Adjuvant and neoadjuvant therapies in high-risk renal cell carcinoma

Adjuvant Therapy for High-Risk Localized Renal Cell Carcinoma: Current Landscape and Future Direction

Locally and regionally advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC) can recur at high rates even after visually complete resection of primary disease. Both targeted therapies and immunotherapies represent potential agents that might help reduce recurrence of RCC in these patients. This paper reviews the current body of evidence defining their potential impact and examines the large Phase III randomized clinical trials that have been performed to assess the safety and efficacy of these systemic therapies in the adjuvant setting. Given that the findings from these trials have been predominantly negative, this paper also explores the role of other potential adjuvant agents, including single and combination agent targeted therapies and immunotherapies, whose use is currently limited to metastatic RCC. Finally, the use of radiation therapy and the use of advanced imaging modalities in RCC are also considered.

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

OPINION STATEMENT

The treatment of renal cell carcinoma (RCC) is one of the great success stories in the field of oncology, which was revolutionized with the development of therapies aimed at disrupting crucial pathways. Tumor biology of RCC has provided insight into the disease through elucidation of the role of vascular endothelial growth-factor (VEGF) and the mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR). Targeted agents against VEGF and mTOR, as well as agents targeting relevant immunomodulatory pathways, have shown clinical benefit for advanced disease. The targeted agents are highly effective in achieving a response and survival, particularly in high-risk patients. These include the vascular endothelial growth factor receptor (VEGFR) tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) axitinib and cabozantinib, and programmed cell death 1 protein (PD-1) immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) nivolumab and pembrolizumab. There is a wealth of evidence investigating different therapeutic options and combinations for first-line treatment of advanced RCC including the CheckMate 214 study, KEYNOTE-426, JAVELIN Renal 101, and CheckMate 9ER. Dual ICI and combination agents targeting the programmed cell death protein 1/programmed cell death protein ligand 1 (PD1/PDL1) and VEGF, began to demonstrate superiority over previously accepted standards in advanced clear-cell RCC. Data from a number of clinical studies are available to help physicians with evidence-based decisions for the sequence of second-line and future treatments for patients with progressive RCC. In this review, we focus on essentials for clinicians treating patients with clear-cell RCC.

Adjuvant Pembrolizumab after Nephrectomy in Renal-Cell Carcinoma

BACKGROUND

Patients with renal-cell carcinoma who undergo nephrectomy have no options for adjuvant therapy to reduce the risk of recurrence that have high levels of supporting evidence.

METHODS

In a double-blind, phase 3 trial, we randomly assigned, in a 1:1 ratio, patients with clear-cell renal-cell carcinoma who were at high risk for recurrence after nephrectomy, with or without metastasectomy, to receive either adjuvant pembrolizumab (at a dose of 200 mg) or placebo intravenously once every 3 weeks for up to 17 cycles (approximately 1 year). The primary end point was disease-free survival according to the investigator's assessment. Overall survival was a key secondary end point. Safety was a secondary end point.

RESULTS

A total of 496 patients were randomly assigned to receive pembrolizumab, and 498 to receive placebo. At the prespecified interim analysis, the median time from randomization to the data-cutoff date was 24.1 months. Pembrolizumab therapy was associated with significantly longer disease-free survival than placebo (disease-free survival at 24 months, 77.3% vs. 68.1%; hazard ratio for recurrence or death, 0.68; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.53 to 0.87; P = 0.002 [two-sided]). The estimated percentage of patients who remained alive at 24 months was 96.6% in the pembrolizumab group and 93.5% in the placebo group (hazard ratio for death, 0.54; 95% CI, 0.30 to 0.96). Grade 3 or higher adverse events of any cause occurred in 32.4% of the patients who received pembrolizumab and in 17.7% of those who received placebo. No deaths related to pembrolizumab therapy occurred.

CONCLUSIONS

Pembrolizumab treatment led to a significant improvement in disease-free survival as compared with placebo after surgery among patients with kidney cancer who were at high risk for recurrence. (Funded by Merck Sharp and Dohme, a subsidiary of Merck; KEYNOTE-564 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03142334.).

Nodular Vascular Transformation of the Lymph Node Sinuses Mimicking Sarcomatoid Change in Renal Cell Carcinoma: A Potential Diagnostic Pitfall

Vascular transformation of the lymph node sinuses (VTS) is an uncommon phenomenon that is believed to occur secondary to obstruction of efferent lymphatics, frequently occuring in retroperitoneal lymph nodes draining cancer. The nodular subtype of VTS, in particular, can mimic metastatic cancer, such as metastatic renal cell carcinoma with sarcomatoid differentiation, potentially resulting in inaccurate tumor grading and/or staging. We present a case of nodular VTS mimicking metastatic renal cell carcinoma with sarcomatoid differentiation in a patient with high-grade clear cell renal cell carcinoma, and explore the relevant differential diagnosis. Awareness of VTS is essential to avoid misdiagnosis of this benign and curative condition.

A review of checkpoint inhibitors in the management of renal cell carcinoma

Renal cell carcinoma is a common malignancy of the genitourinary system and is the eight most common cancer type in the United States. The overall incidence of renal cell carcinoma appears to be increasing but death rates have been declining. Patients with poor risk, advanced disease have a two-year survival rate of approximately 7%. Prior to the advent of tyrosine kinase inhibitors, anti-vascular endothelial growth factor antibodies, mammalian target of rapamycin inhibitors, and checkpoint inhibitors, IFN-α and high-dose IL-2, were standard of care treatment options but, conversely, their use is now limited to select patients. Immunotherapies have played a significant role in the treatment of various cancers and have continued to expand. It is of utmost importance that practitioners include checkpoint inhibitors as treatment options for renal cell carcinoma as they mark a new era in the treatment of advanced or relapsed setting. Nivolumab, pembrolizumab, avelumab, ipilimumab, and atezolizumab all play a role in management of disease as either monotherapy or in combination with other agents. Ongoing clinical trials are ongoing to further assess the benefits of inducing cellular immunity in the treatment of renal cell carcinoma. In this article, the available data on immune checkpoint inhibitors for the treatment of advanced or relapsed renal cell carcinoma and their place in therapy are reviewed.

Perioperative Therapy in Renal Cell Carcinoma: What Do We Know, What Have We Learned, What's Next?

Recent adjuvant vascular endothelial growth factor tyrosine kinase inhibitor trials in resected high-risk renal cell carcinoma that compared sunitinib, sorafenib, pazopanib, and axitinib with placebo controls have demonstrated mixed impact on disease-free survival, no improvement in overall survival, and, thus, controversy. Here, we discuss the results and conduct of these trials to provide new insight into the goals and strategies of treating resected renal cell cancer that is at high risk for recurrence. The potential for leveraging what we have learned from these trials to conduct successful contemporary adjuvant and perioperative immune checkpoint inhibition trials and future adjuvant trial design is discussed.

Retroperitoneal Lymphadenectomy for High Risk, Nonmetastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma: An Analysis of the ASSURE (ECOG-ACRIN 2805) Adjuvant Trial

PURPOSE

Lymphadenectomy is a well established practice for many urological malignancies but its role in renal cell carcinoma is less clear. Our primary objective was to determine whether lymphadenectomy impacted survival in patients with fully resected, high risk renal cell carcinoma.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Patients with fully resected, high risk, nonmetastatic renal cell carcinoma were randomized to adjuvant sorafenib, sunitinib or placebo in the ASSURE (Adjuvant Sorafenib and Sunitinib for Unfavorable Renal Carcinoma) trial. Lymphadenectomy was performed for cN+ disease or at surgeon discretion. Patients treated with lymphadenectomy were compared to patients in the trial who did not undergo lymphadenectomy. The primary outcome was overall survival associated with lymphadenectomy. Secondary outcomes were disease free survival, factors associated with performing lymphadenectomy and surgical complications.

RESULTS

Of the 1,943 patients in ASSURE 701 (36.1%) underwent lymphadenectomy, including all resectable patients with cN+ and 30.1% of those with cN0 disease. A median of 3 lymph nodes (IQR 1-8) were removed and the rate of pN+ disease in the lymphadenectomy group was 23.4%. There was no overall survival benefit for lymphadenectomy relative to no lymphadenectomy (HR 1.14, 95% CI 0.93-1.39, p = 0.20). In patients with pN+ disease who underwent lymphadenectomy no improvement in overall or disease-free survival was observed for adjuvant therapy relative to placebo. Lymphadenectomy did not confer an increased risk of surgical complications (14.2% vs 13.4%, p = 0.63).

CONCLUSIONS

The benefit of lymphadenectomy in patients undergoing surgery for high risk renal cell carcinoma remains uncertain. Future strategies to answer this question should include a prospective trial in which patients with high risk renal cell carcinoma are randomized to specific lymphadenectomy templates.

Immunotherapy: incorporation in the evolving paradigm of renal cancer management and future prospects

Significant progress has been made in the management of renal cell carcinoma (RCC) during the last few decades. In early stage, localized disease, surgical resection remains the modality of choice, with no therapeutic interventions as options for post-operative therapy other than simple observation and clinical surveillance. However, treatment options in the advanced or metastatic setting are increasing at a dizzying pace, initially with cytokine therapy, then with the increased availability of targeted therapy including novel small-molecule inhibitors of receptor tyrosine kinases and monoclonal antibodies targeting novel proteins, establishing them as the current standard of care. Even more recently, immunotherapy has seen tremendous development in the form of immune checkpoint inhibition and vaccines. Overall, these interventions have gradually changed the landscape of cancer management in general, and metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) in particular. This is exemplified by the recent United States Food and Drug Administration (USFDA) approval of nivolumab for patients with mRCC after failure of TKI therapy. In this review, we present a brief overview of the current management of mRCC, primarily the clear cell subtype (ccRCC), and discuss the major clinical trials and data on the immunotherapy in advanced or mRCC.

Benefit of adjuvant immunotherapy in renal cell carcinoma: A myth or a reality?

Background

The benefit of adjuvant immunotherapy after nephrectomy in renal cell carcinoma (RCC) is controversial. The present study aimed to examine the possible benefit of adjuvant immunotherapy in various clinical settings.

Methods

We retrospectively reviewed 436 patients with pT1-3N0-2M0 RCC who underwent radical or partial nephrectomy with curative intent at our institution between 1981 and 2009. Of them, 98 (22.5%) patients received adjuvant interferon-α (IFN-α) after surgery (adjuvant IFN-α group), while 338 (77.5%) did not (control group). The primary endpoint was cancer-specific survival (CSS). Univariate and multivariate analyses were conducted using log-rank tests and Cox proportional hazards models, respectively.

Results

Fifty-two (11.9%) patients died from RCC with a median follow-up period of 96 months. Preliminary univariate analyses comparing CSS among treatment groups in each TNM setting revealed that CSS in the control group was equal or superior to that in the adjuvant IFN-α group in earlier stages, while the opposite trend was observed in more advanced stages. We evaluated the TNM cutoffs and demonstrated maximized benefit of adjuvant IFN-α in patients with pT2b-3cN0 (P = 0.0240). In multivariate analysis, ≥pT3 and pN1-2 were independent predictors for poor CSS in all patients. In the subgroups with ≥pT2 disease (n = 123), pN1-2 and no adjuvant treatment were significant poor prognostic factors.

Conclusions

Adjuvant immunotherapy after nephrectomy may be beneficial in pT2b-3cN0 RCC. Careful consideration is, however, required for interpretation of this observational study because of its selection bias and adverse effects of IFN-α.

Alternate Metabolic Programs Define Regional Variation of Relevant Biological Features in Renal Cell Carcinoma Progression

PURPOSE

Clear cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC) has recently been redefined as a highly heterogeneous disease. In addition to genetic heterogeneity, the tumor displays risk variability for developing metastatic disease, therefore underscoring the urgent need for tissue-based prognostic strategies applicable to the clinical setting. We have recently employed the novel PET/magnetic resonance (MR) image modality to enrich our understanding of how tumor heterogeneity can relate to gene expression and tumor biology to assist in defining individualized treatment plans.

EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN

ccRCC patients underwent PET/MR imaging, and these images subsequently used to identify areas of varied intensity for sampling. Samples from 8 patients were subjected to histologic, immunohistochemical, and microarray analysis.

RESULTS

Tumor subsamples displayed a range of heterogeneity for common features of hypoxia-inducible factor expression and microvessel density, as well as for features closely linked to metabolic processes, such as GLUT1 and FBP1. In addition, gene signatures linked with disease risk (ccA and ccB) also demonstrated variable heterogeneity, with most tumors displaying a dominant panel of features across the sampled regions. Intriguingly, the ccA- and ccB-classified samples corresponded with metabolic features and functional imaging levels. These correlations further linked a variety of metabolic pathways (i.e., the pentose phosphate and mTOR pathways) with the more aggressive, and glucose avid ccB subtype.

CONCLUSIONS

Higher tumor dependency on exogenous glucose accompanies the development of features associated with the poor risk ccB subgroup. Linking these panels of features may provide the opportunity to create functional maps to enable enhanced visualization of the heterogeneous biologic processes of an individual's disease. Clin Cancer Res; 22(12); 2950-9. ©2016 AACR.

Molecular aberrations, targeted therapy, and renal cell carcinoma: current state-of-the-art

Renal cell carcinoma (RCC) is among the most prevalent malignancies in the USA. Most RCCs are sporadic, but hereditary syndromes associated with RCC account for 2-3 % of cases and include von Hippel-Lindau, hereditary leiomyomatosis, Birt-Hogg-Dube, tuberous sclerosis, hereditary papillary RCC, and familial renal carcinoma. In the past decade, our understanding of the genetic mutations associated with sporadic forms of RCC has increased considerably, with the most common mutations in clear cell RCC seen in the VHL, PBRM1, BAP1, and SETD2 genes. Among these, BAP1 mutations are associated with aggressive disease and decreased survival. Several targeted therapies for advanced RCC have been approved and include sunitinib, sorafenib, pazopanib, axitinib (tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) with anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGFR) activity), everolimus, and temsirolimus (TKIs that inhibit mTORC1, the downstream part of the PI3K/AKT/mTOR pathway). High-dose interleukin 2 (IL-2) immunotherapy and the combination of bevacizumab plus interferon-α are also approved treatments. At present, there are no predictive genetic markers to direct therapy for RCC, perhaps because the vast majority of trials have been evaluated in unselected patient populations, with advanced metastatic disease. This review will focus on our current understanding of the molecular genetics of RCC, and how this may inform therapeutics.

New tools for assessing the individual risk of metastasis in renal cell carcinoma

Localized renal cell carcinoma (RCC) progresses to metastatic disease in 20-40 % after surgical resection. Affected patients might benefit from adjuvant treatment and have to be reliably identified for treatment indication. However, existing molecular markers and classification nomograms lack sufficient validity for clinical application so far. Therefore, in order to improve diagnostic tools for the identification of patients at risk, we tested invasiveness and the capability to activate vascular endothelium of primary RCC cells as tumor specific functional parameters. As a parameter for cell invasiveness the ability of RCC cells to break-down transepithelial electrical resistance (TEER) of an epithelial cell monolayer was tested. Loss of resistance, calculated as invasivity index, resembled the degree of cell invasiveness. In addition, secretion of Von Willebrand Factor by endothelial cells incubated with RCC cell supernatant was measured as a surrogate marker for endothelial cell activation. TEER-assay results matched clinical status of disease in 9 out of 12 cases. Metastatic tumors and less differentiated tumors had a significant increase of invasivity index (p = 0.007; p = 0.034). Endothelial cell activation and clinical outcome matched in 5 out of 9 samples. In addition, tumor cell induced endothelial cell activation significantly correlated to the pathologic T classification status of RCC tumors (p = 0.009). Taken together, our study validated endothelial cell activation analysis and cell invasiveness as solitary prognostic markers for tumor dissemination. TEER-analysis has proven to be a useful functional assay giving highly relevant individual information on functional tumor cell characteristics that add to pathologic evaluation.

Integration of surgery and systemic therapy for renal cell carcinoma

Proper integration of surgery and systemic therapy is essential for improving outcomes in renal cell carcinoma (RCC). There is no current role for adjuvant therapy after nephrectomy for clinically localized disease. The potential benefits of neoadjuvant therapy for locally advanced nonmetastatic disease are in need of further study. In metastatic disease, the proper integration of cytoreductive surgery and systemic therapy remains to be elucidated. Presurgical targeted therapy is feasible and may be beneficial. Pending the results of randomized controlled trials, upfront cytoreductive nephrectomy in appropriate patients will likely continue as the paradigm of choice in metastatic RCC.

Adjuvant and neoadjuvant therapy for renal cell carcinoma: a survey of the Society of Urologic Oncology

OBJECTIVE

Several systemic agents have been approved for patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC) and others are in various stages of development. We surveyed members of the Society of Urologic Oncology (SUO) regarding the importance of adjuvant and neoadjuvant systemic therapy for RCC and their participation in such trials.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A survey was sent in October 2010 to 564 U.S. and Canadian members of the SUO and the SUO-Clinical Trials Committee with a valid e-mail address. A total of 136 urologic cancer specialists from a mixture of practice patterns responded to the questionnaire (24% participation rate).

RESULTS

At the time of the study, 75% participated in adjuvant or neoadjuvant treatment protocols, including 75% with adjuvant and 16% with neoadjuvant protocols. There was universal support for continued investigation of agents for adjuvant use in RCC with locoregional metastasis (100%) and nearly universal support for investigation of agents in patients with "high risk" (99%) and "intermediate risk" (91%) localized RCC after nephrectomy. The vast majority of respondents also supported investigation of neoadjuvant therapies in patients with advanced RCC (98%) or locally-advanced RCC (98%), with 70% also supporting neoadjuvant trials in patients with localized RCC. Importantly, 98% of respondents indicated interest in participating in future adjuvant and neoadjuvant trials.

CONCLUSION

Urologic cancer specialists surveyed in late 2010 demonstrated nearly universal support for trials to investigate the role of neoadjuvant and adjuvant therapies for RCC of all stages. With appropriate patient selection and outcome assessment, this widespread support indicates great potential for future clinical trials which will require the participation of urologic surgeons.