Effect of pathological high-risk features on cancer-specific mortality in non-metastatic clear cell renal cell carcinoma: a tool for optimizing patient selection for adjuvant therapy

Role of lymphadenectomy during primary surgery for kidney cancer

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Lymph node dissection (LND) during radical nephrectomy (RN) for renal cell carcinoma (RCC) is not considered as a standard. The emergence of robot-assisted surgery and effective immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) in recent years may change this and lymph node (LN) staging has become easier and has a clinical impact. In this review, we aimed to reconsider the role of LND today.

RECENT FINDINGS

Although the extent of LND has still not been well established, removal of more LN seems to provide better oncologic outcomes for a select group of patients with high-risk factors such as clinical T3-4. Adjuvant therapy using pembrolizumab has been shown to improve disease free survival if complete resection of metastatic lesions as well as the primary site is obtained in combination. Robot assisted RN for localized RCC has been widespread and the studies regarding LND for RCC has been recently appeared.

SUMMARY

The staging and surgical benefits and its extent of LND during RN for RCC remains unclear, but it is becoming increasingly important. Technologies that allow an easier LND and adjuvant ICI that improve survival in LN-positive patients are engaging the role of LND, a procedure that was needed, but almost never done, is now indicated sometimes. Now, the goal is to identify the clinical and molecular imaging tools that can help identify with sufficient accuracy who needs a LND and which LNs to remove in a targeted personalized approach.

How to optimize the use of adjuvant pembrolizumab in renal cell carcinoma: which patients benefit the most?

PURPOSE

The KEYNOTE-564 trial showed improved disease-free survival (DFS) for patients with high-risk renal cell carcinoma (RCC) receiving adjuvant pembrolizumab as compared to placebo. However, if systematically administered to all high-risk patients, it might lead to the overtreatment in a non-negligible proportion of patient. Therefore, we aimed to determine the optimal candidate for adjuvant pembrolizumab.

METHODS

Within a prospectively maintained database we selected patients who fulfilled the inclusion criteria of the KEYNOTE-564. We compared baseline characteristics and oncologic outcomes in this cohort with those of the placebo arm of the KEYNOTE-564. Regression tree analyses was used to generate a risk stratification tool to predict 1-year DFS after surgery.

RESULTS

In the off-trial setting, patients had worse tumor characteristics then in the KEYNOTE-564 placebo arm, i.e. there were more pT4 (5.4 vs. 2.7%, p = 0.046) and pN1 (15 vs. 6.3%, p < 0.001) cases. Median DFS was 29 (95% CI 21-35) months as compared to value not reached in KEYNOTE-564 and 1-year DFS was 64.2% (95% CI 59.6-69.2) as compared to 76.2% (95% CI 72.2-79.7), respectively. Patients with pN1 were at the highest risk of 1-year recurrence (1-year DFS 28.6% [95% CI 20.2-40.3]); patients without LNI, but necrosis were at intermediate risk (1-year DFS 62.5% [95% CI 56.9-68.8]); those without LNI and necrosis were at the lowest risk (1-year DFS 83.8% [95% CI 79.1-88.9]). LVI substratification furtherly improved the accuracy in the prediction of early recurrence.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients potentially eligible for adjuvant pembrolizumab have worse characteristics and DFS in the off-trial setting as compared to the placebo arm of the KEYNOTE-564. Patients with either LNI or necrosis were at the highest risk of early-recurrence, which make them the ideal candidate to adjuvant pembrolizumab.

Potential benefit of lymph node dissection during radical nephrectomy for kidney cancer: A review and critical analysis of current literature

Objective

The role of lymph node dissection (LND) is still controversial in patients with renal cell carcinoma undergoing surgery. We aimed to provide a comprehensive review of the literature about the effect of LND on survival, prognosis, surgical outcomes, as well as patient selection and available LND templates.

Methods

Recent literature (from January 2011 to December 2021) was assessed through PubMed and MEDLINE databases. A narrative review of most relevant articles was provided.

Results

The frequencies in which LNDs are being carried out are decreasing due to an increase in minimally invasive and nephron sparing surgery. Moreover, randomized clinical trials and meta-analyses failed to show any survival advantage of LND versus no LND. However, retrospective studies suggest a survival benefit of LND in high-risk patients (bulky tumors, T3-4 stage, and cN1 patients). Moreover, extended LND might provide important staging information, which could be of interest for adjuvant treatment planning.

Conclusion

No level 1 evidence of any survival advantage deriving from LND is currently available in literature. Thus, the role of LND is limited to staging purposes. However, low grade evidence suggests a possible role of LND in high-risk patients. Randomized clinical trials are warranted to corroborate these findings.

Hematological prognosticators in metastatic renal cell cancer treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors: a meta-analysis

Aim: We aimed to assess the prognostic value of pretreatment hematological biomarkers in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs). Methods: PubMed, Web of Science and Scopus databases were searched for articles according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses statement. Results: Fifteen studies comprising 1530 patients were eligible for meta-analysis. High levels of neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR), platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio (PLR), C-reactive protein and lactate dehydrogenase were significantly associated with worse progression-free survival. High NLR and PLR were significantly associated with worse overall survival. Conclusion: High pretreatment NLR and PLR appear to be hematological prognostic factors of progression and overall mortality in mRCC patients treated with ICIs. These findings might help in the design of correlative biomarker studies to guide the clinical decision-making in the immune checkpoint inhibitor era.

High-risk Surgically Resected Renal Cell Carcinoma: Is There a Role for Adjuvant VEGF-TKI Inhibitors?

The indications for adjuvant vascular endothelial growth factor-tyrosine kinase inhibitor (VEGF-TKI) agents after curative intent nephrectomy for renal cell carcinoma are still a matter of debate. The ASSURE, PROTECT and ATLAS trials have failed to meet their primary end-points. Conversely, S-TRAC has shown a disease free survival (DFS) benefit. To date, meta-analyses have repeatedly proved the absence of a clinical benefit, in term of DFS and overall survival (OS). Nevertheless, the results of the SORCE trial have been recently released and might add valuable information. We pooled the results of all five reported trials testing for any potential DFS and OS benefits associated with VEGF-TKI use. Interestingly, for pooled DFS we found a marginal positive hazard ratio (HR) of 0.92 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.85-1.00; P-value = 0.049) in favor of adjuvant VEGF-TKI agents. This benefit was more pronounced for DFS in the sub-groups of only high-risk patients (HR: 0.89, 95% CI 0.80-0.99; P-value = 0.026), but less pronounced in clear-cell only subgroup (HR 0.92, 95% CI: 0.85-1.00; P-value = 0.044). Overall survival benefit was instead not reached. However, pooled relative risk for high-grade (grade ≥3 according to CTCAE classification) adverse events was irremediably high, 2.56 (95% CI: 2.15-3.04; P-value < 0.001). Given the marginal benefit in terms of DFS and the drawback of high-grade adverse events, even after the SORCE trial publication, adjuvant VEGF-TKIs therapy cannot be considered in the whole group of patients with non-metastatic high-risk renal cell carcinoma after surgery.

Development and Validation of a Nomogram Predicting the Prognosis of Renal Cell Carcinoma After Nephrectomy

Objective

To develop and validate a nomogram for predicting the overall survival (OS) of renal cell carcinoma (RCC) patients after nephrectomy.

Materials and Methods

In total, 488 patients with RCC who underwent nephrectomy at the Urology Department of the First Hospital of Shanxi Medical University between January 2013 and December 2018 were randomly divided into a development cohort (n = 344) and a validation cohort (n = 144). The development cohort was used to build a prediction model, and the validation cohort was used for validation. Single-factor and multifactor analyses were carried out with R software, and the nomogram, calibration chart, ROC curve and C index were constructed.

Results

The median follow-up time of the development and validation cohorts was 34 months. The total 3-year and 5-year survival rates of the development cohort were 93.3% and 91.6%, respectively; those of the validation cohort were 92.4% and 91.0%, respectively. Cox univariate analysis of the development cohort showed that age, type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), smoking history, type of surgery, T stage, N stage, M stage and Fuhrman nuclear grade were prognostic factors for OS in RCC patients undergoing nephrectomy. Cox multivariate analysis showed that T2DM, smoking history and T stage were independent prognostic factors for OS in RCC patients undergoing nephrectomy (P < 0.05). According to the univariate and multivariate analyses, a nomogram was constructed. In the development cohort, the C index of predicted OS was 0.875 (95% CI, 0.820-0.930). The calibration curve of the 3-year and 5-year survival rates showed that the predicted value of the nomogram was consistent with the actual observed value. The area under the 3-year and 5-year survival ROC curves was 0.861 and 0.901, respectively. In the validation cohort, the C index was 0.880 (95% CI, 0.778-0.982). The calibration curve of the 3-year and 5-year survival rates showed that the predicted value of the nomogram was consistent with the actual observed value. The area under the 3-year and 5-year survival ROC curves was 0.813 and 0.799, respectively.

Conclusion

We developed and verified a new and accurate nomogram with available clinicopathological data that can effectively predict the OS of RCC patients after nephrectomy.

A Plea for Optimizing Selection in Current Adjuvant Immunotherapy Trials for High-risk Nonmetastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma According to Expected Cancer-specific Mortality

BACKGROUND

Tyrosine kinase inhibitor-based adjuvant therapy showed no survival benefits for patients with high-risk nonmetastatic renal cell carcinoma (nmRCC). Five randomized immune-oncology checkpoint inhibitor trials are ongoing. We assessed the effect of stage, grade, and histologic type on cancer-specific mortality (CSM) in candidates for 1 of the 4 North American ongoing immune-oncology checkpoint inhibitor trials of high-risk nmRCC.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

From the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database (2001-2015), we identified patients who had undergone surgery for nmRCC and had met the inclusion criteria for the PROSPER RCC (nivolumab in treating patients with localized kidney cancer undergoing nephrectomy), CheckMate 914 (a study comparing the combination of nivolumab and ipilimumab versus placebo in participants with localized renal cell carcinoma), KEYNOTE-564 [safety and efficacy study of pembrolizumab (MK-3475) as monotherapy in the adjuvant treatment of renal cell carcinoma post nephrectomy], or IMmotion010 [a study of atezolizumab as adjuvant therapy in participants with renal cell carcinoma (RCC) at high risk of developing metastasis following nephrectomy] trials. Kaplan-Meier and multivariable Cox regression models were used to assess the 10-year CSM rates in the overall cohort according to stage, grade, and histologic characteristics, and in 4 generated random samples according to the eligible patients for each of the 4 trials.

RESULTS

Of 116,750 patients who had undergone surgery for nmRCC, 18,559 (15.9%) had fulfilled the inclusion criteria for 1 of the 4 trials. The greatest proportion of higher stage and grade combinations and sarcomatoid histologic features would have qualified for IMmotion010, followed by KEYNOTE-564, CheckMate 914, and PROSPER RCC. Multivariable Cox regression models demonstrated the most unfavorable prognosis for stage N1 grade 3/4 (hazard ratio [HR], 11.5; P < .001), stage T4N0 grade 3/4 (HR, 9.8; P < .001), and sarcomatoid histologic features (HR, 5.5; P < .001). Among the 4 random samples, the difference in the qualifying criteria resulted in the greatest versus progressively lower CSM rates in the IMmotion010, KEYNOTE-564, CheckMate 914, and PROSPER RCC trials, respectively (P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings indicate that participation in adjuvant immunotherapy trials should be predominantly encouraged for patients with high-grade stage T3, T4, and N1 and patients with any stage with sarcomatoid pathologic features.

Validation of the GRade, Age, Nodes and Tumor (GRANT) score within the Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) database: A new tool to predict survival in surgically treated renal cell carcinoma patients

The purpose of the present study was to validate the new GRade, Age, Nodes and Tumor (GRANT) score for renal cell carcinoma (RCC) prognostication within a large population of patients. Within the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database, we identified patients with either clear-cell or papillary RCC, who underwent nephrectomy between 2001 and 2015. Harrell’s C-Index, calibration plot and decision curve analysis were used to validate the GRANT model using a five-risk group stratification (0 vs. 1 vs. 2 vs. 3 vs. 4 risk factors). The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS) at 60 months. The analyses were repeated according to the histologic subgroup. The overall population included 73217 cases; 60900 with clear-cell RCC and 12317 with papillary histology, respectively. According to a five-risk group stratification, 23985 patients (32.8%) had no risk factor (0), 35019 (47.8%) had only one risk factor (1), 13275 (18.1%) had risk score 2854 (1.2%) had 3 risk factors and 84 (0.1%) of cases had a GRANT score of 4, respectively. At 60 months, OS rates as determined by the GRANT score were respectively 94% (score 0) vs. 86% (score 1) vs. 76% (score 2) vs. 46% (score 3) vs. 16% (score 4). In both histologic subtypes, the GRANT score yielded good calibration and high net benefit. OS C-Index values were 0.677 and 0.650 for clear-cell and papillary RCC at 60 months after surgery, respectively. In conclusion, the GRANT score was validated with a five-risk group stratification in a huge population from the SEER database, offering a further demonstration of its reliability for prognostication in RCC.

Eupatilin Inhibits Renal Cancer Growth by Downregulating MicroRNA-21 through the Activation of YAP1

Renal cell carcinoma (RCC) is the second most common human urinary tumor. Eupatilin is the main active ingredient of the traditional Chinese medicine Artemisia asiatica. The effect of Eupatilin on RCC and the underlying mechanism remain unknown. Here, we investigated the anticancer effects and mechanisms of Eupatilin in RCC in vivo and in vitro, laying an experimental foundation for the clinical application of Eupatilin in the treatment of RCC. The results showed that Eupatilin significantly inhibited 786-O cell viability and migration and promoted apoptosis. Eupatilin inhibited the expression of miR-21 in 786-O cells, and overexpression of miR-21 suppressed the effect of Eupatilin on viability, apoptosis, and migration in 786-O cells. Eupatilin inhibited the growth of renal tumors in nude mice by downregulating miR-21. YAP1, which was identified as a target of miR-21, showed significantly lower expression in RCC tissues than in healthy tissues. miR-21 significantly inhibited YAP1 protein expression in 786-O cells and tumor tissues isolated from nude mice, and YAP1 attenuated the effect of miR-21 on the viability, apoptosis, and migration of 786-O cells. In conclusion, Eupatilin inhibited the expression of miR-21, which mediated the proapoptotic and antimigratory effects of Eupatilin by suppressing YAP1 in renal cancer cells. These results suggested that Eupatilin could be a potent agent for the treatment of RCC.

Outcome of sentinel lymph node biopsy in patients with clinically non-metastatic renal cell carcinoma

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the rate of occult SN metastases, oncological outcome, and association of recurrence with the pattern of lymphatic tumour drainage in RCC.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A pooled RCC sub-group analysis was conducted of secondary endpoints from a published feasibility and a phase II prospective single-arm SN study to investigate oncological outcome. Patients with cT1-3 (<10 cm) cN0M0 RCC of any sub-type were enrolled. After intratumoural injection of Tc^99m nanocolloid, pre-operative imaging of SNs with SPECT/CT was followed by (partial) nephrectomy with SN and regional lymph node dissection using a γ-probe. The patients were followed with a risk-adapted surveillance programme. Endpoints of the studies were analysed using Cox proportional hazard models.

RESULTS

Sixty-six RCC patients were included. Two patients (3%, 95% CI =0.5-11%) had occult SN metastases and remained free of disease at 57 and 72 months. Ten patients (15%, 95% CI =7-26%) developed recurrences, and four (6%, 95% CI =2.3-14.5%) had died of disease at a median follow-up of 57 months (IQR =18-72 months). Occurrence of distant metachronous metastases were associated with tumour size (HR =1.39, p = 0.02), pT stage (HR =6.83, p < 0.01 for comparison T1 vs T3/4), Grade 3/4 (HR =8.38, p = 0.05 for comparison 1/2 vs 3/4) and interaortocaval sentinel lymph node location (HR =10.52, p = 0.03 for comparison yes vs no).

CONCLUSIONS

The rate of occult metastatic SN is low, but long disease-free survival (DFS) was observed in two patients with occult SN metastases. We hypothesize an interaortocaval lymphatic route in thoracic recurrences. Evaluation of the prognostic and therapeutic role of sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) requires a clinical trial in high-risk RCC.

Urologic Pathology: Key Parameters from a Urologist's Perspective

Prostate cancer, bladder cancer, and kidney cancer represent the 3 most common urologic malignancies, and form a heterogenous group of disease processes, with a wide range of pathologic features. As a urologist, a strong understanding of the pathologic features of urologic malignancies is essential to prognosticate and counsel patients and to determine the most effective course of treatment. This review discusses the pathologic features of prostate, bladder, and kidney cancer, and examines how detailed pathologic reporting is critical to today's practicing urologist.

Kidney Cancer Research Network of Canada consensus statement on the role of adjuvant therapy after nephrectomy for high-risk, non-metastatic renal cell carcinoma: A comprehensive analysis of the literature and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

INTRODUCTION

The Kidney Cancer Research Network of Canada (KCRNC) collaborated to prepare this consensus statement about the use of target agents as adjuvant therapy in patients with non-metastatic renal cell carcinoma (nmRCC) after nephrectomy. We reviewed the published data and performed a meta-analysis of studies that focused on vascular endothelial growth factor receptor (VEGFR) tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs).

METHODS

A systematic literature search identified seven trials on adjuvant target therapy in nmRCC. Three trials, the ASSURE, S-TRAC, and PROTECT, focused on VEGFR TKIs and represented the focus of the study, including a meta-analysis combining their data on disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS).

RESULTS

The ASSURE trial showed no DFS or OS benefit of TKIs over placebo after one year of adjuvant sorafenib or sunitinib. In contrast, the S-TRAC trial showed improved DFS after one year of adjuvant sunitinib using central review process, but not using investigator review process. No OS benefit was recorded in either study. Recently, the PROTECT trial also showed no DFS or OS benefit when one year of adjuvant pazopanib was compared to placebo. Meta-analyses of the pooled DFS and OS estimates from all three trials resulted in DFS and OS hazard ratios of 0.87 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.73-1.04) and 1.04 (95% CI 0.89-1.22), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Data from three available clinical trials of adjuvant VEGFR TKIs vs. placebo do not currently support the use of adjuvant TKI therapy as standard of care after nephrectomy for nmRCC. At this time, adjuvant TKI-based adjuvant therapy is not recommended for routine use after nephrectomy for high-risk nmRCC, but highly motivated patients may benefit from a discussion with their oncologist regarding the risks and benefits of adjuvant TKI.