A 25 year perspective on the evolution and advances in an understanding of the biology, evaluation and treatment of kidney cancer

Variability in Kidney Cancer Treatment and Survival in England: Results of a National Cohort Study

AIMS

To establish whether there are geographic differences in treatments and outcomes for patients with kidney cancer (KC) in England which could potentially be improved by the creation of national guidelines.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A multidisciplinary group convened by the charity Kidney Cancer UK developed Quality Performance Indicators (QPIs) for the treatment of KC. Adherence to these QPIs was reported for all patients with a histological diagnosis of KC diagnosed in England between 2017 and 2018. Utilising data extracted from national datasets, logistic and linear probability models were used to estimate geographic variation in the delivery of surgery and systemic anti-cancer therapy at Cancer Alliance and NHS trust levels. Results were adjusted for a priori confounders, including age at diagnosis, area deprivation of residence, and Charlson Comorbidity Index. Differences in overall survival are reported.

RESULTS

The cohort comprised 18,640 tumours in 18,421 patients. Of tumours diagnosed, median patient age was 68 (interquartile range 58-77) years and 63.4% were in males. When stratified by Cancer Alliance, the proportions of T1a/T1b/N0/M0 KC that had radical nephrectomy (RN), nephron sparing surgery or ablation ranged from 53.3% (95% CI [48.7, 57.8]) to 80.3% (95% CI [73.0, 86.0]). For stage T1b-3 cancers, the proportion that received RN ranged from 65.6% (95% CI [60.3, 70.5]) to 77.3% (95% CI [72.1, 81.7]). Patients with M0 (n = 12,365) and M1 KC (n = 3312) at diagnosis had 24-month survival of 87.5% and 25.1%, respectively. Of patients diagnosed with M1 KC, 50.3% received systemic anti-cancer therapy, ranging from 39.7% (95% CI [33.7, 46.1]) to 70.7% (95% CI [59.6, 79.8]) between Cancer Alliances. The six-month survival of these patients was 77.4% compared to 27.6% for those that did not receive SACT.

CONCLUSION

These major geographical differences in surgical and systemic therapy practice have led to national guideline development.

Patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma who receive immune-targeted therapy may derive survival benefit from nephrectomy

BACKGROUND

Nephrectomy, whether in the era of cytokine therapy or targeted therapy, has an important role in the treatment of metastatic renal cell carcinoma. With the advent of immunotherapy, immunotherapy combined with targeted therapy has become the mainstream of systemic therapy, but the role of nephrectomy in metastatic renal cell carcinoma is unclear. In this study, we retrospectively analyzed the impact of nephrectomy on survival in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma who received immune-targeted therapy.

METHODS

Patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma who received immune-targeted therapy at three centers between May 17, 2019 and August 1, 2022 were collected, who were divided into two groups based on whether nephrectomy was performed or not. Survival, response rate and adverse event were compared between the two groups. The primary end point was progression free survival, Subgroup analysis and univariate and multivariable prognostic analyses were also assessed.

RESULTS

With a median follow-up time of 29.3 months (95% CI 28.5-30.2), 165 patients were recruited and divided into two groups based on whether they underwent nephrectomy or not. There were 68 patients in the non-nephrectomy group, 97 in the nephrectomy group. Compared to patients treated with immune-targeted therapy, patients treated with immune-targeted therapy plus nephrectomy were able to achieve survival benefits, with a median PFS of 10.8 months (95% CI 8.3-13.3) and 14.4 months (95% CI 12.6-16.2), respectively, as well as an HR of 0.476 (95% CI 0.323-0.701, p = 0.0002). The 12-month and 18-month PFS rates were 30.9% versus 60.8% and 7.4% versus 25.8%, respectively. The objective response rate (ORR) was 52.9% and 60.8%, respectively, in the non-nephrectomy and nephrectomy groups (p = 0.313), and the disease control rate (DCR) was 75% and 83.5%, respectively (p = 0.179). The most common adverse events related to treatment were hypothyroidism, immune-related pneumonitis and rash. Multivariate analysis showed that primary tumor nephrectomy prior to immune-targeted therapy, clear cell renal carcinoma and oligo metastasis were independent prognostic factors.

CONCLUSIONS

Nephrectomy may provide PFS benefit with tolerable safety for patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma who receive immune-targeted therapy. In multivariate analysis, nephrectomy, clear cell carcinoma, and oligo-organ metastasis were found to be favorable independent prognostic factors.

Preclinical optimization of a diode laser-based clamp-free partial nephrectomy in a large animal model

Kidney cancer is a common urologic malignancy with either laparoscopic (LPN) or robotic partial nephrectomy as therapeutic options of choice for localized tumors. However, renal resection and suturing are challenging steps of the procedure that can lead to complications such as prolonged warm ischemia, bleeding, and urinary fistulas. LPN with a diode laser is an efficient technique due to its cutting and/or coagulation attributes. Surprisingly, key laser features such as wavelength and power remain undefined. Using a large porcine model, we evaluated the laser range of wavelength and power in a clamp-free LPN and compared it to the established gold-standard LPN technique (i.e., cold-cutting and suturing). By analyzing surgery duration, bleeding, presence of urine leak, tissue damage related to the resected renal fragment and the remaining organ, hemoglobin levels, and renal function, we show that an optimized experimental diode laser clamp-free LPN (wavelength, 980 nm; power, 15 W) had shorter surgery time with less bleeding, and better postoperative renal function recovery when compared to the well-established technique. Together, our data indicate that partial nephrectomy with a diode laser clamp-free LPN technique is an improved alternative to the gold-standard technique. Therefore, translational clinical trials towards human patient applications are readily feasible.

State of the Art: Multidisciplinary Management of Oligometastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma

Oligometastatic renal cell carcinoma (OM-RCC) refers to patients who have limited (typically up to 5) metastatic lesions. Although management principles may overlap, OM-RCC is distinguishable from oligoprogressive RCC, which describes progression of disease to a limited number of sites while receiving systemic therapy. Cytoreductive nephrectomy and metastasectomy are common surgical considerations in OM-RCC, and indications are discussed in this review. It is evident that stereotactic ablative radiotherapy is effective in RCC and is being applied increasingly in the oligometastatic setting. Finally, we will review advances in systemic therapy and the role of active surveillance before the initiation of systemic therapy.

Stereotactic body radiation therapy for kidney cancer. Where do we stand?

At present, surgery is still the gold standard for the local treatment of renal cancer. Nonetheless, in several clinical scenarios, stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) also known as stereotactic ablative body radiotherapy (SABR) is emerging as a highly effective ablative technique in fragile patients and those with significant comorbidities, as well as in cases where percutaneous therapy (cryoablation or radiofrequency) is not viable. However, considering the intrinsic radioresistance of renal tumors, the optimal treatment schemes have not been established. In oligometastatic patients, it has been reported that the control of the oligometastases can be a potentially curable approach. Being a technique than can be administered exclusively or in combination with systemic therapy, treatment individualization based on patient characteristics is key. Another scenario under investigation is oligoprogression, where SBRT offers the possibility of delaying further lines of systemic therapy by eliminating subclones of resistant tumor with ablative doses, with the additional opportunity of stimulating the immune system (immunomodulatory role). In this review, we have conducted an analysis of recently published studies that test the role of this technique in different clinical scenarios of this disease. We have found promising results that make SBRT a potent therapeutic approach with low toxicity. We also comment on ongoing studies that will generate the necessary evidence needed for the implementation of this technique in our daily clinical practice.

Comparative Effectiveness of Front-Line Ipilimumab and Nivolumab or Axitinib and Pembrolizumab in Metastatic Clear Cell Renal Cell Carcinoma

BACKGROUND

Treatment of metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) is rapidly evolving with new combination therapies demonstrating improved response rates and survival. There are no head-to-head prospective trials comparing an immunotherapy doublet with an immunotherapy/tyrosine-kinase inhibitor-based combination. We compare real-world outcomes in patients treated with axitinib/pembrolizumab (axi/pembro) or ipilimumab/nivolumab (ipi/nivo). The primary endpoints were overall-survival (OS) and real-world progression-free survival (rwPFS).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We used a de-identified database to select patients diagnosed with clear cell mRCC and treated with front-line axi/pembro or ipi/nivo from 2018 to 2022. Analyses are adjusted using propensity score-based inverse probability of treatment weighting, balancing age, gender, insurance, race, IMDC risk, and nephrectomy status. We compared survival by treatment groups using weighted and unweighted Kaplan-Meier curves with log-rank tests and weighted Cox proportional hazards regressions.

RESULTS

We included a total of 1506 patients with mRCC who received frontline axi/pembro (n = 547) or ipi/nivo (n = 959). Median follow-up time was 20.0 months (range: 0.2-47.6). Baseline demographics were similar between the 2 cohorts. Adjusted median OS for the full population was 28.9 months for axi/pembro and was 24.3 months for ipi/nivo (P = .09). Twenty-four-month survival was 53.8% for axi/pembro treated patients and 50.2% for ipi/nivo treated patients. rwPFS was 10.6 months for axi/pembro treated patients and 6.9 months for ipi/nivo treated patients. Treatment with axi/pembro conferred improved survival in the IMDC favorable risk strata, with no significant difference in survival observed within the full cohort.

CONCLUSIONS

In this retrospective, real-world study of patients treated with front-line combination therapy, patients with IMDC favorable risk disease had better survival when treated with axi/pembro compared to ipi/nivo. However, survival for the entire population and the 24-month median overall survival were not statistically different between treatment groups. Longer follow-up is necessary to discern any emerging significant differences.

Determining Front-Line Therapeutic Strategy for Metastatic Clear Cell Renal Cell Carcinoma

The therapeutic landscape for metastatic renal cell carcinoma has rapidly evolved over the years, and we are now in an era of combination therapy strategies employing immune checkpoint blockade and anti-angiogenesis targeted therapy. Since 2018, we have gained regulatory approval for four distinct combination therapies, all with survival benefits, and with guideline recommendation for use in the front-line setting. As such, treatment selection has become increasingly complex with a myriad of treatment choices but little high-level head-to-head data to guide treatment selection. Heterogeneity in tumor biology further complicates treatment selection as tumors vary in behavior and treatment responsiveness. Ongoing development of biomarkers will certainly assist in this setting, and validation of predictive markers represents an unmet need. In their absence, we highlight features of disease and nuances to datasets from landmark prospective clinical trials to help inform treatment selection. There is growing evidence to support deferring upfront systemic therapy in some patients, with opportunities for active surveillance or metastasis-directed therapy. In others, upfront systemic therapy is warranted and necessitates thoughtful consideration of multiple clinicopathologic parameters to inform optimal patient-centered decision making.

New Paradigms for Cytoreductive Nephrectomy

Simple Summary

Cytoreductive surgery (CS) is performed to remove the primary tumor in the setting of metastatic disease. In metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC), the role of cytoreductive nephrectomy (CN) in the treatment paradigm has evolved, adjusting to new changes in systemic therapy agents. In particular, immunotherapeutic agents, which utilize the body’s own immune system to attack cancerous cells, have improved over the past decade. Newer immunotherapy agents offer more effective treatments in mRCC, with the goal of more tolerable side effect profiles. However, now urologic and medical oncologists must reframe the role of CN in the context of these new systemic therapies. This review will discuss the current data on this topic as well as the historical context in which it is being studied.

Abstract

The role of CN in the treatment of metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) has been studied over the course of the past few decades. With the advent of immuno-oncologic (IO) agents, there has been a paradigm shift in the treatment of RCC. Within this new era of cancer care, the role of CN is unclear. There are several studies currently underway that aim to assess the role of CN in combination with these therapies. We reviewed articles examining CN, both historically and in the modern immunotherapy era. While immune-oncologic agents are relatively new and large clinical trials have yet to be completed, data thus far is promising that CN may provide clinical benefit. Multiple ongoing trials may clarify the role of CN in this new era of cancer care.

Synthetic lethality of cyclin-dependent kinase inhibitor Dinaciclib with VHL-deficiency allows for selective targeting of clear cell renal cell carcinoma

Clear cell renal cell carcinoma (CC-RCC) remains one of the most deadly forms of kidney cancer despite recent advancements in targeted therapeutics, including tyrosine kinase and immune checkpoint inhibitors. Unfortunately, these therapies have not been able to show better than a 16% complete response rate. In this study we evaluated a cyclin-dependent kinase inhibitor, Dinaciclib, as a potential new targeted therapeutic for CC-RCC. In vitro, Dinaciclib showed anti-proliferative and pro-apoptotic effects on CC-RCC cell lines in Cell Titer Glo, Crystal Violet, FACS-based cell cycle analysis, and TUNEL assays. Additionally, these responses were accompanied by a reduction in phospho-Rb and pro-survival MCL-1 cell signaling responses, as well as the induction of caspase 3 and PARP cleavage. In vivo, Dinaciclib efficiently inhibited primary tumor growth in an orthotopic, patient-derived xenograft-based CC-RCC mouse model. Importantly, Dinaciclib targeted both CD105⁺ cancer stem cells (CSCs) and CD105⁻ non-CSCs in vivo. Moreover, normal cell lines, as well as a CC-RCC cell line with re-expressed von-Hippel Lindau (VHL) tumor suppressor gene, were protected from Dinaciclib-induced cytotoxicity when not actively dividing, indicating an effective therapeutic window due to synthetic lethality of Dinaciclib treatment with VHL loss. Thus, Dinaciclib represents a novel potential therapeutic for CC-RCC.