Search

PURPOSE To determine the value of tumor cell programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression as a predictive biomarker of nivolumab monotherapy efficacy in treatment-naive patients with clear cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC) and the efficacy of salvage nivolumab/ipilimumab in patients with tumors unresponsive to nivolumab monotherapy. METHODS Eligible patients with treatment-naive ccRCC received nivolumab until progressive disease (PD), toxicity, or completing 96 treatment weeks (part A). Patients with PD before or stable disease at 48 weeks could receive salvage nivolumab/ipilimumab (part B). The primary end point was improvement in 1-year progression-free survival in patients with tumor PD-L1 expression > 20% versus 0%. RESULTS One hundred twenty-three patients were enrolled. The objective response rate (ORR) was 34.1% (95% CI, 25.8 to 43.2). ORR by International Metastatic RCC Database Consortium category was favorable-risk 57.1%, intermediate-risk/poor-risk 25.0%, and by sarcomatoid features 36.4%. The ORR was 26.9%, 50.0%, and 75.0% for patients with the tumor PD-L1 expression of 0, 1-20, or > 20%, respectively (trend test P value = .002). The median duration of response was 27.6 (19.3 to not reached) months, with 26 of 42 responders including 17 of 20 with favorable-risk disease remaining progression-free. The 1-year progression-free survival was 34.6% and 75.0% in the PD-L1 = 0% and > 20% categories, respectively ( P = .050). Ninety-seven patients with PD or prolonged stable disease were potentially eligible for part B, and 35 were enrolled. The ORR for part B was 11.4%. Grade ≥ 3 treatment-related adverse events occurred in 35% of patients on nivolumab and 43% of those on salvage nivolumab/ipilimumab. CONCLUSION Nivolumab monotherapy is active in treatment-naive ccRCC. Although efficacy appears to be less than that of nivolumab/ipilimumab in patients with intermediate-risk/poor-risk disease, favorable-risk patients had notable benefit. Efficacy correlated with tumor PD-L1 status. Salvage nivolumab/ipilimumab was frequently not feasible and of limited benefit.

Tivozanib, vascular endothelial growth factor receptor inhibitor, met the primary endpoint of improved progression free survival compared to sorafenib in the phase 3 TIVO-3 study in patients with previously treated metastatic renal cell carcinoma. In this study we sought to understand the temporal characteristics of treatment related adverse events (TRAEs) and frequency and timing of the dose modifications.In this open label, randomized, phase 3 TIVO-3 study, previously treated patients with a diagnosis of metastatic renal cell carcinoma and with measurable disease were included. Patients were randomized to receive either tivozanib 1.5 mg orally once daily in 4-week cycles or sorafenib 400 mg orally twice daily continuously. Based on updated safety analysis data (cutoff date of August 15, 2019), time to onset of the most commonly reported TRAEs, duration of toxicity, rate of dose modifications was calculated for each treatment arm.Overall, 350 patients were randomly assigned to receive tivozanib or sorafenib;173 patients from the tivozanib arm and 170 patients from the sorafenib arm were included in this analysis. Patients received a median of 11.9 cycles (336 days) and 6.7 cycles (192 days) of tivozanib and sorafenib, respectively. Dose reductions, interruptions and treatment discontinuations were 25%, 50%, and 21%, and 39%, 50%, and 30% in the tivozanib and sorafenib arms, respectively, with a longer time to onset of TRAEs in the tivozanib arm.Tivozanib was associated with less TRAEs, fewer dose modifications, a longer time to onset and a shorter duration of TRAEs compared to sorafenib.

To disentangle the "obesity paradox" in renal cell carcinoma (RCC), we examined associations of body mass index (BMI) and weight change with RCC risk and survival in the Health Professionals Follow-up Study (HPFS) and Nurses' Health Study (NHS) 1 and 2. We estimated cohort-specific and summary covariable-adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for RCC incidence, as well as RCC-specific survival among cases in the pooled HPFS and NHS data. Cumulative average BMI was associated with a higher risk of total RCC (summary HR 2.16, 95% CI 1.77-2.63 for BMI ≥30 vs 18-25 kg/m

Tivozanib is a selective vascular endothelial growth factor receptor (VEGFR)-inhibitor designed to, more specifically, bind to the VEGF receptor with fewer off-target interactions with other tyrosine kinase receptors in the treatment of advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC).Both preclinical and early clinical studies have suggested tivozanib could be a more potent VEGFR inhibitor with less off-target toxicities for patients. After a complicated clinical development process, the drug was approved by the FDA for third- and fourth-line use in relapsed, refractory renal cell carcinoma (RCC) in March of 2021 based on the results of the TIVO-3 trial. However, questions remain regarding the proper incorporation of tivozanib in the current treatment landscape of RCC.Here, we review the existing literature surrounding tivozanib and comment on its optimal use in current and future clinical practice. We suggest that tivozanib may be considered in relapsed, refractory RCC in the later-line treatment setting following progression on both immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) and nonselective VEGFR-TKIs. We anticipate the application of tivozanib in RCC will continue to evolve as trials exploring tivozanib in combination with ICIs may move this drug earlier in the future treatment landscape of RCC.

Brain metastases are a challenging manifestation of renal cell carcinoma. We have a limited understanding of brain metastasis tumor and immune biology, drivers of resistance to systemic treatment, and their overall poor prognosis. Current data support a multimodal treatment strategy with radiation treatment and/or surgery. Nonetheless, the optimal approach for the management of brain metastases from renal cell carcinoma remains unclear. To improve patient care, the authors sought to standardize practical management strategies. They performed an unstructured literature review and elaborated on the current management strategies through an international group of experts from different disciplines assembled via the network of the International Kidney Cancer Coalition. Experts from different disciplines were administered a survey to answer questions related to current challenges and unmet patient needs. On the basis of the integrated approach of literature review and survey study results, the authors built algorithms for the management of single and multiple brain metastases in patients with renal cell carcinoma. The literature review, consensus statements, and algorithms presented in this report can serve as a framework guiding treatment decisions for patients. CA Cancer J Clin. 2022;72:454-489.

Blockade of the PD1 pathway is a broadly effective cancer therapy, but additional immune-inhibitory pathways contribute to tumor immune evasion. HERV–H LTR-associating 2 (HHLA2; also known as B7H5 and B7H7) is a member of the B7 family of immunoregulatory ligands that mediates costimulatory effects through its interaction with the CD28 family member transmembrane and immunoglobulin domain containing 2 (TMIGD2). However, HHLA2 has also been known to have inhibitory effects on T cells. Here, we report that we have identified killer cell immunoglobulin-like receptor, three immunoglobulin domains and long cytoplasmic tail 3 (KIR3DL3) as an inhibitory receptor for HHLA2 in T cells and natural killer (NK) cells and have generated HHLA2 and KIR3DL3 antibodies that block the immune-inhibitory activity of HHLA2, preserving the costimulatory signal. It is known that HHLA2 is frequently expressed in several tumor types, including clear cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC). We found that HHLA2 expression was nonoverlapping with PDL1 expression in ccRCC, suggesting that HHLA2 mediates a mechanism of tumor immune evasion that is independent from PDL1. Blockade of both the PD1 and KIR3DL3 pathways may be a more effective way to reverse tumor immune evasion.See related Spotlight on p. 128

Supplementary Figures 1-7 and Supplementary Tables 1-2

PD-L1 expression in primary clear-cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC) increases the likelihood of response to anti–PD-1 inhibition, but fails to identify all responders. We hypothesized that PD-L1 levels assessed in randomly selected areas of the primary tumors may not accurately reflect expression levels in metastatic lesions, which are the target of systemic therapy. Therefore, we compared PD-L1 expression in a series of primary ccRCC and their metastases. Tissue blocks from 53 primary ccRCCs and 76 corresponding metastases were retrieved. Areas with predominant and highest nuclear grade were selected. Slides were immunostained with a validated anti–PD-L1 antibody (405.9A11). Membranous expression in tumor cells was quantified using H-score. Expression in tumor-infiltrating mononuclear cells (TIMC) was quantified using a combined score. Discordant tumor cell PD-L1 staining between primary tumors and metastases was observed in 11 of 53 cases (20.8%). Overall, tumor cell PD-L1 levels were not different in primary tumors and metastases (P = 0.51). Tumor cell PD-L1 positivity was associated with higher T stage (P = 0.03) and higher Fuhrman nuclear grade (P < 0.01). Within individual lesions, PD-L1 positivity was heterogeneous and almost exclusively detected in high nuclear grade areas (P < 0.001). No difference was found in PD-L1 levels in TIMCs between primary tumors and metastases (P = 0.82). The heterogeneity of PD-L1 expression in ccRCC suggests that its assessment as a predictive biomarker for PD-1 blockade may require analysis of metastatic lesions. Notably, because PD-L1 expression was mostly detected in high nuclear grade areas, to avoid false-negative results, these areas should be specifically selected for assessment. Cancer Immunol Res; 3(10); 1158–64. ©2015 AACR.

BRAF inhibitors (BRAFi) have led to clinical benefit in patients with melanoma. The development of a blood-based assay to detect and quantify BRAF levels in these patients has diagnostic, prognostic, and predictive capabilities that could guide treatment decisions. Blood BRAFV600E detection and quantification were performed on samples from 128 patients with stage II (19), III (67), and IV (42) melanoma. Tissue BRAF analysis was performed in all patients with stage IV disease and in selected patients with stage II and III disease. Clinical outcomes were correlated to initial BRAF levels as well as BRAF level dynamics. Serial analysis was performed on 17 stage IV melanoma patients treated with BRAFi and compared with tumor measurements by RECIST. The assay was highly sensitive (96%) and specific (95%) in the stage IV setting, using a blood level of 4.8 pg as “positive.” BRAF levels typically decreased following BRAFi. A subset of these patients (5) had an increase in BRAFV600E values 42 to 112 days before clinical or radiographic disease progression (PD). From 86 patients with resected, stage II or III melanoma, 39 had evidence of disease relapse (45.3%). Furthermore, BRAF mutation in the blood after surgical resection in these patients was not associated with a difference in relapse risk, although tissue BRAF status was only available for a subset of patients. In summary, we have developed a highly sensitive and specific, blood-based assay to detect BRAFV600 mutation in patients with melanoma. Mol Cancer Ther; 13(12); 3210–8. ©2014 AACR.

Supplemental Figure Legends from Clinical Utility of a Blood-Based BRAFV600E Mutation Assay in Melanoma

PD-L1 positivity in relation to tumor grade within individual lesions.

BRAFV600E levels in patients with detectable BRAFV600E mutation in tissue who had peripheral blood cell isolation using CPT tubes vs Ficoll.

Time interval between the resection of the primary tumor and the resection of each metastatic lesion. The discordance in PD-L1 expression between the primary tumor and each metastasis is also noted.

Overall survival (A) and progression-free survival (B) by baseline tumor PD-L1 expression (PD-L1 {greater than or equal to}1% and PD-L1

Supplementary Data from Treatment-free Survival after Immune Checkpoint Inhibitor Therapy versus Targeted Therapy for Advanced Renal Cell Carcinoma: 42-Month Results of the CheckMate 214 Trial

Purpose: Pembrolizumab monotherapy, ipilimumab monotherapy, and pegylated interferon alfa-2b (PEG-IFN) monotherapy are active against melanoma and renal cell carcinoma (RCC). We explored the safety and preliminary antitumor activity of pembrolizumab combined with either ipilimumab or PEG-IFN in patients with advanced melanoma or RCC.Experimental Design: The phase Ib KEYNOTE-029 study (ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02089685) included independent pembrolizumab plus reduced-dose ipilimumab and pembrolizumab plus PEG-IFN cohorts. Pembrolizumab 2 mg/kg every 3 weeks (Q3W) plus 4 doses of ipilimumab 1 mg/kg Q3W was tolerable if ≤6 of 18 patients experienced a dose-limiting toxicity (DLT). The target DLT rate for pembrolizumab 2 mg/kg Q3W plus PEG-IFN was 30%, with a maximum of 14 patients per dose level. Response was assessed per RECIST v1.1 by central review.Results: The ipilimumab cohort enrolled 22 patients, including 19 evaluable for DLTs. Six patients experienced ≥1 DLT. Grade 3 to 4 treatment-related adverse events occurred in 13 (59%) patients. Responses occurred in 5 of 12 (42%) patients with melanoma and 3 of 10 (30%) patients with RCC. In the PEG-IFN cohort, DLTs occurred in 2 of 14 (14%) patients treated at dose level 1 (PEG-IFN 1 μg/kg/week) and 2 of 3 (67%) patients treated at dose level 2 (PEG-IFN 2 μg/kg/week). Grade 3 to 4 treatment-related adverse events occurred in 10 of 17 (59%) patients. Responses occurred in 1 of 5 (20%) patients with melanoma and 2 of 12 (17%) patients with RCC.Conclusions: Pembrolizumab 2 mg/kg Q3W plus ipilimumab 1 mg/kg Q3W was tolerable and provided promising antitumor activity in patients with advanced melanoma or RCC. The maximum tolerated dose of pembrolizumab plus PEG-IFN had limited antitumor activity in this population. Clin Cancer Res; 24(8); 1805–15. ©2018 AACR.

Purpose:Combined axitinib/pembrolizumab is approved for advanced renal cell carcinoma (aRCC). This exploratory analysis examined associations between angiogenic and immune-related biomarkers and outcomes following axitinib/pembrolizumab treatment.Patients and Methods:Prospectively defined retrospective correlative exploratory analyses tested biospecimens from 52 treatment-naïve patients receiving axitinib and pembrolizumab (starting doses 5 mg twice daily and 2 mg/kg respectively, every 3 weeks). Tumor tissue, serum, and whole blood samples were collected at baseline, at cycle 2 day 1 (C2D1), and end of treatment (EOT) for blood-based samples. Clinical outcomes were objective response rate (ORR) and progression-free survival (PFS).Results:Higher baseline tumor levels of CD8 showed a trend toward longer PFS (HR 0.4; P = 0.091). Higher baseline serum levels of CXCL10 (P = 0.0197) and CEACAM1 (P = 0.085) showed a trend toward better ORR and longer PFS, respectively. Patients for whom IL6 was not detected at baseline had longer PFS versus patients for whom it was detected (HR 0.4; P = 0.028). At C2D1 and/or EOT, mainly immune-related biomarkers showed any association with better outcomes. The genes CA9 (P = 0.084), HIF1A (P = 0.064), and IFNG (P = 0.073) showed trending associations with ORR, and AKT3 (P = 0.0145), DDX58 (P = 0.0726), GZMA (P = 0.0666), LCN2 (NGAL; P = 0.0267), and PTPN11 (P = 0.0287) with PFS.Conclusions:With combined axitinib/pembrolizumab treatment in patients with aRCC, mostly immune-related biomarkers are associated with better treatment outcomes. This exploratory analysis has identified some candidate biomarkers to consider in future prospective testing.

59 probesets from an analysis of blood These are probesets for which the null hypothesis was rejected and the change over time averaged over treatment groups was {greater than or equal to}1.2-fold.

Supplementary Table 1. Frequency of FCGR genotypes and HWE test. Supplementary Table 2. PFS Clinical Outcome Assessment of FCGR2A, FCGR3A and FCGR2C SNPs. Supplementary Table 3. Clinical Outcome Parameters were Assessed for FCGR3A, FCGR2A and FCGR2C SNPs within the Group of 100 Patients with Clear Cell Histology that were Genotyped.

Treatment-Related Adverse Events Occurring in {greater than or equal to}1 Patient Treated With Pembrolizumab plus Ipilimumab

Supplementary Figure 2

CONSORT diagram.

Purpose:Atezolizumab [anti–programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1)] selectively targets PD-L1 to block its interaction with receptors programmed death 1 and B7.1, thereby reinvigorating antitumor T-cell activity. We evaluated the long-term safety and activity of atezolizumab, along with biological correlates of clinical activity endpoints, in a cohort of patients with melanoma in an ongoing phase Ia study (NCT01375842).Patients and Methods:Patients with unresectable or metastatic melanoma were enrolled to receive atezolizumab 0.1 to 20 mg/kg or ≥10 mg/kg every 3 weeks. Primary study objectives were safety and tolerability. Secondary objectives included investigator-assessed efficacy measures; pharmacodynamic and predictive biomarkers of antitumor activity were explored.Results:Forty-five patients were enrolled and were evaluable for safety. Most treatment-related adverse events (AE) were grade 1/2 (60%). Fatigue (44%), pruritus (20%), pyrexia (18%), and rash (18%) were the most common treatment-related AEs of any grade. No treatment-related deaths occurred. Overall response rate was 30% among 43 efficacy- evaluable patients, with a median duration of response of 62 months [95% CI, 35–not estimable (NE)]. Clinically meaningful long-term survival was observed, with a median overall survival of 23 months (95% CI, 9–66). Baseline biomarkers of tumor immunity [PD-L1 expression on immune cells, T effector (Teff), and antigen presentation gene signatures) and tumor mutational burden (TMB) were associated with improved response, progression-free survival, and overall survival.Conclusions:Atezolizumab was well tolerated, with durable responses and survival in patients with melanoma. PD-L1 expression, TMB, and Teff signatures may indicate improved benefit with atezolizumab in these patients.

Supplementary Information

Purpose:Patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma with sarcomatoid features (sRCC) have poor prognoses and suboptimal outcomes with targeted therapy. This post hoc analysis of the phase III CheckMate 214 trial analyzed the efficacy of nivolumab plus ipilimumab (NIVO+IPI) versus sunitinib in patients with sRCC.Patients and Methods:Patients with sRCC were identified via independent central pathology review of archival tumor tissue or histologic classification per local pathology report. Patients were randomized 1:1 to receive nivolumab (3 mg/kg) plus ipilimumab (1 mg/kg) every 3 weeks (four doses) then nivolumab 3 mg/kg every 2 weeks, or sunitinib 50 mg orally every day (4 weeks; 6-week cycles). Outcomes in patients with sRCC were not prespecified. Endpoints in patients with sRCC and International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium intermediate/poor-risk disease included overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS) per independent radiology review, and objective response rate (ORR) per RECIST v1.1. Safety outcomes used descriptive statistics.Results:Of 1,096 randomized patients in CheckMate 214, 139 patients with sRCC and intermediate/poor-risk disease and six with favorable-risk disease were identified. With 42 months' minimum follow-up in patients with sRCC and intermediate/poor-risk disease, median OS [95% confidence interval (CI)] favored NIVO+IPI [not reached (NR) (25.2-not estimable [NE]); n = 74] versus sunitinib [14.2 months (9.3–22.9); n = 65; HR, 0.45 (95% CI, 0.3–0.7; P = 0.0004)]; PFS benefits with NIVO+IPI were similarly observed [median 26.5 vs. 5.1 months; HR, 0.54 (95% CI, 0.33–0.86; P = 0.0093)]. Confirmed ORR was 60.8% with NIVO+IPI versus 23.1% with sunitinib, with complete response rates of 18.9% versus 3.1%, respectively. No new safety signals emerged.Conclusions:NIVO+IPI showed unprecedented long-term survival, response, and complete response benefits versus sunitinib in previously untreated patients with sRCC and intermediate/poor-risk disease, supporting the use of first-line NIVO+IPI for this population.See related commentary by Hwang et al., p. 5

List of all patients with complete information on mutations found and allele frequency

Purpose:The use of VEGFR TKIs for the adjuvant treatment of renal cell carcinoma (RCC) remains controversial. We investigated the effects of adjuvant VEGFR TKIs on circulating cytokines in the ECOG-ACRIN 2805 (ASSURE) trial.Experimental Design:Patients with resected high-risk RCC were randomized to sunitinib, sorafenib, or placebo. Plasma from 413 patients was analyzed from post-nephrectomy baseline, 4 weeks, and 6 weeks after treatment initiation. Mixed effects and Cox proportional hazards models were used to test for changes in circulating cytokines and associations between disease-free survival (DFS) and cytokine levels.Results:VEGF and PlGF increased after 4 weeks on sunitinib or sorafenib (P < 0.0001 for both) and returned to baseline at 6 weeks on sunitinib (corresponding to the break in the sunitinib schedule) but not sorafenib (which was administered continuously). sFLT-1 decreased after 4 weeks on sunitinib and 6 weeks on sorafenib (P < 0.0001). sVEGFR-2 decreased after both 4 and 6 weeks of treatment on sunitinib or sorafenib (P < 0.0001). Patients receiving placebo had no significant changes in cytokine levels. CXCL10 was elevated at 4 and 6 weeks on sunitinib and sorafenib but not on placebo. Higher baseline CXCL10 was associated with worse DFS (HR 1.41 per log increase in CXCL10, Bonferroni-adjusted P = 0.003). This remained significant after adjustment for T-stage, Fuhrman grade, and ECOG performance status.Conclusions:Among patients treated with adjuvant VEGFR TKIs for RCC, drug–host interactions mediate changes in circulating cytokines. Elevated baseline CXCL10 was associated with worse DFS. Studies to understand functional consequences of these changes are under way.

Supplementary Tables

Figures S1-S4

Purpose: Fc-gamma receptors (FCGRs) are expressed on immune cells, bind to antibodies, and trigger antibody-induced cell-mediated antitumor responses when tumor-reactive antibodies are present. The affinity of the FCGR/antibody interaction is variable and dependent upon FCGR polymorphisms. Prior studies of patients with cancer treated with immunotherapy indicate that FCGR polymorphisms can influence antitumor response for certain immunotherapies that act via therapeutically administered mAbs or via endogenous tumor-reactive antibodies induced from tumor antigen vaccines. The previously published “SELECT” trial of high-dose aldesleukin (HD-IL2) for metastatic renal cell carcinoma resulted in an objective response rate of 25%. We evaluated the patients in this SELECT trial to determine whether higher-affinity FCGR polymorphisms are associated with outcome.Experimental Design: SNPs in FCGR2A, FCGR3A, and FCGR2C were analyzed, individually and in combination, for associations between genotype and clinical outcome.Results: When higher-affinity genotypes for FCGR2A, FCGR3A, and FCGR2C were considered together, they were associated with significantly increased tumor shrinkage and prolonged survival in response to HD-IL2.Conclusions: Although associations of higher-affinity FCGR genotype with clinical outcome have been demonstrated with mAb therapy and with idiotype vaccines, to our knowledge, this is the first study to show associations of FCGR genotypes with outcome following HD-IL2 treatment. We hypothesize that endogenous antitumor antibodies may engage immune cells through their FCGRs, and HD-IL2 may enhance antibody-induced tumor destruction, or antibody-enhanced tumor antigen presentation, via augmented activation of innate or adaptive immune responses; this FCGR-mediated immune activity would be augmented through immunologically favorable FCGRs. Clin Cancer Res; 23(9); 2159–68. ©2016 AACR.

Supplemental Table 1: Catalog numbers for MSD assays Supplemental Figure 1: Hazard ratio for CXCL10 and DFS by treatment arm Supplemental Figure 2: Assessment of log-linearity for relationship between IP-10 and recurrence risk Supplemental Table 2: Median changes in cytokines at weeks 4 and 6 Supplemental Table 3: Relationship between on-treatment cytokine levels and DFS Supplemental Table 4: Subset analysis for cytokine changes among patients who did not recur Supplemental Table 5: Evaluation for interaction effects between treatment arm and the association between baseline CXCL10 and DFS

ORR in patients with sRCC and I/P-risk disease, per IRRC, by central or local pathology review.

Tables S1-S4

Purpose: We examined the hypothesis that mutations in mTOR pathway genes are associated with response to rapalogs in metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC).Experimental Design: We studied a cohort of mRCC patients who were treated with mTOR inhibitors with distinct clinical outcomes. Tumor DNA from 79 subjects was successfully analyzed for mutations using targeted next-generation sequencing of 560 cancer genes. Responders were defined as those with partial response (PR) by RECIST v1.0 or stable disease with any tumor shrinkage for 6 months or longer. Nonresponders were defined as those with disease progression during the first 3 months of therapy. Fisher exact test assessed the association between mutation status in mTOR pathway genes and treatment response.Results: Mutations in MTOR, TSC1, or TSC2 were more common in responders, 12 (28%) of 43, than nonresponders, 4 (11%) of 36 (P = 0.06). Mutations in TSC1 or TSC2 alone were also more common in responders, 9 (21%), than nonresponders, 2(6%), (P = 0.05). Furthermore, 5 (42%) of 12 subjects with PR had mutations in MTOR, TSC1, or TSC2 compared with 4 (11%) of 36 nonresponders (P = 0.03). Eight additional non-mTOR pathway genes were found to be mutated in at least 4 of 79 tumors (5%); none were associated positively with response.Conclusions: In this cohort of mRCC patients, mutations in MTOR, TSC1, or TSC2 were more common in patients who experienced clinical benefit from rapalogs than in those who progressed. However, a substantial fraction of responders (24 of 43, 56%) had no mTOR pathway mutation identified. Clin Cancer Res; 22(10); 2445–52. ©2016 AACR.See related commentary by Voss and Hsieh, p. 2320