Factors Modifying the Associations of Single or Combination Programmed Cell Death 1 and Programmed Cell Death Ligand 1 Inhibitor Therapies With Survival Outcomes in Patients With Metastatic Clear Cell Renal Cell Carcinoma: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

PD1/PD-L1 blockade in clear cell renal cell carcinoma: mechanistic insights, clinical efficacy, and future perspectives

The advent of PD1/PD-L1 inhibitors has significantly transformed the therapeutic landscape for clear cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC). This review provides an in-depth analysis of the biological functions and regulatory mechanisms of PD1 and PD-L1 in ccRCC, emphasizing their role in tumor immune evasion. We comprehensively evaluate the clinical efficacy and safety profiles of PD1/PD-L1 inhibitors, such as Nivolumab and Pembrolizumab, through a critical examination of recent clinical trial data. Furthermore, we discuss the challenges posed by resistance mechanisms to these therapies and potential strategies to overcome them. We also explores the synergistic potential of combination therapies, integrating PD1/PD-L1 inhibitors with other immunotherapies, targeted therapies, and conventional modalities such as chemotherapy and radiotherapy. In addition, we examine emerging predictive biomarkers for response to PD1/PD-L1 blockade and biomarkers indicative of resistance, providing a foundation for personalized therapeutic approaches. Finally, we outline future research directions, highlighting the need for novel therapeutic strategies, deeper mechanistic insights, and the development of individualized treatment regimens. Our work summarizes the latest knowledge and progress in this field, aiming to provide a valuable reference for improving clinical efficacy and guiding future research on the application of PD1/PD-L1 inhibitors in ccRCC.

The optimal threshold of PD-L1 combined positive score to predict the benefit of PD-1 antibody plus chemotherapy for patients with HER2-negative gastric adenocarcinoma: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) combined with chemotherapy have become the first-line treatment of metastatic gastric and gastroesophageal adenocarcinomas (GEACs). This study aims to figure out the optimal combined positive score (CPS) cutoff value.

METHODS

We searched for randomized phase III trials to investigate the efficacy of ICIs plus chemotherapy for metastatic GEACs compared with chemotherapy alone. Pooled analyses of hazard ratios (HRs) based on PD-L1 expression were performed.

RESULTS

A total of six trials (KEYNOTE-062, KEYNOTE-590, KEYNOTE-859, ATTRACTION-04, CheckMate 649, and ORIENT-16) were included, comprising 5,242 patients. ICIs plus chemotherapy significantly improved OS (HR: 0.79, 95% CI 0.72-0.86 in global patients; HR: 0.75, 95% CI 0.57-0.98 in Asian patients) and PFS (HR: 0.74, 95% CI 0.68-0.82 in global patients; HR: 0.64, 95% CI 0.56-0.73 in Asian patients) compared with chemotherapy alone. The differences in OS (ratio of HR: 1.05, 95% CI 0.79-1.40; predictive value: - 5.1%) and PFS (ratio of HR: 1.16, 95% CI 0.98-1.36; predictive value: - 13.5%) were not statistically significant between the global and Asian patients. Subgroup analyses indicated that the optimal CPS threshold was at ≥ 5 for OS and ≥ 10 for PFS with the highest predictive values.

CONCLUSIONS

The benefit derived from ICIs plus chemotherapy is similar between Asian and global GEAC patients. However, those with a PD-L1 CPS < 5 or CPS < 10 may not have significant benefits from ICIs therapy. Therefore, it is advisable to routinely assess PD-L1 expression in GEAC patients considered for ICIs treatment.

Efficacy and Safety of First-line Systemic Therapy for Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis

CONTEXT

Considerable advances have been made in the first-line treatment of metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC), with immunotherapy-based combinations including immunotherapy-tyrosine kinase inhibitors (IO-TKIs) and dual immunotherapy (IO-IO) favored. A lack of head-to-head clinical trials comparing these treatments means that there is uncertainty regarding their use in clinical practice.

OBJECTIVE

To compare and rank the efficacy and safety of first-line systemic treatments for mRCC with a focus on IO-based combinations.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

MEDLINE (Ovid), EMBASE, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and abstracts of recent major scientific meetings were searched to identify the most up-to-date phase 3 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of first-line IO-based combinations for mRCC up to June 2021. A systematic review and network meta-analysis were completed using the Bayesian framework. Primary endpoints included overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). Secondary endpoints included the objective response rate (ORR), complete response (CR), grade 3-4 treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs), treatment-related drug discontinuation (TRDD), and health-related quality of life (HRQoL). The analysis was performed for the intention-to-treat (ITT) population as well as by clinical risk group.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

A total of six phase 3 RCTs were included involving a total of 5121 patients. Nivolumab plus cabozantinib (NIVO-CABO) had the highest likelihood of an OS benefit in the ITT population (surface under the cumulative ranking curve 82%). Avelumab plus axitinib (AVEL-AXI) had the highest likelihood of an OS benefit for patients with favorable risk (65%). Pembrolizumab plus AXI (PEMBRO-AXI) had the highest likelihood of an OS benefit for patients with intermediate risk (78%). PEMBRO plus lenvatinib (PEMBRO-LENV) had the highest likelihood of an OS benefit for patients with poor risk (89%). PEMBRO-LENV was associated with a superior PFS benefit across all risk groups (89-98%). Maximal ORR was achieved with PEMBRO-LENV (97%). The highest likelihood for CR was attained with NIVO plus ipilimumab (NIVO-IPI; 85%) and PEMBRO-LENV (83%). The highest grade 3-4 TRAE rate occurred with PEMBRO-LENV (95%) and NIVO-CABO (83%), but the latter was associated with the lowest TRDD rate (2%). By contrast, NIVO-IPI had the lowest grade 3-4 TRAE rate (6%) and the highest likelihood of TRDD (100%). HRQoL consistently favored NIVO-CABO (66-75%), PEMBRO-LENV (44-85%), and NIVO-IPI (65-93%) in comparison to the other treatments.

CONCLUSIONS

IO-TKI drug combinations are associated with consistent improvements in clinically relevant outcomes for all mRCC risk groups. This benefit may be at the cost of higher TRAE rates; however, lower TRDD rates suggest a manageable side-effect profile. Longer follow-up is required to determine if the benefits of IO-TKIs will be sustained and if they should be favored in the first-line treatment of mRCC.

PATIENT SUMMARY

Combination treatments based on immunotherapy agents continue to show meaningful benefits in the first-line treatment of metastatic kidney cancer. Our review and network meta-analysis shows that immunotherapy combined with another class of agents called tyrosine kinase inhibitors is promising. However, longer follow-up is needed for this treatment strategy to clarify if the benefits are long-lasting.

Coexpression of lymphocyte-activation gene 3 and programmed death ligand-1 in tumor infiltrating immune cells predicts worse outcome in renal cell carcinoma

OBJECTIVES

Lymphocyte-activation gene 3 (LAG-3) represents a potential immune checkpoint target for cancer treatment. We investigated LAG-3 expression and its prognostic value in patients with surgically treated clear cell renal cell carcinoma (RCC) and correlated LAG-3 expression with programmed cell death ligand 1(PD-L1).

METHODS

We evaluated LAG-3 and PD-L1 expression using immunohistochemistry on tissue microarrays incorporating 134 primary excision specimens of clear cell RCC (ccRCC). The patients were analyzed as two groups: the whole cohort and those with metastatic RCC (mRCC). The cancer genome atlas (TCGA) data analysis of LAG-3 was done through UALCAN web servers.

RESULTS

Using the UALCAN cancer transcriptional data analysis, we found that LAG-3 was overexpressed in ccRCC. LAG-3 expression was significantly correlated with PD-L1 expression in the whole cohort and in the mRCC group (all, p < 0.05). Both LAG-3⁺ RCC and PD-L1⁺ RCC presented with a higher TNM stage and higher Fuhrman nuclear grade (all, p < 0.05). PD-L1⁺/LAG-3⁺ RCC and PD-L1⁻/LAG-3⁺ RCC showed poorer cancer-specific survival (CSS) than PD-L1⁻/LAG-3⁻ RCC (all, p = 0.01). Similarly, PD-L1⁺/LAG-3⁺ mRCC and PD-L1⁻/LAG-3⁺ mRCC showed poorer CSS than PD-L1⁻/LAG-3⁻ mRCC (all, p < 0.05). Multivariate analysis showed that PD-L1⁺/LAG-3⁺ mRCC (hazard ratio: 3.19; 95% CI: 0.77-13.67; p = 0.033) was a predictor of poor CSS.

CONCLUSION

Both LAG-3⁺ and PD-L1⁺ RCC have adverse pathological features, and their coexpression predicts worse clinical outcomes. Our findings suggest LAG-3 blockade in combination with programmed cell death 1/PD-L1 blockade as a potential therapeutic approach for RCC.