Search

Background: Among patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC), those with sarcomatoid histology (sRCC) have the poorest prognosis. This analysis assessed the efficacy of avelumab plus axitinib versus sunitinib in patients with treatment-naive advanced sRCC., Methods: The randomized, open-label, multicenter, phase III JAVELIN Renal 101 trial (NCT02684006) enrolled patients with treatment-naive advanced RCC. Patients were randomized 1 : 1 to receive either avelumab plus axitinib or sunitinib following standard doses and schedules. Assessments in this post hoc analysis of patients with sRCC included efficacy (including progression-free survival) and biomarker analyses., Results: A total of 108 patients had sarcomatoid histology and were included in this post hoc analysis; 47 patients in the avelumab plus axitinib arm and 61 in the sunitinib arm. Patients in the avelumab plus axitinib arm had improved progression-free survival [stratified hazard ratio, 0.57 (95% confidence interval, 0.325-1.003)] and a higher objective response rate (46.8% versus 21.3%; complete response in 4.3% versus 0%) versus those in the sunitinib arm. Correlative gene expression analyses of patients with sRCC showed enrichment of gene pathway scores for cancer-associated fibroblasts and regulatory T cells, CD274 and CD8A expression, and tumors with The Cancer Genome Atlas m3 classification., Conclusions: In this subgroup analysis of JAVELIN Renal 101, patients with sRCC in the avelumab plus axitinib arm had improved efficacy outcomes versus those in the sunitinib arm. Correlative analyses provide insight into this subtype of RCC and suggest that avelumab plus axitinib may increase the chance of overcoming the aggressive features of sRCC., Competing Interests: Disclosure TKC reports grants received from Pfizer during the conduct of the study; personal fees received from Agensys, Alexion, Alligent, American Society of Clinical Oncology, Analysis Group, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celldex, Cerulean, Clinical Care Options, Corvus, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, EMD Serono, Inc., Eisai, Exelixis, Foundation Medicine, Genentech/Roche, GSK, Harborside Press, Heron, Ipsen, Kidney Cancer Association, Kidney Cancer Journal, Lpath, Lancet Oncology, Lilly, Merck & Co., Michael J. Hennessy Associates, National Comprehensive Cancer Network, Navinata Health, New England Journal of Medicine, Novartis, Peloton Therapeutics, Pfizer, PlatformQ Health, Prometheus Laboratories, Sanofi, Seattle Genetics/Astellas, and UpToDate outside the conduct of the study; grants received from AstraZeneca, Bayer, Bristol Myers Squibb, Calithera, Cerulean, Corvus, Eisai, Exelixis, Foundation Medicine, Genentech/Roche, GSK, Ipsen, Merck & Co., Novartis, Peloton Therapeutics, Pfizer, Prometheus Laboratories, Takeda, and TRACON outside the conduct of the study; and medical writing and editorial assistance provided by ClinicalThinking, Envision Pharma Group, Fishawack Group of Companies, Health Interactions, and Parexel, funded by pharmaceutical companies. JL reports personal fees from Eisai, EUSA Pharma, GSK, Kymab, Pierre Fabre, Roche/Genentech, and Secarna and grants and personal fees from Bristol Myers Squibb, Merck & Co., Novartis, and Pfizer outside the submitted work. SP reports personal fees from Astellas Pharma and Novartis and personal fees and grants from Medivation. RJM reports serving as a consultant or advisor for and research funding from Pfizer, Novartis, Eisai, and Genentech/Roche, serving as a consultant or advisor for Exelixis, Lilly, Merck & Co., and Incyte, and receiving travel, accommodation, and expenses and research funding from Bristol Myers Squibb outside the submitted work. BIR reports grants and personal fees from AVEO Oncology, Bristol Myers Squibb, Genentech/Roche, Merck & Co., and Pfizer; grants from AstraZeneca; and personal fees from 3D Medicines, Alkermes, Arravive, Inc., Compugen, Corvus Pharmaceuticals, Exelixis, Merck & Co., Novartis, Peloton, Surface Oncology, and Synthorx. BV reports grants and personal fees from Bristol Myers Squibb, personal fees from Merck & Co. and Pfizer, and grants from Merck & Co. during the conduct of the study; and personal fees from EUSA Pharma, Ipsen, and Janssen outside the submitted work. BA reports personal fees from Amgen and Ferring, grants and personal fees from Astellas, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Bristol Myers Squibb, Janssen, Merck & Co., Pfizer, Roche, and Sanofi, and grants from Ipsen outside the submitted work. GG reports receiving travel, accommodation, and expenses from Astellas, Bristol Myers Squibb, Ipsen, Janssen Oncology, and Pfizer. MAB reports grants from AstraZeneca, Bayer, Bristol Myers Squibb, Genentech/Roche, Incyte, Peleton Therapeutics, Pfizer, and TRACON; personal fees from EMD Serono, Inc., Exelixis, Genomic Health, and Sanofi; and grants and personal fees from Nektar. AC reports employment at Pfizer at the time when the study was conducted. SH, KAC, XJM, MM, PBR, BH, AdiP report employment at Pfizer. LA reports consulting fees compensated to their institution from Amgen, Astellas, AstraZeneca, Bristol Myers Squibb, Corvus Pharmaceuticals, Exelixis, Ipsen, Merck KGaA, Merck & Co., Novartis, Peloton Therapeutics, Roche, and Pfizer outside the submitted work. HM has declared no conflicts of interest. Data sharing Upon request, and subject to certain criteria, conditions, and exceptions (see https://www.pfizer.com/science/clinical-trials/trial-data-and-results for more information), Pfizer will provide access to individual de-identified participant data from Pfizer-sponsored global interventional clinical studies conducted for medicines, vaccines and medical devices (i) for indications that have been approved in the USA and/or EU or (ii) in programs that have been terminated (i.e. development for all indications has been discontinued). Pfizer will also consider requests for the protocol, data dictionary, and statistical analysis plan. Data may be requested from Pfizer trials 24 months after study completion. The de-identified participant data will be made available to researchers whose proposals meet the research criteria and other conditions, and for which an exception does not apply, via a secure portal. To gain access, data requestors must enter into a data access agreement with Pfizer., (Copyright © 2021 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Background: In a single-group, phase 1b trial, avelumab plus axitinib resulted in objective responses in patients with advanced renal-cell carcinoma. This phase 3 trial involving previously untreated patients with advanced renal-cell carcinoma compared avelumab plus axitinib with the standard-of-care sunitinib., Methods: We randomly assigned patients in a 1:1 ratio to receive avelumab (10 mg per kilogram of body weight) intravenously every 2 weeks plus axitinib (5 mg) orally twice daily or sunitinib (50 mg) orally once daily for 4 weeks (6-week cycle). The two independent primary end points were progression-free survival and overall survival among patients with programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1)-positive tumors. A key secondary end point was progression-free survival in the overall population; other end points included objective response and safety., Results: A total of 886 patients were assigned to receive avelumab plus axitinib (442 patients) or sunitinib (444 patients). Among the 560 patients with PD-L1-positive tumors (63.2%), the median progression-free survival was 13.8 months with avelumab plus axitinib, as compared with 7.2 months with sunitinib (hazard ratio for disease progression or death, 0.61; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.47 to 0.79; P<0.001); in the overall population, the median progression-free survival was 13.8 months, as compared with 8.4 months (hazard ratio, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.56 to 0.84; P<0.001). Among the patients with PD-L1-positive tumors, the objective response rate was 55.2% with avelumab plus axitinib and 25.5% with sunitinib; at a median follow-up for overall survival of 11.6 months and 10.7 months in the two groups, 37 patients and 44 patients had died, respectively. Adverse events during treatment occurred in 99.5% of patients in the avelumab-plus-axitinib group and in 99.3% of patients in the sunitinib group; these events were grade 3 or higher in 71.2% and 71.5% of the patients in the respective groups., Conclusions: Progression-free survival was significantly longer with avelumab plus axitinib than with sunitinib among patients who received these agents as first-line treatment for advanced renal-cell carcinoma. (Funded by Pfizer and Merck [Darmstadt, Germany]; JAVELIN Renal 101 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02684006.)., (Copyright © 2019 Massachusetts Medical Society.)