A randomized phase II trial of interleukin 2 and interleukin 2-interferon alpha in advanced renal cancer

First-line therapy for adults with advanced renal cell carcinoma: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Since the approval of tyrosine kinase inhibitors, angiogenesis inhibitors and immune checkpoint inhibitors, the treatment landscape for advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC) has changed fundamentally. Today, combined therapies from different drug categories have a firm place in a complex first-line therapy. Due to the large number of drugs available, it is necessary to identify the most effective therapies, whilst considering their side effects and impact on quality of life (QoL).

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate and compare the benefits and harms of first-line therapies for adults with advanced RCC, and to produce a clinically relevant ranking of therapies. Secondary objectives were to maintain the currency of the evidence by conducting continuous update searches, using a living systematic review approach, and to incorporate data from clinical study reports (CSRs).

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, conference proceedings and relevant trial registries up until 9 February 2022. We searched several data platforms to identify CSRs.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating at least one targeted therapy or immunotherapy for first-line treatment of adults with advanced RCC. We excluded trials evaluating only interleukin-2 versus interferon-alpha as well as trials with an adjuvant treatment setting. We also excluded trials with adults who received prior systemic anticancer therapy if more than 10% of participants were previously treated, or if data for untreated participants were not separately extractable.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

All necessary review steps (i.e. screening and study selection, data extraction, risk of bias and certainty assessments) were conducted independently by at least two review authors. Our outcomes were overall survival (OS), QoL, serious adverse events (SAEs), progression-free survival (PFS), adverse events (AEs), the number of participants who discontinued study treatment due to an AE, and the time to initiation of first subsequent therapy. Where possible, analyses were conducted for the different risk groups (favourable, intermediate, poor) according to the International Metastatic Renal-Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium Score (IMDC) or the Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center (MSKCC) criteria. Our main comparator was sunitinib (SUN). A hazard ratio (HR) or risk ratio (RR) lower than 1.0 is in favour of the experimental arm.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 36 RCTs and 15,177 participants (11,061 males and 4116 females). Risk of bias was predominantly judged as being 'high' or 'some concerns' across most trials and outcomes. This was mainly due to a lack of information about the randomisation process, the blinding of outcome assessors, and methods for outcome measurements and analyses. Additionally, study protocols and statistical analysis plans were rarely available. Here we present the results for our primary outcomes OS, QoL, and SAEs, and for all risk groups combined for contemporary treatments: pembrolizumab + axitinib (PEM+AXI), avelumab + axitinib (AVE+AXI), nivolumab + cabozantinib (NIV+CAB), lenvatinib + pembrolizumab (LEN+PEM), nivolumab + ipilimumab (NIV+IPI), CAB, and pazopanib (PAZ). Results per risk group and results for our secondary outcomes are reported in the summary of findings tables and in the full text of this review. The evidence on other treatments and comparisons can also be found in the full text. Overall survival (OS) Across risk groups, PEM+AXI (HR 0.73, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.50 to 1.07, moderate certainty) and NIV+IPI (HR 0.69, 95% CI 0.69 to 1.00, moderate certainty) probably improve OS, compared to SUN, respectively. LEN+PEM may improve OS (HR 0.66, 95% CI 0.42 to 1.03, low certainty), compared to SUN. There is probably little or no difference in OS between PAZ and SUN (HR 0.91, 95% CI 0.64 to 1.32, moderate certainty), and we are uncertain whether CAB improves OS when compared to SUN (HR 0.84, 95% CI 0.43 to 1.64, very low certainty). The median survival is 28 months when treated with SUN. Survival may improve to 43 months with LEN+PEM, and probably improves to: 41 months with NIV+IPI, 39 months with PEM+AXI, and 31 months with PAZ. We are uncertain whether survival improves to 34 months with CAB. Comparison data were not available for AVE+AXI and NIV+CAB. Quality of life (QoL) One RCT measured QoL using FACIT-F (score range 0 to 52; higher scores mean better QoL) and reported that the mean post-score was 9.00 points higher (9.86 lower to 27.86 higher, very low certainty) with PAZ than with SUN. Comparison data were not available for PEM+AXI, AVE+AXI, NIV+CAB, LEN+PEM, NIV+IPI, and CAB. Serious adverse events (SAEs) Across risk groups, PEM+AXI probably increases slightly the risk for SAEs (RR 1.29, 95% CI 0.90 to 1.85, moderate certainty) compared to SUN. LEN+PEM (RR 1.52, 95% CI 1.06 to 2.19, moderate certainty) and NIV+IPI (RR 1.40, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.97, moderate certainty) probably increase the risk for SAEs, compared to SUN, respectively. There is probably little or no difference in the risk for SAEs between PAZ and SUN (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.75 to 1.31, moderate certainty). We are uncertain whether CAB reduces or increases the risk for SAEs (RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.60 to 1.43, very low certainty) when compared to SUN. People have a mean risk of 40% for experiencing SAEs when treated with SUN. The risk increases probably to: 61% with LEN+PEM, 57% with NIV+IPI, and 52% with PEM+AXI. It probably remains at 40% with PAZ. We are uncertain whether the risk reduces to 37% with CAB. Comparison data were not available for AVE+AXI and NIV+CAB.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Findings concerning the main treatments of interest comes from direct evidence of one trial only, thus results should be interpreted with caution. More trials are needed where these interventions and combinations are compared head-to-head, rather than just to SUN. Moreover, assessing the effect of immunotherapies and targeted therapies on different subgroups is essential and studies should focus on assessing and reporting relevant subgroup data. The evidence in this review mostly applies to advanced clear cell RCC.

Immunotherapy for metastatic renal cell carcinoma

BACKGROUND

Since the mid-2000s, the field of metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) has experienced a paradigm shift from non-specific therapy with broad-acting cytokines to specific regimens, which directly target the cancer, the tumour microenvironment, or both.Current guidelines recommend targeted therapies with agents such as sunitinib, pazopanib or temsirolimus (for people with poor prognosis) as the standard of care for first-line treatment of people with mRCC and mention non-specific cytokines as an alternative option for selected patients.In November 2015, nivolumab, a checkpoint inhibitor directed against programmed death-1 (PD-1), was approved as the first specific immunotherapeutic agent as second-line therapy in previously treated mRCC patients.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of immunotherapies either alone or in combination with standard targeted therapies for the treatment of metastatic renal cell carcinoma and their efficacy to maximize patient benefit.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE (Ovid), Embase (Ovid), ISI Web of Science and registers of ongoing clinical trials in November 2016 without language restrictions. We scanned reference lists and contacted experts in the field to obtain further information.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs with or without blinding involving people with mRCC.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We collected and analyzed studies according to the published protocol. Summary statistics for the primary endpoints were risk ratios (RRs) and mean differences (MD) with their 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We rated the quality of evidence using GRADE methodology and summarized the quality and magnitude of relative and absolute effects for each primary outcome in our 'Summary of findings' tables.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified eight studies with 4732 eligible participants and an additional 13 ongoing studies. We categorized studies into comparisons, all against standard therapy accordingly as first-line (five comparisons) or second-line therapy (one comparison) for mRCC.Interferon (IFN)-α monotherapy probably increases one-year overall mortality compared to standard targeted therapies with temsirolimus or sunitinib (RR 1.30, 95% CI 1.13 to 1.51; 2 studies; 1166 participants; moderate-quality evidence), may lead to similar quality of life (QoL) (e.g. MD -5.58 points, 95% CI -7.25 to -3.91 for Functional Assessment of Cancer - General (FACT-G); 1 study; 730 participants; low-quality evidence) and may slightly increase the incidence of adverse events (AEs) grade 3 or greater (RR 1.17, 95% CI 1.03 to 1.32; 1 study; 408 participants; low-quality evidence).There is probably no difference between IFN-α plus temsirolimus and temsirolimus alone for one-year overall mortality (RR 1.13, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.34; 1 study; 419 participants; moderate-quality evidence), but the incidence of AEs of 3 or greater may be increased (RR 1.30, 95% CI 1.17 to 1.45; 1 study; 416 participants; low-quality evidence). There was no information on QoL.IFN-α alone may slightly increase one-year overall mortality compared to IFN-α plus bevacizumab (RR 1.17, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.36; 2 studies; 1381 participants; low-quality evidence). This effect is probably accompanied by a lower incidence of AEs of grade 3 or greater (RR 0.77, 95% CI 0.71 to 0.84; 2 studies; 1350 participants; moderate-quality evidence). QoL could not be evaluated due to insufficient data.Treatment with IFN-α plus bevacizumab or standard targeted therapy (sunitinib) may lead to similar one-year overall mortality (RR 0.37, 95% CI 0.13 to 1.08; 1 study; 83 participants; low-quality evidence) and AEs of grade 3 or greater (RR 1.18, 95% CI 0.85 to 1.62; 1 study; 82 participants; low-quality evidence). QoL could not be evaluated due to insufficient data.Treatment with vaccines (e.g. MVA-5T4 or IMA901) or standard therapy may lead to similar one-year overall mortality (RR 1.10, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.32; low-quality evidence) and AEs of grade 3 or greater (RR 1.16, 95% CI 0.97 to 1.39; 2 studies; 1065 participants; low-quality evidence). QoL could not be evaluated due to insufficient data.In previously treated patients, targeted immunotherapy (nivolumab) probably reduces one-year overall mortality compared to standard targeted therapy with everolimus (RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.56 to 0.87; 1 study; 821 participants; moderate-quality evidence), probably improves QoL (e.g. RR 1.51, 95% CI 1.28 to 1.78 for clinically relevant improvement of the FACT-Kidney Symptom Index Disease Related Symptoms (FKSI-DRS); 1 study, 704 participants; moderate-quality evidence) and probably reduces the incidence of AEs grade 3 or greater (RR 0.51, 95% CI 0.40 to 0.65; 1 study; 803 participants; moderate-quality evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Evidence of moderate quality demonstrates that IFN-α monotherapy increases mortality compared to standard targeted therapies alone, whereas there is no difference if IFN is combined with standard targeted therapies. Evidence of low quality demonstrates that QoL is worse with IFN alone and that severe AEs are increased with IFN alone or in combination. There is low-quality evidence that IFN-α alone increases mortality but moderate-quality evidence on decreased AEs compared to IFN-α plus bevacizumab. Low-quality evidence shows no difference for IFN-α plus bevacizumab compared to sunitinib with respect to mortality and severe AEs. Low-quality evidence demonstrates no difference of vaccine treatment compared to standard targeted therapies in mortality and AEs, whereas there is moderate-quality evidence that targeted immunotherapies reduce mortality and AEs and improve QoL.

WITHDRAWN: Immunotherapy for advanced renal cell cancer

This review is being updated and replaced following the publication of a new protocol (Unverzagt S, Moldenhauer I, Coppin C, Greco F, Seliger B. Immunotherapy for metastatic renal cell carcinoma [Protocol]. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2015, Issue 4. Art. No.: CD011673. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD011673). It will remain withdrawn when the new review is published.

The editorial group responsible for this previously published document have withdrawn it from publication.

Immunotherapy options in metastatic renal cell cancer: where we are and where we are going

The treatment of renal cell carcinoma is rapidly changing as a result of recent evidence concerning the efficacy of biological drugs, antiangiogenetic agents and signal-transduction inhibitors. This paper will provide a critical overview of the use of immunotherapy in renal cell carcinoma and review the available data concerning the efficacy of interferons, interleukin-2 and other forms of immunological treatment, particularly allogenic transplantation and vaccines. Moreover, it will focus on the new mechanisms of regulation of the immune system with a better understanding of the interaction between host and tumor, the role of T regulatory cells, heat-shock proteins and vaccines. The mechanism of action and the results obtained in renal cell carcinoma using the new molecular targeted drugs will be examined, along with the possibility of using immunotherapy combined with the new biological agents. Future research will not only need to make every effort to optimize the use of the new molecules and to define their efficacy precisely, but also to consider how to integrate these drugs with the traditional immunotherapy.

Cancer immunotherapy

Cancer immunotherapy consists of approaches that modify the host immune system, and/or the utilization of components of the immune system, as cancer treatment. During the past 25 years, 17 immunologic products have received regulatory approval based on anticancer activity as single agents and/or in combination with chemotherapy. These include the nonspecific immune stimulants BCG and levamisole; the cytokines interferon-α and interleukin-2; the monoclonal antibodies rituximab, ofatumumab, alemtuzumab, trastuzumab, bevacizumab, cetuximab, and panitumumab; the radiolabeled antibodies Y-90 ibritumomab tiuxetan and I-131 tositumomab; the immunotoxins denileukin diftitox and gemtuzumab ozogamicin; nonmyeloablative allogeneic transplants with donor lymphocyte infusions; and the anti-prostate cancer cell-based therapy sipuleucel-T. All but two of these products are still regularly used to treat various B- and T-cell malignancies, and numerous solid tumors, including breast, lung, colorectal, prostate, melanoma, kidney, glioblastoma, bladder, and head and neck. Positive randomized trials have recently been reported for idiotype vaccines in lymphoma and a peptide vaccine in melanoma. The anti-CTLA-4 monoclonal antibody ipilumumab, which blocks regulatory T-cells, is expected to receive regulatory approval in the near future, based on a randomized trial in melanoma. As the fourth modality of cancer treatment, biotherapy/immunotherapy is an increasingly important component of the anticancer armamentarium.

Treatment of patients with metastatic renal cell cancer: a RAND Appropriateness Panel

BACKGROUND

New developments in the treatment of patients with metastatic renal cell cancer (MRCC) have suggested a need to reevaluate the role of systemic therapies. The authors convened a panel of medical and urologic oncologists to rate the appropriateness of the main options.

METHODS

The authors used the RAND/University of California-Los Angeles Appropriateness Method to evaluate systemic therapy options and cytoreductive nephrectomy. After a comprehensive literature review, an expert panel rated the appropriateness of systemic options (108 permutations) and cytoreductive nephrectomy (24 permutations) for patients with MRCC.

RESULTS

The appropriateness evaluation indicated that 27.3% of permutations were rated "appropriate," 46.9% were rated "inappropriate," and 25.8% were rated "uncertain." There was a high rate of agreement (95%). Sunitinib and sorafenib were rated appropriate for patients with low-to-moderate risk regardless of prior treatment. Temsirolimus was rated appropriate for first-line therapy for higher risk patients. Interferon-alpha and low-dose interleukin-2 were rated inappropriate or uncertain. In patients who received prior immunotherapy, cytokines were rated inappropriate. In all permutations for evaluating systemic therapy, enrollment into an investigational trial was considered appropriate, treatment with bevacizumab was uncertain, and thalidomide was inappropriate regardless of risk status or prior therapy. For good surgical risk patients with planned immunotherapy, nephrectomy was rated appropriate in patients who had limited metastatic burden regardless of tumor-related symptoms and in symptomatic patients regardless of metastatic burden. Only the most favorable combination of surgical risk, metastatic burden, and symptoms generated an "appropriate" rating for patients with planned targeted therapy.

CONCLUSIONS

The current results begin the process of defining an appropriate role for cytokines, newer targeted therapies, and surgery in the treatment of MRCC.

Long-term maintenance therapy in interferon-alpha2a/interleukin-2-pretreated advanced renal-cell carcinoma patients

PURPOSE

In this paper, we report on the long-term therapeutic efficacy of maintenance treatment in 12 advanced renal carcinoma patients.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Following prior systemic treatment with 8-week cycles of subcutaneous interferon- alpha2a (s.c. IFN-alpha2a) and subcutaneous interleukin-2 (s.c. IL-2)-based immunotherapy (5-day standard Atzpodien regimen), patients received prolonged maintenance treatment consisting of intermittent s.c. IFN-alpha2a and s.c. IL-2, combined with long-term daily peroral 13-cis-retinoic acid (p.o. 13cRA).

RESULTS

Patients received a mean of 10 months (range, 0-27 months) of maintenance treatment. Median progression-free survival was calculated at 6 months (range, 0-61 months), and median overall suvival was 22 months (range, 2-65 months) from the start of maintenance therapy. Of 12 patients, 5 were still alive (> or = 60 months) and 2 patients remained progression-free (61 months) at last follow-up. Maintenance treatment was well or moderately tolerated.

CONCLUSIONS

Maintenance treatment with s.c. IL-2/s.c. INF-alpha2a/p.o. 13-cRA may support long-term efficacy of prior s.c. IL-2/s.c. INF-alpha2a-based therapy in advanced renal carcinoma patients.

Interleukin-2/interferon-alpha2a/13-retinoic acid-based chemoimmunotherapy in advanced renal cell carcinoma: results of a prospectively randomised trial of the German Cooperative Renal Carcinoma Chemoimmunotherapy Group (DGCIN)

We performed a prospectively randomised clinical trial to compare the efficacy of four subcutaneous interleukin-2-(sc-IL-2) and sc interferon-alpha2a (sc-IFN-alpha2a)-based outpatient regimens in 379 patients with progressive metastatic renal cell carcinoma. Patients with lung metastases, an erythrocyte sedimentation rate < or =70 mm h(-1) and neutrophil counts < or =6000 microl(-1) (group I) were randomised to arm A: sc-IL-2, sc-IFN-alpha2a, peroral 13-cis-retinoic acid (po-13cRA) (n=78), or arm B: arm A plus inhaled-IL-2 (n=65). All others (group II) were randomised to arm C: arm A plus intravenous 5-fluorouracil (iv-5-FU) (n=116), or arm D: arm A plus po-Capecitabine (n=120). Median overall survival (OS) was 22 months (arm A; 3-year OS: 29.7%) and 18 months (arm B; 3-year OS: 29.2%) in group I, and 18 months (arm C; 3-year OS: 25.7%) and 16 months (arm D; 3-year OS: 32.6%) in group II. There were no statistically significant differences in OS, progression-free survival, and objective response between arms A and B, and between arms C and D, respectively. Given the known therapeutic efficacy of sc-IL-2/sc-INF-alpha2a/po-13cRA-based outpatient chemoimmunotherapies, our results did not establish survival advantages in favour of po-Capecitabine vs iv-5-FU, and in favour of short-term inhaled-IL-2 in patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma receiving systemic cytokines.

Immunotherapy for advanced renal cell cancer

BACKGROUND

The course of advanced renal cell carcinoma is extremely variable, ranging from spontaneous remission to disease progression refractory to chemotherapy. Immunotherapy has held promise of improved outcomes based on uncontrolled studies and randomized controlled trials generally limited by small size and low power.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate immunotherapy for advanced renal cell carcinoma by comparing: (1) high dose interleukin-2 to other options and (2) interferon-alfa to other options. The primary outcome of interest was overall survival at one year, with remission as the main secondary outcome of interest.

SEARCH STRATEGY

A systematic search of the CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and EMBASE databases was conducted for the period 1966 through end of December 2003. Handsearches were made of the proceedings of the periodic meetings of the American Urologic Association, the American Society of Clinical Oncology, ECCO - the European Cancer Conference, and the European Society of Medical Oncology for the period 1995 to June 2004.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized controlled trials that selected (or stratified) patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma, utilized an immunotherapeutic agent in at least one study arm, and reported remission or survival by allocation. Fifty-three identified studies involving 6117 patients were eligible and all but one reported remission; 32 of these studies reported the one-year survival outcome.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two reviewers independently abstracted each article by following a prospectively designed protocol. Dichotomous outcomes for treatment remission (partial plus complete) and for deaths at one year were used for the main comparisons. Survival hazard ratios were also used for studies of interferon-alfa versus controls, and for two randomized studies of the value of initial nephrectomy prior to interferon-alfa in fit patients with metastases detected at the time of diagnosis.

MAIN RESULTS

Combined data for a variety of immunotherapies gave an overall chance of partial or complete remission of only 12.9% (99 study arms), compared to 2.5% in 10 non-immunotherapy control arms, and 4.3% in two placebo arms. Twenty-eight percent of these remissions were designated as complete (data from 45 studies). Median survival averaged 13.3 months (range by arm, 6 to 27+ months). The difference in remission rate between arms was poorly correlated with the difference in median survival so that remission rate is not a good surrogate or intermediate outcome for survival for advanced renal cancer. We were unable to identify any published randomized study of high-dose interleukin-2 versus a non-immunotherapy control, or of high-dose interleukin-2 versus interferon-alfa reporting survival. It has been established that reduced dose interleukin-2 given by intravenous bolus or by subcutaneous injection provides equivalent survival to high dose interleukin-2 with less toxicity. Results from four studies (644 patients) indicate that interferon-alfa is superior to controls (OR for death at one year = 0.56, 95% confidence interval 0.40 to 0.77). Using the method of Parmar 1998, the pooled overall hazard ratio for death was 0.74 (95% confidence interval 0.63 to 0.88). The weighted average median improvement in survival was 3.8 months. T he optimal dose and duration of interferon-alfa remains to be elucidated. The addition of a variety of enhancers, including lower dose intravenous or subcutaneous interleukin-2, has failed to improve survival compared to interferon-alfa alone. Two recent randomized studies have examined the role of initial nephrectomy prior to interferon-alfa therapy in highly selected fit patients with metastases at diagnosis and minimal symptoms: despite minimal improvement in the chance of remission, both studies of up-front nephrectomy improved median survival by 4.8 months over interferon-alfa alone. Recent studies have been examining anti-angiogenesis agents. A landmark study of bevacizumab, an anti-vascular endothelial growth factor antibody, was associated with significant prolongation of the time to progression of disease when given at high dose compared to low-dose or placebo therapy though frequency of remissions or survival were not improved.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

interferon-alfa provides a modest survival benefit compared to other commonly used treatments and should be considered for the control arm of future studies of systemic agents. In fit patients with metastases at diagnosis and minimal symptoms, nephrectomy followed by interferon-alfa gives the best survival strategy for fully validated therapies. The need for more effective specific therapy for this condition is apparent.

Changing Concepts in the Surgical Management of Renal Cell Carcinoma

The foundations of the generally accepted principles underlying the surgical management of renal cell carcinoma (RCC) were best annunciated in 1969 by Robson in his classic description of the radical nephrectomy [J Urol 1969;101;297]. Since then, much has changed in our understanding of the basic biology and genetics of kidney cancer, advances in renal imaging and clinical staging have led to the increased detection of incidental, lower stage, organ-confined tumors more amendable to expanded surgical options, surgical techniques themselves have evolved, and surgical equipment technology has advanced to make possible new methods of managing renal tumors in situ. Thus, the management of both localized and metastatic RCC has changed dramatically in the last 20 years, predicated on these major advancements in renal imaging, surgical techniques, and the development of effective immunotherapies for advanced disease. In this review, the evolution in thinking regarding the tenets of the radical nephrectomy will be examined, including the necessity for removal of the entire kidney, the possibility of sparing the adrenal gland, when and how extensive a lymphadenectomy should be performed, the development of laparoscopic and percutaneous nephron-sparing surgery using ablative technologies, and the role of nephrectomy and metastasectomy in patients with metastatic RCC. Here, we review current concepts and outcomes on the surgical management of RCC to help elucidate some of these changes, from the evolution of open to laparoscopic to percutaneous, from radical to partial to ablative approaches.

A systematic review of the relation between interleukin-2 schedule and outcome in patients with metastatic renal cell cancer

In Europe, interleukin 2 (IL-2) is one of the two treatment modalities officially approved for patients with metastatic renal cell cancer. Traditionally, IL-2 has been administered by three different routes: intermittent bolus injection (BIV), continuous intravenous infusion (CIV) and subcutaneous injection (SC). There have been few randomized trials designed to compare these routes of administration. This paper describes a systematic review of the literature in which an attempt has been made to determine which schedule of administration is superior. Heterogeneity of the data makes firm conclusions difficult. It appears that the number of complete remissions (CR) is similar between BIV and SC routes and that these are higher than for CIV schedules. The durability of the CRs induced by BIV appeared superior to those induced by SC IL-2 and definitely higher than with CIV protocols. This analysis highlights some of the difficulties of using evidence-based medicine to determine standard of care when the clinical-trial data are heterogeneous. These data emphasize the importance of randomized clinical trials in determining what should be regarded as optimum therapy.

Interleukin-2- and interferon alfa-2a-based immunochemotherapy in advanced renal cell carcinoma: a Prospectively Randomized Trial of the German Cooperative Renal Carcinoma Chemoimmunotherapy Group (DGCIN)

PURPOSE

We conducted a prospectively randomized clinical trial to compare the efficacy of three outpatient therapy regimens in 341 patients with progressive metastatic renal cell carcinoma.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients were stratified according to known clinical predictors and were subsequently randomly assigned. Treatment arms were: arm A (n = 132), subcutaneous interferon alfa-2a (sc-IFN-alpha-2a), subcutaneous interleukin-2 (sc-IL-2), and intravenous (IV) fluorouracil; arm B (n = 146): arm A treatment combined with per oral 13-cis-retinoic acid; and arm C (n = 63), sc-IFN-alpha-2a and IV vinblastine.

RESULTS

Treatment (according to the standard 8-week Hannover Atzpodien regimen) arms A, B, and C yielded objective response rates of 31%, 26%, and 20%, respectively. Arm B, but not arm A, showed a significantly improved progression-free survival (PFS) compared with arm C (P =.0248). Both arm A (median overall survival, 25 months; P =.0440) and arm B (median overall survival, 27 months; P =.0227) led to significantly improved overall survival (OS) compared with arm C (median OS, 16 months). All three sc-IFN-alpha-2a-based therapies were moderately or well tolerated.

CONCLUSION

Our results established the safety and improved long-term therapeutic efficacy of sc-IL-2 plus sc-INF-alpha-2a-based outpatient immunochemotherapies, compared with sc-INF-alpha-2a/IV vinblastine.

A medical oncologist's approach to immunotherapy for advanced renal tumors: is nephrectomy indicated?

Metastatic renal cell carcinoma is highly resistant to systemic therapy. Although interleukin-2 and interferon remain the most active agents for this disease, long-term survival rates remain poor. Two phase 3 trials, European Organization Research and Treatment of Cancer 30947 and Southwest Oncology Group 8949, have demonstrated a survival benefit of nephrectomy followed by interferon versus interferon alone in patients having an excellent performance status (PS 0 and 1). Removal of the primary tumor followed by interferon is not recommended for patients with a moderate or poor PS (PS 2-4). Even with this aggressive approach, most patients eventually will die from their kidney cancer; therefore, every patient with metastatic disease should be considered for enrollment into clinical trials.

Cytokine-based therapy for metastatic renal cell cancer

The use of recombinant gene technology to produce commercially available amounts of cytokines heralded an era of clinical applications of immunotherapy. Although the response rates to cytokine therapies are modest and sometimes occur at the expense of great cost and toxicity, they are proof of the principal that even large tumor burdens can be overcome by purely immune modulation. The interleukins and the interferons have been used in various phases of clinical trials in RCC. The maturation and final results of phase III trials are needed to guide clinical practice. In the meantime, the knowledge gained clinically and in the laboratory should lead to continued improvements and outcomes in immunotherapy for RCC.

Potential of interferon-alpha in solid tumours: part 1

Interferon-alpha (IFNalpha) is a pleiotropic cytokine with direct and indirect antitumour effects. These include prolongation of the cell cycle time of malignant cells, inhibition of biosynthetic enzymes and apoptosis, interaction with other cytokines, and immunomodulatory and antiangiogenic effects. The first clinical trials in solid tumours used crude preparations of natural IFNalpha and demonstrated that tumour regressions in solid tumours and haematological malignancies were possible. Since the advent of genetic engineering technology, recombinant (r) IFNalpha has been widely evaluated in solid tumours. This review discusses the use and potential of rIFNalpha in solid tumours; the first part focuses on malignant melanoma and metastatic renal cell carcinoma (RCC). In the adjuvant treatment of malignant melanoma, rIFNalpha has been tested in randomised trials in more than 6000 patients. High-dosage IFNalpha (> or =10MU) prolongs disease-free survival (DFS) but not overall survival (OS). Low-dosage IFNalpha (< or =3MU) has not been shown to prolong DFS or OS, and current data do not support its use outside clinical trials. The latest United Kingdom Co-ordinating Committee on Cancer Research meta-analysis of ten randomised trials that used adjuvant rIFNalpha has shown that there is a benefit in DFS but not OS. No conclusions can be reached for intermediate-dosage IFNalpha (5 to 10MU) until the mature results of the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) study 18952 are available. In RCC, current evidence does not support the use of adjuvant IFNalpha. In metastatic malignant melanoma and RCC, reported response rates to rIFNalpha are approximately 15%. In a minority of responding patients, however, these responses can be long-standing. In metastatic malignant melanoma, IFNalpha combined with other cytotoxic agents with or without interleukin-2 has achieved high response rates but has not improved survival. In metastatic RCC, intermediate dosages of rIFNalpha should be used and therapy should probably be prolonged (>12 months); response depends on prognostic factors such as good performance status, whereas survival is affected by factors such as low tumour burden. Nephrectomy should therefore be considered in patients with good performance status prior to IFNalpha immunotherapy in advanced RCC, even in patients with metastatic disease. The toxicity of high-dosage IFNalpha and the lack of definite benefit on OS with high- or low-dosage IFNalpha do not support its use outside clinical trials. Data from the ongoing US Intergroup studies, the ongoing EORTC 18991 study (long-term therapy with pegylated IFNalpha) and mature data from EORTC 18952 (intermediate-dosage IFNalpha) will help establish the role of IFNalpha as adjuvant therapy in malignant melanoma.

The role of adjuvant immunotherapy in renal cell carcinoma

After nephrectomy for renal cell carcinoma (RCC), a significant number of patients develop recurrent disease. In order to improve the prognosis of these patients, the role of adjuvant immunotherapy should be clarified; the appropriate selection of patients is especially crucial. For this purpose, the search for prognostic factors is important to identify at-risk patients. Known factors such as stage, grade, and microvascular invasion can be used for appropriate selection. Other molecular markers, such as cadherin-6 and G250 antigen, may become important. So far, adjuvant immunotherapy in RCC has not shown improved survival data, but the results may be hampered by inadequate recruitment and follow-up. Adequate selection of patients and the search for less toxic and more effective immunotherapy approaches are of importance. Therefore, the use of monoclonal antibody G250 or dendritic cell vaccinations, alone or together with cytokines, may be advantageous and is currently used. Today, adjuvant protocols are open for recruitment of patients to elucidate the important question as to whether this approach should be implemented in the treatment of RCC. In this article, an update is given in the field of adjuvant immunotherapy in patients with RCC.

Interferon in oncological practice: review of interferon biology, clinical applications, and toxicities

For the past 40 years, various forms of interferon (IFN) have been evaluated as therapy in a number of malignant and non-malignant diseases. With the advent of gene cloning, large quantities of pure IFN became available for clinical study. This paper reviews the biology, pharmacology, and clinical applications of IFN formulations most commonly used in oncology. It then reviews the most common side effects seen in patients treated with IFN, and makes recommendations for the management of IFN-induced toxicity. The major oncological indications for IFN include melanoma, renal cell carcinoma, AIDS-related Kaposi's sarcoma, follicular lymphoma, hairy cell leukemia, and chronic myelogenous leukemia. Unfortunately, IFN therapy is associated with significant toxicity, which can be divided into constitutional, neuropsychiatric, hematologic, and hepatic effects. These toxicities have a major impact on the patient's quality of life, and on the physician's ability to optimally treat the patient. Careful attention to all aspects of patient care can result in improved tolerability of this difficult but promising therapy.

CONCLUSION

a better understanding of IFN biology, indications, side effect profiles, and toxicity management will aid in optimizing its use in the treatment of patients with cancer.

The role of angiogenesis in prostate and other urologic cancers: a review

Angiogenesis is a process critical to both tumour growth and metastasis. It is a dynamic integrated process involving basement membrane degradation, endothelial cell proliferation and migration, and capillary tubule formation. Under normal circumstances, the microvasculature is maintained in a quiescent state. The acquisition of the angiogenic phenotype depends on the outcome of stimulatory and inhibitory regulation by the tumour and its microenvironment. There are markers of angiogenesis that potentially could provide prognostic information in addition to that gained from conventional clinicopathologic data, and antiangiogenic therapy for urologic cancers has potential advantages over current therapeutic strategies. Promising preclinical studies have led to the initiation of phase I studies of antiangiogenic therapy in combination with chemotherapy, which may lead to novel treatments for urologic malignant tumours and may identify new intermediate markers for the response to therapy.

Treatment of patients with metastatic renal carcinoma with a combination of subcutaneous interleukin-2 and interferon alfa with or without fluorouracil. Groupe Français d'Immunothérapie, Fédération Nationale des Centres de Lutte Contre le Cancer

PURPOSE

Subcutaneous recombinant interleukin-2 (rIL-2) and recombinant interferon alfa-2a (rIFNalpha-2a) have been used extensively in the treatment of metastatic renal cancer. Most results, coming from noncontrolled phase II trials, showed inconsistent rates of response. More recently, the addition of fluorouracil (FU) was proposed to improve the efficacy of these regimens.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

The role of a subcutaneous combination of rIL-2 and rIFNalpha-2a with or without FU was investigated. Patients were randomly assigned to receive a combination of rIL-2 and rIFNalpha-2a at weeks 1, 3, 5, and 7 or the same combination together with a continuous infusion of FU at weeks 1 and 5. The major end points of this multicenter, randomized trial were progression-free survival, response rate, and toxicity. Overall survival was a secondary end point. Tumor responses were reviewed by an independent committee. Analysis of the results was performed on an intention-to-treat basis.

RESULTS

One hundred thirty-one patients were enrolled. There was no difference in toxicity between the arms, and no toxic death was observed. One partial response was observed in arm A and five in arm B. Progression-free survival did not differ between the arms, and rates at 1 year were 12% and 15% in arms A and B, respectively. No statistically significant differences were detected in any end point.

CONCLUSION

The subcutaneous combination of rIL-2 and rIFNalpha-2a with or without FU does not benefit patients with metastatic renal carcinoma. Neither of these regimens can be recommended as standard treatment. The results of the subcutaneous cytokine regimen seem disappointing.

Fatigue in the Danish general population. Influence of sociodemographic factors and disease

OBJECTIVE

To measure the levels of fatigue in the general population, and to examine how disease and sociodemographic factors influence fatigue.

DESIGN

Cross sectional questionnaire study in the Danish general population.

SUBJECTS

A random, age stratified sample of 1608 people aged 20-77 with an equal gender distribution (response rate 67%).

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Five fatigue scales from the questionnaire Multidimensional Fatigue Inventory: General Fatigue, Physical Fatigue, Reduced Activity, Reduced Motivation and Mental Fatigue.

RESULTS

Fatigue scores were skewed towards absence of fatigue. The General Fatigue and Physical Fatigue scales showed the highest fatigue levels while the Reduced Motivation scale showed lowest levels. Gender differences in fatigue scores were small, but the variability among women was higher-that is, more women had high scores. A multiple linear regression analysis showed that respondents of low social status and respondents with a depression had high fatigue scores on all scales, independent of other factors. Chronic somatic disease had an independent direct effect on Mental Fatigue, but for the rest of the scales, the effect of somatic disease depended on age, gender and/or whether the person was living alone. For example, General and Physical Fatigue decreased with age among healthy people, whereas scores on these scales increased with age among those with a somatic disease.

CONCLUSIONS

Physical and mental diseases play essential parts for the level of fatigue and as modulators of the associations between sociodemographic factors and fatigue. These interactions should be taken into account in future research on fatigue and sociodemographic factors and when data from clinical studies are compared with normative data from the general population.

Regression of human metastatic renal cell carcinoma after vaccination with tumor cell-dendritic cell hybrids

Reports of spontaneous regressions of metastases and the demonstration of tumor-reactive cytotoxic T lymphocytes indicate the importance of the host's immune system in controlling the devastating course of metastatic renal cell carcinoma. Recent research indicates that immunization with hybrids of tumor and antigen presenting cells results in protective immunity and rejection of established tumors in various rodent models. Here, we present a hybrid cell vaccination study of 17 patients. Using electrofusion techniques, we generated hybrids of autologous tumor and allogeneic dendritic cells that presented antigens expressed by the tumor in concert with the co-stimulating capabilities of dendritic cells. After vaccination, and with a mean follow-up time of 13 months, four patients completely rejected all metastatic tumor lesions, one presented a 'mixed response', and two had a tumor mass reduction of greater 50%. We also demonstrate induction of HLA-A2-restricted cytotoxic T cells reactive with the Muc1 tumor-associated antigen and recruitment of CD8+ lymphocytes into tumor challenge sites. Our data indicate that hybrid cell vaccination is a safe and effective therapy for renal cell carcinoma and may provide a broadly applicable strategy for other malignancies with unknown antigens.

Immunochemotherapy with interleukin-2, interferon-alpha and 5-fluorouracil for progressive metastatic renal cell carcinoma: a multicenter phase II study. Dutch Immunotherapy Working Party

In patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma response rates of 7-26% have been achieved with immunotherapy. A high response rate of 48% in 35 patients has been reported for treatment with the combination of interferon-alpha (IFN-alpha), interleukin-2 (IL-2) and 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) (Atzpodien et al (1993a) Eur J Cancer29A: S6-8). We conducted a multicentre phase II study to confirm these results. Metastatic renal cell carcinoma patients were treated as outpatients with an 8-week treatment cycle. Recombinant human IL-2 20 MU m(-2) was administered subcutaneously (s.c.) three times a week (t.i.w) in weeks 1 and 4 and 5 MU m(-2) t.i.w. in weeks 2 and 3. Recombinant human IFN-alpha 2a 6 MU m(-2) was administered s.c. once in weeks 1 and 4 and t.i.w. in weeks 2 and 3, and 9 MU m(-2) t.i.w. in weeks 5-8. 5-FU (750 mg m(-2)) was given as a bolus injection intravenous once a week in weeks 5-8. The treatment cycle was repeated once in case of response or minor response. Fifty-two patients entered the study. All had undergone a nephrectomy and had progressive metastatic disease. The median WHO-performance status was 1, the median number of metastatic sites was 2 (range 1-5) and the median time between the diagnosis of the primary tumour and the start of treatment was 12.9 months (range 1-153). Among the 51 patients, including four patients with early progressive disease, who were evaluable for response, the response rate was 11.8% (95% confidence interval (CI) 2.9-20.7%), with no complete responses. Median duration of response was 8.3 (range 3.8-22.4+) months. Median survival was 16.5 (range 1.8-30.5+) months. Grade 3/4 toxicity (WHO) occurred in 29/52 (55.8%) of the patients in cycle 1 and in 6/16 (37.5%) of the patients in cycle 2. It consisted mainly of anorexia, fatigue, nausea, fever and leucocytopenia. We cannot confirm the high response rate in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma treated with the combination of IFN-alpha, IL-2 and 5-FU, as described by Atzpodien et al.

Immunotherapy for advanced renal cell cancer

BACKGROUND

The course of advanced renal cell carcinoma is extremely variable, ranging from spontaneous remission to disease progression refractory to chemotherapy. Immunotherapy has held promise of improved outcomes based on uncontrolled studies and randomized controlled trials generally limited by small size and low power.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate immunotherapy for advanced renal cell carcinoma by comparing: (1) high dose interleukin-2 to other options and (2) interferon-alpha to other options.

SEARCH STRATEGY

A search of MEDLINE, Cancerlit, EMBASE and Cochrane Library databases from 1966 through the end of 1999. Handsearches were made of the proceedings of the annual meetings of the American Urologic Association, ASCO, and biennial European ECCO meetings, and the references of identified studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized controlled trials that selected (or stratified) patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma, utilized an immunotherapeutic agent in at least one study arm, and reported response or survival by allocation. Forty-two studies involving 4216 patients were eligible and reported response and 26 of these reported survival outcome (3089 patients).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two independent reviewers abstracted each article by following a prospectively designed protocol. Dichotomous outcomes for treatment response (partial plus complete) and for deaths at one year were used for the main comparisons. Survival hazard ratios were also used for studies of interferon-alpha versus controls.

MAIN RESULTS

The average response rate was 10.2 % (range by arm, 0 - 39%) and complete response rate was 3.2% (123/3852; n = 38 studies). Median survival averaged 11.6 months (range by arm, 6 - 28 months) and two-year survival averaged 22% (16 studies, range by arm 8 - 41%). There were no placebo-controlled studies and no randomized controlled studies examined survival for high dose interleukin-2 versus controls. Results from 6 studies (n = 963) indicate that interferon-alpha is superior to controls (OR for death at one year = 0.67, 95% CI 0.50 - 0.89. The pooled hazard ratio for survival of 0.78 (0.67 - 0.90) indicates that the treatment effect persisted until 24 months from randomization. The weighted average median improvement in survival was 2.6 months. Additional comparisons failed to prove a survival benefit from the addition of other agents to either modified schedules of interleukin-2 or to interferon-alpha. Dose-response studies examining survival for either agent could not be identified. The difference in response rate between arms was correlated with the difference in survival (P<0.001) suggesting that response rate difference may be a surrogate intermediate endpoint for survival.

REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS

Interferon-alpha provides a modest survival benefit compared to other commonly used treatments and should be considered for the control arm of future studies of systemic agents. Interleukin-2 has not been validated in controlled randomized studies.