Comparison of nivolumab plus ipilimumab with tyrosine kinase inhibitors as first-line therapies for metastatic renal-cell carcinoma: a multicenter retrospective study

The lymphocyte-to-monocyte ratio as a significant inflammatory marker associated with survival of patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma treated using nivolumab plus ipilimumab therapy

BACKGROUND

Nivolumab plus ipilimumab (NIVO + IPI) is the first-line treatment for patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). While approximately 40% of patients treated with NIVO + IPI achieve a durable response, 20% develop primary resistance with severe consequences. Therefore, there is a clinical need for criteria to select patients suitable for NIVO + IPI therapy to optimize its therapeutic efficacy. Accordingly, our aim was to evaluate the association between candidate biomarkers measured before treatment initiation and survival.

METHODS

This was a multi-institutional, retrospective, cohort study of 183 patients with mRCC treated with systematic therapies between August 2015 and July 2023. Of these, 112 received NIVO + IPI as first-line therapy: mean age, 68 years; men, 83.0% (n = 93), and clear cell histology, 80.4% (n = 90). Univariable and multivariable analyses were used to evaluate associations between biomarkers and survival.

RESULTS

On univariate analysis, high C-reactive protein and systemic index, a high neutrophil-to-lymphocyte and platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio, and a low lymphocyte-to-monocyte ratio (LMR) were associated with shorter overall survival (OS). On multivariable analysis, a LMR ≤ 3 was retained as an independent factor associated to shorter OS with the highest accuracy (C-index, 0.656; hazard ratio, 7.042; 95% confidence interval, 2.0-25.0; p = 0.002).

CONCLUSION

A low LMR may identify patients who would be candidate for NIVO + IPI therapy for mRCC.

Real-world outcomes of nivolumab plus ipilimumab combination therapy for advanced renal cell carcinoma in Japanese patients: data with a minimum of 3 years of follow-up

BACKGROUND

Long-term follow-up data regarding treatment outcomes of nivolumab plus ipilimumab combination therapy for advanced renal cell carcinoma as a first-line therapy are limited in real-world Japanese populations.

METHODS

We retrospectively evaluated data of 56 advanced renal cell carcinoma patients treated with nivolumab plus ipilimumab, with a follow-up of at least 3 years. Survival, tumour response and adverse event profiles were assessed.

RESULTS

A total of 41 patients (73%) were histopathologically diagnosed with clear-cell renal cell carcinoma, and 34 (61%) were categorized into the International Metastatic renal cell carcinoma Database Consortium intermediate-risk group. The median follow-up period was 34.4 months. Regarding an effectiveness profile, median progression-free survival, time to treatment failure and overall survival were 9.01, 12.5 and 49.0 months, respectively. Objective response was observed in 27 patients (48%), including eight patients with complete response (14%), and the median duration of response was 30.8 months. Multivariate analyses showed that clear-cell histology was an independent factor of longer overall survival (hazard ratio: 0.23, P = 0.0013). Regarding safety profiles, adverse events of any grade and those with grade ≥3 developed in 40 (71%) and 25 patients (45%), respectively. Median time to adverse event development was 1.68 months. Treatment was interrupted in 28 patients (50%), and corticosteroid administration was needed in 25 (45%).

CONCLUSION

The 3-year follow-up data showed that nivolumab plus ipilimumab combination therapy exhibited a feasible effectiveness in real-world Japanese patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma. Accordingly, the high risk of adverse event development, which often requires treatment withdrawal and corticosteroid administration, should be considered.

Prognostic outcomes in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma receiving second-line treatment with tyrosine kinase inhibitor following first-line immune-oncology combination therapy

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to assess the prognostic outcomes in mRCC patients receiving second-line TKI following first-line IO combination therapy.

METHODS

This study retrospectively included 243 mRCC patients receiving second-line TKI after first-line IO combination therapy: nivolumab plus ipilimumab (n = 189, IO-IO group) and either pembrolizumab plus axitinib or avelumab plus axitinib (n = 54, IO-TKI group). Oncological outcomes between the two groups were compared, and prognostication systems were developed for these patients.

RESULTS

In the IO-IO and IO-TKI groups, the objective response rates to second-line TKI were 34.4% and 25.9% (p = 0.26), the median PFS periods were 9.7 and 7.1 months (p = 0.79), and the median OS periods after the introduction of second-line TKI were 23.1 and 33.5 months (p = 0.93), respectively. Among the several factors examined, non-CCRCC, high CRP, and low albumin levels were identified as independent predictors of both poor PFS and OS by multivariate analyses. It was possible to precisely classify the patients into 3 risk groups regarding both PFS and OS according to the positive numbers of the independent prognostic factors. Furthermore, the c-indices of this study were superior to those of previous systems as follows: 0.75, 0.64, and 0.61 for PFS prediction and 0.76, 0.70, and 0.65 for OS prediction by the present, IMDC, and MSKCC systems, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

There were no significant differences in the prognostic outcomes after introducing second-line TKI between the IO-IO and IO-TKI groups, and the histopathology, CRP and albumin levels had independent impacts on the prognosis in mRCC patients receiving second-line TKI, irrespective of first-line IO combination therapies.

Primary resistance to nivolumab plus ipilimumab therapy in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma

BACKGROUND

Nivolumab plus ipilimumab (NIVO+IPI) is the first-line treatment for patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). Approximately 40% of patients achieve a durable response; however, 20% develop primary resistant disease (PRD) to NIVO+IPI, about which little is known in patients with mRCC. Therefore, this investigation aimed to evaluate the clinical implication of PRD in patients with mRCC to select better candidates in whom NIVO+IPI can be initiated as first-line therapy.

METHODS

This multi-institutional retrospective cohort study used data collected between August 2015 and January 2023. In total, 120 patients with mRCC treated with NIVO+IPI were eligible. Associations between immune-related adverse events and progression-free survival, overall survival (OS), and objective response rate were analyzed. The relationship between other clinical factors and outcomes was also evaluated.

RESULTS

The median observation period was 16 months (interquartile range, 5-27). The median age at NIVO+IPI initiation was 68 years in the male-dominant population (n = 86, 71.7%), and most patients had clear cell histology (n = 104, 86.7%). PRD was recorded in 26 (23.4%) of 111 investigated patients during NIVO+IPI therapy. Patients who experienced PRD showed worse OS (hazard ratio: 4.525, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.315-8.850, p < 0.001). Multivariable analysis showed that lymph node metastasis (LNM) (odds ratio: 4.274, 95% CI: 1.075-16.949, p = 0.039) was an independent risk factor for PRD.

CONCLUSIONS

PRD was strongly correlated with worse survival rates. LNM was independently associated with PRD in patients with mRCC receiving NIVO+IPI as first-line therapy and might indicate that a candidate will not benefit from NIVO+IPI.

Real-world effectiveness of nivolumab plus ipilimumab and second-line therapy in Japanese untreated patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma: 2-year analysis from a multicenter retrospective clinical study (J-cardinal study)

Background

Nivolumab plus ipilimumab combination therapy is one of the standard therapies for untreated renal cell carcinoma patients with an International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium intermediate/poor risk. We have previously reported the 1-year analysis results of the effectiveness and safety of nivolumab plus ipilimumab combination therapy in the real-world setting in Japan. Here, we report the effectiveness of nivolumab plus ipilimumab combination therapy and of second-line therapy, using 2-year analysis.

Methods

This retrospective observational study enrolled Japanese patients with previously untreated metastatic renal cell carcinoma who initiated nivolumab plus ipilimumab combination therapy between August 2018 and January 2019. Data were collected from patients’ medical records at baseline and at 3 months, 1 year and 2 years after the last enrollment.

Results

Of the 45 patients enrolled, 10 patients (22.2%) each had non-clear cell renal cell carcinoma and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status ≥2 at baseline. Median follow-up period was 24.0 months; objective response rate was 41.5%, with 6 patients achieving complete response; median progression-free survival was 17.8 months and 24-month progression-free survival and overall survival rates were 41.6 and 59.1%, respectively. Second-line therapy achieved an objective response rate of 20%; median progression-free survival was 9.8 months. Median progression-free survival 2 was 26.4 months.

Conclusions

The effectiveness of nivolumab plus ipilimumab combination therapy at 2-year analysis in the real-world setting in Japan was comparable to that reported in CheckMate 214. The current analysis also demonstrated the effectiveness of second-line therapy after nivolumab plus ipilimumab combination therapy.

Comprehensive assessments of immuno-oncology drug-based combination therapies as first-line treatment for advanced renal cell carcinoma

Over the last decade, there have been substantial progress in the field of systemic therapy for advanced renal cell carcinoma. Through the transition from treatment with cytokines to molecular-targeted agents, and currently to immuno-oncology drugs, the prognostic outcomes of patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma have been markedly improved. In particular, based on the promising outcomes of recently conducted pivotal randomized clinical trials, immuno-oncology drug-based combination therapy by either dual immune checkpoint inhibition or combined inhibition of an immune checkpoint and tyrosine kinase, is currently regarded as a standard of care for treatment-naïve advanced renal cell carcinoma patients. However, insufficient data are available with respect to the selection of optimal systemic therapies for advanced renal cell carcinoma in the first-line setting due to the lack of a head-to-head comparison between approved immuno-oncology drug-based combination therapies. In this review, therefore, we summarize interesting findings associated with first-line combination therapies for advanced renal cell carcinoma obtained from both randomized clinical trials and real-world clinical practices, in order to present useful guidance to help make treatment decisions for patients with treatment-naïve advanced renal cell carcinoma.

External validation of the REMARCC model for the selection of cytoreductive nephrectomy in patients with primary metastatic renal cell carcinoma: A multicenter retrospective study

OBJECTIVES

This study aims to evaluate the utility of the scoring system of the Registry for Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma (REMARCC) model on the overall survival (OS) of patients undergoing cytoreductive nephrectomy (CN).

METHODS

A total of 278 patients with primary metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) treated with first-line tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) between January 2008 and November 2019 were identified. The c-index and net benefit between the REMARCC score were compared with the International mRCC Database Consortium (IMDC) score in patients with CN (CN group, n = 146). The effect of the REMARCC score on OS was compared between the CN group and patients without CN (non-CN group, n = 132) using Cox regression analysis under the propensity score-based inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) method to adjust for group imbalances.

RESULTS

Of the 146 patients with CN, the c-index of the REMARCC model (0.60) was higher than the IMDC model (0.54). The decision curve analysis showed the advantage of REMARCC model predicting OS compared with the IMDC model. OS was significantly longer in the REMARCC low-score (0-2) than that in the high-score (3-6) among the patients with CN. IPTW-adjusted Cox regression analyses showed that OS was significantly longer in the CN group than that in the non-CN group among the patients with REMARCC low-score but was not significantly different between the groups among the patients with REMARCC high-score.

CONCLUSIONS

The REMARCC score may be active for selecting the CN candidate in patients treated with TKIs.

Comparison of nivolumab plus ipilimumab with tyrosine kinase inhibitors as first-line therapies for metastatic renal-cell carcinoma: a multicenter retrospective study

BACKGROUND

This study compared real-world outcomes of metastatic renal-cell carcinoma (mRCC) patients treated with tyrosine kinase inhibitors or nivolumab plus ipilimumab.

METHODS

Using the International mRCC Database Consortium (IMDC), we retrospectively evaluated intermediate- and poor-risk mRCC patients who were treated with nivolumab plus ipilimumab (Nivo-Ipi), tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) as the first-line therapy between August 2015 and January 2020. We compared oncological outcomes between the Nivo-Ipi group and TKIs group using multivariate logistic regression analysis with the inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) method.

RESULTS

In this study 278 patients were included. There were 52 and 226 patients in the Nivo-Ipi and TKIs groups (sunitinib 97, axitinib 118, sorafenib 9, pazopanib 2), respectively. The median age in the Nivo-Ipi and TKIs groups were 69 and 67 years, respectively. There was no significant difference in age, performance status, history of nephrectomy, and the IMDC risk group distribution between the groups. The objective response rate was significantly higher in the Nivo-Ipi group (38%) than in the TKIs group (23%, P = 0.018). The IPTW-adjusted Cox regression analysis showed that a significantly longer progression-free survival (hazard ratio 0.60, P = 0.039) and overall survival (hazard ratio 0.51, P = 0.037) rates in the Nivo-Ipi group than those in the TKIs group.

CONCLUSIONS

The oncological outcomes of patients receiving the first-line therapy of nivolumab plus ipilimumab in real-world practice were significantly improved in comparison with first-line TKIs therapy.