Search

Figure for online supplement

Purpose: This study investigates the biologic activity of radium-223 with VEGF-targeted therapy in patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma (aRCC) and bone metastases.Patients and Methods: Fifteen treatment-naïve patients (n = 15) received pazopanib 800 mg orally once daily, and 15 previously treated patients received sorafenib 400 mg orally twice daily. Radium-223 55 kilobecquerel/kg was administered concurrently every 4 weeks for up to six infusions in both cohorts. The primary endpoint was decline in bone turnover markers (Procollagen I Intact N-Terminal, N-telopeptide, C-telopeptide, osteocalcin, and bone-specific alkaline phosphatase) compared with baseline. Secondary endpoints included safety, rate of symptomatic skeletal event (SSE) and time to first SSE, objective response rate, change in analgesic use, and quality of life. Exploratory analysis of tumor genomic alterations was performed.Results: Of the 30 patients enrolled, 83% had IMDC intermediate- or poor-risk disease, 33% had liver metastases, and 83% had a history of SSE prior to enrollment. No dose-limiting toxicity was observed. All bone turnover markers significantly declined from baseline at week 8 and 16. Forty percent of patients experienced treatment-related grade ≥3 adverse events. Response rates were 15% and 18% per RECIST v1.1 and bone response was 50% and 30% per MD Anderson criteria, in the pazopanib and sorafenib cohort, respectively. Median SSE-free interval was 5.8 months and not reached, respectively. Analgesic use remained stable over the study time.Conclusions: Radium-223 combined with VEGF-targeted therapy is biologically active and safe. Randomized-controlled trials are needed to define the role of radium-223 in aRCC with skeletal metastases. Clin Cancer Res; 24(17); 4081–8. ©2018 AACR.

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

supplemental table and legend for suppl figures

Supplementary Table S1- Number of patients with 1-4 and {greater than or equal to}5 CTCs per 7.5mL of whole blood at baseline, and at 3, 6 and 12 months. Supplementary Table S2- Biochemical markers of bone turnover and bone mineral density (BMD).

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

Bone metastases are often difficult to manage as they can be symptomatic and skeletal-related events (SREs) can contribute to significant morbidity and declines in performance status. We sought to identify a novel medical treatment for bone metastasis by testing the safety and efficacy of cabozantinib in patients with bone metastasis arising from non-breast, non-prostate, malignant solid tumors. Patients were administered cabozantinib as an oral drug starting at 60 mg per day and radiologic measurements were performed at baseline and every 8 weeks. Thirty-seven patients were enrolled. No SREs were observed throughout the study. Twenty patients had disease measurable by Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) version 1.1. Four of 20 had a partial response by RECIST. An additional 12 patients had some decrease in tumor burden with nine of these having a decrease in tumor burden of at least 10% by RECIST. Six of the patients with at least a minor response had sarcoma. Sixteen patients had biomarkers of bone turnover measured before and after treatment. Most of these patients demonstrated decrease in urine and serum N-telopeptide and serum C-telopeptide. However, these changes in biomarkers of bone turnover did not correlate with radiographic changes measured by RECIST. This study demonstrates clinical activity and safety for cabozantinib in heavily pretreated patients with bone metastasis and shows activity for cabozantinib in patients with metastatic sarcoma.

The NCCN Guidelines for Kidney Cancer focus on the screening, diagnosis, staging, treatment, and management of renal cell carcinoma (RCC). Patients with relapsed or stage IV RCC typically undergo surgery and/or receive systemic therapy. Tumor histology and risk stratification of patients is important in therapy selection. The NCCN Guidelines for Kidney Cancer stratify treatment recommendations by histology; recommendations for first-line treatment of ccRCC are also stratified by risk group. To further guide management of advanced RCC, the NCCN Kidney Cancer Panel has categorized all systemic kidney cancer therapy regimens as “Preferred,” “Other Recommended Regimens,” or “Useful in Certain Circumstances.” This categorization provides guidance on treatment selection by considering the efficacy, safety, evidence, and other factors that play a role in treatment selection. These factors include pre-existing comorbidities, nature of the disease, and in some cases consideration of access to agents. This article summarizes surgical and systemic therapy recommendations for patients with relapsed or stage IV RCC.

PURPOSESapanisertib is a kinase inhibitor that inhibits both mammalian target of rapamycin complex 1 (mTORC1) and mTORC2. In this multicenter, single-arm phase II trial, we evaluated the efficacy of sapanisertib in patients with treatment-refractory metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC; NCT03097328 ).METHODSPatients with mRCC of any histology progressing through standard therapy (including prior mTOR inhibitors) had baseline biopsy and received sapanisertib 30 mg by mouth once weekly until unacceptable toxicity or disease progression. The primary end point was objective response rate by RECIST 1.1. Tissue biomarkers of mTOR pathway activation were explored.RESULTSWe enrolled 38 patients with mRCC (clear cell = 28; variant histology = 10) between August 2017 and November 2019. Twenty-four (63%) had received ≥ 3 prior lines of therapy; 17 (45%) had received prior rapalog therapy. The median follow-up was 10.4 (range 1-27.4) months. Objective response rate was two of 38 (5.3%; 90% CI, 1 to 15.6); the median progression-free survival (PFS) was 2.5 months (95% CI, 1.8 to 3.7). Twelve patients (32%) developed treatment-related grade 3 adverse events, with no grade 4 or 5 toxicities. Alterations in the mTOR pathway genes were seen in 5 of 29 evaluable patients ( MTOR n = 1, PTEN n = 3, and TSC1 n = 1) with no association with response or PFS. Diminished or loss of PTEN expression by immunohistochemistry was seen in 8 of 21 patients and trended toward shorter PFS compared with intact PTEN (median 1.9 v 3.7 months; hazard ratio 2.5; 95% CI, 0.9 to 6.7; P = .055).CONCLUSIONSapanisertib had minimal activity in treatment-refractory mRCC independent of mTOR pathway alterations. Additional therapeutic strategies are needed for patients with refractory mRCC.

The coronavirus disease (COVID)-19 pandemic has affected graduate medical education training programs, including hematology-oncology fellowship programs, both across the United States and abroad. Within the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute/Mass General Brigham hematology-oncology fellowship program, fellowship leadership had to quickly reorganize the program's clinical, educational, and research structure to minimize the risk of COVID-19 spread to our patients and staff, allow fellows to assist in the care of patients with COVID-19, maintain formal didactics despite physical distancing, and ensure the mental and physical well-being of fellows. Following the first wave of patients with COVID-19, we anonymously surveyed the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute/Mass General Brigham first-year fellows to explore their perceptions regarding what the program did well and what could have been improved in the COVID-19 response. In this article, we present the feedback from our fellows and the lessons we learned as a program from this feedback. To our knowledge, this represents the first effort in the hematology-oncology literature to directly assess a hematology-oncology program's overall response to COVID-19 through direct feedback from fellows.

Background Non-clear cell renal cell carcinoma (nccRCC) accounts for ≤20% of RCC cases. Lenvatinib (a multitargeted tyrosine kinase inhibitor) in combination with everolimus (an mTOR inhibitor) is approved for the treatment of advanced RCC after one prior antiangiogenic therapy. Objective To determine the safety and efficacy of lenvatinib plus everolimus as a first-line treatment for patients with advanced nccRCC. Design, setting, and participants This open-label, single-arm, multicenter, phase 2 study enrolled patients with unresectable advanced or metastatic nccRCC and no prior anticancer therapy for advanced disease. Intervention Lenvatinib (18 mg) plus everolimus (5 mg) orally once daily. Outcome measurements and statistical analysis The primary endpoint was the objective response rate (ORR) as assessed by investigators according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1. Secondary endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and safety assessments. The 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for ORRs were calculated using the two-sided Clopper-Pearson method. Median PFS and median OS were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier product-limit method and their 95% CIs were estimated via a generalized Brookmeyer and Crowley method. Results and limitations The study (start date: February 20, 2017) enrolled 31 patients with nccRCC (papillary, n = 20; chromophobe, n = 9; unclassified, n = 2). At the data cutoff date (July 17, 2019), the best overall response was a partial response (eight patients: papillary, n = 3; chromophobe, n = 4; unclassified, n = 1) for an overall ORR of 26% (95% CI 12–45). Median PFS was 9.2 mo (95% CI 5.5–not estimable), and median OS was 15.6 mo (95% CI 9.2–not estimable). The most common treatment-emergent adverse events were fatigue (71%), diarrhea (58%), decreased appetite (55%), nausea (55%), and vomiting (52%). Limitations include the small sample size and single-arm design. Conclusions Lenvatinib plus everolimus showed promising anticancer activity in patients with advanced nccRCC with an ORR of 26% and is worthy of further study. The safety profile was consistent with the established profile of the study-drug combination. Patient summary We examined the combination of lenvatinib plus everolimus as the first therapy for 31 patients who had advanced nccRCC. We found that this treatment seemed effective, because most patients had a decrease in tumor size and manageable treatment-related side effects. Clinical registration This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.Gov as NCT02915783.

Hypoxia-inducible factor-2α (HIF-2α) is a transcription factor that frequently accumulates in clear cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC), resulting in constitutive activation of genes involved in carcinogenesis. Belzutifan (MK-6482, previously known as PT2977) is a potent, selective small molecule inhibitor of HIF-2α. Maximum tolerated dose, safety, pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics and anti-tumor activity of belzutifan were evaluated in this first-in-human phase 1 study (NCT02974738). Patients had advanced solid tumors (dose-escalation cohort) or previously treated advanced ccRCC (dose-expansion cohort). Belzutifan was administered orally using a 3 + 3 dose-escalation design, followed by expansion at the recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D) in patients with ccRCC. In the dose-escalation cohort (n = 43), no dose-limiting toxicities occurred at doses up to 160 mg once daily, and the maximum tolerated dose was not reached; the RP2D was 120 mg once daily. Plasma erythropoietin reductions were observed at all doses; erythropoietin concentrations correlated with plasma concentrations of belzutifan. In patients with ccRCC who received 120 mg once daily (n = 55), the confirmed objective response rate was 25% (all partial responses), and the median progression-free survival was 14.5 months. The most common grade ≥3 adverse events were anemia (27%) and hypoxia (16%). Belzutifan was well tolerated and demonstrated preliminary anti-tumor activity in heavily pre-treated patients, suggesting that HIF-2α inhibition might offer an effective treatment for ccRCC. A first-in-human trial of hypoxia-inducible factor (HIF)-2α inhibitor belzutifan (MK-6482) has a favorable safety profile and shows promising clinical activity for the treatment of patients with renal cell carcinoma who have been heavily pre-treated.

The NCCN Guidelines for Kidney Cancer provide multidisciplinary recommendations for diagnostic workup, staging, and treatment of patients with renal cell carcinoma (RCC). These NCCN Guidelines Insights focus on recent updates to the guidelines, including changes to certain systemic therapy recommendations for patients with relapsed or stage IV RCC. They also discuss the addition of a new section to the guidelines that identifies and describes the most common hereditary RCC syndromes and provides recommendations for genetic testing, surveillance, and/or treatment options for patients who are suspected or confirmed to have one of these syndromes.

A number of therapeutic options are available for the treatment of advanced kidney cancer, including targeted therapy, immunotherapy, and nephrectomy. Choice of therapy for advanced kidney cancer is guided by risk stratification. Immunotherapy combinations are generally superior to vascular endothelial growth factor -based monotherapy, and overall survival rates continue to increase substantially. With new systemic therapy options, additional improvements have been noted in durable responses to treatment and in quality of life. Nephrectomy remains an important consideration in selected patients, particularly those with minimal burden of metastatic disease. Managing the adverse events of treatment of advanced kidney cancer requires close attention and multidisciplinary collaboration.

Aim: To assess the cost–effectiveness of treatment sequences for patients with intermediate- to poor-risk advanced renal cell carcinoma. Patients & methods: A discrete event simulation model was developed to estimate patients’ lifetime costs and survival. Efficacy inputs were derived from the CheckMate 214 and CheckMate 025 studies and network meta-analyses. Safety and cost data were obtained from the published literature. Results: The estimated average quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) gained was the highest on nivolumab + ipilimumab-initiated sequences (3.6–5.3 QALYs) versus tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI)-initiated sequences (2.1–3.7 QALYs). Incremental cost per QALY gained for nivolumab + ipilimumab-initiated sequences was below the willingness-to-pay threshold of $150,000 versus other sequences. Conclusion: Immuno-oncology combination therapy followed by TKIs is cost-effective versus TKI sequences followed by immuno-oncology or sequencing TKIs.

Objective: Compare FDG-PET/CT, CT, and bone scan for detecting and monitoring bone metastases’ response in metastatic renal cell cancer (mRCC). Methods: Patients with mRCC prospectively underwent FDG-PET/CT, CT, and bone scans at baseline and after 8 weeks of therapy. Tumor visibility and metabolic activity were retrospectively recorded. Response was evaluated by PERCIST, RECIST, and MD Anderson bone criteria. Kaplan-Meier methodology estimated event-time distributions for PFS, OS, and time to symptomatic skeletal event (SSE). Log-rank test tested differences in event-time distributions between response at 8 weeks by response criteria. Results: Sixteen patients (n = 30; 53%) were evaluable. Baseline FDG-PET/CT detected more osseous metastases (n = 55) than CT (n = 45) or bone scan (n = 34). From baseline to 8 weeks, metabolic activity of lesions decreased >20%, while qualitative and quantitative CT and bone scan parameters were unchanged for most patients. Partial metabolic responders by PERCIST had longer PFS and OS (n = 5, 20+ months) versus those with stable (n = 9; PFS = 9.2 mos, OS = 8.7 mos) and progressive (n = 2; PFS = 5.4 mos, OS = 12.1 mos) metabolic disease, p = 0.09 and 0.42, respectively. By RECIST, longer PFS and OS was seen for stable (n = 12, PFS = 8.3 mos, OS = 17.7 mos) versus progressive (n = 4; PFS = 3.7 mos, OS = 7.5 mos) disease, p = 0.16, 0.02, respectively. OS was not reached, but estimated ≥20 mos, for 4 patients with RECIST SD and PERCIST PMR, compared to OS of 17.7 mos for other patients with RECIST SD. Conclusions: FDG-PET/CT identified more bone metastases and greater numbers of quantitative and qualitative treatment responses in mRCC compared to CT and bone scan. FDG-PET/CT also may identify a sub-group of patients with better outcomes than predicted by standard imaging modalities.

The phase II CABOSUN trial compared cabozantinib with sunitinib as initial treatment in patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma of intermediate or poor risk. This article presents subgroup analyses by baseline patient characteristics., Cabozantinib treatment prolonged progression‐free survival (PFS) and improved objective response rate (ORR) compared with sunitinib in patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC) of intermediate or poor risk by International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium (IMDC) criteria in the phase II CABOSUN trial (NCT01835158). In the trial, 157 patients were randomized 1:1 to receive cabozantinib or sunitinib, stratified by IMDC risk group and presence of bone metastases. Here, PFS and ORR, both determined by independent radiology committee (IRC), were analyzed by subgroups of baseline characteristics. Cabozantinib treatment was generally associated with improved PFS and ORR versus sunitinib across subgroups, including in groups defined by IMDC risk group, bone metastases, age, and tumor burden. Clinical trial identification number. NCT01835158.

4509 Background: Hypoxia-inducible factor 2α (HIF-2α) is a key oncogenic driver in RCC. Antitumor activity of the HIF-2α inhibitor belzutifan has been observed in RCC and is approved for treatment in patients (pts) with VHL disease who require therapy for associated RCC, CNS hemangioblastomas, or pNETs not requiring immediate surgery. Previous data from the phase 1 LITESPARK-001 trial (NCT02974738) designed to evaluate belzutifan in heavily pretreated RCC showed durable antitumor activity and an acceptable safety profile. After more than 3 years of follow-up for pts with ccRCC still receiving treatment, updated data are presented. Methods: Pts enrolled in the ccRCC cohort were previously treated with ≥1 therapy, had RECIST-measurable disease, ECOG PS score of 0 or 1, adequate organ function, and life expectancy of ≥6 months. Pts received oral belzutifan 120 mg once daily. The primary end point was safety. Secondary end points were ORR, DCR (CR + PR + SD), PFS, and DOR per RECIST v1.1 by investigator. The data cutoff date was July 15, 2021. Results: Of 55 pts enrolled in the ccRCC cohort, 9 (16%) remain on treatment as of the data cutoff date of July 15, 2021; the primary reason for discontinuation was progressive disease (n = 34; 62%). Pts received a median of 3 prior therapies (range, 1-9); 39 (71%) received prior VEGF and immunotherapy. Pts were followed while on treatment and for 30 days after the last dose for a median of 41.2 months (range, 38.2-47.7). Twenty-two pts (40%) experienced grade 3 TRAEs. The most common (≥10%) grade 3 TRAEs were anemia (n = 13; 24%) and hypoxia (n = 7; 13%). There were no grade 4 or 5 TRAEs. ORR was 25%, with 1 confirmed CR (2%) and 13 PRs (24%); DCR was 80%. Median DOR was not reached (range, 3.1+ to 37.9+ months); 8 of 14 responding pts (57%) remain in response as of the data cutoff date. Per IMDC risk, 4 of 13 pts with favorable risk achieved response (ORR = 31%; all PRs) and 10 of 42 pts with intermediate/poor risk achieved response (ORR = 24%; 1 CR, 9 PRs). DCR was 92% for pts with favorable risk and 76% for pts with intermediate/poor risk. For pts who received prior VEGF and immunotherapy, 8 of 39 pts achieved response (ORR = 21%; 1 CR; 7 PR); DCR was 74%. For the 16 pts who did not receive prior VEGF/immunotherapy, 6 achieved response (ORR = 38%; all PRs); DCR was 94%. Median PFS for the total cohort was 14.5 months (95% CI, 7.3-22.1); PFS rate at 156 weeks (̃36 months) was 34%. Conclusions: As seen after a median follow-up of > 3 years for pts still receiving treatment, belzutifan monotherapy continued to show a high rate of disease control and durable responses in previously treated pts with advanced ccRCC. Belzutifan exhibited a favorable safety profile, and no new safety signals were observed. In several phase 3 studies, belzutifan is being evaluated as monotherapy and combined therapy for ccRCC. Clinical trial information: NCT02974738.

The NCCN Guidelines for Kidney Cancer provide multidisciplinary recommendations for diagnostic workup, staging, and treatment of patients with renal cell carcinoma (RCC). These NCCN Guidelines Insights focus on recent updates to the guidelines, including changes to certain systemic therapy recommendations for patients with relapsed or stage IV RCC. They also discuss the addition of a new section to the guidelines that identifies and describes the most common hereditary RCC syndromes and provides recommendations for genetic testing, surveillance, and/or treatment options for patients who are suspected or confirmed to have one of these syndromes.

Background TRC105 is an IgG1 endoglin monoclonal antibody that potentiates VEGF inhibitors in preclinical models. We assessed safety, pharmacokinetics, and antitumor activity of TRC105 in combination with axitinib in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). Subjects, Materials, and Methods Heavily pretreated mRCC patients were treated with TRC105 weekly (8 mg/kg and then 10 mg/kg) in combination with axitinib (initially at 5 mg b.i.d. and then escalated per patient tolerance to a maximum of 10 mg b.i.d.) until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity using a standard 3 + 3 phase I design. Results Eighteen patients (median number of prior therapies = 3) were treated. TRC105 dose escalation proceeded to 10 mg/kg weekly without dose-limiting toxicity. Adverse event characteristics of each drug were not increased in frequency or severity when the two drugs were administered concurrently. TRC105 and axitinib demonstrated preliminary evidence of activity, including partial responses (PR) by RECIST in 29% of patients, and median progression-free survival (11.3 months). None of the patients with PR had PR to prior first-line treatment. Lower baseline levels of osteopontin and higher baseline levels of TGF-β receptor 3 correlated with overall response rate. Conclusion TRC105 at 8 and 10 mg/kg weekly was well tolerated in combination with axitinib, with encouraging evidence of activity in patients with mRCC. A multicenter, randomized phase II trial of TRC105 and axitinib has recently completed enrollment (NCT01806064). Implications for Practice TRC105 is a monoclonal antibody to endoglin (CD105), a receptor densely expressed on proliferating endothelial cells and also on renal cancer stem cells that is implicated as a mediator of resistance to inhibitors of the VEGF pathway. In this Phase I trial, TRC105 combined safely with axitinib at the recommended single agent doses of each drug in patients with renal cell carcinoma. The combination demonstrated durable activity in a VEGF inhibitor-refractory population and modulated several angiogenic biomarkers. A randomized Phase II trial testing TRC105 in combination with axitinib in clear cell renal cell carcinoma has completed accrual.

Combination therapies involving antiangiogenic agents plus immune checkpoint inhibitors have recently demonstrated clinical efficacy in advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC). This commentary summarizes the clinical advances and reviews the potential implications for RCC and other advanced solid tumors.

The NCCN Guidelines for Kidney Cancer provide multidisciplinary recommendations for the clinical management of patients with clear cell and non-clear cell renal carcinoma. These guidelines are developed by a multidisciplinary panel of leading experts from NCCN Member Institutions consisting of medical oncologists, hematologists and hematologic oncologists, radiation oncologists, urologists, and pathologists. The NCCN Guidelines are in continuous evolution and are updated annually or sometimes more often, if new high-quality clinical data become available in the interim.

Purpose Bladder preservation therapy is an effective treatment for muscle-invasive urothelial carcinoma (UC). In this study we treated noncystectomy candidates with daily radiation and weekly paclitaxel for 7 weeks. Patients whose tumors showed her2/neu overexpression were additionally treated with weekly trastuzumab. Methods and Materials Sixty-eight evaluable patients were treated with radiation therapy and either paclitaxel + trastuzumab (group 1) or paclitaxel alone (group 2). Groups were assigned on the basis of her2/neu immunohistochemistry results. Patients received 1.8-Gy fractions to a total dose of 64.8 Gy. The primary endpoint of the study was treatment-related toxicity, and secondary endpoints included complete response (CR) rate, protocol completion rate, and survival. Results A total of 20 evaluable patients were treated in group 1 and 46 patients in group 2. Acute treatment-related adverse events (AEs) were observed in 7 of 20 patients in group 1 (35%) and 14 of 46 patients in group 2 (30.4%). Protocol therapy was completed by 60% (group 1) and 74% (group 2) of patients. Most incompletions were due to toxicity, and the majority of AEs were gastrointestinal, including 1 grade 5 AE (group 1). Two other deaths (both in group 2) were unrelated to protocol therapy. No unexpected cardiac, hematologic, or other toxicities were observed. The CR rate at 1 year was 72% for group 1 and 68% for group 2. Conclusions In patients with muscle-invasive UC who are not candidates for cystectomy, daily radiation combined with paclitaxel is an effective treatment strategy with a high completion rate and moderate toxicity. In patients with her2/neu-positive tumors, a group generally considered to have worse outcomes, the addition of trastuzumab appears to result in comparable efficacy and toxicity. Further biomarker-driven trials should be undertaken in advancing treatment of this challenging disease.

We conducted a retrospective analysis of two clinical trials in treatment-naïve patients (n = 402) with advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC) treated with axitinib. Our objective was to compare duration of treatment (DT) and clinical outcome in patients who achieved DT18 months (longer DT) versus ≤18 months (shorter DT).DT, objective response rate (ORR), tumor shrinkage, and overall survival (OS) were summarized for patients with longer and shorter DT.Overall, 152 patients (37.8%) had longer DT and 250 (62.2%) had shorter DT (median, 34.7 vs. 6.5 months, respectively). ORR in all 402 patients with advanced RCC was 43.5%. ORR was 75% for longer DT versus 24.4% for shorter DT (p 0.0001). More patients with longer DT versus shorter DT had ≥10% tumor shrinkage at first scan (74.8% vs. 55.3%; p = 0.0001) and maximum on-study tumor shrinkage was greater in longer-DT versus shorter-DT group (-51.8% vs. -22.1%; p 0.0001). Median OS was 32.6 months in the overall population while in the patients with longer DT the median was not reached. Treatment-related adverse events (AEs) grade ≥3 were more frequent in longer-DT versus shorter-DT and included hypertension (25.7% vs. 18.8%), diarrhea (15.1% vs. 4.4%), and weight decrease (11.2% vs. 3.2%); however, these AEs decreased over time in both groups. Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0, favorable hematology values, no bone or liver metastases, and baseline tumor burden below the overall median were associated with longer DT.Longer duration (18 months) of axitinib treatment was associated with increased frequency of early tumor shrinkage, greater magnitude of tumor shrinkage, and a favorable OS.

Purpose Cabozantinib is an oral potent inhibitor of vascular endothelial growth factor receptor 2, MET, and AXL and is a standard second-line therapy for metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). This randomized phase II multicenter trial evaluated cabozantinib compared with sunitinib as first-line therapy in patients with mRCC. Patients and Methods Eligible patients had untreated clear cell mRCC and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 to 2 and were intermediate or poor risk per International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium criteria. Patients were randomly assigned at a one-to-one ratio to cabozantinib (60 mg once per day) or sunitinib (50 mg once per day; 4 weeks on, 2 weeks off). Progression-free survival (PFS) was the primary end point. Objective response rate (ORR), overall survival, and safety were secondary end points. Results From July 2013 to April 2015, 157 patients were randomly assigned (cabozantinib, n = 79; sunitinib, n = 78). Compared with sunitinib, cabozantinib treatment significantly increased median PFS (8.2 v 5.6 months) and was associated with a 34% reduction in rate of progression or death (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.46 to 0.95; one-sided P = .012). ORR was 33% (95% CI, 23% to 44%) for cabozantinib versus 12% (95% CI, 5.4% to 21%) for sunitinib. All-causality grade 3 or 4 adverse events were 67% for cabozantinib and 68% for sunitinib and included diarrhea (cabozantinib, 10% v sunitinib, 11%), fatigue (6% v 15%), hypertension (28% v 22%), palmar-plantar erythrodysesthesia (8% v 4%), and hematologic adverse events (3% v 22%). Conclusion Cabozantinib demonstrated a significant clinical benefit in PFS and ORR over standard-of-care sunitinib as first-line therapy in patients with intermediate- or poor-risk mRCC.

The NCCN Guidelines for Kidney Cancer provide multidisciplinary recommendations for the clinical management of patients with clear cell and non–clear cell renal cell carcinoma, and are intended to assist with clinical decision-making. These NCCN Guidelines Insights summarize the NCCN Kidney Cancer Panel discussions for the 2020 update to the guidelines regarding initial management and first-line systemic therapy options for patients with advanced clear cell renal cell carcinoma.

Improving early cancer detection has the potential to substantially reduce cancer-related mortality. Cell-free methylated DNA immunoprecipitation and high-throughput sequencing (cfMeDIP-seq) is a highly sensitive assay capable of detecting early-stage tumors. We report accurate classification of patients across all stages of renal cell carcinoma (RCC) in plasma (area under the receiver operating characteristic (AUROC) curve of 0.99) and demonstrate the validity of this assay to identify patients with RCC using urine cell-free DNA (cfDNA; AUROC of 0.86).

4507 Background: Cisplatin with gemcitabine (CG) remains the standard upfront chemotherapy regimen for metastatic urothelial cancer (mUC). Preclinical synergy was noted between cisplatin and berzosertib, a selective ATR inhibitor. The current study sought to determine if the combination of berzosertib and CG could improve clinical outcomes in mUC. Methods: An open-label, randomized study was conducted across 23 centers in the United States through the Experimental Therapeutics Clinical Trials Network of the National Cancer Institute. Key eligibility criteria included confirmed mUC, no prior cytotoxic therapy for metastatic disease, ≥ 12 months since perioperative therapy and eligibility for cisplatin based on standard criteria. Patients (pts) were randomized to receive either CG alone (control arm) or CG plus berzosertib (experimental arm). In the control arm, 70 mg/m2 of cisplatin was given on day 1 and gemcitabine at 1000 mg/m2 on days 1 and 8 of a 21-day cycle. In the experimental arm, 60 mg/m2 of cisplatin was given on day 1, gemcitabine at 875 mg/m2 on days 1 and 8 and berzosertib at 90 mg/m2 on days 2 and 9 of a 21-day cycle. The primary endpoint of the study was progression-free survival (PFS), with secondary endpoints including response rate (RR), overall survival (OS) and toxicity. Results: A total of 87 pts (median age 67; M:F 68:19) were randomized; 41 pts received CG alone while 46 received CG with berzosertib. Visceral metastases were present in 49% of pts and 52%, 45% and 3% of pts were Bajorin risk 0, 1 and 2, respectively. Median PFS was 8.0 months for both arms (Bajorin risk adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 1.22, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.72-2.08). RR was 54%(4 CR, 21 PR) in the CG with berzosertib arm and 63% (4 CR, 22 PR) in CG alone arm (P = 0.66). Median OS was shorter with CG with berzosertib as compared to CG alone (14.4 versus 19.8 months; Bajorin risk adjusted HR 1.42, 95%CI 0.76-2.68). Notably higher rates of grade 3/4 thrombocytopenia (59% vs 39%) and neutropenia (37% vs 27%) were observed with CG plus berzosertib compared to CG alone. Higher rates of toxicity-related discontinuation were seen in the experimental arm (24% vs 15%), and the median cumulative cisplatin dose in the experimental arm was 250 mg/m2, as compared to 370 mg/m2 in the control arm (P < 0.001). Conclusions: No improvement in PFS was observed with the addition of berzosertib to CG, and a trend towards inferior survival was observed. These results suggest caution in reducing the starting dose of cytotoxic therapy to accommodate addition of a myelosuppressive agent, as in the experimental arm of this study. Clinical trial information: NCT02567409.

42 Background: Patients with advanced genitourinary (GU) cancers are often hospitalized for complications of their cancer and symptom management. Yet, little is known about the symptom burden, functional status, and health care utilization of these patients. Methods: We prospectively enrolled patients with advanced cancer who experienced unplanned hospitalizations at an academic medical center. Upon admission, we asked patients to self-report their physical (Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale-revised [ESAS-r]) and psychological (Patient Health Questionnaire-4 [PHQ-4]) symptoms. We also collected data from nursing assessments about impairments in activities of daily living (ADLs). We compared symptoms, functional impairment, readmissions, and overall survival (OS) between cancer types (dichotomizing GU cancers vs other cancer types) and within GU cancers (dichotomizing prostate cancer vs kidney/bladder/adrenal cancer) using univariate and multivariable regression analyses adjusted for age, sex, education, comorbidities, and time since advanced cancer diagnosis. Results: Among 971 patients enrolled, 106 (10.9%) had advanced GU cancers (39.6% prostate cancer, 32.1% kidney cancer, 25.5% bladder cancer, and 2.8% adrenal cancer). Compared to patients with other cancer types, patients with GU cancers were older (median: 69.0 vs 64.0 years, p < 0.001) and had more time since advanced cancer diagnosis (median: 14.0 vs 7.0 months, p < 0.001). In univariate analyses, a greater proportion of patients with GU cancers had an ADL impairment (57.5% vs 38.0%, p < 0.001) compared to other cancer types but the groups did not differ in their physical (Mean = 33.3 vs 32.6, p = 0.61) or depression (Mean = 4.1 vs 3.3, p = 0.05) symptoms. In multivariable models, patients with GU cancers had similar risk of readmission in 90 days (HR 1.31, p = 0.077), but worse survival (median OS: 102.0 days vs 133.5 days, p < 0.001; HR 1.27, p = 0.046). Within GU cancers, patients with kidney/bladder/adrenal cancer (vs. prostate cancer) were younger (median: 66.0 vs 74.0, p < 0.001) with less time since advanced cancer diagnosis (median: 9.0 vs 23.0 months, p = 0.012) but had no difference in symptoms or functional impairment. They were more likely to be admitted for symptom management (66% vs. 39% for prostate cancer, p = 0.026). Patients with kidney/bladder/adrenal cancer also had higher risk of readmission (HR 2.04, p = 0.043) but no difference in OS, compared to patients with prostate cancer. Conclusions: We found that hospitalized patients with advanced GU cancers had significantly greater functional impairment and worse survival compared to those with other cancer types, and those with kidney/bladder/adrenal cancer had significantly higher readmission risk compared to those with prostate cancer. These findings support the need to develop tailored supportive care for hospitalized patients with GU cancers.

273 Background: Clear cell RCC (ccRCC) accounts for ~70% of kidney cancer cases in the US. Several first-line therapies are approved for ccRCC, but few patients respond completely and most progress within 5-11 mo. A key oncogenic driver in RCC is the transcription factor hypoxia-inducible factor 2α (HIF-2α). MK-6482 is a small molecule HIF-2α inhibitor that blocks the heterodimerization of HIF-2α with HIF-1β, inducing tumor regression in mouse xenograft RCC models. Updated data presented here include additional follow-up from the expansion cohort of patients with ccRCC from the first-in-human phase 1/2 study of MK-6482 in advanced solid tumors (NCT02974738). Methods: Patients were aged ≥18 y with advanced ccRCC, received ≥1 prior therapy, and had RECIST v1.1 measurable disease, ECOG status 0 or 1, adequate organ function, and life expectancy ≥6 mo. They received 120 mg of MK-6482 orally once daily. Tumors were assessed at baseline, within 7 days before week 9, and then every 8 weeks; response was assessed using RECIST v1.1. The primary end point was safety. Secondary end points included ORR, duration of response (DOR), and PFS. Results: Fifty-five patients with ccRCC were treated with MK-6482 120 mg (52 in expansion and 3 in dose-escalation cohorts). The median number of prior therapies was 3 (range 1-9). Forty-two patients (81%) previously received PD-1/L1 inhibitors and 48 (92%) previously received VEGF inhibitors. Thirteen patients (24%) were classified as favorable risk and 42 (76%) as intermediate or poor risk per IMDC criteria. With a median follow-up of 28 mo, the most common all-grade, all-cause AEs >30% were anemia (76%), fatigue (71%), dyspnea (49%), nausea (36%), cough (31%), and hypoxia (31%). Anemia (27%) and hypoxia (16%) were the most common grade 3 AEs. Two patients (4%) experienced grade 4 AEs, and 4 patients (7%) experienced grade 5 AEs. No grade 4 or 5 AEs were related to treatment. ORR was 25%, with 14 confirmed PRs. Thirty patients (55%) had SD, with a disease control rate (CR+PR+SD) of 80%. Median DOR was not reached; 77% had a response ≥6 mo. By IMDC risk, 4 of 13 patients with favorable risk had PR (ORR = 31%) and 10 of 42 with intermediate or poor risk had PR (ORR = 24%); disease control rate was 92% and 76%, respectively. Median PFS for the total population was 14.5 mo; 51% had a PFS of 12 mo. As of June 1, 2020, 33 patients (60%) discontinued because of PD and 2 (4%) because of AEs; 11 patients (20%) had ongoing treatment. Conclusions: MK-6482 remained well tolerated with a favorable safety profile and promising single-agent activity in patients with ccRCC for all IMDC risk groups after further follow-up. A phase III trial in a similar population is underway. Clinical trial information: NCT02974738 .

306 Background: Approved rapalogs inhibit mTORC1 and have limited activity in mRCC, possibly due to compensatory feedback loops. Sapanisertib addresses the incomplete inhibition of the mTOR pathway through targeting of both mTORC1 and mTORC2 with antitumour activity demonstrated in patients with mRCC. In this multicenter, single arm phase II trial, we evaluated the efficacy of sapanisertib in patients with mRCC progressing on standard therapies (NCT03097328). Methods: Eligible mRCC patients had an ECOG performance status of 0-2 and had progressed on standard therapies. Prior therapy with rapalogs (everolimus, temsirolimus) and variant RCC histologies were permitted. Patients had a baseline biopsy and received treatment with sapanisertib 30 mg by mouth weekly until unacceptable toxicity or disease progression. The primary endpoint was overall response rate (ORR) by RECIST 1.1. Tissue biomarkers of mTOR pathway activation were explored. Results: We enrolled 38 mRCC patients (clear cell = 28; variant histology = 10) between August 2017 and November 2019. The majority had intermediate (76%) or poor risk (11%) by IMDC criteria. Twenty (53%) had received ≥ 3 lines of therapy; 13 (34%) patients received prior rapalogs. Median follow-up was 10.4 months (range 1-27.4) and median duration of therapy was 1.6 (range 0.3-13.8) months. ORR by central review was 2 of 38 (5.3% 90%CI: 1%-15.6%). 31.6% of all patients and 30.7% of those with prior rapalog exposure had some tumor shrinkage during course of treatment. Median progression free survival (PFS) was 2.5 months (95% CI 1.8,3.7). Twelve patients (32%) developed treatment-related grade 3 adverse events (AEs) with no grade 4 or 5 toxicity reported; 6 patients (16%) required dose reduction and 4 (11%) discontinued therapy for AEs. Oncopanel tumor sequencing identified alterations in the mTOR pathway in 6 of 29 patients ( MTOR n = 2, PTEN n = 3, TSC1 n = 1.) Reduced PTEN expression by immunohistochemistry was seen in 7 of 19 patients. There was no association between mTOR pathway mutations or PTEN loss and response to sapanisertib. Conclusions: In this study we demonstrate minimal activity of sapanisertib in patients with treatment refractory mRCC with no clear benefit among patients with mTOR/PTEN pathway alterations. Additional treatment strategies are needed for patients with refractory mRCC.

82 Background: Most men who die of prostate cancer are older than 70 years, and the impact of therapy in this population is poorly defined. The ChemoHormonal Therapy Versus Androgen Ablation Randomized Trial for Extensive Disease in Prostate Cancer (CHAARTED) randomized men of all ages with metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC) to receive androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) with or without docetaxel. Methods: The results of CHAARTED showed an overall survival (OS) benefit for the addition of docetaxel to ADT in men with mHSPC. In a secondary analysis of this trial, we assessed patient characteristics and OS in patients ≥70 years (“older men”) versus

TPS4596 Background: There is no standard adjuvant systemic therapy that increases overall survival (OS) over surgery alone for non-metastatic RCC. Anti-PD-1 nivolumab (nivo) improves OS in metastatic RCC and is well tolerated. In mouse models, priming the immune system prior to surgery with anti-PD-1 results in superior OS compared to adjuvant dosing. Remarkable pathologic responses have been seen with neoadjuvant PD-1 in multiple ph 2 studies in bladder, lung and breast cancers. Phase 2 neoadjuvant RCC trials of nivo show preliminary feasibility and safety with no surgical delays. PROSPER RCC seeks to improve clinical outcomes by priming the immune system with neoadjuvant nivo prior to nephrectomy followed by continued immune system engagement with adjuvant blockade in patients (pts) with high risk RCC compared to standard of care surgery alone. Methods: This global, unblinded, phase 3 National Clinical Trials Network study is accruing pts with clinical stage ≥T2 or TanyN+ RCC of any histology planned for radical or partial nephrectomy. Select oligometastatic disease is permitted if the pt can be rendered ‘no evidence of disease’ within 12 weeks of nephrectomy (≤3 metastases; no brain, bone or liver). In the investigational arm, nivo is administered 480mg IV q4 weeks with 1 dose prior to surgery followed by 9 adjuvant doses. The control arm is nephrectomy followed by standard of care surveillance. There is no placebo. Baseline tumor biopsy is required only in the nivo arm but encouraged in both. Randomized pts are stratified by clinical T stage, node positivity, and M stage. 805 pts provide 84.2% power to detect a 14.4% absolute benefit in recurrence-free survival at 5 years assuming the ASSURE historical control of ̃56% to 70% (HR = 0.70). The study is powered to evaluate a significant increase in OS (HR 0.67). Critical perioperative therapy considerations such as safety, feasibility, and quality of life metrics are integrated. PROSPER RCC embeds a wealth of translational studies to examine the contribution of the baseline immune milieu and neoadjuvant priming with anti-PD-1 on clinical outcomes. As of February 10, 2021, 704 patients have been enrolled (N = 805). Clinical trial information: NCT03055013.

611 Background: Hypoxia-inducible factor (HIF)-2α is a transcription factor that is a key oncogenic driver in RCC. MK-6482 is a first-in-class small molecule HIF-2α inhibitor that blocks the heterodimerization of HIF-2α with HIF-1β and induces regression in mouse xenograft RCC models. Methods: Pts with advanced ccRCC who had received at least 1 prior therapy were enrolled in an expansion cohort from the first-in-human phase 1/2 study of MK-6482 in advanced solid tumors (NCT02974738). Pts were administered 120 mg of MK-6482 orally once daily. Primary end point: safety. Key secondary end points: ORR, duration of response (DOR), and PFS. Results: Fifty-five pts were enrolled in the dose expansion cohort. Median (range) number of prior therapies was 3 (1-9); 67% received anti–PD-1 and anti-VEGF agents. Five pts (9%) were favorable risk, 40 (73%) were intermediate risk, and 10 (18%) were poor risk by IMDC criteria. With a median follow-up of 13 mo the most common all-grade, all-cause AEs > 30% were anemia (75%), fatigue (67%), dyspnea (47%), nausea (33%), and cough (31%). Anemia (26%) and hypoxia (15%) were the most common grade 3 AEs. No grade 4/5 drug-related AEs were observed. ORR was 24% with 13 confirmed PRs. Thirty-one pts (56%) had SD, with a disease control rate (CR+PR+SD) of 80%. Thirty-five of 52 (67%) pts with baseline and postbaseline assessments had tumor shrinkage. Median DOR was not reached; 81% of pts had response ≥6 mo per Kaplan-Meier estimate. Sixteen pts (29%) continued treatment beyond 12 mo. By IMDC risk, 2/5 pts with favorable risk had PR (ORR = 40%), 10/40 with intermediate risk had PR (ORR = 25%), and 1/10 with poor risk had PR (ORR = 10%); disease control rate was 100%, 80%, and 70%, respectively. Median PFS for the total population was 11.0 mo; the 12 mo PFS rate was 49%. Median PFS for favorable, intermediate, and poor IMDC risk was 16.5, 11.0, and 6.9 mo, respectively. As of May 15, 2019, 30 pts (55%) discontinued due to PD, 2 (4%) due to AEs. Sixteen pts (29%) had treatment ongoing. Conclusions: MK-6482 is well tolerated with a favorable safety profile and demonstrated promising single-agent activity in heavily pretreated pts with ccRCC across IMDC risk groups. A phase 3 trial in a similar population is planned. Clinical trial information: NCT02974738.

Objective In oncology, extrapolation of clinical outcomes beyond trial duration is traditionally achieved by parametric survival analysis using population-level outcomes. This approach may not fully capture the benefit/risk profile of immunotherapies due to their unique mechanisms of action. We evaluated an alternative approach—dynamic modeling—to predict outcomes in patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma. We compared standard parametric fitting and dynamic modeling for survival estimation of nivolumab and everolimus using data from the phase III CheckMate 025 study. Methods We developed two statistical approaches to predict longer-term outcomes (progression, treatment discontinuation, and survival) for nivolumab and everolimus, then compared these predictions against follow-up clinical trial data to assess their proximity to observed outcomes. For the parametric survival analyses, we selected a probability distribution based on its fit to observed population-level outcomes at 14-month minimum follow-up and used it to predict longer-term outcomes. For dynamic modeling, we used a multivariate Cox regression based on patient-level data, which included risk scores, and probability and duration of response as predictors of longer-term outcomes. Both sets of predictions were compared against trial data with 26- and 38-month minimum follow-up. Results Both statistical approaches led to comparable fits to observed trial data for median progression, discontinuation, and survival. However, beyond the trial duration, mean survival predictions differed substantially between methods for nivolumab (30.8 and 51.5 months), but not everolimus (27.2 and 29.8 months). Longer-term follow-up data from CheckMate 025 and phase I/II studies resembled dynamic model predictions for nivolumab. Conclusions Dynamic modeling can be a good alternative to parametric survival fitting for immunotherapies because it may help better capture the longer-term benefit/risk profile and support health-economic evaluations of immunotherapies.

Purpose: This study investigates the biologic activity of radium-223 with VEGF-targeted therapy in patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma (aRCC) and bone metastases. Patients and Methods: Fifteen treatment-naïve patients (n = 15) received pazopanib 800 mg orally once daily, and 15 previously treated patients received sorafenib 400 mg orally twice daily. Radium-223 55 kilobecquerel/kg was administered concurrently every 4 weeks for up to six infusions in both cohorts. The primary endpoint was decline in bone turnover markers (Procollagen I Intact N-Terminal, N-telopeptide, C-telopeptide, osteocalcin, and bone-specific alkaline phosphatase) compared with baseline. Secondary endpoints included safety, rate of symptomatic skeletal event (SSE) and time to first SSE, objective response rate, change in analgesic use, and quality of life. Exploratory analysis of tumor genomic alterations was performed. Results: Of the 30 patients enrolled, 83% had IMDC intermediate- or poor-risk disease, 33% had liver metastases, and 83% had a history of SSE prior to enrollment. No dose-limiting toxicity was observed. All bone turnover markers significantly declined from baseline at week 8 and 16. Forty percent of patients experienced treatment-related grade ≥3 adverse events. Response rates were 15% and 18% per RECIST v1.1 and bone response was 50% and 30% per MD Anderson criteria, in the pazopanib and sorafenib cohort, respectively. Median SSE-free interval was 5.8 months and not reached, respectively. Analgesic use remained stable over the study time. Conclusions: Radium-223 combined with VEGF-targeted therapy is biologically active and safe. Randomized-controlled trials are needed to define the role of radium-223 in aRCC with skeletal metastases. Clin Cancer Res; 24(17); 4081–8. ©2018 AACR.

Background The randomised phase 2 CABOSUN trial comparing cabozantinib with sunitinib as initial therapy for advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC) of intermediate or poor risk met the primary end-point of improving progression-free survival (PFS) as assessed by investigator. We report PFS by independent radiology review committee (IRC) assessment, ORR per IRC and updated overall survival (OS). Patients and methods Previously untreated patients with advanced RCC of intermediate or poor risk by IMDC criteria were randomised 1:1 to cabozantinib 60 mg daily or sunitinib 50 mg daily (4 weeks on/2 weeks off). Stratification was by risk group and presence of bone metastases. Results A total of 157 patients were randomised 1:1 to cabozantinib (n = 79) or sunitinib (n = 78). Median PFS per IRC was 8.6 months (95% confidence interval [CI] 6.8–14.0) versus 5.3 months (95% CI 3.0–8.2) for cabozantinib versus sunitinib (hazard ratio [HR] 0.48 [95% CI 0.31–0.74]; two-sided p = 0.0008), and ORR per IRC was 20% (95% CI 12.0–30.8) versus 9% (95% CI 3.7–17.6), respectively. Subgroup analyses of PFS by stratification factors and MET tumour expression were consistent with results for the overall population. With a median follow-up of 34.5 months, median OS was 26.6 months (95% CI 14.6–not estimable) with cabozantinib and 21.2 months (95% CI 16.3–27.4) with sunitinib (HR 0.80 [95% CI 0.53–1.21]. The incidence of grade 3 or 4 adverse events was 68% for cabozantinib and 65% for sunitinib. Conclusions In this phase 2 trial, cabozantinib treatment significantly prolonged PFS per IRC compared with sunitinib as initial systemic therapy for advanced RCC of poor or intermediate risk. Trial Registration Number NCT01835158 .

Summary Background Currently, metastatic renal cell carcinoma is treated with sequential single agents targeting VEGF or mTOR. Here, we aimed to assess lenvatinib, everolimus, or their combination as second-line treatment in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma. Methods We did a randomised, phase 2, open-label, multicentre trial at 37 centres in five countries and enrolled patients with advanced or metastatic, clear-cell, renal cell carcinoma. We included patients who had received treatment with a VEGF-targeted therapy and progressed on or within 9 months of stopping that agent. Patients were randomised via an interactive voice response system in a 1:1:1 ratio to either lenvatinib (24 mg/day), everolimus (10 mg/day), or lenvatinib plus everolimus (18 mg/day and 5 mg/day, respectively) administered orally in continuous 28-day cycles until disease progression or unacceptable toxic effects. The randomisation procedure dynamically minimised imbalances between treatment groups for the stratification factors haemoglobin and corrected serum calcium. The primary objective was progression-free survival in the intention-to-treat population. This study is closed to enrolment but patients' treatment and follow-up is ongoing. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01136733. Findings Between March 16, 2012, and June 19, 2013, 153 patients were randomly allocated to receive either the combination of lenvatinib plus everolimus (n=51), single-agent lenvatinib (n=52), or single-agent everolimus (n=50). Lenvatinib plus everolimus significantly prolonged progression-free survival compared with everolimus alone (median 14·6 months [95% CI 5·9–20·1] vs 5·5 months [3·5–7·1]; hazard ratio [HR] 0·40, 95% CI 0·24–0·68; p=0·0005), but not compared with lenvatinib alone (7·4 months [95% CI 5·6–10·2]; HR 0·66, 95% CI 0·30–1·10; p=0·12). Single-agent lenvatinib significantly prolonged progression-free survival compared with everolimus alone (HR 0·61, 95% CI 0·38–0·98; p=0·048). Grade 3 and 4 events occurred in fewer patients allocated single-agent everolimus (25 [50%]) compared with those assigned lenvatinib alone (41 [79%]) or lenvatinib plus everolimus (36 [71%]). The most common grade 3 or 4 treatment-emergent adverse event in patients allocated lenvatinib plus everolimus was diarrhoea (ten [20%]), in those assigned single-agent lenvatinib it was proteinuria (ten [19%]), and in those assigned single-agent everolimus it was anaemia (six [12%]). Two deaths were deemed related to study drug, one cerebral haemorrhage in the lenvatinib plus everolimus group and one myocardial infarction with single-agent lenvatinib. Interpretation Lenvatinib plus everolimus and lenvatinib alone resulted in a progression-free survival benefit for patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma who have progressed after one previous VEGF-targeted therapy. Further study of lenvatinib is warranted in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma. Funding Eisai Inc.

BACKGROUND: Metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) prognostic models may be improved by incorporating treatment-induced toxicities. METHODS: In sunitinib-treated mRCC patients (N=770), baseline prognostic factors and treatment-induced toxicities (hypertension (systolic blood pressure ⩾140 mm Hg), neutropenia (grade ⩾2), thrombocytopenia (grade ⩾2), hand-foot syndrome (grade >0), and asthenia/fatigue (grade >0)) were analysed in multivariate analyses of progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) end points. RESULTS: On-treatment neutropenia and hypertension were associated with longer PFS (P=0.0276 and P

BACKGROUND Sarcomatoid renal cell carcinoma (RCC) is associated with an aggressive biology and a poor prognosis. Poor-risk RCC is defined by clinical prognostic factors and demonstrates similarly aggressive behavior. No standard treatment exists for patients with sarcomatoid RCC, and treatment options for patients with poor-risk disease are of limited benefit. The objective of this study was to investigate the efficacy of antiangiogenic therapy in combination with cytotoxic chemotherapy in clinically aggressive RCC. METHODS This was a phase 2, single-arm trial of sunitinib and gemcitabine in patients with sarcomatoid or poor-risk RCC. The primary endpoint was the objective response rate (ORR). Secondary endpoints included the time to progression (TTP), overall survival (OS), safety, and biomarker correlatives. RESULTS Overall, 39 patients had sarcomatoid RCC, and 33 had poor-risk RCC. The ORR was 26% for patients with sarcomatoid RCC and 24% for patients with poor-risk RCC. The median TTP and OS for patients with sarcomatoid RCC were 5 and 10 months, respectively. For patients with poor-risk disease, the median TTP and OS were 5.5 and 15 months, respectively. Patients whose tumors had >10% sarcomatoid histology had a higher clinical benefit rate (ORR plus stable disease) than those with ≤10% sarcomatoid histology (P = .04). The most common grade 3 or higher treatment-related adverse events included neutropenia (n = 20), anemia (n = 10), and fatigue (n = 7). CONCLUSIONS These results suggest that antiangiogenic therapy and cytotoxic chemotherapy are an active and well-tolerated combination for patients with aggressive RCC. The combination may be more efficacious than either therapy alone and is currently under further investigation. Cancer 2015;121:3435–43. © 2015 American Cancer Society.

The NCCN Guidelines for Kidney Cancer provide multidisciplinary recommendations for the clinical management of patients with clear cell and non-clear cell renal carcinoma. These NCCN Guidelines Insights highlight the recent updates/changes in these guidelines, and updates include axitinib as first-line treatment option for patients with clear cell renal carcinoma, new data to support pazopanib as subsequent therapy for patients with clear cell carcinoma after first-line treatment with another tyrosine kinase inhibitor, and guidelines for follow-up of patients with renal cell carcinoma.

We characterized clinical outcomes of patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) treated with sunitinib who were long-term responders (LTRs), defined as patients having progression-free survival (PFS)18 months.A retrospective analysis of data from 5714 patients with mRCC treated with sunitinib in 8 phase II/III clinical trials and the expanded access program. Duration on-study and objective response rate (ORR) were compared between LTRs and patients with PFS ≤ 18 months ("others"). PFS and overall survival (OS) were summarized using Kaplan-Meier methodology.Overall, 898 (15.7%) patients achieved a long-term response and 4816 (84.3%) patients did not achieve long-term response. The median (range) duration on-study was 28.6 (16.8-70.7) months in LTRs and 5.5 (0-68.8) months in others. ORR was 51% in LTRs versus 14% in others (P .0001). Median PFS in LTRs was 32.11 months and median OS was not reached. LTRs had higher percentage of early tumor shrinkage ≥ 10% at the first scan (67.1% vs. 51.2%; P = .0018) and greater median maximum on-study tumor shrinkage from baseline (-56.9 vs. -27.1; P .0001) versus others. White race, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0, time from diagnosis to treatment ≥ 1 year, clear cell histology, no liver metastasis, lactate dehydrogenase ≤ 1.5 upper limit of normal (ULN), corrected calcium ≤ 10 mg/dL, hemoglobin greater than the lower limit of normal, platelets less than or equal to ULN, body mass index ≥ 25 kg/mA subset of patients with mRCC treated with sunitinib achieved long-term response. LTRs had improved ORR, PFS, and OS.

We retrospectively evaluated the prognostic impact of neutrophil-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) as a marker for inflammatory and immune state in men with progressive metastatic castration resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) following docetaxel.The SUN-1120 phase III trial comparing prednisone combined with sunitinib (n = 584) or placebo (n = 289) for mCRPC following docetaxel-based chemotherapy was evaluated. The arms were combined for analysis, since no difference was observed in the primary endpoint of overall survival (OS). A logarithmic transformation was applied to non-normal factors. The Kaplan-Meier method was used for OS estimation. To identify an optimal prognostic model for survival, we used a Cox proportional hazards regression method with forward stepwise selection, stratifying for ECOG PS, progression type (prostate specific antigen [PSA] or radiographic) and treatment group. Patients were categorized into risk groups.Complete data was evaluable for 784 men. The factors used in the model that remained individually significant for OS in multivariable analysis were: log-lactate dehydrogenase level (LDH) level (HR 2.86 [95% CI = 2.29, 3.56], P.001), hemoglobin (0.80 [0.74, 0.85], P.001),1 organ involved by metastatic disease (1.49 [1.21, 1.84], P.001), log-alkaline phosphatase (1.13 [0.99, 1.28], P = .074), log-number of prior cycles of docetaxel (0.84 [0.71, 0.98], P = .031), progression on docetaxel (1.35 [1.00, 1.81], P = .049), log-PSA (1.06 [1.00, 1.12], P = .075) and log-NLR (1.55 [1.32, 1.83], P.001). NLR increased the c-statistic of the prognostic model from 0.703 to 0.715.High NLR may be associated with an independent poor prognostic impact in post-docetaxel patients with mCRPC. These data warrant external validation.