1
|
Derks SHAE, van der Meer EL, Joosse A, de Jonge MJA, Slagter C, Schouten JW, Hoop EOD, Smits M, van den Bent MJ, Jongen JLM, van der Veldt AAM. The development of brain metastases in patients with different therapeutic strategies for metastatic renal cell cancer. Int J Cancer 2024; 155:1045-1052. [PMID: 38703351 DOI: 10.1002/ijc.34984] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/09/2024] [Revised: 02/27/2024] [Accepted: 04/09/2024] [Indexed: 05/06/2024]
Abstract
A diagnosis of brain metastasis (BM) significantly affects quality of life in patients with metastatic renal cell cancer (mRCC). Although systemic treatments have shown efficacy in mRCC, active surveillance (AS) is still commonly used in clinical practice. In this single-center cohort study, we assessed the impact of different initial treatment strategies for metastatic RCC (mRCC) on the development of BM. All consecutive patients diagnosed with mRCC between 2011 and 2022 were included at the Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, the Netherlands, and a subgroup of patients with BM was selected. In total, 381 patients with mRCC (ECM, BM, or both) were identified. Forty-six patients had BM of whom 39 had metachronous BM (diagnosed ≥1 month after ECM). Twenty-five (64.1%) of these 39 patients with metachronous BM had received prior systemic treatment for ECM and 14 (35.9%) patients were treatment naive at BM diagnosis. The median BM-free survival since ECM diagnosis was significantly longer (p = .02) in previously treated patients (29.0 [IQR 12.6-57.0] months) compared to treatment naive patients (6.8 [IQR 1.0-7.0] months). In conclusion, patients with mRCC who received systemic treatment for ECM prior to BM diagnosis had a longer BM-free survival as compared to treatment naïve patients. These results emphasize the need for careful evaluation of treatment strategies, and especially AS, for patients with mRCC.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sophie H A E Derks
- Department of Neuro-Oncology, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
- Department of Medical Oncology, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
- Department of Radiology & Nuclear Medicine, Erasmus MC, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Edgar L van der Meer
- Department of Neuro-Oncology, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Arjen Joosse
- Department of Medical Oncology, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Maja J A de Jonge
- Department of Medical Oncology, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Cleo Slagter
- Department of Radiotherapy, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Joost W Schouten
- Department of Neurosurgery, Erasmus MC, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Esther Oomen-de Hoop
- Department of Medical Oncology, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Marion Smits
- Department of Radiology & Nuclear Medicine, Erasmus MC, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Martin J van den Bent
- Department of Neuro-Oncology, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Joost L M Jongen
- Department of Neuro-Oncology, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Astrid A M van der Veldt
- Department of Medical Oncology, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
- Department of Radiology & Nuclear Medicine, Erasmus MC, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Bhavsar NA, Harrison MR, Scales CD, Zhang T, Troy J, Ward K, Jabusch SM, Lampron Z, George DJ. Design and Rationale of the Outcomes Database to Prospectively Assess the Changing Therapy Landscape in Renal Cell Carcinoma Registry: A Multi-institutional, Prospective Study of Patients with Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma. EUR UROL SUPPL 2024; 66:75-81. [PMID: 39070100 PMCID: PMC11278923 DOI: 10.1016/j.euros.2024.06.007] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 06/11/2024] [Indexed: 07/30/2024] Open
Abstract
Introduction and hypotheses The Outcomes Database to prospectivelY aSSEss the changing TherapY landscape in Renal Cell Carcinoma (ODYSSEY RCC) Registry is a large, nationally representative prospective registry of patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) that aims to provide a real-world picture of longitudinal clinical management and patient experiences that impact clinical outcomes. The primary goal of this study is to understand the cancer management and health-related quality of life in patients with mRCC in routine real-world clinical practice in the USA. Design This is an observational, phase 4 study with planned enrollment of up to 800 patients aged ≥19 yr with mRCC in the USA. Patients will be identified through electronic health record (EHR) data from the PCORnet network of sites for care received at collaborating sites. A unique aspect of the study is the multiple data sources that will be linked to the EHR data. These include: (1) Medicare claims data, (2) laboratory results, (3) tissue specimens, (4) radiographic images, and (5) patient-reported outcomes, physicians' treatment selection, and discontinuation surveys. Protocol overview We created a novel data resource that can inform patient care. Investigators have the opportunity to use these to study novel research questions after submitting an ancillary proposal and upon approval of the executive committee. Limitations include the potential for selection bias, residual confounding, and missing information. Summary The ODYSSEY Registry will provide an advanced data resource that can examine numerous clinical questions related to patient and physician choice, and support methodological research related to omics and artificial intelligence. Patient summary Cancer medications and treatments are changing rapidly. Collecting data on real-world clinical practice and patient-answered questionnaires will help us better understand cancer management and health-related quality of life while receiving metastatic renal cell carcinoma-specific treatment.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Nrupen A. Bhavsar
- Department of Surgery, Duke University Health System, Durham, NC, USA
- Department of Biostatistics and Bioinformatics, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, NC, USA
| | - Michael R. Harrison
- Duke Cancer Institute Center for Prostate and Urologic Cancers, Durham, NC, USA
| | | | - Tian Zhang
- Harold C. Simmons Comprehensive Cancer Center, UT Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX, USA
| | - Jesse Troy
- Department of Biostatistics and Bioinformatics, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, NC, USA
| | | | | | | | - Daniel J. George
- Duke Cancer Institute Center for Prostate and Urologic Cancers, Durham, NC, USA
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Shakhnazaryan N, Gima-Lange L, Desai A, Fitzgerald K, Kwon DH. Accuracy, readability, and quality of websites about metastatic renal cell carcinoma treatment. Urol Oncol 2024:S1078-1439(24)00527-1. [PMID: 38955572 DOI: 10.1016/j.urolonc.2024.06.015] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/17/2024] [Revised: 05/27/2024] [Accepted: 06/13/2024] [Indexed: 07/04/2024]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES Patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) face complex treatment decisions and frequently turn to the Internet for treatment information. The content of patient educational websites about mRCC treatment has not been evaluated. This study evaluated the accuracy, readability, and quality of websites about the treatment of mRCC. METHODS A total of 2,700 Internet queries were performed. Across 3 Internet search engines, 25 links of 36 permutations of mRCC keywords and their synonyms were screened for eligibility. Eligible websites were English-language websites containing information about mRCC treatments. Sponsored, social media, provider-facing, and news websites were excluded. Accuracy of eligible websites was evaluated in 2 domains: (1) Completeness by calculating the percentage of mRCC facts included in websites using an investigator-created checklist based on the NCI's RCC Treatment (PDQ®)-patient version, and (2) Correctness by identifying incorrect statements that were inconsistent with guidelines. Websites containing ≥60% of checklist items had a "passing" completeness score. Incorrect statements were tallied and qualitatively categorized. Readability was evaluated using the Fry and SMOG formulae, which calculate reading grade levels. Quality was evaluated using validated instruments that appraise health information quality: QUEST (scored 0-28), which focuses on online information, and DISCERN (scored 16-80), which focuses on treatment choices. RESULTS Thirty-nine websites were analyzed. Mean completeness score was 30% (range 0%-69%); only 2 (5%) websites had a passing score. Twelve (31%) websites had ≥1 incorrect statement, such as listing homeopathy or hormone therapy as mRCC treatment options, or including outdated statements. Mean readability levels were 11th and 12th grades for the Fry and SMOG methods, respectively. No website had a reading level lower than 9th grade. Mean QUEST score was 19 (range 9-28); authorship, complementarity, and currency items had the lowest scores. Mean DISCERN score was 56 (range 42-76), with 7 (18%) websites rated "excellent", 22 (56%) rated "good", and 10 (26%) rated fair. CONCLUSIONS Many websites about mRCC treatment have incomplete, inaccurate, and unreadable information. Quality is highly variable. Efforts to improve accuracy, readability, and quality are needed to ensure that patients with mRCC can make well-informed treatment decisions and avoid harm from misinformation.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Nonna Shakhnazaryan
- Helen Diller Family Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of California, San Francisco, CA
| | - Liam Gima-Lange
- Helen Diller Family Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of California, San Francisco, CA
| | - Arpita Desai
- Helen Diller Family Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of California, San Francisco, CA; Department of Medicine, Division of Hematology/Oncology, University of California, San Francisco, CA
| | - Kelly Fitzgerald
- Helen Diller Family Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of California, San Francisco, CA; Department of Medicine, Division of Hematology/Oncology, University of California, San Francisco, CA
| | - Daniel H Kwon
- Helen Diller Family Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of California, San Francisco, CA; Department of Medicine, Division of Hematology/Oncology, University of California, San Francisco, CA.
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Beecroft N, Gauntner TD, Upadhyay R, Wang SJ, Yang Y, Singer EA, Dason S. Active Surveillance in Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma. J Kidney Cancer VHL 2024; 11:27-38. [PMID: 38863736 PMCID: PMC11164654 DOI: 10.15586/jkcvhl.v11i2.309] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/09/2023] [Accepted: 05/24/2024] [Indexed: 06/13/2024] Open
Abstract
Metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) is a heterogenous disease with a variable clinical course. While therapies for treatment of this condition have progressed, they are not without toxicity. In some patients, active surveillance (AS) of this disease is increasingly considered to delay its toxicity. This article seeks to review the literature and discuss management of metastatic renal cell carcinoma, specifically regarding upfront AS, the role of radiation therapy in delaying systemic therapy, and surveillance after initial treatment with systemic therapy. Median time on AS prior to initiation of systemic therapy ranged from 14 to 60 months across studies. AS is appropriate to offer in favorable or intermediate risk, asymptomatic, and systemic treatment naïve patients with mRCC.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Nicholas Beecroft
- Division of Urologic Oncology, The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center, Columbus, OH
| | - Timothy D. Gauntner
- Division of Medical Oncology, The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center, Columbus, OH
| | - Rituraj Upadhyay
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center, Columbus, OH
| | - Shang-Jui Wang
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center, Columbus, OH
| | - Yuanquan Yang
- Division of Medical Oncology, The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center, Columbus, OH
| | - Eric A Singer
- Division of Urologic Oncology, The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center, Columbus, OH
| | - Shawn Dason
- Division of Urologic Oncology, The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center, Columbus, OH
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Yildirim H, Bins AD, van den Hurk C, van Moorselaar RJA, van Oijen MGH, Bex A, Zondervan PJ, Aben KKH. The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on renal cancer care. World J Urol 2024; 42:231. [PMID: 38613582 PMCID: PMC11016011 DOI: 10.1007/s00345-024-04925-2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/27/2023] [Accepted: 03/06/2024] [Indexed: 04/15/2024] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE To evaluate the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on renal cell carcinoma (RCC) care in the Netherlands. METHODS Newly diagnosed RCCs between 2018 and 2021 were selected from the Netherlands Cancer Registry; 2020-2021 was defined as COVID period and 2018-2019 as reference period. Numbers of RCCs were evaluated using 3-week-moving averages, overall and by disease stage and age. Changes in treatment were evaluated with logistic regression analyses. To evaluate possible delays in care, time to start of treatment was assessed. The cumulative number of metastatic RCC (mRCC) over time was assessed to evaluate stage shift. RESULTS During the 1st COVID wave (weeks 9-22, 2020), the number of new RCC diagnoses decreased with 15%. Numbers restored partially in 2020, but remained 10% lower compared to 2018/2019. The decline was mostly due to a drop in T1a/T1b RCCs and in age > 70 years. 2021 showed similar numbers of new RCC diagnoses compared to 2018/2019 without an increase due to previously missed RCCs. Treatment-related changes during the 1st COVID wave were limited and temporarily; less surgery in T1a RCCs in favor of more active surveillance, and in mRCC targeted therapy was preferred over immunotherapy. Time to start of firstline treatment was not prolonged during the 1st COVID wave. No increase in mRCC was found until the end of 2021. CONCLUSIONS The COVID-19 pandemic resulted in fewer RCC diagnoses, especially T1a/T1b tumors. Treatment-related changes appeared to be limited, temporarily and in accordance with the adapted guidelines. The diagnostic delay could lead to more advanced RCCs in later years but there are no indications for this yet.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Hilin Yildirim
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, 4F, De Boelelaan 1117, 1081 HV, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
- Department of Research and Development, Netherlands Comprehensive Cancer Organisation, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
| | - Adriaan D Bins
- Department of Medical Oncology, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Corina van den Hurk
- Department of Research and Development, Netherlands Comprehensive Cancer Organisation, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | | | - Martijn G H van Oijen
- Department of Medical Oncology, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Axel Bex
- Department of Urology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Hospital, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- The Royal Free London NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
- Division of Surgery and Interventional Science, University College London, London, UK
| | - Patricia J Zondervan
- Department of Urology, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Katja K H Aben
- Department of Research and Development, Netherlands Comprehensive Cancer Organisation, Utrecht, The Netherlands
- Department for Health Evidence, Radboud University Medical Centre, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Soares A, Monteiro FSM, da Trindade KM, Silva AGE, Cardoso APG, Sasse AD, Fay AP, Carneiro APCD, Alencar Junior AM, de Andrade Mota AC, Santucci B, da Motta Girardi D, Herchenhorn D, Araújo DV, Jardim DL, Bastos DA, Rosa DR, Schutz FA, Kater FR, da Silva Marinho F, Maluf FC, de Oliveira FNG, Vidigal F, Morbeck IAP, Rinck Júnior JA, Costa LAGA, Maia MCDF, Zereu M, Freitas MRP, Dias MSF, Tariki MS, Muniz P, Beato PMM, Lages PSM, Velho PI, de Carvalho RS, Mariano RC, de Araújo Cavallero SR, Oliveira TM, Souza VC, Smaletz O, de Cássio Zequi S. Advanced renal cell carcinoma management: the Latin American Cooperative Oncology Group (LACOG) and the Latin American Renal Cancer Group (LARCG) consensus update. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol 2024; 150:183. [PMID: 38594593 PMCID: PMC11003910 DOI: 10.1007/s00432-024-05663-z] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/27/2023] [Accepted: 02/22/2024] [Indexed: 04/11/2024]
Abstract
PURPOSE Renal cell carcinoma is an aggressive disease with a high mortality rate. Management has drastically changed with the new era of immunotherapy, and novel strategies are being developed; however, identifying systemic treatments is still challenging. This paper presents an update of the expert panel consensus from the Latin American Cooperative Oncology Group and the Latin American Renal Cancer Group on advanced renal cell carcinoma management in Brazil. METHODS A panel of 34 oncologists and experts in renal cell carcinoma discussed and voted on the best options for managing advanced disease in Brazil, including systemic treatment of early and metastatic renal cell carcinoma as well as nonclear cell tumours. The results were compared with the literature and graded according to the level of evidence. RESULTS Adjuvant treatments benefit patients with a high risk of recurrence after surgery, and the agents used are pembrolizumab and sunitinib, with a preference for pembrolizumab. Neoadjuvant treatment is exceptional, even in initially unresectable cases. First-line treatment is mainly based on tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) and immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs); the choice of treatment is based on the International Metastatic Database Consortium (IMCD) risk score. Patients at favourable risk receive ICIs in combination with TKIs. Patients classified as intermediate or poor risk receive ICIs, without preference for ICI + ICIs or ICI + TKIs. Data on nonclear cell renal cancer treatment are limited. Active surveillance has a place in treating favourable-risk patients. Either denosumab or zoledronic acid can be used for treating metastatic bone disease. CONCLUSION Immunotherapy and targeted therapy are the standards of care for advanced disease. The utilization and sequencing of these therapeutic agents hinge upon individual risk scores and responses to previous treatments. This consensus reflects a commitment to informed decision-making, drawn from professional expertise and evidence in the medical literature.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Andrey Soares
- Latin American Cooperative Oncology Group, Genitourinary Group (LACOG-GU), Av. Brigadeiro Faria Lima, Vila Olímpia, São Paulo, SP, 4300, Brazil.
- Hospital Israelita Albert Einstein, São Paulo, SP, Brazil.
- Centro Paulista de Oncologia/Oncoclínicas, São Paulo, SP, Brazil.
| | - Fernando Sabino Marques Monteiro
- Latin American Cooperative Oncology Group, Genitourinary Group (LACOG-GU), Av. Brigadeiro Faria Lima, Vila Olímpia, São Paulo, SP, 4300, Brazil
- Hospital Sírio-Libanês, Brasília, DF, Brazil
| | - Karine Martins da Trindade
- Latin American Cooperative Oncology Group, Genitourinary Group (LACOG-GU), Av. Brigadeiro Faria Lima, Vila Olímpia, São Paulo, SP, 4300, Brazil
- Oncologia D'Or, Fortaleza, CE, Brazil
| | - Adriano Gonçalves E Silva
- Latin American Cooperative Oncology Group, Genitourinary Group (LACOG-GU), Av. Brigadeiro Faria Lima, Vila Olímpia, São Paulo, SP, 4300, Brazil
- Instituto do Câncer e Transplante de Curitiba/PR (ICTr Curitiba), Curitiba, PR, Brazil
| | - Ana Paula Garcia Cardoso
- Latin American Cooperative Oncology Group, Genitourinary Group (LACOG-GU), Av. Brigadeiro Faria Lima, Vila Olímpia, São Paulo, SP, 4300, Brazil
- Hospital Israelita Albert Einstein, São Paulo, SP, Brazil
| | - André Deeke Sasse
- Latin American Cooperative Oncology Group, Genitourinary Group (LACOG-GU), Av. Brigadeiro Faria Lima, Vila Olímpia, São Paulo, SP, 4300, Brazil
- Grupo SONHE de Campinas, Campinas, SP, Brazil
| | - André P Fay
- Latin American Cooperative Oncology Group, Genitourinary Group (LACOG-GU), Av. Brigadeiro Faria Lima, Vila Olímpia, São Paulo, SP, 4300, Brazil
- Escola de Medicina da Pontifícia, Universidade Católica do Rio Grande do Sul (PUCRS), Porto Alegre, RS, Brazil
| | - André Paternò Castello Dias Carneiro
- Latin American Cooperative Oncology Group, Genitourinary Group (LACOG-GU), Av. Brigadeiro Faria Lima, Vila Olímpia, São Paulo, SP, 4300, Brazil
- Hospital Israelita Albert Einstein, São Paulo, SP, Brazil
- Hospital Municipal Vila Santa Catarina, São Paulo, SP, Brazil
| | - Antonio Machado Alencar Junior
- Latin American Cooperative Oncology Group, Genitourinary Group (LACOG-GU), Av. Brigadeiro Faria Lima, Vila Olímpia, São Paulo, SP, 4300, Brazil
- Hospital São Domingos, São Luís, MA, Brazil
- Dasa Oncologia, Brasília, DF, Brazil
- Hospital Universitário da Universidade Federal do Maranhão (UFMA), São Luís, MA, Brazil
| | - Augusto César de Andrade Mota
- Latin American Cooperative Oncology Group, Genitourinary Group (LACOG-GU), Av. Brigadeiro Faria Lima, Vila Olímpia, São Paulo, SP, 4300, Brazil
- Clínica AMO-DASA, Feira de Santana, BA, Brazil
| | - Bruno Santucci
- Latin American Cooperative Oncology Group, Genitourinary Group (LACOG-GU), Av. Brigadeiro Faria Lima, Vila Olímpia, São Paulo, SP, 4300, Brazil
- Instituto Paulista de Cancerologia, São Paulo, SP, Brazil
| | - Daniel da Motta Girardi
- Latin American Cooperative Oncology Group, Genitourinary Group (LACOG-GU), Av. Brigadeiro Faria Lima, Vila Olímpia, São Paulo, SP, 4300, Brazil
- Hospital Sírio-Libanês, Brasília, DF, Brazil
| | - Daniel Herchenhorn
- Latin American Cooperative Oncology Group, Genitourinary Group (LACOG-GU), Av. Brigadeiro Faria Lima, Vila Olímpia, São Paulo, SP, 4300, Brazil
- Oncologia D'Or, Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil
| | - Daniel Vilarim Araújo
- Latin American Cooperative Oncology Group, Genitourinary Group (LACOG-GU), Av. Brigadeiro Faria Lima, Vila Olímpia, São Paulo, SP, 4300, Brazil
- Hospital de Base de São José do Rio Preto/SP, São José do Rio Preto, São Paulo, SP, Brazil
| | - Denis Leonardo Jardim
- Latin American Cooperative Oncology Group, Genitourinary Group (LACOG-GU), Av. Brigadeiro Faria Lima, Vila Olímpia, São Paulo, SP, 4300, Brazil
- Grupo Oncoclínicas, São Paulo, São Paulo, SP, Brazil
| | - Diogo Assed Bastos
- Latin American Cooperative Oncology Group, Genitourinary Group (LACOG-GU), Av. Brigadeiro Faria Lima, Vila Olímpia, São Paulo, SP, 4300, Brazil
- Hospital Sirio-Libanês de São Paulo, São Paulo, SP, Brazil
| | - Diogo Rodrigues Rosa
- Latin American Cooperative Oncology Group, Genitourinary Group (LACOG-GU), Av. Brigadeiro Faria Lima, Vila Olímpia, São Paulo, SP, 4300, Brazil
- Grupo Oncoclínicas, Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil
| | - Fabio A Schutz
- Latin American Cooperative Oncology Group, Genitourinary Group (LACOG-GU), Av. Brigadeiro Faria Lima, Vila Olímpia, São Paulo, SP, 4300, Brazil
- Beneficência Portuguesa de São Paulo, São Paulo, SP, Brazil
| | - Fábio Roberto Kater
- Latin American Cooperative Oncology Group, Genitourinary Group (LACOG-GU), Av. Brigadeiro Faria Lima, Vila Olímpia, São Paulo, SP, 4300, Brazil
- Beneficência Portuguesa de São Paulo, São Paulo, SP, Brazil
| | - Felipe da Silva Marinho
- Latin American Cooperative Oncology Group, Genitourinary Group (LACOG-GU), Av. Brigadeiro Faria Lima, Vila Olímpia, São Paulo, SP, 4300, Brazil
- Grupo Oncoclínicas, Recife, PE, Brazil
| | - Fernando Cotait Maluf
- Latin American Cooperative Oncology Group, Genitourinary Group (LACOG-GU), Av. Brigadeiro Faria Lima, Vila Olímpia, São Paulo, SP, 4300, Brazil
- Hospital Israelita Albert Einstein, São Paulo, SP, Brazil
- Beneficência Portuguesa de São Paulo, São Paulo, SP, Brazil
| | - Fernando Nunes Galvão de Oliveira
- Latin American Cooperative Oncology Group, Genitourinary Group (LACOG-GU), Av. Brigadeiro Faria Lima, Vila Olímpia, São Paulo, SP, 4300, Brazil
- Grupo Oncoclínicas, Salvador, BA, Brazil
| | - Fernando Vidigal
- Latin American Cooperative Oncology Group, Genitourinary Group (LACOG-GU), Av. Brigadeiro Faria Lima, Vila Olímpia, São Paulo, SP, 4300, Brazil
- Dasa Oncologia, Brasília, DF, Brazil
| | - Igor Alexandre Protzner Morbeck
- Latin American Cooperative Oncology Group, Genitourinary Group (LACOG-GU), Av. Brigadeiro Faria Lima, Vila Olímpia, São Paulo, SP, 4300, Brazil
- Grupo Oncoclínicas, Brasília, DF, Brazil
| | - Jose Augusto Rinck Júnior
- Latin American Cooperative Oncology Group, Genitourinary Group (LACOG-GU), Av. Brigadeiro Faria Lima, Vila Olímpia, São Paulo, SP, 4300, Brazil
- AC Camargo Cancer Center, São Paulo, SP, Brazil
| | - Leonardo Atem G A Costa
- Latin American Cooperative Oncology Group, Genitourinary Group (LACOG-GU), Av. Brigadeiro Faria Lima, Vila Olímpia, São Paulo, SP, 4300, Brazil
- Oncologia D'Or, Fortaleza, CE, Brazil
| | - Manuel Caitano Dias Ferreira Maia
- Latin American Cooperative Oncology Group, Genitourinary Group (LACOG-GU), Av. Brigadeiro Faria Lima, Vila Olímpia, São Paulo, SP, 4300, Brazil
- Hospital do Câncer Porto Dias, Belém, PA, Brazil
| | - Manuela Zereu
- Latin American Cooperative Oncology Group, Genitourinary Group (LACOG-GU), Av. Brigadeiro Faria Lima, Vila Olímpia, São Paulo, SP, 4300, Brazil
- Santa Casa de Misericórdia de Porto Alegre, Porto Alegre, RS, Brazil
| | - Marcelo Roberto Pereira Freitas
- Latin American Cooperative Oncology Group, Genitourinary Group (LACOG-GU), Av. Brigadeiro Faria Lima, Vila Olímpia, São Paulo, SP, 4300, Brazil
- Centro Especializado de Oncologia de Florianópolis, Florianópolis, SC, Brazil
| | - Mariane Sousa Fontes Dias
- Latin American Cooperative Oncology Group, Genitourinary Group (LACOG-GU), Av. Brigadeiro Faria Lima, Vila Olímpia, São Paulo, SP, 4300, Brazil
- Grupo Oncoclínicas, Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil
| | - Milena Shizue Tariki
- Latin American Cooperative Oncology Group, Genitourinary Group (LACOG-GU), Av. Brigadeiro Faria Lima, Vila Olímpia, São Paulo, SP, 4300, Brazil
- AC Camargo Cancer Center, São Paulo, SP, Brazil
| | - Pamela Muniz
- Latin American Cooperative Oncology Group, Genitourinary Group (LACOG-GU), Av. Brigadeiro Faria Lima, Vila Olímpia, São Paulo, SP, 4300, Brazil
- Grupo Oncoclínicas, São Paulo, São Paulo, SP, Brazil
- Universidade Federal de São Paulo (UNIFESP), São Paulo, SP, Brazil
| | - Patrícia Medeiros Milhomem Beato
- Latin American Cooperative Oncology Group, Genitourinary Group (LACOG-GU), Av. Brigadeiro Faria Lima, Vila Olímpia, São Paulo, SP, 4300, Brazil
- Hospital Amaral Carvalho, Jaú, SP, Brazil
| | - Paulo Sérgio Moraes Lages
- Latin American Cooperative Oncology Group, Genitourinary Group (LACOG-GU), Av. Brigadeiro Faria Lima, Vila Olímpia, São Paulo, SP, 4300, Brazil
- Grupo Oncoclínicas, Brasília, DF, Brazil
| | - Pedro Isaacsson Velho
- Latin American Cooperative Oncology Group, Genitourinary Group (LACOG-GU), Av. Brigadeiro Faria Lima, Vila Olímpia, São Paulo, SP, 4300, Brazil
- Hospital Moinhos de Vento, Porto Alegre, RS, Brazil
- Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Ricardo Saraiva de Carvalho
- Latin American Cooperative Oncology Group, Genitourinary Group (LACOG-GU), Av. Brigadeiro Faria Lima, Vila Olímpia, São Paulo, SP, 4300, Brazil
- Beneficência Portuguesa de São Paulo, São Paulo, SP, Brazil
| | - Rodrigo Coutinho Mariano
- Latin American Cooperative Oncology Group, Genitourinary Group (LACOG-GU), Av. Brigadeiro Faria Lima, Vila Olímpia, São Paulo, SP, 4300, Brazil
- Beneficência Portuguesa de São Paulo, São Paulo, SP, Brazil
| | - Sandro Roberto de Araújo Cavallero
- Latin American Cooperative Oncology Group, Genitourinary Group (LACOG-GU), Av. Brigadeiro Faria Lima, Vila Olímpia, São Paulo, SP, 4300, Brazil
- Hospital Adventista de Belém, Belém, PA, Brazil
| | - Thiago Martins Oliveira
- Latin American Cooperative Oncology Group, Genitourinary Group (LACOG-GU), Av. Brigadeiro Faria Lima, Vila Olímpia, São Paulo, SP, 4300, Brazil
- Hospital São Rafael, Salvador, BA, Brazil
| | - Vinicius Carrera Souza
- Latin American Cooperative Oncology Group, Genitourinary Group (LACOG-GU), Av. Brigadeiro Faria Lima, Vila Olímpia, São Paulo, SP, 4300, Brazil
- Instituto D'Or de Ensino e Pesquisa, Salvador, BA, Brazil
| | - Oren Smaletz
- Latin American Cooperative Oncology Group, Genitourinary Group (LACOG-GU), Av. Brigadeiro Faria Lima, Vila Olímpia, São Paulo, SP, 4300, Brazil
- Hospital Israelita Albert Einstein, São Paulo, SP, Brazil
| | - Stênio de Cássio Zequi
- AC Camargo Cancer Center, São Paulo, SP, Brazil
- National Institute for Science and Technology in Oncogenomics and Therapeutic Innovation, AC Camargo Cancer Center, São Paulo, SP, Brazil
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Nigam A, Li JWY, Fiasconaro M, Lin S, Capanu M, Kleiman DA, Memeh K, Raj N, Reidy-Lagunes DL, Untch BR. Morbidity and Outcomes of Primary Tumor Management in Patients with Widely Metastatic Well-Differentiated Small Bowel Neuroendocrine Tumors. Ann Surg Oncol 2024; 31:2337-2348. [PMID: 38036927 DOI: 10.1245/s10434-023-14637-3] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/16/2022] [Accepted: 11/06/2023] [Indexed: 12/02/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND The benefit of primary tumor resection in distant metastatic small bowel neuroendocrine tumors (SBNETs) is controversial, with treatment-based morbidity not well-defined. We aimed to determine the impact of primary tumor resection on development of disease-specific complications in patients with metastatic well-differentiated SBNETs. PATIENTS AND METHODS A retrospective analysis was performed of patients diagnosed with metastatic well-differentiated jejunal/ileal SBNETs at a single tertiary care cancer center from 1980 to 2016. Outcomes were compared on the basis of treatment selected at diagnosis between patients who underwent initial medical treatment or primary tumor resection. RESULTS Among 180 patients, 71 underwent medical management and 109 primary tumor resection. Median follow-up was 116 months. Median event-free survival did not differ between treatment approaches (log-rank p = 0.2). In patients medically managed first, 16/71 (23%) required surgery due to obstruction, perforation, or bleeding. These same complications led to resection at presentation in 31/109 (28%) surgically treated patients. Development of an obstruction from the primary tumor was not associated with disease progression/recurrence (HR 1.14, 95% CI 0.75-1.75) with all patients recovering postoperatively. Ongoing tumor progression requiring secondary laparotomy was associated with worse mortality (HR 7.51, 95% CI 3.3-16.9; p < 0.001) and occurred in 20/109 (18%) primary tumor resection and 7/16 (44%) initially medically treated patients. CONCLUSIONS Rates of event-free survival among patients with metastatic SBNETs do not differ on the basis of primary tumor management. The development of an obstruction from the primary tumor was not associated with worse outcomes with all patients salvaged. Regardless of initial treatment selected, patients with metastatic SBNET should be closely followed for early signs of primary tumor complications.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Aradhya Nigam
- Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Janet W Y Li
- Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Megan Fiasconaro
- Department of Epidemiology and Statistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Sabrina Lin
- Department of Epidemiology and Statistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Marinela Capanu
- Department of Epidemiology and Statistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - David A Kleiman
- Department of Surgery, Lahey Hospital and Medical Center, Burlington, MA, USA
| | - Kelvin Memeh
- Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Nitya Raj
- Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | | | - Brian R Untch
- Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Bekku K, Kawada T, Sekito T, Yoshinaga K, Maruyama Y, Yamanoi T, Tominaga Y, Sadahira T, Katayama S, Iwata T, Nishimura S, Edamura K, Kobayashi T, Kobayashi Y, Araki M, Niibe Y. The Diagnosis and Treatment Approach for Oligo-Recurrent and Oligo-Progressive Renal Cell Carcinoma. Cancers (Basel) 2023; 15:5873. [PMID: 38136417 PMCID: PMC10741872 DOI: 10.3390/cancers15245873] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/21/2023] [Revised: 12/14/2023] [Accepted: 12/15/2023] [Indexed: 12/24/2023] Open
Abstract
One-third of renal cell carcinomas (RCCs) without metastases develop metastatic disease after extirpative surgery for the primary tumors. The majority of metastatic RCC cases, along with treated primary lesions, involve limited lesions termed "oligo-recurrent" disease. The role of metastasis-directed therapy (MDT), including stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) and metastasectomy, in the treatment of oligo-recurrent RCC has evolved. Although the surgical resection of all lesions alone can have a curative intent, SBRT is a valuable treatment option, especially for patients concurrently receiving systemic therapy. Contemporary immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) combination therapies remain central to the management of metastatic RCC. However, one objective of MDT is to delay the initiation of systemic therapies, thereby sparing patients from potentially unnecessary burdens. Undertaking MDT for cases showing progression under systemic therapies, known as "oligo-progression", can be complex in considering the treatment approach. Its efficacy may be diminished compared to patients with stable disease. SBRT combined with ICI can be a promising treatment for these cases because radiation therapy has been shown to affect the tumor microenvironment and areas beyond the irradiated sites. This may enhance the efficacy of ICIs, although their efficacy has only been demonstrated in clinical trials.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kensuke Bekku
- Department of Urology, Graduate School of Medicine, Dentistry and Pharmaceutical Sciences, Okayama University, Okayama 700-8558, Japan; (T.K.); (T.S.); (K.Y.); (Y.M.); (T.Y.); (Y.T.); (T.S.); (S.K.); (T.I.); (S.N.); (K.E.); (T.K.); (Y.K.); (M.A.)
| | - Tatsushi Kawada
- Department of Urology, Graduate School of Medicine, Dentistry and Pharmaceutical Sciences, Okayama University, Okayama 700-8558, Japan; (T.K.); (T.S.); (K.Y.); (Y.M.); (T.Y.); (Y.T.); (T.S.); (S.K.); (T.I.); (S.N.); (K.E.); (T.K.); (Y.K.); (M.A.)
| | - Takanori Sekito
- Department of Urology, Graduate School of Medicine, Dentistry and Pharmaceutical Sciences, Okayama University, Okayama 700-8558, Japan; (T.K.); (T.S.); (K.Y.); (Y.M.); (T.Y.); (Y.T.); (T.S.); (S.K.); (T.I.); (S.N.); (K.E.); (T.K.); (Y.K.); (M.A.)
| | - Kasumi Yoshinaga
- Department of Urology, Graduate School of Medicine, Dentistry and Pharmaceutical Sciences, Okayama University, Okayama 700-8558, Japan; (T.K.); (T.S.); (K.Y.); (Y.M.); (T.Y.); (Y.T.); (T.S.); (S.K.); (T.I.); (S.N.); (K.E.); (T.K.); (Y.K.); (M.A.)
| | - Yuki Maruyama
- Department of Urology, Graduate School of Medicine, Dentistry and Pharmaceutical Sciences, Okayama University, Okayama 700-8558, Japan; (T.K.); (T.S.); (K.Y.); (Y.M.); (T.Y.); (Y.T.); (T.S.); (S.K.); (T.I.); (S.N.); (K.E.); (T.K.); (Y.K.); (M.A.)
| | - Tomoaki Yamanoi
- Department of Urology, Graduate School of Medicine, Dentistry and Pharmaceutical Sciences, Okayama University, Okayama 700-8558, Japan; (T.K.); (T.S.); (K.Y.); (Y.M.); (T.Y.); (Y.T.); (T.S.); (S.K.); (T.I.); (S.N.); (K.E.); (T.K.); (Y.K.); (M.A.)
| | - Yusuke Tominaga
- Department of Urology, Graduate School of Medicine, Dentistry and Pharmaceutical Sciences, Okayama University, Okayama 700-8558, Japan; (T.K.); (T.S.); (K.Y.); (Y.M.); (T.Y.); (Y.T.); (T.S.); (S.K.); (T.I.); (S.N.); (K.E.); (T.K.); (Y.K.); (M.A.)
| | - Takuya Sadahira
- Department of Urology, Graduate School of Medicine, Dentistry and Pharmaceutical Sciences, Okayama University, Okayama 700-8558, Japan; (T.K.); (T.S.); (K.Y.); (Y.M.); (T.Y.); (Y.T.); (T.S.); (S.K.); (T.I.); (S.N.); (K.E.); (T.K.); (Y.K.); (M.A.)
| | - Satoshi Katayama
- Department of Urology, Graduate School of Medicine, Dentistry and Pharmaceutical Sciences, Okayama University, Okayama 700-8558, Japan; (T.K.); (T.S.); (K.Y.); (Y.M.); (T.Y.); (Y.T.); (T.S.); (S.K.); (T.I.); (S.N.); (K.E.); (T.K.); (Y.K.); (M.A.)
| | - Takehiro Iwata
- Department of Urology, Graduate School of Medicine, Dentistry and Pharmaceutical Sciences, Okayama University, Okayama 700-8558, Japan; (T.K.); (T.S.); (K.Y.); (Y.M.); (T.Y.); (Y.T.); (T.S.); (S.K.); (T.I.); (S.N.); (K.E.); (T.K.); (Y.K.); (M.A.)
| | - Shingo Nishimura
- Department of Urology, Graduate School of Medicine, Dentistry and Pharmaceutical Sciences, Okayama University, Okayama 700-8558, Japan; (T.K.); (T.S.); (K.Y.); (Y.M.); (T.Y.); (Y.T.); (T.S.); (S.K.); (T.I.); (S.N.); (K.E.); (T.K.); (Y.K.); (M.A.)
| | - Kohei Edamura
- Department of Urology, Graduate School of Medicine, Dentistry and Pharmaceutical Sciences, Okayama University, Okayama 700-8558, Japan; (T.K.); (T.S.); (K.Y.); (Y.M.); (T.Y.); (Y.T.); (T.S.); (S.K.); (T.I.); (S.N.); (K.E.); (T.K.); (Y.K.); (M.A.)
| | - Tomoko Kobayashi
- Department of Urology, Graduate School of Medicine, Dentistry and Pharmaceutical Sciences, Okayama University, Okayama 700-8558, Japan; (T.K.); (T.S.); (K.Y.); (Y.M.); (T.Y.); (Y.T.); (T.S.); (S.K.); (T.I.); (S.N.); (K.E.); (T.K.); (Y.K.); (M.A.)
| | - Yasuyuki Kobayashi
- Department of Urology, Graduate School of Medicine, Dentistry and Pharmaceutical Sciences, Okayama University, Okayama 700-8558, Japan; (T.K.); (T.S.); (K.Y.); (Y.M.); (T.Y.); (Y.T.); (T.S.); (S.K.); (T.I.); (S.N.); (K.E.); (T.K.); (Y.K.); (M.A.)
| | - Motoo Araki
- Department of Urology, Graduate School of Medicine, Dentistry and Pharmaceutical Sciences, Okayama University, Okayama 700-8558, Japan; (T.K.); (T.S.); (K.Y.); (Y.M.); (T.Y.); (Y.T.); (T.S.); (S.K.); (T.I.); (S.N.); (K.E.); (T.K.); (Y.K.); (M.A.)
| | - Yuzuru Niibe
- Department of Public Health, School of Medicine, Kurume University, Fukuoka 830-0011, Japan;
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Motzer RJ, Rane PP, Saretsky TL, Pawar D, Martin Nguyen A, Sundaram M, Burgents J, Pandey R, Rudell K. Patient-reported Outcome Measurement and Reporting for Patients with Advanced Renal Cell Carcinoma: A Systematic Literature Review. Eur Urol 2023; 84:406-417. [PMID: 37550153 DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2023.07.006] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/31/2023] [Revised: 05/31/2023] [Accepted: 07/17/2023] [Indexed: 08/09/2023]
Abstract
CONTEXT In the oncology setting, patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) provide important data that help to ensure patient-relevant endpoints are captured and reported. Use of this information for treatment decision-making by clinicians and patients in real-world settings is facilitated by consistent and transparent reporting of trial methods. OBJECTIVE To identify and compare PROMs used in advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC) trials in terms of the rationale for the choice of measure, endpoint hierarchy (primary, secondary, exploratory), assessment time points, statistical methods, and statistical metrics for interpretation. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION A systematic literature review via searches of four online databases (2016-2021) and recent conference abstracts (2019-2021) identified 2616 articles, of which 33 were included in the review according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS Among the 33 clinical studies included, 19 different PROMs were identified: three kidney cancer-specific scales, two cancer-specific scales, two generic scales, and 12 symptom-specific scales. The endpoint hierarchy for patient reported outcome (PRO) assessment was reported in 42% of the studies; one study included PROs as a primary endpoint. Reporting of time points, minimal important differences, and statistical analyses was highly heterogeneous. CONCLUSIONS A diverse range of PROMs have been included in clinical studies for patients with advanced/metastatic RCC. Prespecified analyses for PRO assessments were generally not stated, while analytical methods and reporting varied. An improvement in alignment across studies would better inform regulatory, market-access, reimbursement, and clinical decision-making to improve patient care. PATIENT SUMMARY We reviewed how the impact of cancer therapies on health outcomes from the patient's point of view is being measured in clinical trials for kidney cancer. The techniques and reporting varied across trials. Standardisation of how these data are captured and reported may improve care and decision-making for patients with kidney cancer.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Robert J Motzer
- Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | - Rishabh Pandey
- Health Economics and Outcomes Research, Parexel, Bangalore, India
| | - Katja Rudell
- COA Science, Epidemiology and RW Sciences, Parexel, London, UK
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Pan E, Urman D, Malvar C, McKay RR. Managing First-Line Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma: Favorable-Risk Disease. Hematol Oncol Clin North Am 2023; 37:943-949. [PMID: 37258352 DOI: 10.1016/j.hoc.2023.04.017] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 06/02/2023]
Abstract
Defining metastatic renal-cell carcinoma as a favorable risk depends on clinical risk-stratification tools such as the International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium or the Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center scores. The favorable-risk disease tends to have better prognosis and survival compared with disease stratified as either intermediate or poor risk and can be attributed in part to an indolent tumor biology. Several phase 3 clinical trials have demonstrated an improvement in progression-free survival and objective response rate, but not overall survival benefit with combinations of immunotherapy and vascular endothelial growth factor tyrosine kinase inhibitors compared with sunitinib in favorable-risk disease.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Elizabeth Pan
- University of California San Diego, Moores Cancer Center, 3855 Health Sciences Drive, #0987, La Jolla, CA 92093-0987, USA
| | - Danielle Urman
- University of California San Diego, Moores Cancer Center, 3855 Health Sciences Drive, #0987, La Jolla, CA 92093-0987, USA
| | - Carmel Malvar
- University of California San Diego, Moores Cancer Center, 3855 Health Sciences Drive, #0987, La Jolla, CA 92093-0987, USA
| | - Rana R McKay
- University of California San Diego, Moores Cancer Center, 3855 Health Sciences Drive, #0987, La Jolla, CA 92093-0987, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Gasparro D, Scarlattei M, Silini EM, Migliari S, Baldari G, Cervati V, Graziani T, Campanini N, Maestroni U, Ruffini L. High Prognostic Value of 68Ga-PSMA PET/CT in Renal Cell Carcinoma and Association with PSMA Expression Assessed by Immunohistochemistry. Diagnostics (Basel) 2023; 13:3082. [PMID: 37835825 PMCID: PMC10572927 DOI: 10.3390/diagnostics13193082] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/02/2023] [Revised: 09/05/2023] [Accepted: 09/23/2023] [Indexed: 10/15/2023] Open
Abstract
In oligo-metastatic renal cell carcinoma (RCC), neither computed tomography (CT) nor bone scan is sensitive enough to detect small tumor deposits hampering early treatment and potential cure. Prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) is a transmembrane glycoprotein expressed in the neo-vasculature of numerous malignant neoplasms, including RCC, that can be targeted by positron emission tomography (PET) using PSMA-targeting radioligands. Our aim was to investigate whether PSMA-expression patterns of renal cancer in the primary tumor or metastatic lesions on immunohistochemistry (IHC) are associated with PET/CT findings using [68Ga]-PSMA-HBED-CC (PSMA-PET/CT). We then analyzed the predictive and prognostic role of the PSMA-PET/CT signal. In this retrospective single-center study we included patients with renal cancer submitted to PSMA-PET/CT for staging or restaging, with tumor specimens available for PSMA-IHC. Clinical information (age, tumor type, and grade) and IHC results from the primary tumor or metastases were collected. The intensity of PSMA expression at IHC was scored into four categories: 0: none; 1: weak; 2: moderate; 3: strong. PSMA expression was also graded according to the proportion of vessels involved (PSMA%) into four categories: 0: none; 1: 1-25%; 2: 25-50%; 3: >50%. The intensity of PSMA expression and PSMA% were combined in a three-grade score: 0-2 absent or mildly positive, 3-4 moderately positive, and 5-6 strongly positive. PSMA scores were used for correlation with PSMA-PET/CT results. Results: IHC and PET scans were available for the analysis in 26 patients (22 ccRCC, 2 papillary RCC, 1 chromophobe, 1 "not otherwise specified" RCC). PSMA-PET/CT was positive in 17 (65%) and negative in 9 patients (35%). The mean and median SUVmax in the target lesion were 34.1 and 24.9, respectively. Reporter agreement was very high for both distant metastasis location and local recurrence (kappa 1, 100%). PSMA-PET detected more lesions than conventional imaging and revealed unknown metastases in 4 patients. Bone involvement, extension, and lesion number were greater than in the CT scan (median lesion number on PET/CT 3.5). The IHC PSMA score was concordant in primary tumors and metastases. All positive PSMA-PET/CT results (15/22 ccRCC, 1 papillary cancer type II, and 1 chromofobe type) were revealed in tumors with strong or moderate PSMA combined scores (3-4 and 5-6). In ccRCC tissue samples, PSMA expression was strong to moderate in 20/22 cases. The SUVmax values correlated to the intensity of PSMA expression which were assessed using IHC (p = 0.01), especially in the ccRCC subgroup (p = 0.009). Median survival was significantly higher in patients with negative PSMA-PET/CT (48 months) compared to patients with a positive scan (24 months, p= 0.001). SUVmax ≥ 7.4 provides discrimination of patients with a poor prognosis. Results of PSMA-PET/CT changed treatment planning. Conclusions: in renal cancer, positive PSMA-PET/CT is strongly correlated to the intensity of PSMA expression on immunohistochemistry in both ccRCC and chromophobe cancer. PSMA-PET/CT signal predicts a poor prognosis confirming its potential as an aggressiveness biomarker and providing paramount additional information influencing patient management.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Donatello Gasparro
- Oncology Division, Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria di Parma, 43126 Parma, Italy;
| | - Maura Scarlattei
- Nuclear Medicine Division, Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria di Parma, 43126 Parma, Italy; (M.S.); (G.B.); (V.C.); (T.G.); (L.R.)
| | - Enrico Maria Silini
- Pathology Division, Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria di Parma, 43126 Parma, Italy; (E.M.S.); (N.C.)
- Department of Medicine and Surgery, University of Parma, 43121 Parma, Italy
| | - Silvia Migliari
- Nuclear Medicine Division, Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria di Parma, 43126 Parma, Italy; (M.S.); (G.B.); (V.C.); (T.G.); (L.R.)
| | - Giorgio Baldari
- Nuclear Medicine Division, Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria di Parma, 43126 Parma, Italy; (M.S.); (G.B.); (V.C.); (T.G.); (L.R.)
| | - Veronica Cervati
- Nuclear Medicine Division, Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria di Parma, 43126 Parma, Italy; (M.S.); (G.B.); (V.C.); (T.G.); (L.R.)
| | - Tiziano Graziani
- Nuclear Medicine Division, Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria di Parma, 43126 Parma, Italy; (M.S.); (G.B.); (V.C.); (T.G.); (L.R.)
| | - Nicoletta Campanini
- Pathology Division, Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria di Parma, 43126 Parma, Italy; (E.M.S.); (N.C.)
- Department of Medicine and Surgery, University of Parma, 43121 Parma, Italy
| | - Umberto Maestroni
- Urology Division, Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria di Parma, 43126 Parma, Italy;
| | - Livia Ruffini
- Nuclear Medicine Division, Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria di Parma, 43126 Parma, Italy; (M.S.); (G.B.); (V.C.); (T.G.); (L.R.)
| |
Collapse
|
12
|
Sahoo TP, Desai C, Agarwal S, Rauthan A, Dhabhar B, Biswas G, Batra S, Saha R, Philip A, Agarwal V, Dattatreya PS, Mohapatra PN, Deshmukh C, Bhagat S, Patil S, Barkate H. ExPert ConsEnsus on the management of Advanced clear-cell RenaL celL carcinoma: INDIAn Perspective (PEARL-INDIA). BMC Cancer 2023; 23:737. [PMID: 37558975 PMCID: PMC10413514 DOI: 10.1186/s12885-023-11237-y] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/03/2023] [Accepted: 07/29/2023] [Indexed: 08/11/2023] Open
Abstract
In advanced Renal Cell Carcinoma (aRCC), systemic therapy is the mainstay of treatment, with no or little role for surgery in these patients. Tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) and immune-oncological (IOs) therapies, either alone or in combination, are recommended in these patients depending on patient and tumour factors. The sequencing of therapies is critical in RCC because the choice of subsequent line therapy is heavily dependent on the response and duration of the previous treatment. There are additional barriers to RCC treatment in India. Immunotherapy is the cornerstone of treatment in ccRCC, but it is prohibitively expensive and not always reimbursed, effectively putting it out of reach for the vast majority of eligible patients in India. Furthermore, in advanced RCC (particularly the clear cell variety), Indian oncologists consider the disease burden of the patients, which is particularly dependent on the quantum of the disease load, clinical symptoms, and performance status of the patient, before deciding on treatment. There are no India-specific guidelines for clear cell RCC (ccRCC) treatment or the positioning and sequencing of molecules in the management of advanced ccRCC that take these country-specific issues into account. The current consensus article provides expert recommendations and treatment algorithms based on existing clinical evidence, which will be useful to specialists managing advanced ccRCC.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Chirag Desai
- Medical Oncology & Director Hemato-Oncology Clinic Vedanta, Ahmedabad, Ahmedabad, India
| | - Shyam Agarwal
- Medical Oncology, Sir Gangaram Hospital, Delhi, India
| | - Amit Rauthan
- Medical Oncology, Manipal Hospital, Bangalore, India
| | - Boman Dhabhar
- Medical & Hemat-Oncology, BND Onco Center, Mumbai, India
| | | | - Sandeep Batra
- Medical Oncology, Max Superspeciality Hospital, Saket, New Delhi, India
| | - Rajat Saha
- Medical Oncology, Max Superspeciality Hospital, Saket, New Delhi, India
| | - Arun Philip
- Medical Oncology Amrita Institute of Medical Sciences, Cochin, India
| | - Vijay Agarwal
- Medical Oncology Aster, CMI Hospital, Bangalore, India
| | | | | | - Chetan Deshmukh
- Medical Oncology, Deenanath Mangeshkar Hospital, Pune, India
| | - Sagar Bhagat
- DGM, Global Medical Affairs, Glenmark Pharmaceutical Limited, B D Sawant Marg, Chakala, Andheri East, Maharashtra, 400099, Mumbai, India.
| | - Saiprasad Patil
- GM, Global Medical Affairs, Glenmark Pharmaceutical Limited, Mumbai, India
| | - Hanmant Barkate
- Medical Affairs, Glenmark Pharmaceutical Limited, Mumbai, India
| |
Collapse
|
13
|
Reese SW, Khaleel S, Silagy A, Xie A, Eismann L, Vazquez-Rivera K, Oparanozie A, Patil S, Coleman J, Motzer R, Kotecha RR, Russo P, Voss MH, Hakimi AA. Prognostic Factors for Survival in Patients Undergoing Surveillance After Cytoreductive Nephrectomy. J Urol 2023; 210:273-279. [PMID: 37167628 PMCID: PMC10726735 DOI: 10.1097/ju.0000000000003549] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/26/2022] [Accepted: 05/04/2023] [Indexed: 05/13/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE The clinical course of patients being placed on surveillance in a cohort of systemic therapy-naïve patients who undergo cytoreductive nephrectomy is not well documented. Thus, we evaluated the clinical course of patients placed on surveillance following cytoreductive nephrectomy and identified predictors of survival. MATERIALS AND METHODS In this large single-institution study, we retrospectively analyzed metastatic renal cell carcinoma patients who underwent cytoreductive nephrectomy followed by surveillance. Predictors of survival were evaluated using the Kaplan-Meier method with a log-rank test. Patients were risk stratified based on IMDC (International mRCC Database Consortium) and number of metastatic sites (Rini score), with IMDC score ≤1 and ≤2 metastatic organ sites considered favorable risk. Primary end point was systemic therapy-free survival. Secondary end points included intervention-free survival, cancer-specific survival, and overall survival. RESULTS Median systemic therapy-free survival was 23.6 months (95% CI: 15.1-40.6), intervention-free survival was 11.8 months (95% CI: 8.0-18.4), cancer-specific survival was 54.2 months (95% CI: 46.2-71.4), and overall survival 52.4 months (95% CI: 40.3-66.8). Favorable-risk patients compared to unfavorable-risk patients had longer systemic therapy-free survival (50.6 vs 11.1 months, P < .01), survival (25.2 vs 7.3, P < .01), and cancer-specific survival (71.4 vs 46.2 months, P = .02). CONCLUSIONS Using risk stratification based on IMDC and number of metastatic sites, surveillance in favorable-risk patients can be utilized for a period without the initiation of systemic therapy. This approach can delay patients' exposure to the side effects of systemic therapy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Stephen W Reese
- Urology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - Sari Khaleel
- Urology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - Andrew Silagy
- Urology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - Amy Xie
- Computational Oncology, Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - Lennert Eismann
- Urology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
- Department of Quantitative Health Sciences, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio
| | - Katiana Vazquez-Rivera
- Urology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - Arnold Oparanozie
- Urology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - Sujata Patil
- Department of Urology, Ludwig-Maximilians University, Munich, Germany
| | - Jonathan Coleman
- Urology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - Robert Motzer
- Genitourinary Oncology Service, Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - Ritesh R Kotecha
- Genitourinary Oncology Service, Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - Paul Russo
- Urology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - Martin H Voss
- Genitourinary Oncology Service, Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - A Ari Hakimi
- Urology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| |
Collapse
|
14
|
Green H, Taylor A, Khoo V. Beyond the Knife in Renal Cell Carcinoma: A Systematic Review-To Ablate or Not to Ablate? Cancers (Basel) 2023; 15:3455. [PMID: 37444565 DOI: 10.3390/cancers15133455] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/01/2023] [Revised: 06/26/2023] [Accepted: 06/27/2023] [Indexed: 07/15/2023] Open
Abstract
Intensified systemic therapy in metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) has led to improved patient outcomes. Patients commonly require local control of one or a few metastases. The aim was to evaluate metastasis-directed ablative therapies in extracranial mRCC. Two databases and one registry were searched, using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) approach, for all prospective and matched-pair case-control mRCC studies of radiofrequency ablation (RFA), cryotherapy, microwave ablation (MWA), and stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT). Eighteen studies were identified. Fourteen investigated SBRT in 424 patients. Four thermal ablation studies were identified: two cryotherapy (56 patients) and two RFA studies (90 patients). The median participant number was 30 (range 12-69). The combined median follow-up was 17.3 months (range 8-52). Four SBRT studies reported local control (LC) at 12 months, median 84.4% (range 82.5-93). Seven studies (six SBRT and one cryotherapy) reported an LC rate of median 87% (79-100%). Median overall survival (OS) was reported in eight studies (five SBRT, two cryotherapy, and one RFA) with a median of 22.7 months (range 6.7-not reached). Median progression-free survival was reported in seven studies (five SBRT, one cryotherapy, and one RFA); the median was 9.3 months (range 3.0-22.7 months). Grade ≥ 3 toxicity ranged from 1.7% to 10%. SBRT has excellent local control outcomes and acceptable toxicity. Only four eligible thermal ablative studies were identified and could not be compared with SBRT. Translationally rich definitive studies are warranted.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Harshani Green
- Royal Marsden Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, London SW3 6JJ, UK
- Institute of Cancer Research, London SW7 3RP, UK
| | - Alexandra Taylor
- Royal Marsden Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, London SW3 6JJ, UK
- Institute of Cancer Research, London SW7 3RP, UK
| | - Vincent Khoo
- Royal Marsden Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, London SW3 6JJ, UK
- Institute of Cancer Research, London SW7 3RP, UK
- Department of Medical Imaging and Radiation Science, Monash University, Clayton, VIC 3800, Australia
- Department of Medicine, University of Melbourne, Parkville, VIC 3010, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
15
|
Dason S, Lacuna K, Hannan R, Singer EA, Runcie K. State of the Art: Multidisciplinary Management of Oligometastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma. Am Soc Clin Oncol Educ Book 2023; 43:e390038. [PMID: 37253211 DOI: 10.1200/edbk_390038] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 06/01/2023]
Abstract
Oligometastatic renal cell carcinoma (OM-RCC) refers to patients who have limited (typically up to 5) metastatic lesions. Although management principles may overlap, OM-RCC is distinguishable from oligoprogressive RCC, which describes progression of disease to a limited number of sites while receiving systemic therapy. Cytoreductive nephrectomy and metastasectomy are common surgical considerations in OM-RCC, and indications are discussed in this review. It is evident that stereotactic ablative radiotherapy is effective in RCC and is being applied increasingly in the oligometastatic setting. Finally, we will review advances in systemic therapy and the role of active surveillance before the initiation of systemic therapy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Shawn Dason
- Division of Urologic Oncology, The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center, Columbus, OH
| | - Kristine Lacuna
- Division of Hematology and Oncology, Columbia University Irving Medical Center, New York, NY
| | - Raquibul Hannan
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX
| | - Eric A. Singer
- Division of Urologic Oncology, The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center, Columbus, OH
| | - Karie Runcie
- Division of Hematology and Oncology, Columbia University Irving Medical Center, New York, NY
| |
Collapse
|
16
|
Stares M, Chauhan V, Moudgil-Joshi J, Kong QG, Malik J, Sundaramurthy A, Elliott T, Mains E, Leung S, Laird A, Symeonides SN. Initial active surveillance for patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma: 10 years' experience at a regional cancer Centre. Cancer Med 2023; 12:5255-5264. [PMID: 36207803 PMCID: PMC10028026 DOI: 10.1002/cam4.5330] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/07/2022] [Revised: 09/10/2022] [Accepted: 09/25/2022] [Indexed: 11/10/2022] Open
Abstract
A subset of patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) follow an indolent disease course and may benefit from initial active surveillance (AS). However, selecting patients suitable for this approach is challenging. To investigate this we sought to define outcomes of patients with mRCC suitable for initial AS. All patients with mRCC clinically selected for initial AS at the Edinburgh Cancer Centre between January 2010 and December 2020 were identified. Key inflammatory biomarkers (haemoglobin, white cell count, neutrophil count, platelets, C-reactive protein [CRP], albumin, corrected calcium) and the International Metastatic RCC Database Consortium (IMDC) risk score were measured. The relationship between these and time to systemic anticancer therapy (tSACT) and overall survival (OS) was analysed. Data were available for 160 patients. Estimated median overall survival was 88.0 (interquartile range [IQR] 34.0-127.0) months. Median tSACT was 31.8 (IQR 12.0-76.3) months. On multivariate analysis, only CRP was predictive of tSACT (HR 2.47 [95% CI:1.59-3.85] p < 0.001) and OS (HR 3.89 [95% CI:2.15-6.83] p < 0.001). Patients with CRP > 10 mg/L were more likely to commence SACT within 1 year than those with CRP≤10 mg/L (41% vs. 18%, Relative Risk 2.16 (95% CI:1.18-3.96) (p = 0.012)). IMDC risk score was not predictive of tSACT or OS. Active surveillance is an appropriate initial management option for selected patients with mRCC. CRP, a biomarker of systemic inflammation, may provide additional objective information to assist clinical decision-making in patients with mRCC being considered for initial AS. Although this is a retrospective observational study, the cohort is well defined and includes all patients managed with initial AS in an inclusive real-world setting.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Mark Stares
- Edinburgh Cancer Centre, Western General Hospital, NHS Lothian, Edinburgh, UK
- Institute of Genetics and Cancer, Cancer Research UK Edinburgh Centre, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK
| | - Vishwani Chauhan
- Institute of Genetics and Cancer, Cancer Research UK Edinburgh Centre, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK
| | - Jigi Moudgil-Joshi
- Institute of Genetics and Cancer, Cancer Research UK Edinburgh Centre, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK
| | - Qiu G Kong
- Institute of Genetics and Cancer, Cancer Research UK Edinburgh Centre, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK
| | - Jahangeer Malik
- Edinburgh Cancer Centre, Western General Hospital, NHS Lothian, Edinburgh, UK
| | | | - Tony Elliott
- Edinburgh Cancer Centre, Western General Hospital, NHS Lothian, Edinburgh, UK
| | - Edward Mains
- Department of Urology, Western General Hospital, NHS Lothian, Edinburgh, UK
| | - Steve Leung
- Department of Urology, Western General Hospital, NHS Lothian, Edinburgh, UK
| | - Alexander Laird
- Department of Urology, Western General Hospital, NHS Lothian, Edinburgh, UK
| | - Stefan N Symeonides
- Edinburgh Cancer Centre, Western General Hospital, NHS Lothian, Edinburgh, UK
- Institute of Genetics and Cancer, Cancer Research UK Edinburgh Centre, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK
| |
Collapse
|
17
|
Bos MK, Verhoeff SR, Oosting SF, Menke-van der Houven van Oordt WC, Boers RG, Boers JB, Gribnau J, Martens JWM, Sleijfer S, van Herpen CML, Wilting SM. Methylated Cell-Free DNA Sequencing (MeD-seq) of LpnPI Digested Fragments to Identify Early Progression in Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Patients on Watchful Waiting. Cancers (Basel) 2023; 15:cancers15051374. [PMID: 36900167 PMCID: PMC10000042 DOI: 10.3390/cancers15051374] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/07/2023] [Revised: 02/09/2023] [Accepted: 02/16/2023] [Indexed: 02/24/2023] Open
Abstract
According to the current guidelines, watchful waiting (WW) is a feasible option for patients with good or intermediate prognosis renal-cell carcinoma (RCC). However, some patients rapidly progress during WW, requiring the initiation of treatment. Here, we explore whether we can identify those patients using circulating cell-free DNA (cfDNA) methylation. We first defined a panel of RCC-specific circulating methylation markers by intersecting differentially methylated regions from a publicly available dataset with known RCC methylation markers from the literature. The resulting RCC-specific methylation marker panel of 22 markers was subsequently evaluated for an association with rapid progression by methylated DNA sequencing (MeD-seq) in serum from 10 HBDs and 34 RCC patients with a good or intermediate prognosis starting WW in the IMPACT-RCC study. Patients with an elevated RCC-specific methylation score compared to HBDs had a shorter progression-free survival (PFS, p = 0.018), but not a shorter WW-time (p = 0.15). Cox proportional hazards regression showed that only the International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium (IMDC) criteria were significantly associated with WW time (HR 2.01, p = 0.01), whereas only our RCC-specific methylation score (HR 4.45, p = 0.02) was significantly associated with PFS. The results of this study suggest that cfDNA methylation is predictive of PFS but not WW.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Manouk K. Bos
- Department of Medical Oncology, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Erasmus University Medical Center, 3015 GD Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Sarah R. Verhoeff
- Department of Medical Oncology, Radboud University Medical Center, 6525 GA Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| | - Sjoukje F. Oosting
- Department of Medical Oncology, University Medical Centre Groningen, 9713 GZ Groningen, The Netherlands
| | | | - Ruben G. Boers
- Department of Developmental Biology, Erasmus Medical Center, 3015 GD Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Joachim B. Boers
- Department of Developmental Biology, Erasmus Medical Center, 3015 GD Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Joost Gribnau
- Department of Developmental Biology, Erasmus Medical Center, 3015 GD Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - John W. M. Martens
- Department of Medical Oncology, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Erasmus University Medical Center, 3015 GD Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Stefan Sleijfer
- Department of Medical Oncology, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Erasmus University Medical Center, 3015 GD Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Carla M. L. van Herpen
- Department of Medical Oncology, Radboud University Medical Center, 6525 GA Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| | - Saskia M. Wilting
- Department of Medical Oncology, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Erasmus University Medical Center, 3015 GD Rotterdam, The Netherlands
- Correspondence: ; Tel.: +31-107044375
| |
Collapse
|
18
|
Verhoeff SR, Oosting SF, Elias SG, van Es SC, Gerritse SL, Angus L, Heskamp S, Desar IM, Menke-van der Houven van Oordt CW, van der Veldt AA, Arens AI, Brouwers AH, Eisses B, Mulders PF, Hoekstra OS, Zwezerijnen GJ, van der Graaf WT, Aarntzen EH, Oyen WJ, van Herpen CM. [89Zr]Zr-DFO-girentuximab and [18F]FDG PET/CT to Predict Watchful Waiting Duration in Patients with Metastatic Clear-cell Renal Cell Carcinoma. Clin Cancer Res 2023; 29:592-601. [PMID: 36394882 PMCID: PMC9890134 DOI: 10.1158/1078-0432.ccr-22-0921] [Citation(s) in RCA: 13] [Impact Index Per Article: 13.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/09/2022] [Revised: 05/11/2022] [Accepted: 11/15/2022] [Indexed: 11/18/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE Watchful waiting (WW) can be considered for patients with metastatic clear-cell renal cell carcinoma (mccRCC) with good or intermediate prognosis, especially those with <2 International Metastatic RCC Database Consortium criteria and ≤2 metastatic sites [referred to as watch and wait ("W&W") criteria]. The IMaging PAtients for Cancer drug SelecTion-Renal Cell Carcinoma study objective was to assess the predictive value of [18F]FDG PET/CT and [89Zr]Zr-DFO-girentuximab PET/CT for WW duration in patients with mccRCC. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN Between February 2015 and March 2018, 48 patients were enrolled, including 40 evaluable patients with good (n = 14) and intermediate (n = 26) prognosis. Baseline contrast-enhanced CT, [18F]FDG and [89Zr]Zr-DFO-girentuximab PET/CT were performed. Primary endpoint was the time to disease progression warranting systemic treatment. Maximum standardized uptake values (SUVmax) were measured using lesions on CT images coregistered to PET/CT. High and low uptake groups were defined on the basis of median geometric mean SUVmax of RECIST-measurable lesions across patients. RESULTS The median WW time was 16.1 months [95% confidence interval (CI): 9.0-31.7]. The median WW period was shorter in patients with high [18F]FDG tumor uptake than those with low uptake (9.0 vs. 36.2 months; HR, 5.6; 95% CI: 2.4-14.7; P < 0.001). Patients with high [89Zr]Zr-DFO-girentuximab tumor uptake had a median WW period of 9.3 versus 21.3 months with low uptake (HR, 1.7; 95% CI: 0.9-3.3; P = 0.13). Patients with "W&W criteria" had a longer median WW period of 21.3 compared with patients without: 9.3 months (HR, 1.9; 95% CI: 0.9-3.9; Pone-sided = 0.034). Adding [18F]FDG uptake to the "W&W criteria" improved the prediction of WW duration (P < 0.001); whereas [89Zr]Zr-DFO-girentuximab did not (P = 0.53). CONCLUSIONS In patients with good- or intermediate-risk mccRCC, low [18F]FDG uptake is associated with prolonged WW. This study shows the predictive value of the "W&W criteria" for WW duration and shows the potential of [18F]FDG-PET/CT to further improve this.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sarah R. Verhoeff
- Department of Medical Oncology, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands
| | - Sjoukje F. Oosting
- Department of Medical Oncology, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands
| | - Sjoerd G. Elias
- Department of Epidemiology, Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | - Suzanne C. van Es
- Department of Medical Oncology, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands
| | - Sophie L. Gerritse
- Department of Medical Oncology, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.,Department of Medical Oncology, Amsterdam UMC location VUMC, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Lindsay Angus
- Departments of Medical Oncology and Radiology & Nuclear Medicine, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Sandra Heskamp
- Department of Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Anatomy, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands
| | - Ingrid M.E. Desar
- Department of Medical Oncology, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands
| | | | - Astrid A.M. van der Veldt
- Departments of Medical Oncology and Radiology & Nuclear Medicine, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Anne I.J. Arens
- Department of Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Anatomy, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands
| | - Adrienne H. Brouwers
- Department of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands
| | - Bertha Eisses
- Department of Medical Oncology, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands
| | - Peter F.A. Mulders
- Department of Urology, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands
| | - Otto S. Hoekstra
- Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Amsterdam UMC location VUMC, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Gerben J.C. Zwezerijnen
- Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Amsterdam UMC location VUMC, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Winette T.A. van der Graaf
- Department of Medical Oncology, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.,Department of Medical Oncology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Erik H.J.G. Aarntzen
- Department of Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Anatomy, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands
| | - Wim J.G. Oyen
- Department of Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Anatomy, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.,Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Rijnstate, Arnhem, the Netherlands.,Department of Biomedical Sciences, Humanitas University, Milan, Italy
| | - Carla M.L. van Herpen
- Department of Medical Oncology, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.,Corresponding Author: Carla M.L. van Herpen, Radboud University Nijmegen Medical Center, Nijmegen 6500 HB, the Netherlands. Phone: 312-4361-4038; Fax: 312-4361-5025; E-mail:
| |
Collapse
|
19
|
Rolley C, Barthelemy P, Bensalah K, Nouhaud FX, Villers A, Bruyère F, Lebdai S, Ricard S, Gross-Goupil M, Rouprêt M, Bernhard JC, Bigot P. Does the Time to Start First-Line Treatment Influence the Survival of Favorable-Risk Patients With Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma? Results of the MetaSurv-UroCCR 79 Study. Clin Genitourin Cancer 2023; 21:194-202. [PMID: 35931600 DOI: 10.1016/j.clgc.2022.07.002] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/13/2022] [Revised: 04/22/2022] [Accepted: 07/06/2022] [Indexed: 02/01/2023]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES Many patients in the favorable International Metastatic renal cell carcinoma (RCC) Data Base Consortium group (F-MRC) may have a relatively indolent disease course. Surveillance and delay of systemic therapy could be an option in this specific population. However, the question whether this delay could alter patients' outcome remains unanswered. Our objective was to determine if delaying first-line treatment influences the survival of F-MRC patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS We performed a retrospective multicenter national study involving the French Network for Research on Kidney Cancer UroCCR (NCT03293563). We included treatment naive F-MRC patients. We compared the overall survival of patients with immediate medical treatment (IMT) (started less than 3 months after metastatic diagnosis) to those with delayed medical treatment (DMT). RESULTS We included 90 patients treated between 2009 and 2018. The median time before occurrence of metastases from diagnosis was 28 (12-137) months. The two groups (IMT vs. DMT) were comparable for follow-up, age, sarcomatoid feature, number, and localization of metastatic sites and ECOG performance status. IMT was given in 25 (27.8 %) patients. Local treatment of metastasis (LTM) was performed in 47 (52%) patients. Patients with DMT had more LTM (63% vs. 24%, P = .001). Among patients with DMT (n = 65); 27 (41%) received a systemic treatment and median systemic treatment-free survival was 39 months (95% CI, 26.3-51.6). Median overall survival from metastasis disease diagnosis was 55 months (95% CI, 42.4-67.5) in the IMT group and 88 months (95%CI, 64-111.9) in the DMT group (P = .028). In multivariable analysis LTM was the only prognostic factor associated to survival improvement (HR: 0.33; P = .024). CONCLUSIONS Selected Patients with F-MRC may safely undergo DMT. LTM positively impacted survival in this population and should be considered whenever possible. Prospective trial with a larger population is needed to confirm these results.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Cyrielle Rolley
- Department of Urology, Angers University Hospital, Angers, France.
| | - Philippe Barthelemy
- Cancer Institute of Strasbourg Europe, ICANS, Department of Medical Oncology, Strasbourg, France; Members of the French Committee of Urologic Oncology, Paris, France
| | - Karim Bensalah
- Department of Urology, Rennes University Hospital, Rennes, France
| | - François-Xavier Nouhaud
- Department of Urology, Rouen University Hospital, Rouen, France; Members of the French Committee of Urologic Oncology, Paris, France
| | - Arnauld Villers
- Department of Urology, Lille University Hospital, Lille, France
| | - Franck Bruyère
- Department of Urology, Tours University Hospital, Tours, France
| | - Souhil Lebdai
- Department of Urology, Angers University Hospital, Angers, France
| | | | | | - Morgan Rouprêt
- Department of Urology, Sorbonne University, Paris, France; Members of the French Committee of Urologic Oncology, Paris, France
| | - Jean-Christophe Bernhard
- Department of Urology, UroCCR, Bordeaux, France; Department of Oncology, Bordeaux University Hospital, Paris, France; Members of the French Committee of Urologic Oncology, Paris, France
| | - Pierre Bigot
- Department of Urology, Angers University Hospital, Angers, France; Members of the French Committee of Urologic Oncology, Paris, France
| |
Collapse
|
20
|
Aragon-Ching JB, Uzzo R. Multidisciplinary treatment (MDT) perspectives in renal cell carcinoma. Ther Adv Urol 2023; 15:17562872231182216. [PMID: 37359736 PMCID: PMC10286529 DOI: 10.1177/17562872231182216] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 06/28/2023] Open
Affiliation(s)
| | - Robert Uzzo
- Department of Urologic Oncology, Fox Chase Cancer Center, Philadelphia, PA, USA
| |
Collapse
|
21
|
Determining Front-Line Therapeutic Strategy for Metastatic Clear Cell Renal Cell Carcinoma. Cancers (Basel) 2022; 14:cancers14194607. [PMID: 36230530 PMCID: PMC9559659 DOI: 10.3390/cancers14194607] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/31/2022] [Revised: 09/15/2022] [Accepted: 09/20/2022] [Indexed: 11/17/2022] Open
Abstract
The therapeutic landscape for metastatic renal cell carcinoma has rapidly evolved over the years, and we are now in an era of combination therapy strategies employing immune checkpoint blockade and anti-angiogenesis targeted therapy. Since 2018, we have gained regulatory approval for four distinct combination therapies, all with survival benefits, and with guideline recommendation for use in the front-line setting. As such, treatment selection has become increasingly complex with a myriad of treatment choices but little high-level head-to-head data to guide treatment selection. Heterogeneity in tumor biology further complicates treatment selection as tumors vary in behavior and treatment responsiveness. Ongoing development of biomarkers will certainly assist in this setting, and validation of predictive markers represents an unmet need. In their absence, we highlight features of disease and nuances to datasets from landmark prospective clinical trials to help inform treatment selection. There is growing evidence to support deferring upfront systemic therapy in some patients, with opportunities for active surveillance or metastasis-directed therapy. In others, upfront systemic therapy is warranted and necessitates thoughtful consideration of multiple clinicopathologic parameters to inform optimal patient-centered decision making.
Collapse
|
22
|
Mikhail M, Chua KJ, Khizir L, Tabakin A, Singer EA. Role of metastasectomy in the management of renal cell carcinoma. Front Surg 2022; 9:943604. [PMID: 35965871 PMCID: PMC9372304 DOI: 10.3389/fsurg.2022.943604] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/13/2022] [Accepted: 07/13/2022] [Indexed: 11/16/2022] Open
Abstract
Treatment of metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) has evolved with the development of a variety of systemic agents; however, these therapies alone rarely lead to a complete response. Complete consolidative surgery with surgical metastasectomy has been associated with improved survival outcomes in well-selected patients in previous reports. No randomized control trial exists to determine the effectiveness of metastasectomy. Therefore, reviewing observational studies is important to best determine which patients are most appropriate for metastasectomy for mRCC and if such treatment continues to be effective with the development of new systemic therapies such as immunotherapy. In this narrative review, we discuss the indications for metastasectomies, outcomes, factors associated with improved survival, and special considerations such as location of metastasis, number of metastases, synchronous metastases, and use of systemic therapy. Additionally, alternative treatment options and trials involving metastasectomy will be reviewed.
Collapse
|
23
|
Fitzgerald KN, Lee CH. Personalizing First-Line Management of Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma: Leveraging Current and Novel Therapeutic Options. J Natl Compr Canc Netw 2022; 20:jnccn21496. [PMID: 35385828 DOI: 10.6004/jnccn.2022.7003] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/23/2021] [Accepted: 01/13/2022] [Indexed: 11/17/2022]
Abstract
The treatment of metastatic renal cell carcinoma (RCC) has been revolutionized by advances in immunotherapeutic and targeted agents. Therapeutic approaches to RCC in these categories have recently evolved to include immune checkpoint inhibitors, novel vascular endothelial growth factor receptor-targeting tyrosine kinase inhibitors, and combinations of those agents. Multiple regimens within each category have been approved for use in the first-line treatment of clear cell and non-clear cell RCC. However, few of these regimens have been directly compared, leading to a new clinical challenge for physicians: how to select a first-line treatment regimen for an individual patient from among multiple approved options. In the modern era of RCC management, the initial treatment selection therefore becomes highly personalized and depends on numerous patient-specific factors, including histopathologic and clinical features of the disease, comorbid conditions, and psychosocial and economic factors. This review details current first-line treatment options for the management of metastatic RCC and proposes a framework whereby treatment selection can be optimized for individual patients.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kelly N Fitzgerald
- 1Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - Chung-Han Lee
- 1Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| |
Collapse
|
24
|
Labriola MK, George DJ. Setting a new standard for long-term survival in metastatic kidney cancer. Cancer 2022; 128:2058-2060. [PMID: 35383907 DOI: 10.1002/cncr.34177] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/15/2022] [Accepted: 02/18/2022] [Indexed: 11/10/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- Matthew K Labriola
- Duke Cancer Institute Center for Prostate and Urologic Cancers, Durham, North Carolina.,Division of Medical Oncology, Department of Medicine, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, North Carolina
| | - Daniel J George
- Duke Cancer Institute Center for Prostate and Urologic Cancers, Durham, North Carolina.,Division of Medical Oncology, Department of Medicine, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, North Carolina
| |
Collapse
|
25
|
Andrews JR, Lohse CM, Boorjian SA, Leibovich BC, Thompson H, Costello BA, Bhindi B. Outcomes following cytoreductive nephrectomy without immediate postoperative systemic therapy for patients with synchronous metastatic renal cell carcinoma. Urol Oncol 2022; 40:166.e1-166.e8. [PMID: 35168879 DOI: 10.1016/j.urolonc.2022.01.005] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/20/2021] [Revised: 12/15/2021] [Accepted: 01/11/2022] [Indexed: 11/25/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND While the recent CARMENA trial evaluated upfront cytoreductive nephrectomy (CN) among patients treated with immediate subsequent systemic therapy for metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC), the role of CN in patients not immediately requiring systemic therapy remains to be determined. OBJECTIVE To describe the oncologic outcomes of patients with de-novo synchronous mRCC who underwent CN +/- metastasis-directed therapy (MDT) and subsequent surveillance without planned immediate post-CN systemic therapy. DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS Adults who underwent CN for unilateral, sporadic mRCC between 1996 and 2016 without immediate postoperative systemic therapy were identified using the prospectively-maintained Mayo Clinic Nephrectomy Registry. Co-primary outcomes were survival free of systemic therapy or death and overall-survival. RESULTS Of 156 patients who met inclusion criteria for study, 37 (24%) patients were managed after CN with surveillance alone and 119 (76%) underwent MDT. Seventy-two patients ultimately initiated systemic therapy at a median of 0.7 years (IQR 0.3-1.7). Median follow-up among survivors was 6.2 years (IQR 4.4-9.5), during which time 133 patients died. At 1, 3, and 5 years, survival free of systemic therapy or death rates were 47%, 21% and 14% and overall-survival rates were 69%, 37%, and 28%. CONCLUSION Among carefully selected patients managed with surveillance after CN +/- MDT, approximately half may avoid systemic therapy for 1 year, with a subset achieving long-term survival free of systemic therapy or death. Having a single metastatic site and disease amenable to complete metastasectomy are features of patients who might be well served with upfront CN +/- MDT.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Christine M Lohse
- Department of Quantitative Health Sciences, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN
| | | | | | | | | | - Bimal Bhindi
- Section of Urology, Department of Surgery, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
26
|
Reshaping Treatment Paradigms for Advanced Renal Cell Cancer Patients and Improving Patient Management : Optimal Management for Renal Cell Cancer Patients. Curr Treat Options Oncol 2022; 23:609-629. [PMID: 35316480 DOI: 10.1007/s11864-022-00966-0] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 03/02/2022] [Indexed: 12/24/2022]
Abstract
OPINION STATEMENT The treatment of renal cell carcinoma (RCC) is one of the great success stories in the field of oncology, which was revolutionized with the development of therapies aimed at disrupting crucial pathways. Tumor biology of RCC has provided insight into the disease through elucidation of the role of vascular endothelial growth-factor (VEGF) and the mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR). Targeted agents against VEGF and mTOR, as well as agents targeting relevant immunomodulatory pathways, have shown clinical benefit for advanced disease. The targeted agents are highly effective in achieving a response and survival, particularly in high-risk patients. These include the vascular endothelial growth factor receptor (VEGFR) tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) axitinib and cabozantinib, and programmed cell death 1 protein (PD-1) immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) nivolumab and pembrolizumab. There is a wealth of evidence investigating different therapeutic options and combinations for first-line treatment of advanced RCC including the CheckMate 214 study, KEYNOTE-426, JAVELIN Renal 101, and CheckMate 9ER. Dual ICI and combination agents targeting the programmed cell death protein 1/programmed cell death protein ligand 1 (PD1/PDL1) and VEGF, began to demonstrate superiority over previously accepted standards in advanced clear-cell RCC. Data from a number of clinical studies are available to help physicians with evidence-based decisions for the sequence of second-line and future treatments for patients with progressive RCC. In this review, we focus on essentials for clinicians treating patients with clear-cell RCC.
Collapse
|
27
|
[Stereotactic body radiotherapy as "first-line treatment" for oligometastatic renal cell cancer]. Strahlenther Onkol 2022; 198:497-499. [PMID: 35278095 DOI: 10.1007/s00066-022-01920-7] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 02/23/2022] [Indexed: 10/18/2022]
|
28
|
Chen YW, Rini BI. Approaches to First-Line Therapy for Metastatic Clear Cell Renal Cell Carcinoma. Curr Oncol Rep 2022; 24:695-702. [PMID: 35247142 DOI: 10.1007/s11912-022-01196-1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 09/30/2021] [Indexed: 12/18/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE OF REVIEW Four immuno-oncology (IO)-based combinations have demonstrated overall survival benefit as frontline treatment of metastatic clear cell renal cell carcinoma (mccRCC). Choosing among the available combinations depends on treating physician's interpretation of existing data without level I evidence to inform choice of therapy. Landmark trials of mccRCC are reviewed and perspective on treatment options is provided. RECENT FINDINGS The four IO-based combinations reviewed are ipilimumab/nivolumab (IO/IO), pembrolizumab/axitinib (IO/TKI), nivolumab/cabozantinib (IO/TKI), and pembrolizumab/lenvatinib (IO/TKI). The ipilimumab/nivolumab combination is notable for durable efficacy after extended 4-year follow-up. IO/TKI combinations have clinical efficacy across all IMDC risk groups with higher response rates and longer progression-free survival (PFS) but also had higher ≥ grade 3 adverse events rate. Patient tumor burden, performance status, and IMDC risk group are factors in choosing an IO-based treatment. IO/IO and IO/TKI combinations for mccRCC have distinct efficacy and toxicity profiles. Future studies are needed to identify biomarkers to optimize patient outcomes.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Yu-Wei Chen
- Vanderbilt-Ingram Cancer Center, Nashville, TN, USA.,Division of Hematology Oncology, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN, USA
| | - Brian I Rini
- Vanderbilt-Ingram Cancer Center, Nashville, TN, USA. .,Division of Hematology Oncology, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
29
|
European Association of Urology Guidelines on Renal Cell Carcinoma: The 2022 Update. Eur Urol 2022; 82:399-410. [DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2022.03.006] [Citation(s) in RCA: 49] [Impact Index Per Article: 24.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/05/2022] [Accepted: 03/10/2022] [Indexed: 12/22/2022]
|
30
|
Invited commentary: When and how to initiate systemic therapy in treating favorable risk metastatic renal cell carcinoma. Curr Urol 2022; 15:185-186. [PMID: 35069079 PMCID: PMC8772631 DOI: 10.1097/cu9.0000000000000052] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/10/2021] [Accepted: 09/27/2021] [Indexed: 11/26/2022] Open
|
31
|
Bedke J, Albiges L, Capitanio U, Giles RH, Hora M, Lam TB, Ljungberg B, Marconi L, Klatte T, Volpe A, Abu-Ghanem Y, Dabestani S, Fernández-Pello S, Hofmann F, Kuusk T, Tahbaz R, Powles T, Bex A. 2021 Updated European Association of Urology Guidelines on the Use of Adjuvant Pembrolizumab for Renal Cell Carcinoma. Eur Urol 2021; 81:134-137. [PMID: 34920897 DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2021.11.022] [Citation(s) in RCA: 11] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/06/2021] [Accepted: 11/18/2021] [Indexed: 01/02/2023]
Abstract
Adjuvant treatment of nonmetastatic high-risk renal cell carcinoma is an unmet medical need. In the past, several tyrosine kinase inhibitor trials have failed to demonstrate an improvement of disease-free survival (DFS) in this setting. Only one trial (S-TRAC) provided evidence for improved DFS with sunitinib but without an overall survival (OS) signal. Keynote-564 is the first trial of an immune checkpoint inhibitor that significantly improved DFS with adjuvant pembrolizumab, a programmed death receptor-1 antibody, in clear cell renal cell carcinoma with a high risk of relapse. The intention-to-treat population, which included a group of patients after metastasectomy and no evidence of disease (M1 NED), had a significant DFS benefit. The OS data are not mature as yet. The Renal Cell Carcinoma Guideline Panel issues a weak recommendation for the adjuvant use of pembrolizumab for high-risk clear cell renal carcinoma, as defined by the trial until final OS data are available. However, the trial reilluminates the discussion on when and in whom metastasectomy should be performed. Here, caution is necessary not to perform metastasectomy in patients with poor prognostic features and rapid progressive disease, which must be excluded by a confirmatory scan of disease status prior to planned metastasectomy. PATIENT SUMMARY: New data from the adjuvant immune checkpoint inhibitor trial with pembrolizumab (a programmed death receptor-1 antibody) for the treatment of high-risk clear cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC) after surgery showed that the drug prolonged the period of being cancer free significantly, although whether it prolonged survival remained uncertain. Consequently, pembrolizumab is cautiously recommended as additional (ie, adjuvant) treatment in high-risk ccRCC after kidney cancer surgery.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jens Bedke
- Department of Urology, University Hospital Tuebingen, Tuebingen, Germany; German Cancer Consortium (DKTK) and German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Laurence Albiges
- Department of Cancer Medicine, Gustave Roussy, Université Paris-Saclay, Villejuif, France
| | - Umberto Capitanio
- Department of Urology, San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milan, Italy; Division of Experimental Oncology/Unit of Urology, URI, IRCCS San Raffaele Hospital, Milan, Italy
| | - Rachel H Giles
- International Kidney Cancer Coalition (IKCC), Duivendrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Milan Hora
- Department of Urology, University Hospital Pilsen and Faculty of Medicine in Pilsen, Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic
| | - Thomas B Lam
- Academic Urology Unit, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK; Department of Urology, Aberdeen Royal Infirmary, Aberdeen, UK
| | - Börje Ljungberg
- Department of Surgical and Perioperative Sciences, Urology and Andrology, Umeå University, Umeå, Sweden
| | - Lorenzo Marconi
- Department of Urology, Coimbra University Hospital, Coimbra, Portugal
| | - Tobias Klatte
- Department of Urology, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany
| | - Alessandro Volpe
- Department of Urology, University of Eastern Piedmont, Maggiore della Carità Hospital, Novara, Italy
| | - Yasmin Abu-Ghanem
- Department of Urology, Chaim Sheba Medical Center, Tel-Hashomer, Ramat-Gan, Israel
| | - Saeed Dabestani
- Department of Translational Medicine, Division of Urological Cancers, Lund University, Malmö, Sweden
| | | | - Fabian Hofmann
- Department of Urology, Sunderby Sjukhus, Umeå University, Luleå, Sweden
| | - Teele Kuusk
- Department of Urology, Darent Valley Hospital, Dartford, UK; Gravesham NHS Trust, Dartford, UK
| | - Rana Tahbaz
- Department of Urology, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany
| | - Thomas Powles
- The Royal Free NHS Trust and Barts Cancer Institute, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK
| | - Axel Bex
- The Royal Free London NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK; UCL Division of Surgery and Interventional Science, London, UK; Department of Urology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Hospital, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
| |
Collapse
|
32
|
Tang C, Msaouel P, Hara K, Choi H, Le V, Shah AY, Wang J, Jonasch E, Choi S, Nguyen QN, Das P, Prajapati S, Yu Z, Khan K, Powell S, Murthy R, Sircar K, Tannir NM. Definitive radiotherapy in lieu of systemic therapy for oligometastatic renal cell carcinoma: a single-arm, single-centre, feasibility, phase 2 trial. Lancet Oncol 2021; 22:1732-1739. [PMID: 34717797 DOI: 10.1016/s1470-2045(21)00528-3] [Citation(s) in RCA: 76] [Impact Index Per Article: 25.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/31/2021] [Revised: 08/30/2021] [Accepted: 09/02/2021] [Indexed: 12/22/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND The role of radiotherapy in metastatic renal cell carcinoma is controversial. We prospectively tested the feasibility and efficacy of radiotherapy to defer systemic therapy for patients with oligometastatic renal cell carcinoma. METHODS This single-arm, phase 2, feasibility trial was done at one centre in the USA (The MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA). Patients (aged ≥18 years) with five or fewer metastatic lesions, an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group status of 0-2, and no more than one previous systemic therapy (if this therapy was stopped at least 1 month before enrolment) without limitations on renal cell carcinoma histology were eligible for inclusion. Patients were treated with stereotactic body radiotherapy (defined as ≤5 fractions with ≥7 Gy per fraction) to all lesions and maintained off systemic therapy. When lesion location precluded safe stereotactic body radiotherapy, patients were treated with hypofractionated intensity-modulated radiotherapy regimes consisting of 60-70 Gy in ten fractions or 52·5-67·5 Gy in 15 fractions. Additional rounds of radiotherapy were allowed to treat subsequent sites of progression. Co-primary endpoints were feasibility (defined as all planned radiotherapy completed with <7 days unplanned breaks) and progression-free survival. All efficacy analyses were intention-to-treat. Safety was analysed in the as-treated population. A second cohort, with the aim of assessing the feasibility of sequential stereotactic body radiotherapy alone in patients with low-volume metastatic disease, was initiated and will be reported separately. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03575611. FINDINGS 30 patients (six [20%] women) were enrolled from July 13, 2018, to Sept 18, 2020. All patients had clear cell histology and had a nephrectomy before enrolment. All patients completed at least one round of radiotherapy with less than 7 days of unplanned breaks. At a median follow-up of 17·5 months (IQR 13·2-24·6), median progression-free survival was 22·7 months (95% CI 10·4-not reached; 1-year progression-free survival 64% [95% CI 48-85]). Three (10%) patients had severe adverse events: two grade 3 (back pain and muscle weakness) and one grade 4 (hyperglycaemia) adverse events were observed. There were no treatment-related deaths. INTERPRETATION Sequential radiotherapy might facilitate deferral of systemic therapy initiation and could allow sustained systemic therapy breaks for select patients with oligometastatic renal cell carcinoma. FUNDING Anna Fuller Foundation, the Cancer Prevention and Research Institute of Texas (CPRIT), and the National Cancer Institute.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Chad Tang
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA; Department of Translational Molecular Pathology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA; Department of Investigational Cancer Therapeutics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA.
| | - Pavlos Msaouel
- Genitourinary Medical Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA; Department of Translational Molecular Pathology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Kieko Hara
- Department of Translational Molecular Pathology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Haesun Choi
- Department of Radiology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Venus Le
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Amishi Y Shah
- Genitourinary Medical Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Jennifer Wang
- Genitourinary Medical Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Eric Jonasch
- Genitourinary Medical Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Seungtaek Choi
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Quynh-Nhu Nguyen
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Prajnan Das
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Surendra Prajapati
- Department of Radiation Physics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Zhiqian Yu
- Department of Radiation Physics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Khaja Khan
- Department of Translational Molecular Pathology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Steven Powell
- Department of Translational Molecular Pathology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Ravi Murthy
- Department of Interventional Radiology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Kanishka Sircar
- Department of Translational Molecular Pathology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA; Department of Pathology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Nizar M Tannir
- Genitourinary Medical Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| |
Collapse
|
33
|
Tran J, Ornstein MC. Clinical Review on the Management of Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma. JCO Oncol Pract 2021; 18:187-196. [PMID: 34529499 DOI: 10.1200/op.21.00419] [Citation(s) in RCA: 56] [Impact Index Per Article: 18.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/22/2022] Open
Abstract
Renal cell carcinomas vary considerably in their tumor biology and disease course, which is reflected in the range of treatment paradigms in localized and metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). Active surveillance remains an important component of all renal cell carcinoma management. In mRCC, the rapid evolution from cytokine-based therapy to targeted therapy to immunotherapy with checkpoint blockade has revolutionized the field and drastically altered treatment outcomes. More recently, combination therapies have become a standard of care for most patients with mRCC. In this review, we highlight recent critical data that led to changes in treatment paradigms and provide a practical framework for the management of patients with mRCC.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jennifer Tran
- Department of Internal Medicine, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH
| | - Moshe C Ornstein
- Department of Hematology & Medical Oncology, Cleveland Clinic Taussig Cancer Institute, Cleveland, OH
| |
Collapse
|
34
|
Costello BA, Bhavsar NA, Zakharia Y, Pal SK, Vaishampayan U, Jim H, Fishman MN, Molina AM, Kyriakopoulos CE, Tsao CK, Appleman LJ, Gartrell BA, Hussain A, Stadler WM, Agarwal N, Pachynski RK, Hutson TE, Hammers HJ, Ryan CW, Mardekian J, Borham A, George DJ, Harrison MR. A Prospective Multicenter Evaluation of Initial Treatment Choice in Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Prior to the Immunotherapy Era: The MaRCC Registry Experience. Clin Genitourin Cancer 2021; 20:1-10. [PMID: 34364796 PMCID: PMC10186183 DOI: 10.1016/j.clgc.2021.07.002] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/17/2020] [Revised: 05/07/2021] [Accepted: 07/02/2021] [Indexed: 11/30/2022]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION The Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma (MaRCC) Registry provides prospective data on real-world treatment patterns and outcomes in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). METHODS AND MATERIALS Patients with mRCC and no prior systemic therapy were enrolled at academic and community sites. End of study data collection was in March 2019. Outcomes included overall survival (OS). A survey of treating physicians assessed reasons for treatment initiations and discontinuations. RESULTS Overall, 376 patients with mRCC initiated first-line therapy; 171 (45.5%) received pazopanib, 75 (19.9%) sunitinib, and 74 (19.7%) participated in a clinical trial. Median (95% confidence interval) OS was longest in the clinical trial group (50.3 [35.8-not reached] months) versus pazopanib (39.0 [29.7-50.9] months) and sunitinib 26.2 [19.9-61.5] months). Non-clear cell RCC (21.5% of patients) was associated with worse median OS than clear cell RCC (18.0 vs. 47.3 months). Differences in baseline characteristics, treatment starting dose, and relative dose exposure among treatment groups suggest selection bias. Survey results revealed a de-emphasis on quality of life, toxicity, and patient preference compared with efficacy in treatment selection. CONCLUSION The MaRCC Registry gives insights into real-world first-line treatment selection, outcomes, and physician rationale regarding initial treatment selection prior to the immunotherapy era. Differences in outcomes between clinical trial and off-study patients reflect the difficulty in translating trial results to real-world patients, and emphasize the need to broaden clinical trial eligibility. Physician emphasis on efficacy over quality of life and toxicity suggests more data and education are needed regarding these endpoints.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | - Ana M Molina
- Department of Medicine, Division of Hematology and Medical Oncology, Weill Cornell Medicine, New York, NY
| | | | - Che-Kai Tsao
- Tisch Cancer Institute, Mount Sinai Medical Center, New York, NY
| | | | - Benjamin A Gartrell
- Departments of Medical Oncology and Urology, Montefiore Medical Center, Bronx, NY
| | - Arif Hussain
- University of Maryland Greenebaum Comprehensive Cancer Center, Baltimore, MD
| | - Walter M Stadler
- University of Chicago, Department of Medicine, Section of Hematology/Oncology, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Chicago, IL
| | - Neeraj Agarwal
- Huntsman Cancer Institute, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT
| | - Russell K Pachynski
- Siteman Cancer Center, Department of Medicine, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
35
|
Harrison MR, Costello BA, Bhavsar NA, Vaishampayan U, Pal SK, Zakharia Y, Jim HSL, Fishman MN, Molina AM, Kyriakopoulos CE, Tsao C, Appleman LJ, Gartrell BA, Hussain A, Stadler WM, Agarwal N, Pachynski RK, Hutson TE, Hammers HJ, Ryan CW, Inman BA, Mardekian J, Borham A, George DJ. Active surveillance of metastatic renal cell carcinoma: Results from a prospective observational study (MaRCC). Cancer 2021; 127:2204-2212. [PMID: 33765337 PMCID: PMC8251950 DOI: 10.1002/cncr.33494] [Citation(s) in RCA: 29] [Impact Index Per Article: 9.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/17/2020] [Revised: 10/29/2020] [Accepted: 12/01/2020] [Indexed: 12/26/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Systemic therapy (ST) can be deferred in patients who have metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) and slow-growing metastases. Currently, this subset of patients managed with active surveillance (AS) is not well described in the literature. METHODS This was a prospective observational study of patients with mRCC across 46 US community and academic centers. The objective was to describe baseline characteristics and demographics of patients with mRCC initially managed by AS, reasons for AS, and patient outcomes. Descriptive statistics were used to characterize demographics, baseline characteristics, and patient-related outcomes. Wilcoxon 2-sample rank-sum tests and χ2 tests were used to assess differences between ST and AS cohorts in continuous and categorical variables, respectively. Kaplan-Meier survival curves were used to assess survival. RESULTS Of 504 patients, mRCC was initially managed by AS (n = 143) or ST (n = 305); 56 patients were excluded from the analysis. Disease was present in 69% of patients who received AS, whereas the remaining 31% had no evidence of disease. At data cutoff, 72 of 143 patients (50%) in the AS cohort had not received ST. The median overall survival was not reached (95% CI, 122 months to not estimable) in patients who received AS versus 30 months (95% CI, 25-44 months) in those who received ST. Quality of life at baseline was significantly better in patients who were managed with AS versus ST. CONCLUSIONS AS occurs frequently (32%) in real-world clinical practice and appears to be a safe and appropriate alternative to immediate ST in selected patients.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | - Nrupen A. Bhavsar
- Duke Cancer InstituteDuke University Medical CenterDurhamNorth Carolina
| | | | - Sumanta K. Pal
- Medical Oncology and Experimental TherapeuticsCity of Hope Comprehensive Cancer CenterDuarteCalifornia
| | - Yousef Zakharia
- Department of MedicineUniversity of Iowa Hospitals and ClinicsIowa CityIowa
| | | | | | - Ana M. Molina
- Division of Hematology and Medical OncologyDepartment of MedicineWeill Cornell MedicineNew YorkNew York
| | | | - Che‐Kai Tsao
- Tisch Cancer Institute, Mount Sinai Medical CenterNew YorkNew York
| | - Leonard J. Appleman
- The University of Pittsburgh Medical Center (UPMC) Cancer PavilionPittsburghPennsylvania
| | - Benjamin A. Gartrell
- Department of Medical OncologyMontefiore Medical CenterBronxNew York,Department of UrologyMontefiore Medical CenterBronxNew York
| | - Arif Hussain
- Department of MedicineUniversity of MarylandBaltimoreMaryland
| | - Walter M. Stadler
- Section of Hematology/OncologyDepartment of MedicineComprehensive Cancer CenterUniversity of ChicagoChicagoIllinois
| | - Neeraj Agarwal
- Huntsman Cancer InstituteUniversity of UtahSalt Lake CityUtah
| | - Russell K. Pachynski
- Siteman Cancer Center, Department of MedicineWashington University School of MedicineSt LouisMissouri
| | | | - Hans J. Hammers
- Division of Hematology‐OncologyUniversity of Texas SouthwesternDallasTexas
| | - Christopher W. Ryan
- Department of Medicine, Division of Hematology and Medical OncologyOregon Health and Science UniversityPortlandOregon
| | - Brant A. Inman
- Duke Cancer InstituteDuke University Medical CenterDurhamNorth Carolina
| | | | | | - Daniel J. George
- Duke Cancer InstituteDuke University Medical CenterDurhamNorth Carolina
| |
Collapse
|
36
|
ImmuneOncology-tyrosine kinase inhibitors combination, sometimes less is more. Int Immunopharmacol 2021; 98:107673. [PMID: 33935023 DOI: 10.1016/j.intimp.2021.107673] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/25/2021] [Revised: 04/01/2021] [Accepted: 04/09/2021] [Indexed: 11/23/2022]
|