did or did not have the primary tumor removed. We found that most patients benefited from tumor removal, except for those with four or more IMDC risk factors., (Copyright © 2014. Published by Elsevier B.V.)

Background: A subset of primarily localized renal cell carcinoma (RCC) patients will experience disease recurrence ≥5 yr after initial nephrectomy., Objective: To characterize the clinical outcome of patients with late recurrence beyond 5 yr., Design, Setting, and Participants: Patients with metastatic RCC (mRCC) treated with targeted therapy were retrospectively characterized according to time to relapse. Relapse was defined as the diagnosis of recurrent metastatic disease >3 mo after initial curative-intent nephrectomy. Patients with synchronous metastatic disease at presentation were excluded. Patients were classified as early relapsers (ERs) if they recurred within 5 yr; late relapsers (LRs) recurred after 5 yr., Outcome Measurements and Statistical Analysis: Demographics were compared with the Student t test, the chi-square test, or the Fisher exact test. The survival time was estimated with the Kaplan-Meier method, and associations with survival outcome were assessed with univariable and multivariable Cox regression analyses., Results and Limitations: Among 1210 mRCC patients treated with targeted therapy after surgery for localized disease, 897 (74%) relapsed within the first 5 yr and 313 (26%) (range: 5-35 yr) after 5 yr. LRs presented with younger age (p<0.0001), fewer with sarcomatoid features (p<0.0001), more clear cell histology (p=0.001), and lower Fuhrman grade (p<0.0001). Overall objective response rates to targeted therapy were better in LRs versus ERs (31.8% vs 26.5%; p=0.004). LRs had significantly longer progression-free survival (10.7 mo vs 8.5 mo; p=0.005) and overall survival (OS; 34.0 mo vs 27.4 mo; p=0.004). The study is limited by its retrospective design, noncentralized imaging and pathology review, missing information on metastatectomy, and nonstandardized follow-up protocols., Conclusions: A quarter of patients who eventually developed metastatic disease and were treated with targeted therapy relapsed over 5 yr from initial nephrectomy. LRs have more favorable prognostic features and consequently better treatment response and OS., (Copyright © 2013 European Association of Urology. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

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 (P<0.0001). On multivariable analysis, 2 lines and 3+ lines of therapy were each associated with better OS (HR=0.738 and 0.626, P<0.0001). Survival outcomes for the subgroups were as follows: for all patients, OS 20.9 months and PFS 7.2 months; for those similar to eligible patients in the first-line ADAPT trial, OS 14.7 months and PFS 5.6 months; for those similar to patients in first-line TIVO-1 trial, OS 24.8 months and PFS 8.2 months; for those similar to patients in second-line INTORSECT trial, OS 13.0 months and PFS 3.9 months; and for those similar to patients in the third-line GOLD trial, OS 18.0 months and PFS 4.4 months., Conclusions: Patients who are able to receive more lines of TT live longer. Survival benchmarks provide context and perspective when interpreting and designing clinical trials.