1
|
Lin H, Fu L, Li P, Zhu J, Xu Q, Wang Y, Mumin MA, Zhou X, Chen Y, Shu G, Yao G, Chen M, Lu J, Zhang L, Liu Y, Zhao Y, Bao J, Chen W, Luo J, Li X, Chen Z, Cao J. Fatty acids metabolism affects the therapeutic effect of anti-PD-1/PD-L1 in tumor immune microenvironment in clear cell renal cell carcinoma. J Transl Med 2023; 21:343. [PMID: 37221577 DOI: 10.1186/s12967-023-04161-z] [Citation(s) in RCA: 12] [Impact Index Per Article: 12.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/27/2023] [Accepted: 04/25/2023] [Indexed: 05/25/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Clear cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC) is a highly invasive and metastatic subtype of kidney malignancy and is correlated with metabolic reprogramming for adaptation to the tumor microenvironment comprising infiltrated immune cells and immunomodulatory molecules. The role of immune cells in the tumor microenvironment (TME) and their association with abnormal fatty acids metabolism in ccRCC remains poorly understood. METHOD RNA-seq and clinical data of KIRC from The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) and E-MTAB-1980 from the ArrayExpress dataset. The Nivolumab group and Everolimus group of the CheckMate 025 study, the Atezolizumab arm of IMmotion150 and the Atezolizumab plus Bevacizumab group of IMmotion151 cohort were obtained for subsequent analysis. After differential expression genes identification, the signature was constructed through univariate Cox proportional hazard regression and simultaneously the least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (Lasso) analysis and the predictive performance of our signature was assessed by using receiver operating characteristic (ROC), Kaplan-Meier (KM) survival analysis, nomogram, drug sensitivity analysis, immunotherapeutic effect analysis and enrichment analysis. Immunohistochemistry (IHC), qPCR and western blot were performed to measure related mRNA or protein expression. Biological features were evaluated by wound healing, cell migration and invasion assays and colony formation test and analyzed using coculture assay and flow cytometry. RESULTS Twenty fatty acids metabolism-related mRNA signatures were constructed in TCGA and possessed a strong predictive performance demonstrated through time-dependent ROC and KM survival analysis. Notably, the high-risk group exhibited an impaired response to anti-PD-1/PD-L1 (Programmed death-1 receptor/Programmed death-1 receptor-ligand) therapy compared to the low-risk group. The overall levels of the immune score were higher in the high-risk group. Additionally, drug sensitivity analysis observed that the model could effectively predict efficacy and sensitivity to chemotherapy. Enrichment analysis revealed that the IL6-JAK-STAT3 signaling pathway was a major pathway. IL4I1 could promote ccRCC cells' malignant features through JAK1/STAT3 signaling pathway and M2-like macrophage polarization. CONCLUSION The study elucidates that targeting fatty acids metabolism can affect the therapeutic effect of PD-1/PD-L1 in TME and related signal pathways. The model can effectively predict the response to several treatment options, underscoring its potential clinical utility.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Hansen Lin
- Department of Urology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou, People's Republic of China
- Institute of Precision Medicine, The First Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou, People's Republic of China
| | - Liangmin Fu
- Department of Urology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou, People's Republic of China
- Institute of Precision Medicine, The First Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou, People's Republic of China
| | - Pengju Li
- Department of Urology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou, People's Republic of China
- Institute of Precision Medicine, The First Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou, People's Republic of China
| | - Jiangquan Zhu
- Department of Urology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou, People's Republic of China
- Institute of Precision Medicine, The First Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou, People's Republic of China
| | - Quanhui Xu
- Department of Urology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou, People's Republic of China
- Institute of Precision Medicine, The First Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou, People's Republic of China
| | - Yinghan Wang
- Department of Urology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou, People's Republic of China
- Institute of Precision Medicine, The First Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou, People's Republic of China
| | - Mukhtar Adan Mumin
- Department of Urology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou, People's Republic of China
- Institute of Precision Medicine, The First Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou, People's Republic of China
| | - Xinwei Zhou
- Department of Urology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou, People's Republic of China
- Institute of Precision Medicine, The First Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou, People's Republic of China
| | - Yuhang Chen
- Department of Urology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou, People's Republic of China
- Institute of Precision Medicine, The First Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou, People's Republic of China
| | - Guannan Shu
- Department of Urology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou, People's Republic of China
- Institute of Precision Medicine, The First Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou, People's Republic of China
| | - Gaosheng Yao
- Department of Urology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou, People's Republic of China
- Institute of Precision Medicine, The First Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou, People's Republic of China
| | - Minyu Chen
- Department of Urology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou, People's Republic of China
- Institute of Precision Medicine, The First Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou, People's Republic of China
| | - Jun Lu
- Department of Urology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou, People's Republic of China
- Institute of Precision Medicine, The First Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou, People's Republic of China
| | - Lizhen Zhang
- Department of Urology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou, People's Republic of China
- Institute of Precision Medicine, The First Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou, People's Republic of China
| | - YuJun Liu
- Zhongshan School of Medicine, Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou, China
| | - Yiqi Zhao
- Zhongshan School of Medicine, Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou, China
| | - Jiahao Bao
- Guangdong Provincial Key Laboratory of Stomatology, Guanghua School of Stomatology, Hospital of Stomatology, Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou, People's Republic of China
| | - Wei Chen
- Department of Urology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou, People's Republic of China
- Institute of Precision Medicine, The First Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou, People's Republic of China
| | - Junhang Luo
- Department of Urology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou, People's Republic of China.
- Institute of Precision Medicine, The First Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou, People's Republic of China.
| | - Xiaofei Li
- Department of Urology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou, People's Republic of China.
| | - Zhenhua Chen
- Department of Urology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou, People's Republic of China.
- Institute of Precision Medicine, The First Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou, People's Republic of China.
| | - Jiazheng Cao
- Department of Urology, Jiangmen Central Hospital, Haibang Street 23, Pengjiang District, Jiangmen, 529030, Guangdong, China.
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Aldin A, Besiroglu B, Adams A, Monsef I, Piechotta V, Tomlinson E, Hornbach C, Dressen N, Goldkuhle M, Maisch P, Dahm P, Heidenreich A, Skoetz N. First-line therapy for adults with advanced renal cell carcinoma: a systematic review and network meta-analysis. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2023; 5:CD013798. [PMID: 37146227 PMCID: PMC10158799 DOI: 10.1002/14651858.cd013798.pub2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 05/07/2023]
Abstract
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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Angela Aldin
- Cochrane Haematology, Department I of Internal Medicine, Center for Integrated Oncology Aachen Bonn Cologne Duesseldorf, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Cologne, University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany
| | - Burcu Besiroglu
- Cochrane Haematology, Department I of Internal Medicine, Center for Integrated Oncology Aachen Bonn Cologne Duesseldorf, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Cologne, University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany
| | - Anne Adams
- Institute of Medical Statistics and Computational Biology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Cologne, University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany
| | - Ina Monsef
- Cochrane Haematology, Department I of Internal Medicine, Center for Integrated Oncology Aachen Bonn Cologne Duesseldorf, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Cologne, University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany
| | - Vanessa Piechotta
- Cochrane Haematology, Department I of Internal Medicine, Center for Integrated Oncology Aachen Bonn Cologne Duesseldorf, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Cologne, University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany
| | - Eve Tomlinson
- Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
| | - Carolin Hornbach
- Cochrane Haematology, Department I of Internal Medicine, Center for Integrated Oncology Aachen Bonn Cologne Duesseldorf, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Cologne, University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany
| | - Nadine Dressen
- Cochrane Haematology, Department I of Internal Medicine, Center for Integrated Oncology Aachen Bonn Cologne Duesseldorf, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Cologne, University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany
| | - Marius Goldkuhle
- Cochrane Haematology, Department I of Internal Medicine, Center for Integrated Oncology Aachen Bonn Cologne Duesseldorf, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Cologne, University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany
| | | | - Philipp Dahm
- Urology Section, Minneapolis VA Health Care System, Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA
| | - Axel Heidenreich
- Department of Urology, Uro-oncology, Special Urological and Robot-assisted Surgery, University Hospital of Cologne, Cologne, Germany
| | - Nicole Skoetz
- Cochrane Haematology, Department I of Internal Medicine, Center for Integrated Oncology Aachen Bonn Cologne Duesseldorf, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Cologne, University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Hofmann F, Hwang EC, Lam TB, Bex A, Yuan Y, Marconi LS, Ljungberg B. Targeted therapy for metastatic renal cell carcinoma. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2020; 10:CD012796. [PMID: 33058158 PMCID: PMC8094280 DOI: 10.1002/14651858.cd012796.pub2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 14] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/24/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Several comparative randomised controlled trials (RCTs) have been performed including combinations of tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) and immune checkpoint inhibitors since the publication of a Cochrane Review on targeted therapy for metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) in 2008. This review represents an update of that original review. OBJECTIVES To assess the effects of targeted therapies for clear cell mRCC in patients naïve to systemic therapy. SEARCH METHODS We performed a comprehensive search with no restrictions on language or publication status. The date of the latest search was 18 June 2020. SELECTION CRITERIA We included randomised controlled trials, recruiting patients with clear cell mRCC naïve to previous systemic treatment. The index intervention was any TKI-based targeted therapy. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS Two review authors independently assessed the included studies and extracted data for the primary outcomes: progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS) and serious adverse events (SAEs); and the secondary outcomes: health-related quality of life (QoL), response rate and minor adverse events (AEs). We performed statistical analyses using a random-effects model and rated the certainty of evidence according to the GRADE approach. MAIN RESULTS We included 18 RCTs reporting on 11,590 participants randomised across 18 comparisons. This abstract focuses on the primary outcomes of select comparisons. 1. Pazopanib versus sunitinib Pazopanib may result in little to no difference in PFS as compared to sunitinib (hazard ratio (HR) 1.05, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.90 to 1.23; 1 study, 1110 participants; low-certainty evidence). Based on the control event risk of 420 per 1000 in this trial at 12 months, this corresponds to 18 fewer participants experiencing PFS (95% CI 76 fewer to 38 more) per 1000 participants. Pazopanib may result in little to no difference in OS compared to sunitinib (HR 0.92, 95% CI 0.80 to 1.06; 1 study, 1110 participants; low-certainty evidence). Based on the control event risk of 550 per 1000 in this trial at 12 months, this corresponds to 27 more OSs (95% CI 19 fewer to 70 more) per 1000 participants. Pazopanib may result in little to no difference in SAEs as compared to sunitinib (risk ratio (RR) 1.01, 95% CI 0.94 to 1.09; 1 study, 1102 participants; low-certainty evidence). Based on the control event risk of 734 per 1000 in this trial, this corresponds to 7 more participants experiencing SAEs (95% CI 44 fewer to 66 more) per 1000 participants. 2. Sunitinib versus avelumab and axitinib Sunitinib probably reduces PFS as compared to avelumab plus axitinib (HR 1.45, 95% CI 1.17 to 1.80; 1 study, 886 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Based on the control event risk of 550 per 1000 in this trial at 12 months, this corresponds to 130 fewer participants experiencing PFS (95% CI 209 fewer to 53 fewer) per 1000 participants. Sunitinib may result in little to no difference in OS (HR 1.28, 95% CI 0.92 to 1.79; 1 study, 886 participants; low-certainty evidence). Based on the control event risk of 890 per 1000 in this trial at 12 months, this would result in 29 fewer OSs (95% CI 78 fewer to 8 more) per 1000 participants. Sunitinib may result in little to no difference in SAEs (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.93 to 1.10; 1 study, 873 participants; low-certainty evidence). Based on the control event risk of 705 per 1000 in this trial, this corresponds to 7 more SAEs (95% CI 49 fewer to 71 more) per 1000 participants. 3. Sunitinib versus pembrolizumab and axitinib Sunitinib probably reduces PFS as compared to pembrolizumab plus axitinib (HR 1.45, 95% CI 1.19 to 1.76; 1 study, 861 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Based on the control event risk of 590 per 1000 in this trial at 12 months, this corresponds to 125 fewer participants experiencing PFS (95% CI 195 fewer to 56 fewer) per 1000 participants. Sunitinib probably reduces OS (HR 1.90, 95% CI 1.36 to 2.65; 1 study, 861 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Based on the control event risk of 880 per 1000 in this trial at 12 months, this would result in 96 fewer OSs (95% CI 167 fewer to 40 fewer) per 1000 participants. Sunitinib may reduce SAEs as compared to pembrolizumab plus axitinib (RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.81 to 1.02; 1 study, 854 participants; low-certainty evidence) although the CI includes the possibility of no effect. Based on the control event risk of 604 per 1000 in this trial, this corresponds to 60 fewer SAEs (95% CI 115 fewer to 12 more) per 1000 participants. 4. Sunitinib versus nivolumab and ipilimumab Sunitinib may reduce PFS as compared to nivolumab plus ipilimumab (HR 1.30, 95% CI 1.11 to 1.52; 1 study, 847 participants; low-certainty evidence). Based on the control event risk of 280 per 1000 in this trial at 30 months' follow-up, this corresponds to 89 fewer PFSs (95% CI 136 fewer to 37 fewer) per 1000 participants. Sunitinib reduces OS (HR 1.52, 95% CI 1.23 to 1.89; 1 study, 847 participants; high-certainty evidence). Based on the control event risk 600 per 1000 in this trial at 30 months, this would result in 140 fewer OSs (95% CI 219 fewer to 67 fewer) per 1000 participants. Sunitinib probably increases SAEs (RR 1.37, 95% CI 1.22 to 1.53; 1 study, 1082 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Based on the control event risk of 457 per 1000 in this trial, this corresponds to 169 more SAEs (95% CI 101 more to 242 more) per 1000 participants. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS Based on the low to high certainty of evidence, several combinations of immune checkpoint inhibitors appear to be superior to single-agent targeted therapy in terms of PFS and OS, and with a favourable AE profile. Some single-agent targeted therapies demonstrated a similar or improved oncological outcome compared to others; minor differences were observed for AE within this group. The certainty of evidence was variable ranging from high to very low and all comparisons were based on single trials.
Collapse
Key Words
- adult
- humans
- antibodies, monoclonal, humanized
- antibodies, monoclonal, humanized/adverse effects
- antibodies, monoclonal, humanized/therapeutic use
- antineoplastic agents
- antineoplastic agents/adverse effects
- antineoplastic agents/therapeutic use
- antineoplastic agents, immunological
- antineoplastic agents, immunological/therapeutic use
- axitinib
- axitinib/adverse effects
- axitinib/therapeutic use
- bevacizumab
- bevacizumab/adverse effects
- bevacizumab/therapeutic use
- bias
- carcinoma, renal cell
- carcinoma, renal cell/drug therapy
- carcinoma, renal cell/mortality
- everolimus
- everolimus/adverse effects
- everolimus/therapeutic use
- indazoles
- ipilimumab
- ipilimumab/adverse effects
- ipilimumab/therapeutic use
- kidney neoplasms
- kidney neoplasms/drug therapy
- kidney neoplasms/mortality
- kidney neoplasms/pathology
- phenylurea compounds
- phenylurea compounds/adverse effects
- phenylurea compounds/therapeutic use
- progression-free survival
- protein kinase inhibitors
- protein kinase inhibitors/adverse effects
- protein kinase inhibitors/therapeutic use
- pyrimidines
- pyrimidines/adverse effects
- pyrimidines/therapeutic use
- quality of life
- quinolines
- quinolines/adverse effects
- quinolines/therapeutic use
- randomized controlled trials as topic
- receptors, vascular endothelial growth factor
- receptors, vascular endothelial growth factor/antagonists & inhibitors
- sirolimus
- sirolimus/adverse effects
- sirolimus/analogs & derivatives
- sirolimus/therapeutic use
- sorafenib
- sorafenib/adverse effects
- sorafenib/therapeutic use
- sulfonamides
- sulfonamides/adverse effects
- sulfonamides/therapeutic use
- sunitinib
- sunitinib/adverse effects
- sunitinib/therapeutic use
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Fabian Hofmann
- Department of Urology, Sunderby Sjukhus, Umeå University, Luleå, Sweden
| | - Eu Chang Hwang
- Department of Urology, Chonnam National University Medical School, Chonnam National University Hwasun Hospital, Hwasun, Korea, South
| | - Thomas Bl Lam
- Academic Urology Unit, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK
| | - Axel Bex
- Department of Urology and UCL Division of Surgery and Interventional Science, Royal Free London NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
| | - Yuhong Yuan
- Department of Medicine, Division of Gastroenterology, McMaster University, Hamilton, Canada
| | - Lorenzo So Marconi
- Department of Urology and Renal Transplantation, Centro Hospitalar e Universitario de Coimbra, Coimbra, Portugal
| | - Börje Ljungberg
- Department of Surgical and Perioperative Sciences, Umeå University, Umeå, Sweden
| |
Collapse
|