Active surveillance of metastatic renal cell carcinoma: Results from a prospective observational study (MaRCC)

The development of brain metastases in patients with different therapeutic strategies for metastatic renal cell cancer

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.

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

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.

Accuracy, readability, and quality of websites about metastatic renal cell carcinoma treatment

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.

Active Surveillance in Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma

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.

The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on renal cancer care

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.

Advanced renal cell carcinoma management: the Latin American Cooperative Oncology Group (LACOG) and the Latin American Renal Cancer Group (LARCG) consensus update

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.

Morbidity and Outcomes of Primary Tumor Management in Patients with Widely Metastatic Well-Differentiated Small Bowel Neuroendocrine Tumors

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.

The Diagnosis and Treatment Approach for Oligo-Recurrent and Oligo-Progressive Renal Cell Carcinoma

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.

Patient-reported Outcome Measurement and Reporting for Patients with Advanced Renal Cell Carcinoma: A Systematic Literature Review

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.

Managing First-Line Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma: Favorable-Risk Disease

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.

High Prognostic Value of 68Ga-PSMA PET/CT in Renal Cell Carcinoma and Association with PSMA Expression Assessed by Immunohistochemistry

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.

ExPert ConsEnsus on the management of Advanced clear-cell RenaL celL carcinoma: INDIAn Perspective (PEARL-INDIA)

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.

Prognostic Factors for Survival in Patients Undergoing Surveillance After Cytoreductive Nephrectomy

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.

Beyond the Knife in Renal Cell Carcinoma: A Systematic Review-To Ablate or Not to Ablate?

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.

State of the Art: Multidisciplinary Management of Oligometastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma

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.

Initial active surveillance for patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma: 10 years' experience at a regional cancer Centre

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.

Methylated Cell-Free DNA Sequencing (MeD-seq) of LpnPI Digested Fragments to Identify Early Progression in Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Patients on Watchful Waiting

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.

[89Zr]Zr-DFO-girentuximab and [18F]FDG PET/CT to Predict Watchful Waiting Duration in Patients with Metastatic Clear-cell Renal Cell Carcinoma

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.

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

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.

Determining Front-Line Therapeutic Strategy for Metastatic Clear Cell Renal Cell Carcinoma

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.

Role of metastasectomy in the management of renal cell carcinoma

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.

Personalizing First-Line Management of Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma: Leveraging Current and Novel Therapeutic Options

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.

Outcomes following cytoreductive nephrectomy without immediate postoperative systemic therapy for patients with synchronous metastatic renal cell carcinoma

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.

Reshaping Treatment Paradigms for Advanced Renal Cell Cancer Patients and Improving Patient Management : Optimal Management for Renal Cell Cancer Patients

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.

Approaches to First-Line Therapy for Metastatic Clear Cell Renal Cell Carcinoma

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.

2021 Updated European Association of Urology Guidelines on the Use of Adjuvant Pembrolizumab for Renal Cell Carcinoma

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.

Definitive radiotherapy in lieu of systemic therapy for oligometastatic renal cell carcinoma: a single-arm, single-centre, feasibility, phase 2 trial

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.

Clinical Review on the Management of Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma

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.

A Prospective Multicenter Evaluation of Initial Treatment Choice in Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Prior to the Immunotherapy Era: The MaRCC Registry Experience

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.

Active surveillance of metastatic renal cell carcinoma: Results from a prospective observational study (MaRCC)

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.