Addressing the best treatment for non-clear cell renal cell carcinoma: A meta-analysis of randomised clinical trials comparing VEGFR-TKis versus mTORi-targeted therapies

Clinical features and response to immune combinations in patients with renal cell carcinoma and sarcomatoid de-differentiation (ARON-1 study)

Metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) carrying sarcomatoid features (sRCC) has aggressive biology and poor prognosis. First-line immunotherapy (IO)-based combinations have improved the outcome of clear cell RCC patients, including that of sRCC. Real-world data confirming the adequate first-line management of sRCC is largely lacking. We investigated the clinical features and the outcome of sRCC patients treated with IO-based combinations within the ARON-1 study population (NCT05287464). The primary objective was to define the incidence and baseline clinical characteristics of sRCC compared with non-sRCC patients. The secondary objective was to describe the outcome of sRCC patients based on type of first-line treatment (IO + IO vs. IO + tyrosin kinase inhibitor [TKI]). We identified 1362 mRCC patients with IMDC intermediate or poor risk, 226 sRCC and 1136 non-sRCC. These two subgroups did not differ in terms of baseline characteristics. The median overall survival (OS) was 26.8 months (95%CI 21.6-44.2) in sRCC and 35.3 months (95%CI 30.2-40.4) in non-sRCC patients (p = .013). The median progression-free survival (PFS) was longer in non-sRCC patients compared to sRCC (14.5 vs. 12.3 months, p = .064). In patients treated with first-line IO + TKI the median OS was 34.4 months compared to 26.4 months of those who received IO + IO (p = .729). The median PFS was 12.4 months with IO + TKI and 12.3 months with IO + IO (p = .606). In conclusion, we confirm that sRCC are aggressive tumors with poor prognosis. IO-based combinations improve survival outcomes of sRCC patients, regardless from the type of strategy (IO + IO versus IO + TKI) adopted.

Downregulation of UBB potentiates SP1/VEGFA-dependent angiogenesis in clear cell renal cell carcinoma

Clear cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC) presents a unique profile characterized by high levels of angiogenesis and robust vascularization. Understanding the underlying mechanisms driving this heterogeneity is essential for developing effective therapeutic strategies. This study revealed that ubiquitin B (UBB) is downregulated in ccRCC, which adversely affects the survival of ccRCC patients. UBB exerts regulatory control over vascular endothelial growth factor A (VEGFA) by directly interacting with specificity protein 1 (SP1), consequently exerting significant influence on angiogenic processes. Subsequently, we validated that DNA methyltransferase 3 alpha (DNMT3A) is located in the promoter of UBB to epigenetically inhibit UBB transcription. Additionally, we found that an unharmonious UBB/VEGFA ratio mediates pazopanib resistance in ccRCC. These findings underscore the critical involvement of UBB in antiangiogenic therapy and unveil a novel therapeutic strategy for ccRCC.

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.

Advanced Non-Clear Cell Renal Cell Carcinoma Treatments and Survival: A Real-World Single-Centre Experience

BACKGROUND

Non-clear cell renal cell carcinoma (nccRCC) is a heterogeneous group of cancer. Treatment recommendations are extrapolated from ccRCC and lack solid evidence. Here, we review advanced nccRCC patients treated at our institute.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We collected retrospective data on all advanced nccRCC pts treated at the Istituto Oncologico Veneto from January 2008. We compared overall response rate (ORR), progression free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) according to histological subtypes and type of systemic treatments. Kaplan-Meier method, log-rank test and Cox regression were used to estimate and compare PFS and OS.

RESULTS

Of 1370 RCC patients, 289 had a diagnosis of nccRCC and 121 were eligible for the analysis. Fifty-three pts showed papillary histology (pRCC), 15 chromophobe; 37 unclassified RCC (NOS-RCC), 16 other histologies. Pts with chromophobe and other hystologies showed poorer survival rates compared to pRCC and NOS-RCC (mOS 10.7 vs. 20.7 vs. 30.7, p = 0.34). Pts treated with combination regimens achieved a better OS (30.7 vs. 13.7, p = 0.10), PFS (12.7 vs. 6.4, p = 0.10) and ORR (42.4% vs. 13.9%, p = 0.002) than those treated with monotherapy. IMDC and Meet-URO score retained their prognostic value.

CONCLUSION

Our retrospective real-life cohort of advanced nccRCC patients shows that immunotherapy-based combinations could improve ORR, PFS and OS compared to TKI monotherapy. Prospective trials for nccRCC patients utilizing novel therapies are ongoing and their results eagerly awaited.

An Update on the Treatment of Papillary Renal Cell Carcinoma

Papillary renal cell carcinoma (pRCC) is the second-most common subtype of kidney cancer following clear cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC), representing 15% of kidney cancers. Despite advances in therapy, including combination strategies with targeted therapies and immune checkpoint inhibitors, progress has lagged behind that of ccRCC. This is in part due to the heterogenous nature of the various subtypes of pRCC. More recently, investigators have turned efforts towards histology and biology-based trials. In this review, we outline some of the distinct biological characteristics of pRCC and discuss the most impactful clinical trials to date. Finally, we look ahead to several highly anticipated ongoing trials in pRCC.

Long Non-Coding RNAs as Novel Biomarkers in the Clinical Management of Papillary Renal Cell Carcinoma Patients: A Promise or a Pledge?

Papillary renal cell carcinoma (pRCC) represents the second most common subtype of renal cell carcinoma, following clear cell carcinoma and accounting for 10-15% of cases. For around 20 years, pRCCs have been classified according to their mere histopathologic appearance, unsupported by genetic and molecular evidence, with an unmet need for clinically relevant classification. Moreover, patients with non-clear cell renal cell carcinomas have been seldom included in large clinical trials; therefore, the therapeutic landscape is less defined than in the clear cell subtype. However, in the last decades, the evolving comprehension of pRCC molecular features has led to a growing use of target therapy and to better oncological outcomes. Nonetheless, a reliable molecular biomarker able to detect the aggressiveness of pRCC is not yet available in clinical practice. As a result, the pRCC correct prognosis remains cumbersome, and new biomarkers able to stratify patients upon risk of recurrence are strongly needed. Non-coding RNAs (ncRNAs) are functional elements which play critical roles in gene expression, at the epigenetic, transcriptional, and post-transcriptional levels. In the last decade, ncRNAs have gained importance as possible biomarkers for several types of diseases, especially in the cancer universe. In this review, we analyzed the role of long non-coding RNAs (lncRNAs) in the prognosis of pRCC, with a particular focus on their networking. In fact, in the competing endogenous RNA hypothesis, lncRNAs can bind miRNAs, resulting in the modulation of the mRNA levels targeted by the sponged miRNA, leading to additional regulation of the target gene expression and increasing complexity in the biological processes.

Progressive Global Ataxia With Sensory Changes as a Paraneoplastic Syndrome in a Patient With Chromophobe Renal Cell Carcinoma

Paraneoplastic syndromes (PNS) are rare and can be challenging to diagnose and treat. The uniqueness of PNS lies in the complexity of presentation, the importance of early diagnosis, and the role of multidisciplinary care in managing those patients to mitigate long-term neurologic complications. We describe a patient with metastatic renal cell carcinoma who presented with a complex constellation of neurological symptoms (progressive global ataxia and sensory changes) that did not resolve following nephrectomy. While complete resolution of symptoms was not achieved, he did have stabilization of his neurologic decline with the initiation of cancer-directed therapies.

Kidney Cancer, Version 3.2022, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology

The NCCN Guidelines for Kidney Cancer focus on the screening, diagnosis, staging, treatment, and management of renal cell carcinoma (RCC). Patients with relapsed or stage IV RCC typically undergo surgery and/or receive systemic therapy. Tumor histology and risk stratification of patients is important in therapy selection. The NCCN Guidelines for Kidney Cancer stratify treatment recommendations by histology; recommendations for first-line treatment of ccRCC are also stratified by risk group. To further guide management of advanced RCC, the NCCN Kidney Cancer Panel has categorized all systemic kidney cancer therapy regimens as "Preferred," "Other Recommended Regimens," or "Useful in Certain Circumstances." This categorization provides guidance on treatment selection by considering the efficacy, safety, evidence, and other factors that play a role in treatment selection. These factors include pre-existing comorbidities, nature of the disease, and in some cases consideration of access to agents. This article summarizes surgical and systemic therapy recommendations for patients with relapsed or stage IV RCC.

[Interdisciplinary recommendations for the treatment of advanced renal cell carcinoma]

In the treatment of advanced renal cell carcinoma, anti-VEGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKI) have been replaced mostly by immunotherapy combinations with checkpoint inhibitors (CPI), especially in first line therapy. Due to these novel therapies, the prognosis of patients has been improved further. In pivotal studies a median overall survival of 3-4 years has been achieved. TKI monotherapy remains important for patients with low risk, a contraindication against immunotherapy and with regard to the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic.Selection of the correct first line therapy is difficult to answer because there are two CPI-TKI combinations and one CPI-combination. Temsirolimus and the combination bevacizumab + interferon alfa have become less important. In second line therapy, nivolumab and cabozantinib have demonstrated superior overall survival compared to everolimus. Furthermore, the combination of lenvatinib + everolimus and axitinib are approved treatment options in the second line and further settings. TKI are an option as well, but they have lower supporting evidence. Everolimus has been replaced in the second line setting by these new options. Biomarkers are not available. The German S3 guideline has been updated recently to give better orientation in clinical practice.The question of the optimal sequence is still unanswered. Most second line options were evaluated after failure of anti-VEGF-TKI, but these are only applicable for a minority of patients.The purpose of an interdisciplinary expert meeting in november 2020 was to debate which criteria should influence the therapy. The members discussed several aspects of treating patients with advanced or metastatic RCC, including the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. As in previous years, the experts intended to provide recommendations for clinical practice. The results are presented in this publication.

The Morphological Spectrum of Papillary Renal Cell Carcinoma and Prevalence of Provisional/Emerging Renal Tumor Entities with Papillary Growth

Renal cell carcinoma (RCC) represents a heterogeneous disease, encompassing an increasing number of tumor subtypes. Post-2016, the World Health Organization (WHO) classification recognized that the spectrum of papillary renal cell carcinoma is evolving and has long surpassed the dichotomic simplistic "type 1 versus type 2" classification. The differential diagnosis of pRCC includes several new provisional/emerging entities with papillary growth. Type 2 tumors have been cleared out of several confounding entities, now regarded as independent tumors with specific clinical and molecular backgrounds. In this work we describe the prevalence and characteristics of emerging papillary tumor entities in two renal tumor cohorts (one consisting of consecutive papillary tumors from a single institute, the other consisting of consultation cases from several centers). After a review of 154 consecutive pRCC cases, 58% remained type 1 pRCC, and 34% type 2 pRCC. Papillary renal neoplasm with reversed polarity (1.3%), biphasic hyalinizing psammomatous RCC (1.3%), and biphasic squamoid/alveolar RCC (4.5%) were rare. Among 281 consultation cases, 121 (43%) tumors had a dominant papillary growth (most frequently MiT family translocation RCCs, mucinous tubular and spindle cell carcinoma and clear cell papillary RCC). Our data confirm that the spectrum of RCCs with papillary growth represents a major diagnostical challenge, frequently requiring a second expert opinion. Papillary renal neoplasm with reversed polarity, biphasic hyalinizing psammomatous RCC, and biphasic squamoid/alveolar RCC are rarely sent out for a second opinion, but correct classification and knowledge of these variants will improve our understanding of the clinical behavior of renal tumors with papillary growth.

2021 ASCO genitourinary cancers symposium: a focus on renal cell carcinoma

BACKGROUND

The 2021 American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) Genitourinary Cancers Symposium represents an unmissable event for oncologists who deal with renal cell carcinoma (RCC).

AIM AND RESULTS

This article describes the main acquisitions of RCC management, including the advent of a new combo (pembrolizumab+lenvatinib) as first-line therapy, the confirmation of an OS advantage of ICI plus VEGFR-TKI combinations over sunitinib at longer follow-up, the persistent benefit from these combinations in particular subgroups (clear cell mRCC tumors with sarcomatoid differentiation), and possible new approaches in subsequent lines of therapy (including the HIF-2α inhibitor belzutifan).

CONCLUSIONS

This 2021 ASCO Genitourinary Cancer Symposium laid the foundations for further knowledge development necessary for an increasingly personalized management of mRCC.

Pathology and systemic therapy of non-clear cell renal cell carcinoma: an overview

Introduction: Non-clear cell renal cell carcinoma (nccRCC) represents a highly heterogenous group of kidney cancer entities. As most clinical trials predominantly include patients with clear cell RCC (ccRCC), nccRCC treatment guidelines are mainly extrapolated from recommendations in ccRCC. Here, we review and elucidate current data on the pathologic classification and treatment of nccRCC.Areas covered: This article gives an overview of the WHO classification of RCC, showing the histological diversity of nccRCC and focusing particularly on entities first characterized since 2016, their specific molecular behavior and their role as indicators for hereditary cancer syndromes. In this context, we discuss the available data on nccRCC treatment oprtions such as tyrosine kinase inhibitors, mammalian target of rapamycin inhibitors, cytotoxic chemotherapy, and immune checkpoint inhibitors.Expert opinion: Although nccRCCs are relatively uncommon, entities of this type account for a subgroup of up to 20-25% of all RCCs. Advances in histopathology and molecular genetics, together with evidence gained from retrospective and prospective clinical data, have improved understanding of these tumors in recent years. Nevertheless, selective trials of current and novel therapies including new targeted agents in patients with nccRCC are urgently needed to further improve treatment guidelines.

The Molecular Characteristics of Non-Clear Cell Renal Cell Carcinoma: What's the Story Morning Glory?

Non-clear cell renal cell carcinomas are a miscellaneous group of tumors that include different histological subtypes, each one characterized by peculiarity in terms of genetic alteration, clinical behavior, prognosis, and treatment response. Because of their low incidence and poor enrollment in clinical trials, alongside their heterogeneity, additional efforts are required to better unveil the pathogenetic mechanisms and, consequently, to improve the treatment algorithm. Nowadays, tyrosine kinase inhibitors, mTOR and MET inhibitors, and even cisplatin-based chemotherapy and immunotherapy are potential weapons that are still under evaluation in this setting. Various biomarkers have been evaluated for detecting progression and monitoring renal cell carcinoma, but more studies are necessary to improve this field. In this review, we provide an overview on the molecular characteristics of this group of tumors and the recently published trials, giving an insight into what might become the future therapeutic standard in this complex world of non-clear cell kidney cancers.

Adjuvant therapy in renal cell carcinoma: Current knowledges and future perspectives

While many patients with non-metastatic renal cell carcinoma (RCC) can be cured with surgery alone, upward of 40% of patients recur in a short delay, raising the question of additional perioperative treatments. To address this clinical need, multiple trials have investigated the addition of systemic therapy after surgery in localized or locally advanced RCC. However, adjuvant systemic therapies in the past decades have provided disappointing results with only one positive study of antiangiogenic treatments. Debatable clinical benefit of adjuvant antiangiogenic tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) therapy at cost of high adverse event profiles have paved the way for development of alternative perioperative strategies, such as immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs). Further investigation into combination therapies with immunotherapy, neoadjuvant approaches and patient selection will be key to determining optimal adjuvant therapy regimens to improve outcomes and increase cure rates for patients with non-metastatic RCC. In this review, we extensively present the strong and weakness of the five adjuvant antiangiogenic TKI trials, highlight the main differences and discuss about the reasons of failure. We also expose the current ongoing clinical trials in the perioperative setting and provide new insights concerning the evolving landscape of the management of non-metastatic RCC.

Improved Control of Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitor-Induced Diarrhea with a Novel Chloride Channel Modulator: A Case Report

Despite the efficacy of tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) across multiple cancers, side effects including treatment-related diarrhea can impede a patient’s ability to reach therapeutic doses or stay on therapy. Below, we present the case of a 72-year-old patient with metastatic papillary renal cell carcinoma recurrent despite nephrectomy. Over the course of treatment, the patient received multiple different tyrosine kinase inhibitors with varying efficacy. Treatment with the TKI cabozantinib after failure of two prior TKIs resulted in a clinical response with shrinkage of his nodal metastatic disease. However, the severe treatment-related diarrhea refractory to conventional management required both dose holds and dose reductions of cabozantinib. Off-label administration of crofelemer, a novel FDA-approved antidiarrheal agent, successfully controlled the treatment-related diarrhea and allowed resumption and partial dose increase of cabozantinib. This case suggests that crofelemer could be a viable therapeutic strategy to address TKI-induced diarrhea.

New Insights into Adjuvant Therapy in Renal Cell Carcinoma: Is the Chapter of VEGF Inhibitors Definitely Closed?

Adjuvant therapy with antiangiogenic agents in locoregional renal cell carcinoma did not translate into a sufficient benefit and highlight the crucial role of patient selection. Ongoing clinical trials with immune-targeted agents hold great promise for this unmet clinical need.

[Interdisciplinary recommendations for the treatment of advanced metastatic renal cell carcinoma]

Due to novel therapies, the prognosis of patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) has improved. A median overall survival of more than two years is a realistic goal. Immunotherapy combinations with checkpoint inhibitors or checkpoint inhibitors and the tyrosine kinase inhibitor axitinib are new first-line options.Sunitinib, pazopanib, tivozanib and the combination of bevacizumab + interferon alpha are approved for first-line therapy regardless of the progression risk score. The use of both the combination of nivolumab + ipilimumab and cabozantinib is restricted to intermediate and high-risk patients. In this subgroup, the immunotherapy combination was more effective in terms of overall survival compared with sunitinib. Temsirolimus is only approved for high-risk patients.Sunitinib and pazopanib can also be applied as second-line options - for pazopanib the use is restricted to the event of cytokine failure. Nivolumab and cabozantinib demonstrated superior overall survival compared with everolimus. Furthermore, the combination of lenvatinib + everolimus and axitinib are approved treatment options in the second-line and further settings. Everolimus has been replaced in the second-line setting by these new options.The question regarding the optimal sequence is still unanswered.The purpose of an interdisciplinary expert meeting was to debate which criteria should influence treatment. The members discussed several aspects of treating patients with advanced or metastatic RCC. As in previous years, the experts intended to provide recommendations for clinical practice. The results are presented in this publication.

A Randomized Phase IIa Trial with Temsirolimus versus Sunitinib in Advanced Non-Clear Cell Renal Cell Carcinoma: An Intergroup Study of the CESAR Central European Society for Anticancer Drug Research-EWIV and the Interdisciplinary Working Group on Renal Cell Cancer (IAGN) of the German Cancer Society

BACKGROUND

Non-clear cell renal cell cancers (nccRCC) are rare entities, and the optimal therapy in metastatic disease has still to be defined.

METHODS

In this small prospectively randomized phase IIa multicenter trial, we investigated temsirolimus (TEM) versus sunitinib (SUN) as first-line therapy in patients with metastatic nccRCC. The patients were randomized 1:1 to either TEM in a dose of 25 mg i.v. once a week or SUN with 50 mg p.o. daily for 4 weeks on and 2 weeks off. Primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS). In total, 22 patients were included with predominantly papillary RCC (16/22) followed by chromophobe RCC and others.

RESULTS

The male to female ratio was 16:6. The tumor control rate (CR + PR + SD) was 58% for TEM and 90% for SUN-treated patients. There was also a trend for improved PFS with 9.3 versus 13.2 months (HR 1.64; 95% CI 0.65-4.18) in favor of SUN. There was no trend for overall survival.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite this trial had to be terminated earlier due to low recruitment, the results match the other studies published so far with the mTOR inhibitor everolimus and SUN, which show a trend in favor of SUN for ORR and PFS.

Rare patients in routine care: Treatment and outcome in advanced papillary renal cell carcinoma in the prospective German clinical RCC-Registry

Non‐clear cell renal cell carcinoma is a very rare malignancy that includes several histological subtypes. Each subtype may need to be addressed separately regarding prognosis and treatment; however, no Phase III clinical trial data exist. Thus, treatment recommendations for patients with non‐clear cell metastatic RCC (mRCC) remain unclear. We present first prospective data on choice of first‐ and second‐line treatment in routine practice and outcome of patients with papillary mRCC. From the prospective German clinical cohort study (RCC‐Registry), 99 patients with papillary mRCC treated with systemic first‐line therapy between December 2007 and May 2017 were included. Prospectively enrolled patients who had started first‐line treatment until May 15, 2016, were included into the outcome analyses (n = 82). Treatment was similar to therapies used for clear cell mRCC and consisted of tyrosine kinase inhibitors, mechanistic target of rapamycin inhibitors and recently checkpoint inhibitors. Median progression‐free survival from start of first‐line treatment was 5.4 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 4.1–9.2) and median overall survival was 12.0 months (95% CI, 8.1–20.0). At data cutoff, 73% of the patients died, 6% were still observed, 12% were lost to follow‐up, and 9% were alive at the end of the individual 3‐year observation period. Despite the lack of prospective Phase III evidence in patients with papillary mRCC, our real‐world data reveal effectiveness of systemic clear cell mRCC therapy in papillary mRCC. The prognosis seems to be inferior for papillary compared to clear cell mRCC. Further studies are needed to identify drivers of effectiveness of systemic therapy for papillary mRCC.

What's new?

Over the past decade, the treatment landscape for locally advanced or metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) has dramatically changed. To date, however, guideline recommendations mainly address patients with clear cell mRCC, due to a lack of prospective Phase III evidence for the rarer, non‐clear cell mRCC subtypes. This is the first longitudinal, prospective cohort study evaluating treatment and survival of patients with papillary mRCC outside a prospective clinical trial setting. The presented real‐world data help bridge the evidence gap by revealing the frequent use and effectiveness of systemic clear cell mRCC therapy in papillary mRCC, with a seemingly inferior prognosis.

[Interdisciplinary recommendations for the treatment of metastatic renal cell carcinoma]

Due to novel therapies, the prognosis of patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma has improved significantly. A median overall survival of more than two years is a realistic goal. Immunotherapies with checkpoint inhibitors are new first-line and second-line options. Sunitinib, Pazopanib, Tivozanib and the combination of Bevacizumab + interferon alpha are approved for first-line therapy, regardless of the progression risk score. The use of both the combination Nivolumab + Ipilimumab and Cabozantinib is limited to intermediate and high-risk patients. In this subgroup, the immunotherapy combination was more effective in terms of overall survival compared with Sunitinib. Temsirolimus is only approved for high-risk patients. Sunitinib and Pazopanib can also be used as second-line options, with the use of Pazopanib being limited to the event of cytokine failure. Nivolumab and Cabozantinib demonstrated superior overall survival compared to Everolimus. Furthermore, the combination of Lenvatinib + Everolimus and Axitinib are approved treatment options in second-line and further settings. Everolimus monotherapy has been replaced by the new options. The question regarding the optimal sequence of treatments is still unanswered. An interdisciplinary expert meeting aimed to discuss the criteria that should be used for therapy. The members discussed several aspects of treating patients with RCC. As in previous years, the experts intended to provide recommendations for clinical practice. The results are presented here.

Outcomes and prognosticators of stage 4 renal cell carcinoma with pathological T4 primary lesion using a large, Canadian, multi-institutional database

INTRODUCTION

The primary objective of this study was to evaluate outcomes and prognosticators in patients who underwent radical nephrectomy (RN) or cytoreductive nephrectomy (CN), depending on the clinical stage of disease preoperatively, with a pathological T4 (pT4) renal cell carcinoma (RCC) outcome. There is little data on the outcome of this specific subset of patients.

METHODS

From 2009-2016, we identified patients in the Canadian Kidney Cancer information system (CKCis) who underwent RN or CN and were found to have pT4 RCC. Clinical, operative, and pathological variables were analyzed with univariable and multivariable Cox proportional hazard models to identify factors associated with overall survival (OS). Survival curves were created using Kaplan-Meier methods and compared using the log-rank test.

RESULTS

A total of 82 patients were included in the study cohort. Median patient age was 62 years (interquartile range [IQR] 55, 70). Fifty (61%) patients had clear-cell histology and 14 (17%) had sarcomatoid characteristics. Median followup was 12 months (IQR 3, 24). At last followup, eight (10%) patients are alive with no evidence of disease, 27 (33%) are alive with disease, four (5%) were lost to followup, 36 (44%) died of disease, and seven (8%) died of other causes. Tumor histological subtype (clear-cell vs. non-clear-cell) (p=0.0032), larger tumor size (cm) (p=0.012), and Fuhrman grade (G4 vs. G2-G3) (p=0.045) were significantly associated with mortality in a multivariable Cox regression model.

CONCLUSIONS

For patients with pT4 RCC after RN or CN, survival is poor. Sarcomatoid features, non-clear-cell histology, and presence of systemic symptoms were associated with worse OS.

NK and T cells with a cytotoxic/migratory phenotype accumulate in peritumoral tissue of patients with clear cell renal carcinoma

OBJECTIVES

Renal cell carcinoma (RCC) is the most lethal urologic malignancy with increasing incidence worldwide. The conventional treatment strategies for advanced or recurrent RCC are not efficient and show considerable toxicities. Adoptive cell transfer (ACT) has become a promising treatment option for multiple cancers, particularly in combination with other therapeutic approaches. ACT often utilizes extensively in vitro expanded tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs). However, TILs are a very heterogeneous mix of cell populations and only those populations that have a cytotoxic and migratory potential are thought to deliver a therapeutic impact in ACT. The identification and localization of these therapeutically potent populations are therefore needed.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

A total number of 57 tissue samples from 19 RCC patients who underwent radical nephrectomy was analyzed. The tissue samples were obtained from the tumor, peritumoral tissue, and the adjacent healthy renal tissue. The tissues were sliced, enzymatically dissociated into single cell suspensions and the obtained cells further analyzed by flow cytometry for the expression of markers of lymphocyte cytotoxicity - TRAIL and FasL, and a surrogate marker of lymphocyte migratory activity - PECAM-1. The analyzed data were next correlated with the clinical and histopathological data.

RESULTS

Non-clear cell RCC (non-ccRCC) tumors showed a significantly decreased tumor infiltration with TRAIL⁺FasL⁺ NK cells but elevated infiltration with FasL⁺PECAM-1⁺ T cells as compared with clear cell RCC (ccRCC) tumors. Further analyses revealed that the peritumoral tissue of ccRCC patients is a reservoir of TRAIL⁺FasL⁺, TRAIL⁺PECAM-1⁺, or FasL⁺PECAM-1⁺ NK and T cells.

CONCLUSIONS

The cytotoxic/migratory lymphocytes were identified in tumors of ccRCC patients. These lymphocytes became excluded from the tumor and accumulated in the patient's peritumoral tissue.

Unclassified renal cell carcinoma: diagnostic difficulties and treatment modalities

Over the past few decades, the classification system of renal cell carcinoma (RCC) variants has witnessed tremendous and ongoing refinement driven by genomic profiling and morphological correlation that have provided valuable insights into tumor biology and characterization of this heterogeneous subset of tumors. The importance of accurate classification cannot be understated given the downstream impact on treatment decisions, risk stratification, and need for genetic testing. While the morphologic heterogeneity across these tumors is increasingly being recognized, all non-clear-cell RCCs are commonly categorized under one therapeutic category with management strategies that largely derive from clear-cell RCCs. As research in metastatic RCC progresses, there is a growing focus on rare subtypes and unclassified tumors, which is rapidly changing the treatment paradigm for non-clear-cell RCC. This review focuses on the histomorphologic diagnostic challenges of unclassified RCCs discussing the utility of contemporary diagnostic tools. It further discusses the current state of knowledge and guidelines for management of this class of tumors.

Modulating ATP binding cassette transporters in papillary renal cell carcinoma type 2 enhances its response to targeted molecular therapy

Papillary renal cell carcinoma (PRCC) is the most common nonclear cell RCCs and is known to comprise two histological subtypes. PRCC2 is more aggressive and is molecularly distinct from the other subtypes. Despite this, PRCCs are treated together as one entity, and they show poor response to the current therapies that do not target pathways implicated in their pathogenesis. We have previously detected ABCC2 (an ABC transporter), VEGF, and mTOR pathways to be enriched in PRCC2. In this study, we assess the therapeutic potential of targeting these pathways in PRCC2. Twenty RCC cell lines from the Cancer Cell Encyclopedia were compared to the Cancer Genome Atlas PRCC cohort (290), to identify representative PRCC2 cell lines. Cell lines were further validated in xenograft models. Selected cell lines were treated in vitro and in vivo (mice models) under five different conditions, untreated, anti-VEGF (sunitinib), ABCC2 blocker (MK571), mTOR inhibitor (everolimus) and sunitinib + MK571. Sunitinib +ABCC2 blocker group showed a significant response to therapy compared to the other treatment groups both in vitro (P ≤ 0.0001) and in vivo (P = 0.0132). ABCC2 blockage resulted in higher sunitinib uptake, both in vitro (P = 0.0016) and in vivo (P = 0.0031). Everolimus group demonstrated the second best response in vivo. The double-treatment group showed the highest apoptotic rate and lowest proliferation rate. There is an urgent need for individualized therapies of RCC subtypes that take into account their specific biology. Our results demonstrate that combined targeted therapy with sunitinib and ABCC2 blocker in PRCC2 has therapeutic potential. The results are likewise potentially significant for other ABCC2 high tumors. However, the results are preliminary and clinical trials are needed to confirm these effects in PRCC2 patients.