1
|
Gebrael G, Jo Y, Mathew Thomas V, Li H, Sayegh N, Tripathi N, Srivastava A, Nordblad B, Dal E, Narang A, Brundage J, Campbell P, Galarza Fortuna G, Hage Chehade C, Maughan BL, Agarwal N, Swami U. Cabozantinib with immune checkpoint inhibitor versus cabozantinib monotherapy in patients with metastatic clear cell renal cell carcinoma progressing after prior immune checkpoint inhibitor. Cancer 2024; 130:2621-2628. [PMID: 38564301 DOI: 10.1002/cncr.35302] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/04/2023] [Revised: 03/01/2024] [Accepted: 03/05/2024] [Indexed: 04/04/2024]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Rechallenge with antibodies targeting programmed cell death protein-1 or its ligand (PD-1/L1) after discontinuation or disease progression in solid tumors following a prior PD-1/L1 treatment is often practiced in clinic. This study aimed to investigate if adding PD-1/L1 inhibitors to cabozantinib, the most used second-line treatment in real-world patients with metastatic clear cell renal cell carcinoma (mccRCC), offers additional benefits. METHODS Using de-identified patient-level data from a large real-world US-based database, patients diagnosed with mccRCC, who received any PD-1/L1-based combination in first-line (1L) setting, followed by second-line (2L) therapy with either cabozantinib alone or in combination with PD-1/L1 inhibitors were included. Patients given a cabozantinib-containing regimen in 1L were excluded. The study end points were real-world time to next therapy (rwTTNT) and real-world overall survival (rwOS) by 2L. RESULTS Of 12,285 patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma in the data set, 348 patients met eligibility and were included in the analysis. After propensity score matching weighting, cabozantinib with PD-1/L1 inhibitors versus cabozantinib (ref.) had similar rwTTNT and rwOS in the 2L setting. Hazard ratios and 95% confidence interval (CI) for rwTTNT and rwOS are 0.74 (95% CI, 0.49-1.12) and 1.15 (95% CI, 0.73-1.79), respectively. CONCLUSION In this study, the results align with the phase 3 CONTACT-03 trial results, which showed no additional benefit of adding PD-L1 inhibitor to cabozantinib compared to cabozantinib alone in 2L following PD-1/L1-based therapies in 1L. These results from real-world patients strengthen the evidence regarding the futility of rechallenge with PD-1/L1 inhibitors.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Georges Gebrael
- Division of Medical Oncology, Department of Internal Medicine, Huntsman Cancer Institute, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah, USA
| | - Yeonjung Jo
- Division of Medical Oncology, Department of Internal Medicine, Huntsman Cancer Institute, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah, USA
| | - Vinay Mathew Thomas
- Division of Medical Oncology, Department of Internal Medicine, Huntsman Cancer Institute, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah, USA
| | - Haoran Li
- Division of Medical Oncology, University of Kansas Cancer Center, Kansas City, Kansas, USA
| | - Nicolas Sayegh
- Division of Medical Oncology, Department of Internal Medicine, Huntsman Cancer Institute, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah, USA
| | - Nishita Tripathi
- Division of Medical Oncology, Department of Internal Medicine, Huntsman Cancer Institute, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah, USA
| | - Ayana Srivastava
- Division of Medical Oncology, Department of Internal Medicine, Huntsman Cancer Institute, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah, USA
| | - Blake Nordblad
- Division of Medical Oncology, Department of Internal Medicine, Huntsman Cancer Institute, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah, USA
| | - Emre Dal
- Division of Medical Oncology, Department of Internal Medicine, Huntsman Cancer Institute, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah, USA
| | - Arshit Narang
- Division of Medical Oncology, Department of Internal Medicine, Huntsman Cancer Institute, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah, USA
| | - James Brundage
- Division of Medical Oncology, Department of Internal Medicine, Huntsman Cancer Institute, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah, USA
| | - Patrick Campbell
- Division of Medical Oncology, Department of Internal Medicine, Huntsman Cancer Institute, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah, USA
| | - Gliceida Galarza Fortuna
- Division of Medical Oncology, Department of Internal Medicine, Huntsman Cancer Institute, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah, USA
| | - Chadi Hage Chehade
- Division of Medical Oncology, Department of Internal Medicine, Huntsman Cancer Institute, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah, USA
| | - Benjamin L Maughan
- Division of Medical Oncology, Department of Internal Medicine, Huntsman Cancer Institute, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah, USA
| | - Neeraj Agarwal
- Division of Medical Oncology, Department of Internal Medicine, Huntsman Cancer Institute, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah, USA
| | - Umang Swami
- Division of Medical Oncology, Department of Internal Medicine, Huntsman Cancer Institute, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah, USA
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Powles T, Albiges L, Bex A, Comperat E, Grünwald V, Kanesvaran R, Kitamura H, McKay R, Porta C, Procopio G, Schmidinger M, Suarez C, Teoh J, de Velasco G, Young M, Gillessen S. Renal cell carcinoma: ESMO Clinical Practice Guideline for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up. Ann Oncol 2024; 35:692-706. [PMID: 38788900 DOI: 10.1016/j.annonc.2024.05.537] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/22/2024] [Revised: 05/03/2024] [Accepted: 05/13/2024] [Indexed: 05/26/2024] Open
Affiliation(s)
- T Powles
- Barts Cancer Institute, Department of Medical Oncology, Queen Mary University of London and Royal Free London NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
| | - L Albiges
- Université Paris Saclay, Institut Gustave Roussy, Villejuif, France
| | - A Bex
- Specialist Centre for Kidney Cancer, Royal Free London NHS Foundation Trust, London; Division of Surgery and Interventional Science, University College London, London, UK; Department of Urology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Hospital, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - E Comperat
- Department of Pathology, Medical University of Vienna, General Hospital of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | - V Grünwald
- Interdisciplinary Genitourinary Oncology, West German Cancer Center Clinic for Internal Medicine and Clinic for Urology, University Hospital Essen, Essen, Germany
| | - R Kanesvaran
- Division of Medical Oncology, National Cancer Centre, Singapore, Singapore
| | - H Kitamura
- Department of Urology, Faculty of Medicine, University of Toyama, Toyama, Japan
| | - R McKay
- Department of Medicine and Urology, University of California San Diego, La Jolla, USA
| | - C Porta
- Interdisciplinary Department of Medicine, University of Bari 'A. Moro', Bari; Division of Medical Oncology, A.O.U. Consorziale Policlinico di Bari, Bari
| | - G Procopio
- Department of Medical Oncology, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori di Milano, Milan, Italy
| | - M Schmidinger
- Department of Urology, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | - C Suarez
- Medical Oncology, Vall d'Hebron Institute of Oncology (VHIO), Hospital Universitari Vall d'Hebron, Vall d'Hebron Barcelona Hospital Campus, Barcelona, Spain
| | - J Teoh
- S. H. Ho Urology Centre, Department of Surgery, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong SAR, China
| | - G de Velasco
- Instituto de Investigación i+12 and Departamento de Oncología Médica, Hospital University 12 de Octubre, Madrid, Spain
| | - M Young
- Barts Cancer Institute, Department of Medical Oncology, Queen Mary University of London and Royal Free London NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK; Barts Cancer Institute, Department of Experimental Cancer Medicine, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK
| | - S Gillessen
- Oncology Institute of Southern Switzerland (IOSI), Ente Ospedaliero Cantonale (EOC), Bellinzona; Università della Svizzera Italiana, Lugano, Switzerland
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Albiges L, McGregor BA, Heng DYC, Procopio G, de Velasco G, Taguieva-Pioger N, Martín-Couce L, Tannir NM, Powles T. Vascular endothelial growth factor-targeted therapy in patients with renal cell carcinoma pretreated with immune checkpoint inhibitors: A systematic literature review. Cancer Treat Rev 2024; 122:102652. [PMID: 37980876 DOI: 10.1016/j.ctrv.2023.102652] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/18/2023] [Revised: 11/01/2023] [Accepted: 11/03/2023] [Indexed: 11/21/2023]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION We conducted a systematic literature review to identify evidence for use of vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF)-targeted (anti-VEGF) treatment in patients with renal cell carcinoma (RCC) following prior checkpoint inhibitor (CPI)-based therapy. METHODS This was a PRISMA-standard systematic literature review; registered with PROSPERO (CRD42021255568). Literature searches were conducted in MEDLINE®, Embase, and the Cochrane Library (January 28, 2021; updated September 13, 2022) to identify publications reporting efficacy/effectiveness and safety/tolerability evidence for anti-VEGF treatment in patients with RCC who had received prior CPI therapy. RESULTS Of 2,639 publications screened, 48 were eligible and featured 2,759 patients treated in trials and 2,209 in real-world studies (RWS). Most patients with available data were treated with anti-VEGF tyrosine kinase inhibitor-based regimens (trials: 93 %; RWS: 100 %), most commonly cabozantinib, which accounted for 46 % of trial and 62 % of RWS patients in publications with available data. Collectively, there was consistent evidence of anti-VEGF treatment activity after prior CPI therapy. Activity was reported for all anti-VEGF regimens and regardless of prior CPI-based regimen. No new safety signals were detected for subsequent anti-VEGF therapy; no studies suggested increased immune-related adverse events associated with prior CPI therapy. The results were limited by data quality; study heterogeneity prohibited meta-analyses. CONCLUSION Based on the available data (most commonly for cabozantinib), anti-VEGF therapy appears to be a rational treatment choice in patients with RCC who have progressed despite prior CPI-based therapy. Results from ongoing trials of combination anti-VEGF plus CPI regimen post prior CPI therapy trials will contribute more definitive evidence. PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARY Anticancer treatments that work by reducing levels of a substance in the body called Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor are known as anti-VEGF drugs. Reducing VEGF levels helps to reduce blood supply to tumors, which can slow the speed at which the cancer grows. Some other types of anticancer drugs that help the immune system to fight cancer cells are called checkpoint inhibitors. Here, we looked at published studies that investigated how anti-VEGF drugs work, and what side effects they cause, in people who have already been treated with checkpoint inhibitors for a type of kidney cancer called renal cell carcinoma. We aimed to summarize the available evidence to help doctors decide how best to use anti-VEGF drugs in these patients. We found 48 studies that included almost 5,000 patients. The results of the studies showed that anti-VEGF drugs have anticancer effects in people with renal cell carcinoma who had already been treated with checkpoint inhibitors. All of the VEGF-targeting drugs had anticancer effects, irrespective of what checkpoint inhibitor treatment people had received before. There were different amounts of evidence available for the different anti-VEGF drugs. The anti-VEGF cabozantinib had the largest amount of evidence. Importantly, previous checkpoint inhibitor treatment did not seem to affect the number or type of side-effects associated with anti-VEGF drugs. Results from ongoing, well-designed studies will be helpful to confirm these results. Our findings may be useful for doctors considering using anti-VEGF drugs in patients with renal cell carcinoma who have received checkpoint inhibitor treatment.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Laurence Albiges
- Medical Oncology, Gustave Roussy, Université Paris-Saclay, Villejuif, France.
| | | | - Daniel Y C Heng
- Division of Medical Oncology, Tom Baker Cancer Centre, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada
| | - Giuseppe Procopio
- Genitourinary Medical Oncology, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, Milan, Italy
| | - Guillermo de Velasco
- University Hospital 12 de Octubre, Department of Medical Oncology, Madrid, Spain
| | | | | | - Nizar M Tannir
- Department of Genitourinary Medical Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Thomas Powles
- Barts Cancer Institute, Cancer Research UK Experimental Cancer Medicine Centre, Queen Mary University of London, Department of Genitourinary Oncology, London, UK
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Clavijo ND, Lara PA, Silva JAM, Triana IC, Vargas HA, Pino LE, Segovia JM, Cantor EA. Successful long-term management of metastatic clear cell renal cell carcinoma with nivolumab: a case report and literature review. Ecancermedicalscience 2023; 17:1643. [PMID: 38414972 PMCID: PMC10898913 DOI: 10.3332/ecancer.2023.1643] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/30/2023] [Indexed: 02/29/2024] Open
Abstract
In Colombia, renal cancer is a rare condition, with clear cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC) being the most prevalent neoplasm. In recent years, immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) have been proposed for the management of metastatic disease, as they have shown improved rates of response and long-term survival. Furthermore, they exhibit a favourable tolerance profile, and adverse events causing significant morbidity are infrequent. We report the case of a 61-year-old male patient initially diagnosed with early-stage ccRCC who underwent right nephrectomy in 2009. Six years later, disease recurrence with metastatic compromise was documented, which led to the resection of the L1 vertebral body followed by radiotherapy and maintenance treatment with sunitinib. Due to disease progression, treatment with sunitinib was discontinued. Subsequently, everolimus was initiated as second-line immunotherapy, which was later discontinued due to the appearance of new metastatic lesions. In 2017, the patient was referred to our institution, where a third-line pharmacological treatment with nivolumab was initiated. In 2022, complete remission by positron emission tomography-computed tomography (PET-CT) was evidenced, which has been sustained to date. This case demonstrates the efficacy and safety of ICI in patients with metastatic ccRCC. The case presented is relevant in that it describes the achievement of complete remission in a patient who did not respond to the first two lines of immunotherapy. Given the limited literature regarding the discontinuation of therapy after achieving sustained remission, further research is warranted to explore this topic.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Nicolás Duque Clavijo
- Universidad de los Andes, Fundacion Santa Fe de Bogota, Bogota 110111, Colombia
- https://orcid.org/0009-0009-4553-5168
| | - Paula A Lara
- Universidad de los Andes, Fundacion Santa Fe de Bogota, Bogota 110111, Colombia
- https://orcid.org/0009-0000-0080-1084
| | - John Alejandro Murillo Silva
- Internal Medicine Department, Santa Fe Fundacion Santa Fe de Bogota, Bogota 110111, Colombia
- https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7450-8286
| | - Iván Camilo Triana
- Internal Medicine Department, Fundacion Santa Fe de Bogota, Bogota 110111, Colombia
- https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8349-5576
| | - Henry Alexander Vargas
- Internal Medicine Department, ICCAL, Fundacion Santa Fe de Bogota, Bogota 110111, Colombia
- https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2039-1857
| | - Luis Eduardo Pino
- Internal Medicine Department, ICCAL, Fundacion Santa Fe de Bogota, Bogota 110111, Colombia
- https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4475-7470
| | - Javier Mauricio Segovia
- Internal Medicine Department, ICCAL, Fundacion Santa Fe de Bogota, Bogota 110111, Colombia
- https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8971-0911
| | - Erick Andrés Cantor
- Internal Medicine Department, ICCAL, Fundacion Santa Fe de Bogota, Bogota 110111, Colombia
- https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0920-219X
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Méndez-Vidal MJ, Lázaro Quintela M, Lainez-Milagro N, Perez-Valderrama B, Suárez Rodriguez C, Arranz Arija JÁ, Peláez Fernández I, Gallardo Díaz E, Lambea Sorrosal J, González-del-Alba A. SEOM SOGUG clinical guideline for treatment of kidney cancer (2022). Clin Transl Oncol 2023; 25:2732-2748. [PMID: 37556095 PMCID: PMC10425490 DOI: 10.1007/s12094-023-03276-5] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/30/2023] [Accepted: 07/01/2023] [Indexed: 08/10/2023]
Abstract
Renal cancer is the seventh most common cancer in men and the tenth in women. The aim of this article is to review the diagnosis, treatment, and follow-up of renal carcinoma accompanied by recommendations with new evidence and treatment algorithms. A new pathologic classification of RCC by the World Health Organization (WHO) was published in 2022 and this classification would be considered a "bridge" to a future molecular classification. For patients with localized disease, surgery is the treatment of choice with nephron-sparing surgery recommended when feasible. Adjuvant treatment with pembrolizumab is an option for intermediate-or high-risk cases, as well as patients after complete resection of metastatic disease. More data are needed in the future, including positive overall survival data. Clinical prognostic classification, preferably IMDC, should be used for treatment decision making in mRCC. Cytoreductive nephrectomy should not be deemed mandatory in individuals with intermediate-poor IMDC/MSKCC risk who require systemic therapy. Metastasectomy can be contemplated in selected subjects with a limited number of metastases or long metachronous disease-free interval. For the population of patients with metastatic ccRCC as a whole, the combination of pembrolizumab-axitinib, nivolumab-cabozantinib, or pembrolizumab-lenvatinib can be considered as the first option based on the benefit obtained in OS versus sunitinib. In cases that have an intermediate IMDC and poor prognosis, the combination of ipilimumab and nivolumab has demonstrated superior OS compared to sunitinib. As for individuals with advanced RCC previously treated with one or two antiangiogenic tyrosine-kinase inhibitors, nivolumab and cabozantinib are the options of choice. When there is progression following initial immunotherapy-based treatment, we recommend treatment with an antiangiogenic tyrosine-kinase inhibitor. While no clear sequence can be advocated, medical oncologists and patients should be aware of the recent advances and new strategies that improve survival and quality of life in the setting of metastatic RC.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- María José Méndez-Vidal
- Medical Oncology Department, Maimonides Institute for Biomedical Research of Cordoba (IMIBIC), Hospital Universitario Reina Sofía, Córdoba, Spain
| | - Martin Lázaro Quintela
- Medical Oncology Department, Hospital Alvaro Cunqueiro-Complejo Hospitalario Universitario de Vigo, Pontevedra, Spain
| | - Nuria Lainez-Milagro
- Medical Oncology Department, Hospital Universitario de Navarra (HUN), Pamplona, Spain
| | | | | | | | | | | | - Julio Lambea Sorrosal
- Medical Oncology Department, Hospital Clínico Universitario Lozano Blesa, Zaragoza, Spain
| | | |
Collapse
|
6
|
Sammarco E, Manfredi F, Nuzzo A, Ferrari M, Bonato A, Salfi A, Serafin D, Zatteri L, Antonuzzo A, Galli L. Immune Checkpoint Inhibitor Rechallenge in Renal Cell Carcinoma: Current Evidence and Future Directions. Cancers (Basel) 2023; 15:3172. [PMID: 37370782 DOI: 10.3390/cancers15123172] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/16/2023] [Revised: 06/11/2023] [Accepted: 06/12/2023] [Indexed: 06/29/2023] Open
Abstract
Immune checkpoint inhibitor-based therapies represent the current standard of care in the first-line treatment of advanced renal cell carcinoma. Despite a clear benefit in survival outcomes, a considerable proportion of patients experience disease progression; prospective data about second-line therapy after first-line treatment with immune checkpoint inhibitors are limited to small phase II studies. As with other solid tumors (such as melanoma and non-small cell lung cancer), preliminary data about the clinical efficacy of rechallenge of immunotherapy (alone or in combination with other drugs) in renal cell carcinoma are beginning to emerge. Nevertheless, the role of rechallenge in immunotherapy in this setting of disease remains unclear and cannot be considered a standard of care; currently some randomized trials are exploring this approach in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma. The aim of our review is to summarize main evidence available in the literature concerning immunotherapy rechallenge in renal carcinoma, especially focusing on biological rationale of resistance to immune checkpoint inhibitors, on the published data of clinical efficacy and on future perspectives.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Enrico Sammarco
- Unit of Medical Oncology 2, Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria Pisana, Santa Chiara Hospital, 56126 Pisa, Italy
| | - Fiorella Manfredi
- Unit of Medical Oncology 2, Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria Pisana, Santa Chiara Hospital, 56126 Pisa, Italy
| | - Amedeo Nuzzo
- Unit of Medical Oncology 2, Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria Pisana, Santa Chiara Hospital, 56126 Pisa, Italy
| | - Marco Ferrari
- Unit of Medical Oncology 2, Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria Pisana, Santa Chiara Hospital, 56126 Pisa, Italy
| | - Adele Bonato
- Unit of Medical Oncology 2, Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria Pisana, Santa Chiara Hospital, 56126 Pisa, Italy
| | - Alessia Salfi
- Unit of Medical Oncology 2, Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria Pisana, Santa Chiara Hospital, 56126 Pisa, Italy
| | - Debora Serafin
- Unit of Medical Oncology 2, Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria Pisana, Santa Chiara Hospital, 56126 Pisa, Italy
| | - Luca Zatteri
- Unit of Medical Oncology 2, Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria Pisana, Santa Chiara Hospital, 56126 Pisa, Italy
| | - Andrea Antonuzzo
- Unit of Medical Oncology 1, Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria Pisana, Santa Chiara Hospital, 56126 Pisa, Italy
| | - Luca Galli
- Unit of Medical Oncology 2, Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria Pisana, Santa Chiara Hospital, 56126 Pisa, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Current Options for Second-Line Systemic Therapy in Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma. J Kidney Cancer VHL 2022; 9:29-40. [PMID: 36310639 PMCID: PMC9551369 DOI: 10.15586/jkcvhl.v9i3.243] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/13/2022] [Accepted: 08/26/2022] [Indexed: 11/06/2022] Open
Abstract
Standard systemic therapy of advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC) involves targeting angiogenesis, mainly through tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKI) against the vascular endothelial growth factor receptor (VEGFR) pathway and targeting the immune checkpoints, namely, programmed death-1 (PD-1) or its ligand (PD-L1), and cytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated protein 4 (CTLA4). With current strategies of combining these two approaches in the front-line setting, less is known about optimal selection of therapy upon development of resistance in the second and later lines of treatment for progressive disease. This review discusses currently available therapeutic options in patients who have progressive RCC after prior treatment with double immune check-point inhibitors (ICIs) or ICI-TKI combinations.
Collapse
|
8
|
Rosellini M, Marchetti A, Tassinari E, Nuvola G, Rizzo A, Santoni M, Mollica V, Massari F. Guiding treatment selection with immunotherapy compared to targeted therapy agents in patients with metastatic kidney cancer. EXPERT REVIEW OF PRECISION MEDICINE AND DRUG DEVELOPMENT 2022. [DOI: 10.1080/23808993.2022.2156786] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/23/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- Matteo Rosellini
- Medical Oncology, IRCCS Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria di Bologna, Bologna, Italy
| | - Andrea Marchetti
- Medical Oncology, IRCCS Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria di Bologna, Bologna, Italy
| | - Elisa Tassinari
- Medical Oncology, IRCCS Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria di Bologna, Bologna, Italy
| | - Giacomo Nuvola
- Medical Oncology, IRCCS Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria di Bologna, Bologna, Italy
| | - Alessandro Rizzo
- Struttura Semplice Dipartimentale di Oncologia Medica per la Presa in Carico Globale del Paziente Oncologico “Don Tonino Bello,”, I.R.C.C.S. Istituto Tumori “Giovanni Paolo II,”, Bari, Italy
| | - Matteo Santoni
- Oncology Unit, Macerata Hospital, Via Santa Lucia 2, Macerata, Italy
| | - Veronica Mollica
- Medical Oncology, IRCCS Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria di Bologna, Bologna, Italy
- Department of Experimental, Diagnostic and Specialty Medicine, S.Orsola-Malpighi University Hospital, University of Bologna, Bologna, Italy
| | - Francesco Massari
- Medical Oncology, IRCCS Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria di Bologna, Bologna, Italy
- Department of Experimental, Diagnostic and Specialty Medicine, S.Orsola-Malpighi University Hospital, University of Bologna, Bologna, Italy
| |
Collapse
|