Search

Introduction: Clinical trials show improved progression‐free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) in first‐line metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) patients with immunotherapy containing systemic anti‐cancer therapies (SACT). However, in the favourable international metastatic renal cell cancer database consortium (IMDC) group there is no trial evidence for OS benefit despite clear PFS improvement when comparing anti‐VEGF tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) monotherapy and (immunotherapy and TKI) IO/TKI combinations. Objective: To assess the impact of first‐line SACT choice on the clinical outcomes of PFS and OS in mRCC. To evaluate this impact of initial SACT for allcomers and the favourable IMDC group. Methods: A multicentre retrospective review of patients who started SACT for mRCC (01/01/2018–30/06/2021) at 17 UK NHS trusts. Patient demographics and IMDC group were analysed. Survival data were compared using Kaplan–Meier curves, and the statistical significance of differences in outcome between the groups was assessed with the log‐rank test. Univariable and multivariable Cox proportional hazard modelling estimate the hazard ratios (HRs) for survival outcomes associated with IMDC and treatment subtype. Results: One thousand three hundred and nineteen patients were identified with a median age of 64. 294 (22.3%), 695 (52.7%) and 321 (24.3%) were IMDC group favourable, intermediate and poor, respectively. 311 (23.6%), 197 (14.9%) and 778 (59%) patients received checkpoint inhibitor and anti‐CTLA4 monoclonal antibody (IO/IO), IO/TKI and TKI first‐line SACT across all IMDC groups. Significant PFS improvement favouring IO/TKI versus TKI was demonstrated in allcomers HR = 0.61. In the favourable risk group, Log rank testing demonstrated a significant benefit for IO/TKI over TKI for PFS (HR = 0.60, 95% CI [0.39, 0.91]) and OS (HR = 0.42, 95% CI [0.18, 0.99]). Conclusion: In this real‐world evidence cohort, we have shown OS and PFS benefit with IO/TKI versus TKI in the favourable IMDC risk group. This has not been previously reported from trial outcomes and would support use of front‐line IO/TKI in mRCC favourable risk patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and Objective: The tyrosine kinase inhibitors cabozantinib and axitinib have been widely used in England to treat advanced renal cell carcinoma following prior vascular endothelial growth factor-targeted therapy, but data on real-world usage remain limited. Our objective was to describe the real-world treatment patterns and outcomes of patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma who received second-line or later-line (≥ 2L) cabozantinib or axitinib after vascular endothelial growth factor-targeted therapy in clinical practice in England. Methods: This retrospective cohort study used clinical practice data (collected 2011–20) from the English Cancer Analysis System database. Patient characteristics, treatment sequence and duration, and overall survival (time from initiation of cabozantinib/axitinib treatment to death) were evaluated. Results: Data from 1485 eligible adults with advanced renal cell carcinoma were analyzed: 440 received ≥ 2L cabozantinib (2L for 88.6% of them); 1045 received ≥ 2L axitinib (2L for 89.5%). The most common first-line treatments were sunitinib (2L cabozantinib subcohort, 48%; 2L axitinib subcohort, 46%) and pazopanib (46% and 54%, respectively); nivolumab was the most common third-line treatment (18% and 19%, respectively). Median (interquartile range) 2L therapy duration was 5.52 (2.73–11.74) months for cabozantinib and 4.60 (1.45–12.36) months for axitinib. Following adjustment for potential confounders using inverse probability weighting, overall survival (median [interquartile range]) was longer for ≥ 2L cabozantinib (11.2 [5.7–28.0] months) than for ≥ 2L axitinib (10.4 [4.7–22.0] months; log-rank p = 0.0034). Conclusions: The Cancer Analysis System database is a valuable research resource providing extensive real-world clinical data. Real-world overall survival was longer with ≥ 2L cabozantinib than with axitinib. Clinical Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04637204; registered November 2020. Plain Language Summary: Cabozantinib and axitinib are anticancer drugs called tyrosine kinase inhibitors. They work by blocking the activity of proteins that cancer cells use to help them divide and grow. Cabozantinib and axitinib are treatment options for a common type of kidney cancer called renal cell carcinoma (RCC). There is evidence about how well cabozantinib and axitinib work in clinical trials, but it is less clear how well they work in standard practice outside of clinical trials. We investigated how cabozantinib and axitinib are used and how well they work as part of 'real-world' RCC care. We did this by analyzing patient data from an English cancer database. All patients in the study had advanced RCC and had been treated with at least one previous anticancer drug. This includes a type of drug that blocks new blood vessels forming, which tumors need for rapid growth. Most of the 1485 patients received cabozantinib or axitinib after receiving only one previous anticancer drug. These patients were treated for a median of 5.5 months with cabozantinib and 4.6 months with axitinib. Patients lived for a median of 11.2 months after starting cabozantinib treatment and a median of 10.4 months after starting axitinib treatment. This study provides new evidence showing how well cabozantinib and axitinib work in everyday RCC care. The results add to those from clinical trials and show the value of the English cancer registry for conducting studies of routine cancer care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Window-of-opportunity trials, evaluating the engagement of drugs with their biological target in the time period between diagnosis and standard-of-care treatment, can help prioritise promising new systemic treatments for later-phase clinical trials. Renal cell carcinoma (RCC), the 7th commonest solid cancer in the UK, exhibits targets for multiple new systemic anti-cancer agents including DNA damage response inhibitors, agents targeting vascular pathways and immune checkpoint inhibitors. Here we present the trial protocol for the WIndow-of-opportunity clinical trial platform for evaluation of novel treatment strategies in REnal cell cancer (WIRE).Methods: WIRE is a Phase II, multi-arm, multi-centre, non-randomised, proof-of-mechanism (single and combination investigational medicinal product [IMP]), platform trial using a Bayesian adaptive design. The Bayesian adaptive design leverages outcome information from initial participants during pre-specified interim analyses to determine and minimise the number of participants required to demonstrate efficacy or futility. Patients with biopsy-proven, surgically resectable, cT1b+, cN0-1, cM0-1 clear cell RCC and no contraindications to the IMPs are eligible to participate. Participants undergo diagnostic staging CT and renal mass biopsy followed by treatment in one of the treatment arms for at least 14 days. Initially, the trial includes five treatment arms with cediranib, cediranib + olaparib, olaparib, durvalumab and durvalumab + olaparib. Participants undergo a multiparametric MRI before and after treatment. Vascularised and de-vascularised tissue is collected at surgery. A ≥ 30% increase in CD8+ T-cells on immunohistochemistry between the screening and nephrectomy is the primary endpoint for durvalumab-containing arms. Meanwhile, a reduction in tumour vascular permeability measured by Ktrans on dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI by ≥30% is the primary endpoint for other arms. Secondary outcomes include adverse events and tumour size change. Exploratory outcomes include biomarkers of drug mechanism and treatment effects in blood, urine, tissue and imaging.Discussion: WIRE is the first trial using a window-of-opportunity design to demonstrate pharmacological activity of novel single and combination treatments in RCC in the pre-surgical space. It will provide rationale for prioritising promising treatments for later phase trials and support the development of new biomarkers of treatment effect with its extensive translational agenda.Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03741426 / EudraCT: 2018-003056-21 . [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The outlook for patients with advanced renal cell cancer (RCC) has been improved by targeted agents including inhibitors of the PI3 kinase (PI3K)-AKT-mTOR axis, although treatment resistance is a major problem. Here, we aimed to understand how RCC cells acquire resistance to PI3K-mTOR inhibition. We used the RCC4 cell line to generate a model of in vitro resistance by continuous culture in PI3K-mTOR kinase inhibitor NVP-BEZ235 (BEZ235, Dactolisib). Resistant cells were cross-resistant to mTOR inhibitor AZD2014. Sensitivity was regained after 4 months drug withdrawal, and resistance was partially suppressed by HDAC inhibition, supporting an epigenetic mechanism. BEZ235-resistant cells up-regulated and/or activated numerous proteins including MET, ABL, Notch, IGF-1R, INSR and MEK/ERK. However, resistance was not reversed by inhibiting or depleting these pathways, suggesting that many induced changes were passengers not drivers of resistance. BEZ235 blocked phosphorylation of mTOR targets S6 and 4E-BP1 in parental cells, but 4E-BP1 remained phosphorylated in resistant cells, suggesting BEZ235-refractory mTORC1 activity. Consistent with this, resistant cells over-expressed mTORC1 component RAPTOR at the mRNA and protein level. Furthermore, BEZ235 resistance was suppressed by RAPTOR depletion, or allosteric mTORC1 inhibitor rapamycin. These data reveal that RAPTOR up-regulation contributes to PI3K-mTOR inhibitor resistance, and suggest that RAPTOR expression should be included in the pharmacodynamic assessment of mTOR kinase inhibitor trials. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article focuses on research which aims to examine renal cancer nephrectomies over 25 years as well as the factors underlying changes in disease-specific survival. It performs retrospective data analysis on all patients undergoing nephrectomies for renal cell carcinoma (RCC). Information about tumour pT-stage, an important univariate prognostic factor, is provided.

Hypoxia-inducible factors, HIF-1α and HIF-2α, are expressed in the majority of clear-cell renal cell carcinoma (CC-RCC). In vitro, HIFα isoforms regulate a differential set of genes, and their effects in vivo within CC-RCC tumours may affect outcome. The role of angiogenesis and HIFα transcriptional products, including those involved in cell metabolism and morphological dedifferentiation have not been extensively investigated and might have relevance to the development of antiangiogenic or anti-HIFα trials in primary CC-RCC, either before or after radical nephrectomy. We analysed 168 consecutive clear-cell renal tumours from 1983 to 1999 within tissue microarrays and assessed expression of HIF-1α and HIF-2α together with the protein expression of seven of their target genes (BNIP3, CA9, Cyclin D1, GLUT-1, LDH5, Oct-4 and VEGF). The expression of these factors was compared with patient overall survival and CD31 angiogenesis. We found that HIFα antigenicity deteriorated with the age of the paraffin block (P < 0.0001) and in tumours from 1983 to 1992 was deemed not to be reliable. Similar findings were found in aged archival osteosarcoma samples. This might have important implications for retrospective biomarker studies that rely on archival tissue material. HIF-1αHIGH/HIF-2αLOW tumours had a worse overall survival compared with HIF-1αLOW/HIF-2αLOW tumours (P = 0.04). Surprisingly, on multivariate analysis, high levels of CD31+ angiogenesis was shown to be an independent prognostic marker of increased overall survival (P = 0.003). We propose that better differentiation of vascular endothelium may be a reflection of a greater production of vessel stabilization factors versus pro-angiogenic factors, and therefore a less aggressive phenotype. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Study Type - Therapy (case series) Level of Evidence 4 OBJECTIVE To determine whether primary extracorporeal high-intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU) is safe, feasible and effective for managing small renal tumours. PATIENTS AND METHODS Although surgery currently remains the standard treatment for localized renal cell carcinoma (RCC), the increasing incidence of small renal cancers has led to a shift towards nephron-sparing surgery, with associated morbidity in 20-25% of cases, and minimally invasive ablative therapies present an alternative management. HIFU results in 'trackless' homogenous tissue ablation and when administered via an extracorporeal device, is entirely noninvasive. The study comprised 17 patients (mean tumour size 2.5 cm) with radiologically suspicious renal tumours who underwent extracorporeal HIFU using the Model-JC System (Chongqing HAIFUTM, China), under general anaesthesia with one overnight hospital stay. Real-time diagnostic ultrasonography was used for targeting and monitoring. Patients were followed with a clinical review and gadolinium-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging at 12 days and every 6 months for a mean of 36 months. The outcomes measures were patient morbidity and oncological efficacy of HIFU treatment. RESULTS Of the 17 patients, 15 were treated according to protocol; two procedures were abandoned due to intervening bowel. There were no major complications related to HIFU. Radiological evidence of ablation was apparent at 12 days in seven of the 15 patients. Before the 6-month follow-up one patient had surgery due to persisting central enhancement. Fourteen patients were evaluated at the 6-month follow-up; eight tumours had involuted (mean 12% decrease in tumour area). Four patients had irregular enhancement on imaging and had alternative therapies. Ten patients remain on follow-up at a mean (range) of 36 (14-55) months after HIFU (mean 30% decrease in tumour area). There was central loss of enhancement in all. CONCLUSIONS Renal HIFU achieves stable lesions in two-thirds of patients, with minimal morbidity, and might be appropriate in selected cases. Further trials with accurate histological follow-up are essential to fully evaluate this novel technique. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: The type 1 insulin-like growth factor receptor (IGF1R) mediates many key aspects of the malignant phenotype. Clear cell renal cell carcinoma (CC-RCC) is a highly chemoresistant tumour that is characterised by frequent inactivating mutation of the von Hippel-Lindau (VHL) gene. In CC-RCC cells, IGF1R protein levels were not affected by hypoxia, but were higher in cells harbouring inactivating VHL mutations than in isogenic cells expressing wild-type (WT) VHL. Steady-state IGF1R mRNA and IGF1R promoter activity were significantly lower in CC-RCC cells expressing WT VHL compared with parental cells, consistent with a transcriptional effect. VHL was shown to sequester Sp1 and HuR to suppress IGF1R expression at the level of transcription and mRNA stability. This represents a new, non-HIF-dependent role for VHL. IGF1R mRNA levels were found to be significantly higher in biopsies of CC-RCC than benign kidney, confirming the clinical relevance of these findings. Methods: We proceeded to test the hypothesis that IGF1R upregulation contributes to the survival and chemoresistance of CC-RCC cells. Results: IGF1R depletion using sequence-specific IGF1R siRNA was found to block survival of CC-RCC cells expressing either mutant (MT) or WT VHL. Moreover, IGF1R gene silencing was found to induce sensitisation to 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) in CC-RCC cells expressing MT but not WT VHL, supporting the hypothesis that the IGF1R upregulation that follows VHL inactivation contributes to chemoresistance. IGF1R knockdown also sensitised MT VHL CC-RCC cells to etoposide, zoledronate and rapamycin but not to cisplatin. Conclusions: These findings suggest that anti-IGF1R strategies may be of therapeutic benefit in advanced CC-RCC patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Non-clear cell renal cell carcinomas are histologically and genetically diverse kidney cancers with variable prognoses, and their optimum initial treatment is unknown. We aimed to compare the mTOR inhibitor everolimus and the VEGF receptor inhibitor sunitinib in patients with non-clear cell renal cell carcinoma.Methods: We enrolled patients with metastatic papillary, chromophobe, or unclassified non-clear cell renal cell carcinoma with no history of previous systemic treatment. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive everolimus (10 mg/day) or sunitinib (50 mg/day; 6-week cycles of 4 weeks with treatment followed by 2 weeks without treatment) administered orally until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Randomisation was stratified by Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center risk group and papillary histology. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival in the intention-to-treat population using the RECIST 1.1 criteria. Safety was assessed in all patients who were randomly assigned to treatment. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01108445.Findings: Between Sept 23, 2010, and Oct 28, 2013, 108 patients were randomly assigned to receive either sunitinib (n=51) or everolimus (n=57). As of December, 2014, 87 progression-free survival events had occurred with two remaining active patients, and the trial was closed for the primary analysis. Sunitinib significantly increased progression-free survival compared with everolimus (8·3 months [80% CI 5·8-11·4] vs 5·6 months [5·5-6·0]; hazard ratio 1·41 [80% CI 1·03-1·92]; p=0·16), although heterogeneity of the treatment effect was noted on the basis of histological subtypes and prognostic risk groups. No unexpected toxic effects were reported, and the most common grade 3-4 adverse events were hypertension (12 [24%] of 51 patients in the sunitinib group vs one [2%] of 57 patients in the everolimus group), infection (six [12%] vs four [7%]), diarrhoea (five [10%] vs one [2%]), pneumonitis (none vs five [9%]), stomatitis (none vs five [9%]), and hand-foot syndrome (four [8%] vs none).Interpretation: In patients with metastatic non-clear cell renal cell carcinoma, sunitinib improved progression-free survival compared with everolimus. Future trials of novel agents should account for heterogeneity in disease outcomes based on genetic, histological, and prognostic factors.Funding: Novartis and Pfizer. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Background: Cediranib is a highly potent vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) signalling inhibitor with activity against VEGF receptors 1, 2 and 3. This Phase II, randomised, double-blind, parallel-group study compared the efficacy of cediranib with placebo in patients with metastatic or recurrent clear cell renal cell carcinoma who had not previously received a VEGF signalling inhibitor. Methods: Patients were randomised (3:1) to cediranib 45mg/day or placebo. The primary objective was comparison of change from baseline in tumour size after 12weeks of therapy. Secondary objectives included response rate and duration, progression-free survival (PFS) and safety and tolerability. Patients in the placebo group could cross over to open-label cediranib at 12weeks or earlier if their disease had progressed. This study has been completed and is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00423332. Findings: Patients (n =71) were randomised to receive cediranib (n =53) or placebo (n =18). The primary study outcome revealed that, after 12weeks of therapy, there was a significant difference in mean percentage change from baseline in tumour size between the cediranib (–20%) and placebo (+20%) arms (p <0.0001). Eighteen patients (34%) on cediranib achieved a partial response and 25 (47%) experienced stable disease. Cediranib treatment prolonged PFS significantly compared with placebo (hazard ratio (HR)=0.45, 90%confidence interval: 0.26–0.76, p =0.017; median PFS 12.1 versus 2.8months). The most common adverse events in patients receiving cediranib were diarrhoea (74%), hypertension (64%), fatigue (58%) and dysphonia (58%). Interpretation: Cediranib monotherapy demonstrated significant evidence of antitumour activity in patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma. The adverse event profile was consistent with previous studies of cediranib 45mg. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Abstract: A rare variant of renal cell carcinoma (RCC) with a translocation involving Xp11.2 has become increasingly recognized as a separate entity in the 2004 World Health Organization (WHO) kidney carcinoma classification. These tumors predominantly affect children and young adults and tend to present with advanced stage disease. Although reported to be indolent in children, adult cases run a more aggressive course. Little is known about their natural history, prognosis and response to therapy. We report a case of Xp11 translocation renal cancer in a 33-year-old male patient who presented with widespread rapidly progressive metastatic disease involving extensive intra-thoracic lymph nodes, supra-clavicular, retroperitoneal lymph nodes, lung nodules, and peritoneal mass. He had failed to respond to treatment with high dose interleukin 2, but showed a significant clinical response to treatment with the multikinase inhibitor sunitinib. CT scan performed after 3 cycles (18 weeks) of therapy revealed more than 65% reduction of measurable disease by response evaluation criteria in solid tumors (RECIST) criteria, resolution of other assessable lesions, and a clinical benefit that lasted for over 13 months. But unfortunately, this was subsequently followed by a rapidly progressive course. The well-recognized clinical efficacy of multikinase inhibitors such as sunitinib and sorafenib is based on the outcomes in patients with clear cell histology. There is limited data on efficacy in non-clear cell RCC, but activity in translocation RCC has not been reported. To our knowledge, this is the first documented case of Xp11 translocation carcinoma to have demonstrated an objective durable response to sunitinib. It remains unclear how resistance to sunitinib develops, but the results to date support further evaluation of sunitinib in cases of translocation RCC. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]