Nivolumab plus Ipilimumab versus Sunitinib in Advanced Renal-Cell Carcinoma

Evolving Systemic Treatment Landscape for Patients With Advanced Renal Cell Carcinoma

PURPOSE

To outline current practices and challenges in the systemic management of patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC).

DESIGN

We conducted a focused review of hallmark randomized controlled trials informing the systemic treatment of patients with RCC. We concentrated on trials informing the use of combination therapies, therapy in both treatment-naïve and previously treated patients, sequential treatment strategies, and schedules.

RESULTS

The systemic treatment of advanced RCC has experienced tremendous progress over the past 15 years. An improved understanding of the canonical pathways implicated in RCC pathogenesis has resulted in the development of molecularly targeted and immunotherapy options for patients. These therapies have replaced cytokine-based treatments as the standard of care for patients with advanced RCC. Until recently, sequential vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF)-targeted therapy or VEGF-targeted therapy followed by mammalian target of rapamycin inhibition has been the prevailing treatment paradigm for patients. However, newer agents such as cabozantinib and nivolumab have challenged this traditional approach. In addition, combination treatments including nivolumab plus ipilimumab and atezolizumab plus bevacizumab have transformed the RCC treatment landscape, and other doublet combinations in clinical testing will likely continue to alter the treatment paradigm in RCC. Currently, factors that inform treatment selection between different therapy options include performance status, comorbidities, prognostic risk stratification, treatment adverse event profile, and mode of administration, with no Level I evidence for predictive biomarker use in clinic.

CONCLUSIONS

The treatment options for advanced RCC are rapidly evolving since the introduction of VEGF-targeted therapy, immunotherapy with checkpoint blockade and, more recently, combination regimens. Despite the success of these regimens, advanced RCC remains a largely incurable disease, and additional strategies are warranted.

Novel Agents and Drug Development Needs in Advanced Clear Cell Renal Cancer

The treatment of metastatic clear cell renal cancer is changing rapidly, with the focus switching from vascular endothelial growth factor-targeted therapies to immune checkpoint inhibitors and novel combinations. Specifically, recent data with programmed death ligand inhibitors is revolutionizing the standard approach to metastatic renal cell carcinoma. However, there is speculation around a number of newer potentially therapeutic targets, such as indoleamine 2,3-dioxygenase, transforming growth factor-β, interleukin-10, and adenosine. In this article, we review novel treatments, promising combinations, and consideration in both trial design and clinical application of therapeutics that will influence practice in the future.

The Immunobiology of Kidney Cancer

Although kidney cancer (renal cell carcinoma [RCC]) is susceptible to immunotherapy, the immunologic aspects of the tumor microenvironment (TME) in RCC are relatively unique among tumor types. In RCC, baseline CD8 T-cell infiltration is associated with a worse prognosis. In addition, kidney cancer responds to programmed death-1/programmed death-ligand 1 blockade, despite a relatively low tumor mutation burden. Recent clinical data highlight the efficacy of combined immune checkpoint blockade and demonstrate that combining antiangiogenic agents with programmed death-1/programmed death-ligand 1 blockade has additive activity. Yet an important unanswered question in RCC is the nature of the antigens that are targeted by the immune system when immunotherapy is successful. Ongoing clinical studies are interrogating the multiple suppressive mechanisms in the RCC TME, including metabolic pathways such as those mediated by adenosine and tryptophan as well as cytokine-based therapies. Future regimens are likely to be combinatorial and may eventually be based on a broader understanding of the RCC TME and how it is modulated by both conventional and immune-based therapy.

Chromosome 3p Loss-Orchestrated VHL, HIF, and Epigenetic Deregulation in Clear Cell Renal Cell Carcinoma

Clear cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC) is the most common renal cell carcinoma subtype, and metastatic ccRCC is associated with 5-year survival rates of 10% to 20%. Genetically, ccRCC originates from sequential losses of multiple tumor suppressor genes. Remarkably, chromosome 3p loss occurs in more than 90% of sporadic ccRCCs. This results in concurrent one-copy loss of four tumor suppressor genes that are also mutated individually at high frequency in ccRCC (ie, VHL, 80%; PBRM1, 29% to 46%; BAP1, 6% to 19%; and SETD2, 8% to 30%). Pathogenically, 3p loss probably represents the first genetic event that occurs in sporadic ccRCC and the second genetic event in VHL-mutated hereditary ccRCC. VHL constitutes the substrate recognition module of the VCB-Cul2 E3 ligase that degrades HIF1/2α, whereas PBRM1, BAP1, and SETD2 are epigenetic modulators that regulate gene transcription. Because 3p loss and VHL inactivation are nearly universal truncal events in ccRCC, the resulting HIF1/2 signaling overdrive and accompanied tumor hypervascularization probably underlie the therapeutic benefits observed with vascular endothelial growth factor receptor inhibitors, including sorafenib, sunitinib, pazopanib, axitinib, bevacizumab, cabozantinib, and lenvatinib. Furthermore, recent marked advances in ccRCC genomics, transcriptomics, proteomics, metabolomics, molecular mechanisms, mouse models, prognostic and predictive biomarkers, and clinical trials have rendered invaluable translational insights concerning precision kidney cancer therapeutics. With an armamentarium encompassing 13 drugs that exploit seven unique therapeutic mechanisms (ie, cytokines, vascular endothelial growth factor receptor, mTORC1, cMET/AXL, fibroblast growth factor receptor, programmed cell death-1 and programmed death-ligand 1, and cytotoxic T-cell lymphocyte associated-4) to treat metastatic renal cell carcinoma, one of the imminent clinical questions concerning care of patients with metastatic ccRCC is how a personalized treatment strategy, through rationally combining and sequencing different therapeutic modalities, can be formulated to offer the best clinical outcome for individual patients. Here, we attempt to integrate recent discoveries of immediate translational impacts and discuss future translational challenges and opportunities.

Contemporary treatment of metastatic renal cell carcinoma

Renal cell carcinoma is the 14th most common cancer worldwide. It is a heterogeneous group of histopathological entities, of which the most common is clear cell renal cell carcinoma. Approximately 20-30% of patients present initially with metastatic disease and an additional 20% will progress after radical surgical treatment. Metastatic disease that is non-feasible for surgical treatment remains incurable. Numerous studies have demonstrated that-with the introduction of new drugs-the treatment outcomes of metastatic disease have improved. The development of new therapies as well as the optimization and individualization of procedures allow us to hope for further progress in this area.

RETRACTED: Recommandations françaises du Comité de Cancérologie de l’AFU – Actualisation 2018–2020 : prise en charge du cancer du reinFrench ccAFU guidelines – Update 2018–2020: Management of kidney cancer

This article has been retracted: please see Elsevier Policy on Article Withdrawal (http://www.elsevier.com/locate/withdrawalpolicy). Cet article est retiré de la publication à la demande des auteurs car ils ont apporté des modifications significatives sur des points scientifiques après la publication de la première version des recommandations. Le nouvel article est disponible à cette adresse: DOI:10.1016/j.purol.2019.01.004. C’est cette nouvelle version qui doit être utilisée pour citer l’article. This article has been retracted at the request of the authors, as it is not based on the definitive version of the text because some scientific data has been corrected since the first issue was published. The replacement has been published at the DOI:10.1016/j.purol.2019.01.004. That newer version of the text should be used when citing the article.

[Risk-adapted (immuno)therapy for renal cell carcinoma]

The introduction of immunotherapy into the therapeutic algorithm of metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) represents the most recent expansion of the therapy landscape. This provides a new therapeutic axis in addition to targeted therapies. At the same time, the development of new tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) has led to an improvement in the effectiveness of targeted therapies. Cabozantinib and tivozanib are two new first-line options that redefine the existing therapy algorithm. The importance of the checkpoint blockade in the first line is clinically undisputed; however, approval of the immune combination ipilimumab + nivolumab has not yet been granted. An important task now is to offer risk-adapted therapy in order to optimally balance efficacy and risks of systemic therapy, thereby ensuring the best possible individual therapy.

[Mode of action, new targets and potential biomarkers in modern immunotherapy]

Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) have significantly improved the systemic therapy of metastatic disease in genitourinary malignancies. With the European Medicines Agency (EMA) approval of the antibodies nivolumab and pembrolizumab directed against programmed cell death 1 (PD-1) as well as the PD-L1 antibody atezolizumab, three agents are available for the treatment of metastatic urothelial carcinoma and renal cell carcinoma. This article describes the underlying mode of action of PD-1/PD-L1 blockade and other ICIs to activate the immune system for effective tumor rejection. Future therapeutic strategies are focusing on the combination of ICI with targeted therapies to enhance the immune defense, especially in the local tumor microenvironment. A further clinical need exists for the establishment of biomarkers to predict a therapy response under ICI, in particular for the role of the PD-L1 status. Biomarkers for predicting primary or acquired therapy resistance are also of clinical importance to enable good patient selection for ICI therapy.

Checkpoint Inhibition: Will Combination with Radiotherapy and Nanoparticle-Mediated Delivery Improve Efficacy?

Checkpoint inhibition (CPI) has been a rare success story in the field of cancer immunotherapy. Knowledge gleaned from preclinical studies and patients that do not respond to these therapies suggest that the presence of tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes and establishment of immunostimulatory conditions, prior to CPI treatment, are required for efficacy of CPI. To this end, radiation therapy (RT) has been shown to promote immunogenic cell-death-mediated tumor-antigen release, increase infiltration and cross-priming of T cells, and decreasing immunosuppressive milieu in the tumor microenvironment, hence allowing CPI to take effect. Preclinical and clinical studies evaluating the combination of RT with CPI have been shown to overcome the resistance to either therapy alone. Additionally, nanoparticle and liposome-mediated delivery of checkpoint inhibitors has been shown to overcome toxicities and improve therapeutic efficacy, providing a rationale for clinical investigations of nanoparticle, microparticle, and liposomal delivery of checkpoint inhibitors. In this review, we summarize the preclinical and clinical studies of combined RT and CPI therapies in various cancers, and review findings from studies that evaluated nanoparticle and liposomal delivery of checkpoint inhibitors for cancer treatments.

Safety and efficacy of nivolumab in combination with sunitinib or pazopanib in advanced or metastatic renal cell carcinoma: the CheckMate 016 study

BACKGROUND

Combination treatment with immune checkpoint inhibitors and antiangiogenic drugs has shown encouraging preliminary antitumor activity across various tumor types including advanced or metastatic renal cell carcinoma (aRCC). The open-label, parallel-cohort, dose-escalation, phase I CheckMate 016 study evaluated the efficacy and safety of nivolumab in combination with antiangiogenic tyrosine kinase inhibitors or ipilimumab. Long-term outcomes from this study for the combination of nivolumab plus sunitinib or pazopanib in aRCC are presented.

METHODS

Patients with aRCC received nivolumab plus either sunitinib (50 mg/day, 4 weeks on/2 weeks off; N + S) or pazopanib (800 mg/day; N + P) until progression/unacceptable toxicity. The nivolumab starting dose was 2 mg/kg every 3 weeks, with planned escalation to 5 mg/kg every 3 weeks. Primary endpoints were safety and tolerability; antitumor activity was a secondary endpoint.

RESULTS

Arm N + S enrolled 33 patients, 19 of whom were treatment-naïve; this arm advanced to the expansion phase. Median follow-up was 50.0 months. Patients experienced high frequencies of adverse events (AEs) including treatment-related AEs (100%), grade 3/4 treatment-related AEs (82%), and treatment-related AEs leading to discontinuation (39%). Investigator-assessed objective response rate (ORR) was 55% (18/33) and median progression-free survival (PFS) was 12.7 months. Median overall survival (OS) was not reached. Arm N + P enrolled 20 patients, all had ≥1 prior systemic therapy; this arm was closed due to dose-limiting toxicities and did not proceed to expansion. Median follow-up was 27.1 months. Patients treated with N + P experienced high frequencies of AEs including treatment-related AEs (100%), grade 3/4 treatment-related AEs (70%), and treatment-related AEs leading to discontinuation (25%). Investigator-assessed ORR was 45% (9/20) and median PFS was 7.2 months. Median OS was 27.9 months.

CONCLUSIONS

The addition of standard doses of sunitinib or pazopanib to nivolumab resulted in a high incidence of high-grade toxicities limiting future development of either combination regimen. While there was no adverse impact on response and the OS outcome was notable, the findings suggest that the success of combination regimens based on immune checkpoint inhibitors and antiangiogenic drugs may be dependent on careful selection of the antiangiogenic component and dose.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT01472081 . Registered 16 November 2011.

Frontline immunotherapy treatment with nivolumab and ipilimumab in metastatic renal cell cancer: a new standard of care

Nivolumab is a programmed death 1 (PD-1) inhibitor currently approved as second-line treatment for advanced renal cell carcinomas (RCC) after failure of standard antiangiogenic treatment. Motzer et al. have recently published in the New England Journal of Medicine the findings of CheckMate 214 trial, using nivolumab and ipilimumab, a cytotoxic T-lymphocyte antigen 4 (CTLA-4) inhibitor, versus sunitinib in previously untreated advanced RCC. The combination demonstrated a higher 18-month overall survival rate of 75% versus 60%, and a higher objective response rate of 42% versus 27%, for the combination in favor over sunitinib monotherapy. These results herald the rapidly changing role of immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy as first-line treatment for metastatic RCC.

Why is immunotherapy effective (or not) in patients with MSI/MMRD tumors?

In the last few years, immunotherapy has revolutionized the oncology landscape by targeting the host immune system. Blocking immune checkpoints such as cytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated antigen 4 (CTLA-4), programmed cell death-1 (PD-1) and its ligand (PD-L1 or B7-H1), has proven its efficacy in several solid cancers. Recently, several clinical studies have demonstrated a significant improvement in clinical response to the anti-PD-1-based immunotherapy in a subset of patients with microsatellite instability-high (MSI-H)/mismatch repair (MMR)-deficient tumors that accumulate short insertion/deletion mutations notably in coding microsatellites regions of the genome. Thus, the responsiveness of MSI cancers to immune checkpoint inhibitors can be explained by the increased rate of putative frameshift peptide neoantigens and the immunogenic tumor microenvironment. However, not all MSI tumors respond to immunotherapy. The current review will summarize how and why MMR deficiency has emerged as an important predictor of sensitivity for immunotherapy-based strategies. We will also discuss tumor-cell intrinsic genetic and immune-related features of MSI tumors that can modulate immune checkpoint blockade response and explain primary and/or acquired resistance to anti-PD-1 therapy. Finally, we will also discuss about emerging scores which can define more precisely the immune context of the tumor microenvironment and thus better evaluate prognosis and predict response to Immune Checkpoint Blockade.

Patterns, predictors and subsequent outcomes of disease progression in metastatic renal cell carcinoma patients treated with nivolumab

Background

Nivolumab is approved for the treatment of refractory metastatic renal cell carcinoma. Patterns and predictors of progressive disease (PD) on nivolumab, and outcomes in such patients are lacking.

Methods

A retrospective analysis of patients (pts) with metastatic clear cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC) who received nivolumab at Cleveland Clinic (2015–2017) was performed. PD was defined per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) v1.1 or clinical progression as per treating physician. Univariate analyses (UVA) and multivariate analyses (MVA) were used to identify clinical and laboratory markers as potential predictors of progression-free survival (PFS).

Results

Ninety patients with mean age of 65, 74% men, and 83% good or intermediate International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium (IMDC) risk group were included. Median number of prior systemic treatments was 2 (range, 1–6). Median overall survival (OS) and PFS were 15.8 and 4.4 months, respectively. Fifty-seven patients (63%) had PD and 44% of patients with radiographic PD had new organ sites of metastases with brain (8/23, 35%) being the most common. Twelve patients received treatment beyond progression (TBP), and among 6 patients with available data, 3 (50%) had any tumor shrinkage (2 pts. with 17% shrinkage, one pt. with 29% shrinkage). Of 57 patients with PD, 28 patients (49%) were able to initiate subsequent treatment, mainly with axitinib and cabozantinib, while 40% of patients were transitioned to hospice after PD. In MVA, a higher baseline Neutrophil-to-Lymphocyte ratio (NLR) (HR, 1.86; 95% CI, 1.05–3.29; p = 0.033) was associated with an increased risk of progression, whereas higher (> 0.1 k/uL) baseline eosinophil count was associated with a lower risk of progression (HR, 0.54; 95% CI, 0.30–0.98; p = 0.042).

Conclusion

Brain was the most common site of PD in patients treated with nivolumab, and only half of patients progressing on nivolumab were able to initiate subsequent treatment. The risk of PD increased with a higher baseline NLR and reduced with a higher baseline eosinophil count.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s40425-018-0425-8) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Somatic mutations in renal cell carcinomas from Chinese patients revealed by whole exome sequencing

Background

While the somatic mutation profiles of renal cell carcinoma (RCC) have been revealed by several studies worldwide, the overwhelming majority of those were not derived from Chinese patients. The landscape of somatic alterations in RCC from Chinese patients still needs to be elucidated to determine whether discrepancies exist between Chinese patients and sufferers from other countries and regions.

Methods

We collected specimens from 26 Chinese patients with primary RCC, including 15 clear cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC) samples, 5 papillary renal cell carcinoma (PRCC) samples and 6 chromophobe renal cell carcinoma (ChRCC) samples. Genomic DNAs were isolated from paired tumor-normal tissues and subjected to whole exome sequencing (WES). Immunohistochemistry analysis was performed to detect the programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression in tumor tissues.

Results

A total of 1920 nonsynonymous somatic variants in exons and 86 mutations at splice junctions were revealed. The tumor mutation burden of ccRCC was significantly higher than that of ChRCC (P < 0.05). For both ccRCC and PRCC, the most frequent substitution in somatic missense mutations was T:A > A:T, which was different from that recorded in the COSMIC database. Among eight significantly mutated genes in ccRCC in the TCGA database, six genes were verified in our study including VHL (67%), BAP1 (13%), SETD2 (13%), PBRM1 (7%), PTEN (7%) and MTOR (7%). All the mutations detected in those genes had not been reported in ccRCC before, except for alterations in VHL and PBRM1. Regarding the frequently mutated genes in PRCC in our study, DEPDC4 (p.E293A, p.T279A), PNLIP (p.N401Y, p.F342L) and SARDH (p.H554Q, p.M1T) were newly detected gene mutations predicted to be deleterious. As the most recurrently mutated gene in ChRCC in the TCGA dataset, TP53 (p.R81Q) was somatically altered only in one ChRCC case in this study. The HIF-1 signaling pathway was the most affected pathway in ccRCC, while the PI3K-Akt signaling pathway was altered in all of the three RCC types. Membranous PD-L1 expression was positive in tumor cells from 6/26 (23%) RCC specimens. The PD-L1-positive rate was higher in RCC samples with the somatically mutated genes CSPG4, DNAH11, INADL and TMPRSS13 than in specimens without those (P < 0.05).

Conclusions

Using WES, we identified somatic mutations in 26 Chinese patients with RCC, which enriched the racial diversity of the somatic mutation profiles of RCC subjects, and revealed a few discrepancies in molecular characterizations between our study and published datasets. We also identified numerous newly detected somatic mutations, which further supplements the somatic mutation landscape of RCC. Moreover, 4 somatically mutated genes, including CSPG4, DNAH11, INADL and TMPRSS13, might be promising predictive factors of PD-L1-positive expression in RCC tumor cells.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s12935-018-0661-5) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Systemic Treatment of Metastatic Clear Cell Renal Cell Carcinoma in 2018: Current Paradigms, Use of Immunotherapy, and Future Directions

CONTEXT

Systemic therapy for metastatic clear cell renal cell carcinoma (mccRCC) has greatly evolved over the last 15yr. More recently, combination strategies involving contemporary immunotherapy have emerged as key opportunities to further shift the treatment landscape.

OBJECTIVE

To review the evidence regarding the efficacy and safety of standard therapeutic options in mccRCC as well as combination immunotherapy options on the horizon.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

PubMed/Medline, Embase, Web of Knowledge, and Cochrane Library databases were searched up to February 2018 and according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses statement. A narrative review of studies was performed.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

Twenty-six studies were included regarding therapies for metastatic RCC including vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF)-directed therapy (n=9), mTOR inhibitors (n=2), cytokines (n=3), vaccines (n=3), and immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs, n=9). VEGF tyrosine kinase inhibitor monotherapy had been the standard therapy, and its use is evolving in the front-line setting with ICIs; cabozantinib provides superior progression-free survival versus sunitinib in intermediate- and poor-risk patients, by International Metastatic RCC Database Consortium criteria. The mTOR therapy is largely inferior to VEGF-directed therapy, although it has a role in combination strategies. Cytokines have largely been replaced in current practice throughout most regions, and vaccines have failed to show improved survival in phase III studies to date. ICIs have now become standard care in untreated patients with intermediate and poor risks, given overall survival benefit seen with CheckMate-214 study; survival data from IMmotion 151 are not yet mature. Several ongoing phase III combination trials, with promising early-phase data, are due to be read out.

CONCLUSIONS

The treatment landscape for mccRCC has evolved since the introduction of VEGF inhibitors. Combination therapies involving checkpoint inhibitors could be the next standard of care.

PATIENT SUMMARY

With the expanding role of immune checkpoint inhibitors in metastatic renal cell carcinoma, the treatment paradigm has shifted to include combination therapy in the untreated setting. As the field advances, the bar has been raised in evaluating ongoing combination strategies.

Infliximab associated with faster symptom resolution compared with corticosteroids alone for the management of immune-related enterocolitis

BACKGROUND

Immune-related enterocolitis (irEC) is the most common serious complication from checkpoint inhibitors (CPIs). The current front-line treatment for irEC, high-dose corticosteroids (CS), have significant side effects and prolonged therapy may reduce CPI-anti-tumor activity. Early addition of TNF-α inhibitors such as infliximab (IFX) may expedite symptom resolution and shorten CS duration. Thus, we conducted the first retrospective study, to our knowledge, evaluating symptom resolution in patients with irEC treated with and without IFX.

METHODS

Data were collected from the medical records of patients diagnosed with irEC. The primary endpoint was time to symptom resolution for irEC for cases managed with IFX plus CS (IFX group) versus CS alone (CS group). Duration of CS, overall survival (OS), and time to treatment failure (TTF) were secondary endpoints.

RESULTS

Among 75 patients with irEC, 52% received CS alone, and 48% received IFX. Despite higher grade colitis in the IFX group (grade 3/4: 86% vs. 34%; p < 0.001), median times to diarrhea resolution (3 vs. 9 days; p < 0.001) and to steroid titration (4 vs. 13 days; p < 0.001) were shorter in the IFX group than in the CS group without a negative impact on TTF or OS. Total steroid duration (median 35 vs. 51 days; p = 0.150) was numerically lower in the IFX group.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite higher incidence of grade 3/4 colitis, IFX added to CS for the treatment of patients with irEC was associated with a significantly shorter time to symptom resolution. The data suggest that early introduction of IFX should be considered for patients with irEC until definitive prospective clinical trials are conducted.

The reciprocal function and regulation of tumor vessels and immune cells offers new therapeutic opportunities in cancer

Tumor angiogenesis and escape of immunosurveillance are two cancer hallmarks that are tightly linked and reciprocally regulated by paracrine signaling cues of cell constituents from both compartments. Formation and remodeling of new blood vessels in tumors is abnormal and facilitates immune evasion. In turn, immune cells in the tumor, specifically in context with an acidic and hypoxic environment, can promote neovascularization. Immunotherapy has emerged as a major therapeutic modality in cancer but is often hampered by the low influx of activated cytotoxic T-cells. On the other hand, anti-angiogenic therapy has been shown to transiently normalize the tumor vasculature and enhance infiltration of T lymphocytes, providing a rationale for a combination of these two therapeutic approaches to sustain and improve therapeutic efficacy in cancer. In this review, we discuss how the tumor vasculature facilitates an immunosuppressive phenotype and vice versa how innate and adaptive immune cells regulate angiogenesis during tumor progression. We further highlight recent results of antiangiogenic immunotherapies in experimental models and the clinic to evaluate the concept that targeting both the tumor vessels and immune cells increases the effectiveness in cancer patients.

Developments in urologic oncology "OncoForum": The best of 2017

OBJECTIVE

To put forth new findings of urologic oncology with impact on clinical practice presented during 2017 in the main annual meetings.

METHODS

This document reviews abstracts on prostate, kidney and bladder cancer presented at the congresses of 2016 (EAU, AUA, ASCO, ESMO and ASTRO) and publications with the highest impact in this period valued with the highest scores by the OncoForum committee.

RESULTS

Among patients at high risk of recurrent renal cell carcinoma after nephrectomy, adjuvant sunitinib compared to placebo showed a benefit in patients at higher risk of recurrence. In cisplatin-ineligible advanced urothelial cancer, pembrolizumab elicits clinically meaningful, durable responses. Among patients with localized prostate cancer, treatment for disease progression was less frequent (absolute difference, 26.2 percentage pontis) and adverse events was more frequent with surgery than with observation. Among patients with locally advanced or merastatic prostate cancer, androgen-deprivation therapy plus abiraterone and prednisolone resulted in fewer deaths and fewer treatment-failure events (P<.001). Among patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer previously treated with abiraterone acetate, enzalutamide median radiographic progression free survival was 8,1 months and enzalutamide median overall survival was not reached.

CONCLUSIONS

Among patients at high risk of recurrent renal cell carcinoma after nephrectomy, adjuvant sunitinib showed a benefit across subgroups including patients at higher risk of recurrence. Among patients with localized prostate cancer, surgery was not associated with significantly lower all-cause or porstate-cancer mortality than observation. Among patients with locally advanced or merastatic prostate cancer, androgen-deprivation therapy plus abiraterone and prednisolone was associated with significantly higher rates of overall and failure-free survival than androgen-deprivation therapy alone. In patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer previously treated with abiraterone enzalutamide remained active.

Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors for the Treatment of Central Nervous System (CNS) Metastatic Disease

While the CNS has long been viewed as an immune-privileged environment, a paradigm shift in neuro-immunology has elevated the role of systemic immunotherapy for the treatment of metastatic disease. Increasing knowledge regarding the presence of a CNS lymphatic system and the physical and biochemical alteration of the blood brain barrier (BBB) by the tumor microenvironment suggests immune cell trafficking in and out of the CNS is possible. Emerging clinical data suggest immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) can stimulate T cells peripherally to in turn have anti-tumor effects in the CNS. For example, anti-programmed cell death-1 (PD-1) monotherapy with pembrolizumab has shown intracranial response rates of 20-30% in patients with melanoma or non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) brain metastases. The combination of nivolumab and ipilimumab [anti-PD-1 and anti-cytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated protein 4 (CTLA-4)] showed an intracranial response rate of 55% in patients with melanoma brain metastases. More data are needed to confirm these response rates and to determine mechanisms of efficacy and resistance. While local therapies such as stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS), whole-brain radiation therapy (WBRT), and surgery remain current mainstays, ICIS offer potential decreased neurotoxicity. This review summarizes the biological rationale for systemic immunotherapy to treat CNS metastatic disease, existing clinical data on ICIs in this setting and ongoing clinical trials exploring areas of unmet need.

Response to PD1 inhibition in conventional chondrosarcoma

Background

Chondrosarcoma is one of the most common malignant bone tumors in adults. Conventional chondrosarcoma represents around 85% of all chondrosarcomas and is notoriously difficult to treat with chemotherapy.

Case presentation

We describe a 67-year-old man with metastatic conventional chondrosarcoma who was treated with nivolumab. Treatment was discontinued after restaging showed increased tumor burden, which later proved to be pseudoprogression. The patient restarted nivolumab and continues to have a near complete response.

Conclusion

Conventional chondrosarcoma may be sensitive to checkpoint inhibitors. Further, this case demonstrates clearly the phenomenon of pseudo-progression in this disease, a factor that must be considered in the design of clinical trials and clinical care. This case supports additional study of immunomodulatory agents in this deadly disease.

Spotlight on cabozantinib for previously untreated advanced renal cell carcinoma: evidence to date

Background

In the past few years, new drugs made their appearance in the first-line setting of treatment for metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC), and cabozantinib is one among them. The present systematic review aims to point out any evidence published to date about first-line treatment with cabozantinib for mRCC patients, describing their outcome in all end points explored by the literature.

Methods

PRISMA guidelines were followed. A systematic assessment of literature and peer- reviewed presentations was performed by searching PubMed and major oncology meeting resources, from the database inception until June 25, 2018. The following keywords were used: "cabozantinib or cabozantinib-s-malate or XL184" and "renal cell carcinoma or kidney cancer or clear cell renal carcinoma or renal cancer" and "first-line or untreated or treatment-naïve or primary treatment". All types of original clinical studies were included, evaluating either cabozantinib monotherapy or any systemic drug combination containing cabozantinib for previously untreated patients with mRCC.

Results

From potential 75 titles and abstracts, seven publications were selected. One was the main report of a randomized clinical trial (the CABOSUN study); four papers reported updated results, secondary or subgroup analyses from the same study population; and further two reports consisted of network meta-analyses. From the additional search for ongoing clinical trials, six studies currently in progress were reported.

Conclusion

According to the reported evidence, cabozantinib may be a viable first-line option in mRCC patients with intermediate or poor risk according to International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium model. It offers an undoubtful advantage in terms of progression-free survival, despite quite high rates of G3-4 toxicity, modest objective response rate, and no survival advantage. Nevertheless, given the availability of an immunotherapy combination that significantly improved overall survival for the same population in a Phase III trial and the indisputable efficacy of cabozantinib as second-line treatment, this drug may be devoted as a rescue option in patients progressive to primary therapy.

Lessons From the Development of the Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors in Oncology

Immunotherapies are becoming increasingly important in the treatment armamentarium of a variety of malignancies. Immune checkpoint inhibitors are the most representative drugs receiving regulatory approval over the past few years. In a recent study published in Clinical Cancer Research, we demonstrated that these agents are being developed faster than other prior anticancer therapies. All checkpoint inhibitors received priority review, being granted with at least one Food and Drug Administration expedited program. Hence, some of them are getting marketing approval after preliminary trials. The model continues to rely on phase I trials, designed with traditional models for dose definition, although a substantial number of patients are treated during the dose expansion cohorts. We demonstrated that efficacy and safety are reasonably predicted from the dose-finding portion of phase I trials with these agents, assuring a low treatment-related mortality for patients throughout the development process. In this article, we further discuss and summarize these findings and update some recent approval information for immune checkpoint inhibitors.

Toxicities and outcomes: Do steroids matter?

Hypophysitis is a common toxicity of ipilimumab and may be managed with either low- or high-dose steroids. In this issue of Cancer, Faje and colleagues observe that patients treated with low-dose steroids have equivalent rates of hypophysitis resolution compared to those who receive higher doses. Importantly, however, melanoma-specific outcomes are improved in the low-dose cohort. Herein, we discuss the implications of this finding and the known associations between steroids and clinical outcomes to cancer immunotherapy.

Treating patients with renal cell carcinoma and bone metastases

INTRODUCTION

Bone metastases (BMs) are common and cause morbidity in cancer patients. This review focuses on evidence in BMs from metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) management and discusses current evidence on the role of systemic treatments in BMs management, bone-targeting agents' benefits in skeletal-related events prevention and local therapeutic approaches to BM in mRCC. Areas covered: A comprehensive review of literature concerning incidence, prognosis, and therapeutic approaches of BMs was performed, focusing on the latest emerging evidence in management of BMs from mRCC. Expert commentary: One-third of mRCC patients present metastatic disease to the bone. BMs impact negatively the prognosis and decrease quality of life. Adequate management of BMs from RCC requires a multimodal evaluation to optimize care and quality of life. Both tyrosine-kinase inhibitors and immunotherapy may be effective in BMs treatment. BMs cause severe complications such as fracture, spinal cord compression, and pain requiring surgery or radiotherapy and several local approaches are available to achieve a local control of the disease. Defining prognosis of systemic disease and identifying the main goal of treatment is crucial for the selection of the best strategy.

Camrelizumab (SHR-1210) alone or in combination with gemcitabine plus cisplatin for nasopharyngeal carcinoma: results from two single-arm, phase 1 trials

BACKGROUND

Platinum-based doublet chemotherapy regimens, preferentially gemcitabine plus cisplatin, are generally considered the first-line standard of care for patients with recurrent or metastatic nasopharyngeal carcinoma. However, no consensus has been reached regarding treatment following progression after first-line therapy. Camrelizumab (SHR-1210) is a humanised anti-programmed death-1 (anti PD-1) antibody. We present safety and preliminary antitumour activity of camrelizumab alone as second-line therapy in patients with recurrent or metastatic nasopharyngeal carcinoma and combined with gemcitabine and cisplatin as first-line therapy in this patient population.

METHODS

We report the results from two single-arm, phase 1 trials. Both trials included patients aged 18-70 years with histologically or cytologically confirmed nasopharyngeal carcinoma and confirmed metastatic disease or locoreginal recurrence, and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1. Patients who received at least one previous line of treatment were enrolled at five academic hospitals in China into the dose-escalation and expansion trial to receive camrelizumab monotherapy intravenously at escalating doses of 1 mg/kg, 3 mg/kg, and 10 mg/kg, and a bridging dose of 200 mg per dose once every 2 weeks (monotherapy trial). Treatment-naive patients were enrolled from a single centre in China to receive six cycles of camrelizumab 200 mg (day 1), gemcitabine 1 g/m² (days 1 and 8), and cisplatin 80 mg/m² (day 1) every 3 weeks followed by camrelizumab 200 mg maintenance once every 3 weeks (combination trial). The primary endpoint of both trials was the safety and tolerability of the study treatment. Analyses were done per protocol. Both trials are registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02721589 (camrelizumab monotherapy trial) and NCT03121716 (camrelizumab combination trial). Both trials are ongoing, but are no longer enrolling patients.

FINDINGS

In the camrelizumab monotherapy trial, between March 31, 2016, and Sept 20, 2017, 121 patients were assessed for eligibility, of whom 93 patients were enrolled across the dose-escalation and expansion cohorts and received at least one dose of camrelizumab (safety population). 15 (16%) of 93 patients had treatment-related adverse events of grade 3 or 4, the most common of which were elevated conjugated bilirubin concentration (three [3%] of 93 patients), stomatitis, anaemia, and increased concentrations of aspartate aminotransferase, alanine aminotransferase, and total bilirubin, each of which occurred in two (2%) patients. Eight (9%) patients had a treatment-related serious adverse event. No dose-limiting toxic effects were observed during the dose-escalation phase. 31 (34%; 95% CI 24-44) of 91 evaluable patients on camrelizumab monotherapy had an overall response with a median follow-up of 9·9 months (IQR 8·1-11·7). In the camrelizumab combination trial, between April 18, 2017, and Aug 15, 2017, 24 patients were assessed for eligibility, of whom 23 patients were enrolled and treated (safety population). 20 (87%) of 23 patients had grade 3 or 4 treatment-related adverse events: neutropenia (13 [57%] of 23 patients), anaemia (11 [48%] patients), leucopenia (11 [48%] patients), thrombocytopenia (seven [30%] patients), oedema (two [9%] patients), hyponatraemia (two [9%] patients), hypochloraemia (one [4%] patients), and rash (one [4%] patient). Two patients had treatment-related serious adverse events. No treatment-related deaths occurred in these trials. 20 (91% [95% CI 72-97]) of 22 evaluable patients had an overall response with a median follow-up time of 10·2 months (IQR 9·7-10·8).

INTERPRETATION

Camrelizumab is a well tolerated, potential treatment option for patients with recurrent or metastatic nasopharyngeal carcinoma. The combination of camrelizumab plus gemcitabine and cisplatin has a manageable toxicity profile and promising preliminary antitumour activity for this disease in treatment-naive patients. Randomised controlled trials are needed to further establish the role of immune checkpoint inhibition for nasopharyngeal carcinomas.

FUNDING

Hengrui Medicine Co, Chinese National Natural Science Foundation project, Science and Technology Program of Guangdong, Pearl River Nova Program of Guangzhou.

[Management of metastatic renal cell carcinomass]

The management of metastatic renal cell carcinoma had changed over the last ten years with the apparition of new treatments and advances in surgery and ablative techniques. The therapies for metastatic patients have also been personalized and different prognostic groups have been established to adapt the treatment to the severity of the disease. Surgical excision, radiotherapy or ablative therapy could be proposed for patients with isolated metastasis and good condition to delay the systemic therapy initiation. Until 2006, in case of metastatic renal cell carcinoma, immunotherapy (IL-2 and TNF-alpha) was proposed. Targeted therapies acting on angiogenesis mechanisms have also been developed. Recently, immunotherapy has revolutionized the therapeutic management and has improved the overall survival of patients with metastatic renal carcinoma. For each patient, a multidisciplinary management is organized with a personal therapeutic project. This global management needs coordination with the medical team and also need a good communication with the patient, his entourage and his doctor.

Treatment of mycophenolate-resistant immune-related organizing pneumonia with infliximab

Background

The development of pulmonary immune-related adverse events (irAEs) in patients undergoing PD-(L)1 targeted checkpoint inhibitors are rare, but may be life-threatening. While many published articles and guidelines are focusing on the presentation and upfront treatment of pulmonary irAEs, the strategy in patients with late-onset pneumonia that are resistant to commonly used immunosuppressive drugs remains unclear.

Case presentation

Here, we report the successful treatment of a mycophenolate-resistant organizing pneumonia (OP) with infliximab in a patient with metastatic melanoma after PD-1 blockade. The patient received two years of PD-1 targeted immunotherapy when he developed multiple nodular lung lesions mimicking a metastatic progression. However, wedge resection of these lesions showed defined areas of OP, which responded well to corticosteroids. Upon tapering, new foci of OP developed which were resistant to high-dose steroids and mycophenolate treatment. The TNFα antagonist infliximab led to a rapid and durable regression of the inflammatory lesions.

Conclusion

This case describes a not well-studied situation, in which a mycophenolate-resistant PD-1 blocker-associated pneumonitis was successfully treated with a TNFα neutralizing antibody. The outcome of this case suggests that infliximab might be the preferable option compared to classical immunosuppressants in the case of steroid-resistant/−dependent late onset pulmonary irAEs.

Systemic treatment for hepatocellular carcinoma

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is one of the most common cancers with high mortality worldwide. Treatment options for patients with advanced stage HCC remain a great challenge. However, novel agents especially small molecule tyrosine kinase inhibitor and innovative immunotherapy demonstrate new promising therapeutic options for these patients. This review article summarizes systemic treatment options evaluated in HCC focusing on the most recently published data and ongoing studies.

Ipilimumab in combination with nivolumab for the treatment of renal cell carcinoma

INTRODUCTION

Renal cell carcinoma (RCC) is a highly immunogenic neoplasm, and cytokine-based immunotherapies have been used for decades with limited success. In recent years, antibody-based immunotherapies targeting immune checkpoint receptors PD-1 and CTLA-4 have demonstrated clinical efficacy in metastatic RCC (mRCC) patients, leading to FDA approval of the combination of nivolumab and ipilimumab in treatment-naïve patients with intermediate- or poor-risk disease in April 2018. Areas covered: The pharmacodynamics and pharmacokinetics of nivolumab and ipilimumab are reviewed. Clinical safety and efficacy results from pivotal phase I and III trials of the combination of nivolumab plus ipilimumab in mRCC are summarized, and the combination is reviewed in the context of other available systemic therapies for RCC. Ongoing clinical studies involving the combination of nivolumab plus ipilimumab in RCC are discussed. Expert opinion: The combination of nivolumab and ipilimumab has demonstrated superior efficacy for treatment-naïve patients with intermediate- and poor-risk mRCC with clear cell histology and is likely to replace anti-angiogenic therapies as the treatment-of-choice in this patient population in the United States. Development of additional combination strategies, novel trial designs, and predictive biomarkers of response will be important to further optimize therapeutic selection and clinical outcomes.

Carcinoma of Unknown Primary Site (CUP) With Metastatic Renal-Cell Carcinoma (mRCC) Histologic and Immunohistochemical Characteristics (CUP-mRCC): Results From Consecutive Patients Treated With Targeted Therapy and Review of Literature

BACKGROUND

Carcinoma of unknown primary site (CUP) is a heterogenous group of metastatic cancer with no detectable primary tumor site. Diagnostic assessment occasionally presents CUP with metastatic renal-cell carcinoma (mRCC) histologic and immunohistochemical characteristics (CUP-mRCC). Efficacy and toxicity data for vascular endothelial growth factor inhibitor therapies in CUP-mRCC patients are few.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed consecutive patients with CUP-mRCC at a single institution between 2007 and 2018. Treatment outcomes were assessed from initiation of renal-cell carcinoma-specific therapy, including response rate, progression-free survival, and overall survival.

RESULTS

Ten patients with CUP-mRCC were identified. Median age was 64 years. Histologies were clear-cell (30%), papillary type II (20%), and unclassified renal-cell (50%) carcinoma. International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium risk group were favorable, intermediate, and poor in 0, 40%, and 60%, respectively. One patient received empiric first-line chemotherapy. Targeted treatments were pazopanib (n = 7), sunitinib (n = 2), and sorafenib (n = 1). Objective response rate was 40%, progression-free survival was 2.5 months (95% confidence interval, 1.2-3.8), and overall survival was 5.7 months (95% confidence interval, 0-24.0). Stratified for International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium risk, overall survival in intermediate versus poor risk group were 18.6 months and 2.3 months, respectively. Second-line therapy did not result in disease control. No new or unexpected toxicities were observed.

CONCLUSION

CUP-mRCC treated with vascular endothelial growth factor-targeted therapy is valid, feasible, and safe even though these patients had several negative prognostic factors. CUP-mRCC patients should be identified among CUP patients for specific renal-cell carcinoma therapy.

Receptor activator of NF-κB (RANK)-mediated induction of metastatic spread and association with poor prognosis in renal cell carcinoma

BACKGROUND

Inhibition of the receptor activator of NF-κB ligand (RANKL) has become a standard of care supportive treatment to prevent skeletal related events in cancer patients. Moreover, RANKL inhibition has been implicated with better survival outcome in lung cancer, while RANKL expression induces tumor progression and metastatic spread in vivo in breast cancer. Whether RANK/RANKL may have an impact on the pathogenesis of clear cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC) is currently unknown.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A retrospective tissue micro array (TMA)-study was carried out determining the expression of RANK/RANKL in primary tumors of 306 ccRCC patients. Additionally, 24 ccRCC cell lines were employed for in vitro analyses of the RANK/RANKL axis including cell proliferation, migration and anchorage independent growth.

RESULTS

RANK (+) vs. RANK (-) tumors had both worse cancer specific survival (CSS) (6.3 vs. 1.3 years; p < 0.001) and recurrence free survival (RFS) (9.9 vs. 5.8 years; p < 0.001). RANK (+) (HR 2.21; p < 0.001) was an independent prognostic factor for CSS and RFS (HR 4.98; p < 0.001). RANKL treatment resulted in increased proliferation, soft agar growth, and colony formation of RANK (+) RCC cell lines, which could be reversed by treatment with an NF-κB inhibitor and with a combination of osteoprotegrin and RANKL in vitro.

CONCLUSIONS

RANK is expressed in ccRCC tissue, correlates with clinicopathological features, survival outcome, and when stimulated with RANKL can induce ccRCC progression in vitro. Consequently, RANKL inhibition combined with standard of care treatment may be a promising approach to improve ccRCC patient's survival.

Immune-related adverse events from combination immunotherapy in cancer patients: A comprehensive meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Although available evidence from clinical trials has shown that immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) combination therapy can lead to a series of immune-related adverse events (irAEs), the overall risk of irAEs on combination therapy has yet not been systematically reported. Therefore, we performed a meta-analysis to comprehensively explore the overall risks for irAEs on combination immunotherapy.

METHODS

PubMed, Embase, and Google Scholar were systematically searched for relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing combination immunotherapy to monotherapy. The meta-analysis was conducted by using Review Manager 5.3.

RESULTS

A total of 11 RCTs involving 5307 patients were eligible for this meta-analysis. The risk ratio for all-grade diarrhea and all-grade colitis for combination therapy was 1.95 (95% CI 1.54, 2.46; P < 0.00001) and 4.45 (95% CI 3.04, 6.51; P < 0.00001), respectively. The risk ratio for all-grade hyperthyroidism and all-grade hypothyroidism for combination therapy was 2.84 (95% CI 1.71, 4.72; P < 0.0001) and 1.71 (95% CI 1.38, 2.13; P < 0.00001), respectively. The risk ratio for all-grade increased AST and all-grade increased ALT was 3.87 (95% CI 2.74, 5.47; P < 0.00001) and 4.29 (95% CI 3.05, 6.04; P < 0.00001), respectively. The risk ratio for all-grade hypophysitis and all-grade pneumonitis was 4.24 (95% CI 2.26, 7.98; P < 0.00001) and 2.92 (95% CI 1.60, 5.33; P = 0.0005), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients receiving combination immunotherapy are at increased risk of selected all-grade irAEs. Although fatal high-grade irAEs is rare, AEs caused by combination immunotherapy should be recognized promptly in order to avoid more serious complications.

Cure in metastatic breast cancer

Oligometastatic disease characterizes a distinct subgroup of metastatic breast cancer patients that might benefit from different treatment strategies to achieve long-lasting remission and potentially cure. Those long-lasting remissions are reported after locoregional treatment of the primary tumor and all metastatic sites in several case series; however, unlike other tumor entities, prospective data are lacking. Furthermore, tumor eradication by excellent systemic anticancer therapy with novel chemotherapies and targeted agents can lead to long-term survival. In addition, reactivation of the host immune defense by immuno-oncologic drugs can achieve long-lasting tumor control. So far, unfortunately, checkpoint inhibitors as monotherapy have led to responses only in a small percentage of patients with metastatic breast cancer. This short review summarizes available data on long-lasting remissions and potential cure in metastatic breast cancers. It describes and discusses data on locoregional treatment, chemo-, antibody- and immunotherapy and tries to select individual patients for whom a multidisciplinary treatment approach with curative intention might be an option to achieve long-term survival.

Fundamental Mechanisms of Immune Checkpoint Blockade Therapy

Immune checkpoint blockade is able to induce durable responses across multiple types of cancer, which has enabled the oncology community to begin to envision potentially curative therapeutic approaches. However, the remarkable responses to immunotherapies are currently limited to a minority of patients and indications, highlighting the need for more effective and novel approaches. Indeed, an extraordinary amount of preclinical and clinical investigation is exploring the therapeutic potential of negative and positive costimulatory molecules. Insights into the underlying biological mechanisms and functions of these molecules have, however, lagged significantly behind. Such understanding will be essential for the rational design of next-generation immunotherapies. Here, we review the current state of our understanding of T-cell costimulatory mechanisms and checkpoint blockade, primarily of CTLA4 and PD-1, and highlight conceptual gaps in knowledge.Significance: This review provides an overview of immune checkpoint blockade therapy from a basic biology and immunologic perspective for the cancer research community. Cancer Discov; 8(9); 1069-86. ©2018 AACR.