New approaches to first-line treatment of advanced renal cell carcinoma

Costs of Adverse Events in Patients with Advanced or Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma with First-Line Treatment

AIM

This study evaluated costs associated with adverse events (AEs) in previously untreated real-world patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma (aRCC) in the USA.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This retrospective longitudinal cohort study analyzed data from the Merative MarketScan Research Database (1 January 2014-30 September 2021). Adult patients with aRCC receiving first-line systemic treatments for aRCC (tyrosine kinase inhibitors [TKIs], or combination therapies of TKIs and immunotherapy) on or after the date of aRCC diagnosis were included. A total of 27 AEs of interest were included based on a review of product labels of the first-line treatments included in the study and identified using International Classification of Diseases, Ninth/Tenth Revision, Clinical Modification codes. Incremental costs associated with AEs between cases and controls (unadjusted and adjusted for relevant baseline characteristics) were estimated by two-part modeling. Analyses were performed over three AE cost assessment periods (7, 14, and 30 days).

RESULTS

The study included 1681 patients with aRCC (mean [standard deviation; SD] age, 60.8 [10.6] years; 73.1% male), of which 1542 (91.7%) had at least one AE. AEs were mostly diagnosed in the outpatient (OP) setting. For most AEs, cases had significantly higher unadjusted and adjusted costs than controls. Costs associated with AEs ranged from < 300 US dollars (USD) for proteinuria to nearly 60,000 USD for hypophosphatemia. Seventeen AEs had adjusted 30-day costs exceeding 10,000 USD; of these, nine (pancreatitis, acute kidney injury, dyspnea, hypotension, hyperkalemia, hypomagnesemia, hyponatremia, hypophosphatemia, and neutrophil decreased/neutropenia) had 30-day costs exceeding 20,000 USD.

LIMITATIONS

The study was subject to limitations of all observational analyses of claims data (e.g., residual confounding). Observed cost differences may not have been solely attributable to an AE of interest. Study findings may not be generalizable to aRCC patient populations outside the USA.

CONCLUSION

Most patients experienced at least one AE after initiation of first-line treatment with a TKI or combination therapies of TKIs and immunotherapy. There were substantial costs associated with AEs. Considering both safety and efficacy profiles when selecting optimal treatments can potentially mitigate healthcare costs for aRCC.

A Phase 2 Trial of Talazoparib and Avelumab in Genomically Defined Metastatic Kidney Cancer

BACKGROUND

Although different kidney cancers represent a heterogeneous group of malignancies, multiple subtypes including Von Hippel-Lindau (VHL)-altered clear cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC), fumarate hydratase (FH)- and succinate dehydrogenase (SDH)-deficient renal cell carcinoma (RCC), and renal medullary carcinoma (RMC) are affected by genomic instability. Synthetic lethality with poly ADP-ribose polymerase inhibitors (PARPis) has been suggested in preclinical models of these subtypes, and paired PARPis with immune checkpoint blockade (ICB) may achieve additive and/or synergistic effects in patients with previously treated advanced kidney cancers.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate combined PARPi + ICB in treatment-refractory metastatic kidney cancer.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

We conducted a single-center, investigator-initiated phase 2 trial in two genomically selected advanced kidney cancer cohorts: (1) VHL-altered RCC with at least one prior ICB agent and one vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) inhibitor, and (2) FH- or SDH-deficient RCC with at least one prior ICB agent or VEGF inhibitor and RMC with at least one prior line of chemotherapy.

INTERVENTION

Patients received talazoparib 1 mg daily plus avelumab 800 mg intravenously every 14 d in 28-d cycles.

OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS

The primary endpoint was objective response rate (ORR) by Immune Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors at 4 mo, and the secondary endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival, and safety.

RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS

Cohort 1 consisted of ten patients with VHL-altered ccRCC. All patients had previously received ICB. The ORR was 0/9 patients; one patient was not evaluable due to missed doses. In this cohort, seven patients achieved stable disease (SD) as the best response. The median PFS was 3.5 mo (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.0, 3.9 mo). Cohort 2 consisted of eight patients; four had FH-deficient RCC, one had SDH-deficient RCC, and three had RMC. In this cohort, six patients had previously received ICB. The ORR was 0/8 patients; two patients achieved SD as the best response and the median PFS was 1.2 mo (95% CI 0.4, 2.9 mo). The most common treatment-related adverse events of all grades were fatigue (61%), anemia (28%), nausea (22%), and headache (22%). There were seven grade 3-4 and no grade 5 events.

CONCLUSIONS

The first clinical study of combination PARPi and ICB therapy in advanced kidney cancer did not show clinical benefit in multiple genomically defined metastatic RCC cohorts or RMC.

PATIENT SUMMARY

We conducted a study to look at the effect of two medications, talazoparib and avelumab, in patients with metastatic kidney cancer who had disease progression on standard treatment. Talazoparib blocks the normal activity of molecules called poly ADP-ribose polymerase, which then prevents tumor cells from repairing themselves and growing, while avelumab helps the immune system recognize and kill cancer cells. We found that the combination of these agents was safe but not effective in specific types of kidney cancer.

Time to strategy failure and treatment beyond progression in pretreated metastatic renal cell carcinoma patients receiving nivolumab: post-hoc analysis of the Meet-URO 15 study

Background

Immunotherapies exhibit peculiar cancer response patterns in contrast to chemotherapy and targeted therapy. Some patients experience disease response after initial progression or durable responses after treatment interruption. In clinical practice, immune checkpoint inhibitors may be continued after radiological progression if clinical benefit is observed. As a result, estimating progression-free survival (PFS) based on the first disease progression may not accurately reflect the actual benefit of immunotherapy.

Methods

The Meet-URO 15 study was a multicenter retrospective analysis of 571 pretreated metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) patients receiving nivolumab. Time to strategy failure (TSF) was defined as the interval from the start of immunotherapy to definitive disease progression or death. This post-hoc analysis compared TSF to PFS and assess the response and survival outcomes between patients treatated beyond progression (TBP) and non-TBP. Moreover, we evaluated the prognostic accuracy of the Meet-URO score versus the International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium (IMDC) score based on TSF and PFS.

Results

Overall, 571 mRCC patients were included in the analysis. Median TSF was 8.6 months (95% CI: 7.0 - 10.1), while mPFS was 7.0 months (95% CI: 5.7 - 8.5). TBP patients (N = 93) had significantly longer TSF (16.3 vs 5.5 months; p < 0.001) and overall survival (OS) (34.8 vs 17.9 months; p < 0.001) but similar PFS compared to non-TBP patients. In TBP patients, a median delay of 9.6 months (range: 6.7-16.3) from the first to the definitive disease progression was observed, whereas non-TBP patients had overlapped median TSF and PFS (5.5 months). Moreover, TBP patients had a trend toward a higher overall response rate (33.3% vs 24.3%; p = 0.075) and disease control rate (61.3% vs 55.5%; p = 0.31). Finally, in the whole population the Meet-URO score outperformed the IMDC score in predicting both TSF (c-index: 0.63 vs 0.59) and PFS (0.62 vs 0.59).

Conclusion

We found a 2-month difference between mTSF and mPFS in mRCC patients receiving nivolumab. However, TBP patients had better outcomes, including significantly longer TSF and OS than non-TBP patients. The Meet-URO score is a reliable predictor of TSF and PFS.

LITESPARK-012: pembrolizumab plus lenvatinib with or without belzutifan or quavonlimab for advanced renal cell carcinoma

Combination treatment with immunotherapy agents and/or vascular endothelial growth factor tyrosine kinase inhibitors are a standard of care for patients with advanced clear cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC). Novel therapeutic combinations that include the hypoxia-inducible factor 2α inhibitor belzutifan and the cytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated protein 4 inhibitor quavonlimab are being investigated for their potential to further improve patient outcomes. This protocol describes the rationale and design of the randomized, phase III LITESPARK-012 study, which will evaluate the efficacy and safety of pembrolizumab plus lenvatinib with or without belzutifan or quavonlimab as first-line treatment for advanced ccRCC. Results from this study may support triplet combination therapies as a potential new standard of care for advanced ccRCC. Clinical trial registry: NCT04736706 (ClinicalTrials.gov).

The stratification and prognostic importance of molecular and immune landscapes in clear cell renal cell carcinoma

The aim of our research is to explore the various characteristics and genetic profiles of clear cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC) in order to discover possible predictors of prognosis and targets for treatment. By utilizing ssGSEA scores, we categorized patients with ccRCC into groups based on their phenotype, distinguishing between low and high. This categorization revealed significant variations in the expression of crucial immune checkpoint genes and Human Leukocyte Antigen (HLA) genes, suggesting the presence of a potential immune evasion tactic in different subtypes of ccRCC. A predictive model was built using genes that are expressed differently and linked to cell death, showing strong effectiveness in categorizing patient risk. Furthermore, we discovered a noteworthy correlation among risk scores, infiltration of immune cells, the expression of genes related to immune checkpoint inhibitors, and diverse clinical features. This indicates that our scoring system for risk could function as a comprehensive gauge of the severity of the disease. The examination of the mutational terrain further highlighted the predominance of particular genetic changes, including VHL and PBRM1 missense mutations. Finally, we have discovered the function of DKK1 in facilitating cell death in ccRCC, presenting an additional possibility for therapeutic intervention. The results of our study suggest the possibility of incorporating molecular information into clinical prediction, which could lead to personalized treatment approaches in ccRCC.

The Utility of Renal Mass Biopsy in Large Renal Masses

Objectives

The role of needle core renal biopsy in large renal masses, defined as lesions larger than 4 cm, is debatable, as larger renal masses are associated with malignant histology. We aim to review the safety and impact of renal biopsy on the management of large renal masses.

Methods

A retrospective, single-center review of all renal biopsies performed between January 2011 and December 2020 at Royal Perth Hospital was conducted. Indications for biopsy, complications and final management plans were correlated to assess the value of biopsies in large renal masses.

Results

In total, 126 biopsies were performed. Indeterminate imaging findings and comorbidities were the main indications for biopsies. We identified 116 (92.1%) diagnostic biopsies and 10 (8.0%) non-diagnostic biopsies due to insufficient samples or inflammatory tissue. Of the diagnostic biopsies, 99 (78.6%) were malignant and 17 (13.5%) were benign. Unnecessary extirpative surgery was avoided in 17 patients. Histology included renal cell carcinoma (96%) and other malignancies such as urothelial carcinoma (3%) and non-Hodgkin's lymphoma (1%). Benign biopsies identified histology including angiomyolipoma (35.3%) and oncocytoma (52.5%). The median follow-up time was 68 months (range 19-132 months).

Conclusion

Renal biopsies in large renal masses may aid in preventing unnecessary surgery, especially in situations where imaging findings are equivocal or in patients with many comorbidities.

ExPert ConsEnsus on the management of Advanced clear-cell RenaL celL carcinoma: INDIAn Perspective (PEARL-INDIA)

In advanced Renal Cell Carcinoma (aRCC), systemic therapy is the mainstay of treatment, with no or little role for surgery in these patients. Tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) and immune-oncological (IOs) therapies, either alone or in combination, are recommended in these patients depending on patient and tumour factors. The sequencing of therapies is critical in RCC because the choice of subsequent line therapy is heavily dependent on the response and duration of the previous treatment. There are additional barriers to RCC treatment in India. Immunotherapy is the cornerstone of treatment in ccRCC, but it is prohibitively expensive and not always reimbursed, effectively putting it out of reach for the vast majority of eligible patients in India. Furthermore, in advanced RCC (particularly the clear cell variety), Indian oncologists consider the disease burden of the patients, which is particularly dependent on the quantum of the disease load, clinical symptoms, and performance status of the patient, before deciding on treatment. There are no India-specific guidelines for clear cell RCC (ccRCC) treatment or the positioning and sequencing of molecules in the management of advanced ccRCC that take these country-specific issues into account. The current consensus article provides expert recommendations and treatment algorithms based on existing clinical evidence, which will be useful to specialists managing advanced ccRCC.

Identifying the Needs of Health Care Providers in Advanced First-Line Renal Cell Carcinoma: A Mixed-Methods Research

INTRODUCTION

Systemic treatments for metastatic or unresectable renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) are rapidly evolving. This study aimed at investigating challenges in the care of mRCC to inform future educational interventions for health care providers (HCPs).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The sequential mixed-method design consisted of a qualitative phase (semistructured interviews) followed by a quantitative phase (online surveys). Participants included US-based medical oncologists, nephrologists, physician assistants, nurse practitioners, and registered nurses. Interview transcripts were thematically analyzed. Survey data was descriptively and inferentially analyzed.

RESULTS

Forty interviews and 265 surveys were completed. Analysis revealed four challenges in the care of mRCC patients. A challenge in staying current with emerging evidence and treatment recommendations was found with 33% of surveyed HCPs reporting suboptimal skills interpreting published evidence on the efficacy and safety of emerging agents. A challenge weighing patient health and preferences in treatment decisions was found, especially among HCPs with 3 to 10 years of practice (37%) who reported suboptimal skills in assessing patients' tolerance to side effects. Promoting a collaborative care approach to the management of immune-related adverse events was a challenge, specifically related to barriers involving nephrologists (eg, diverging treatment goals). Breakdowns in communication were reported (46% of HCPs), especially in the monitoring of side effects and treatment adherence.

CONCLUSION

This study revealed key challenges faced by HCPs when treating and managing patients with mRCC across multiple providers. Future interventions (eg, community of practice) should aim to address the identified gaps and promote a team-based approach to care that strengthens the complementary competencies of HCPs involved.

The Evolving Landscape of Cytoreductive Nephrectomy in Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma

The role of cytoreductive nephrectomy in metastatic renal cell carcinoma (RCC) has been studied intensively over the past few decades. Interestingly, the opinion with regard to the importance of this procedure has switched from a recommendation as a standard of care to an almost complete refutation. However, no definitive agreement on cytoreductive nephrectomy, including the pros and cons of the procedure, has been reached, and the topic remains highly controversial. With the advent of immune checkpoint inhibitors, we have experienced a paradigm shift, with immunotherapy playing a crucial role in the treatment algorithm. Nevertheless, obtaining results from prospective clinical trials on the role of cytoreductive nephrectomy requires time, and once some data have been gathered, the standards of systemic therapy may be different, and we stand again at the beginning. This review summarizes current knowledge on the topic in the light of newly evolving treatment strategies. The crucial point is to recognize who could be an appropriate candidate for immediate cytoreductive surgery that may facilitate the effect of systemic therapy through tumor debulking, or who might benefit from deferred cytoreduction in the setting of an objective response of the tumor. The role of prognostic factors in management decisions as well as the technical details associated with performing the procedure from a urological perspective are discussed. Ongoing clinical trials that may bring new evidence for transforming therapeutic paradigms are listed.

Immunotherapy and Antiangiogenic Therapy for the Treatment of Patients With Advanced Renal Cell Carcinoma: A Systematic Review and an Updated Network Meta-Analysis of Phase III Clinical Trials

In advanced renal cell carcinoma, few randomized controlled trials involving immunotherapy plus antiangiogenic therapy have shown survival benefits relative to Sunitinib. Our meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of combined immunotherapy and antiangiogenic therapy compared to Sunitinib therapy alone in patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma. Six phase III randomized controlled trials were analyzed, including 4,119 patients. The primary endpoints were overall survival and progression-free survival, and the secondary endpoints were objective response rate and serious adverse events. The results showed that combined immunotherapy and antiangiogenic therapy significantly improved overall survival, progression-free survival, and objective response rate compared to Sunitinib alone. No significant difference was observed in adverse events between the two groups. This study suggests that combined immunotherapy and antiangiogenic therapy is a great treatment option for advanced renal cell carcinoma.

Adjuvant Therapy for Renal Cell Carcinoma: End Points, Outcomes, and Risk Assessments

PURPOSE

Targeted tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) and immune-checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) revolutionized the treatment of metastatic renal cell carcinoma (RCC). Efforts to translate these therapies into the adjuvant setting for local and locoregional RCC have been pursued over the past decade. We sought to provide an updated review of the literature regarding adjuvant therapy in RCC, as well as an analysis of patient characteristics that may portend the most favorable responses.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Using PubMed, Google Scholar, and Wiley Online Library, we reviewed articles between 2000 and 2022. Search terms included "tyrosine kinase inhibitors," "adjuvant," "immunotherapy," and "renal cell carcinoma." The articles included were original and published in English. Information on clinical trials was collected from ClinicalTrials.gov, accessed in June 2022.

RESULTS

Landmark trials investigating adjuvant vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) inhibitors produced conflicting results, with only a single trial of sunitinib (S-TRAC) resulting in US Food and Drug Administration-approval on the basis of a slightly prolonged progression-free survival (PFS). Subsequent meta-analyses failed to show a benefit for adjuvant VEGF inhibitors. Several trials evaluating ICIs are currently ongoing, with pembrolizumab (KEYNOTE-564) earning US Food and Drug Administration-approval for a prolonged PFS, although overall survival data are not yet mature. Preliminary results from other adjuvant ICI trials have been conflicting.

CONCLUSION

There remains a lack of clear benefit for the use of adjuvant VEGF inhibitors in local and locoregional RCC. Adjuvant ICI investigations are ongoing, with promising results from KEYNOTE-564. It remains to be seen if PFS is an adequate surrogate end point for overall survival. Selection of patients at greatest risk for recurrence, and identification of those at greatest risk of rare but serious adverse events, may improve outcomes.

Associations of selenoprotein expression and gene methylation with the outcome of clear cell renal carcinoma

Selenoproteins are a ubiquitous class of proteins defined by having a selenocysteine amino acid residue. While many of the selenoproteins have been well characterized with important roles in oxidation-reduction reactions and hormone synthesis among others, there exist some whose biological roles are not as well understood as denoted by the "SELENO" root. In this study, we explored associations between the reported RNA levels of "SELENO" proteins and clear cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC), the most common subtype of renal carcinoma in the US. Utilizing The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) alongside other in silico tools, we discovered higher mRNA expression of Selenoprotein I, T, and P was associated with better overall survival outcomes and differential expression of other selenoproteins based on tumor stage. Additionally, we uncovered relative hypomethylation among selenoproteins in primary ccRCC tumor samples compared to normal tissue. Network and enrichment analysis showed numerous genes through which selenoproteins may modulate cancer progression and outcomes such as DERL1, PNPLA2/3, MIEN1, and FOXO1 which have been well-described in other cancers. In light of our findings highlighting an association of selenoprotein methylation and expression patterns with ccRCC outcome, further wet lab research is warranted.

Renal Carcinoma and Angiogenesis: Therapeutic Target and Biomarkers of Response in Current Therapies

Due to the aberrant hypervascularization and the high immune infiltration of renal tumours, current therapeutic regimens of renal cell carcinoma (RCC) target angiogenic or immunosuppressive pathways or both. Tumour angiogenesis plays an essential role in tumour growth and immunosuppression. Indeed, the aberrant vasculature promotes hypoxia and can also exert immunosuppressive functions. In addition, pro-angiogenic factors, including VEGF-A, have an immunosuppressive action on immune cells. Despite the progress of treatments in RCC, there are still non responders or acquired resistance. Currently, no biomarkers are used in clinical practice to guide the choice between the different available treatments. Considering the role of angiogenesis in RCC, angiogenesis-related markers are interesting candidates. They have been studied in the response to antiangiogenic drugs (AA) and show interest in predicting the response. They have been less studied in immunotherapy alone or combined with AA. In this review, we will discuss the role of angiogenesis in tumour growth and immune escape and the place of angiogenesis-targeted biomarkers to predict response to current therapies in RCC.

Diagnostic and Prognostic Biomarkers in Renal Clear Cell Carcinoma

Renal clear cell carcinoma (ccRCC) comprises over 75% of all renal tumors and arises in the epithelial cells of the proximal convoluted tubule. Molecularly ccRCC is characterized by copy number alterations (CNAs) such as the loss of chromosome 3p and VHL inactivation. Additional driver mutations (SETD2, PBRM1, BAP1, and others) promote genomic instability and tumor cell metastasis through the dysregulation of various metabolic and immune-response pathways. Many researchers identified mutation, gene expression, and proteomic signatures for early diagnosis and prognostics for ccRCC. Despite a tremendous influx of data regarding DNA alterations, gene expression, and protein expression, the incorporation of these analyses for diagnosis and prognosis of RCC into the clinical application has not been implemented yet. In this review, we focused on the molecular changes associated with ccRCC development, along with gene expression and protein signatures, to emphasize the utilization of these molecular profiles in clinical practice. These findings, in the context of machine learning and precision medicine, may help to overcome some of the barriers encountered for implementing molecular profiles of tumors into the diagnosis and treatment of ccRCC.

High expression of CD73 contributes to poor prognosis of clear-cell renal cell carcinoma by promoting cell proliferation and migration

BACKGROUND

Accumulating data have shown that high expression of CD73 is associated with poor prognosis in various cancers, however the role and significance of CD73 in clear-cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC) still remain unclear. The present study aims to evaluate the prognostic significance of CD73 in ccRCC and explore the potential function in vitro and in vivo.

METHODS

Firstly, the expression of CD73 in ccRCC was detected using clinical tissues and verified using TCGA and GEO data. Immunohistochemistry and Kaplan-Meier test were performed for survival analysis. Furthermore, knockdown or overexpression of CD73 was conducted by lentivirus transfection in ccRCC cells. MTT assay, colony formation assay, wound healing assay, transwell assay and xenograft assay were performed in vitro or in vivo.

RESULTS

Our results showed that CD73 was highly expressed in ccRCC, and high expression of CD73 was negatively correlated with prognosis. In addition, CD73 promoted cell proliferation and migration in vitro and in vivo. Our data also showed that CD73 played both enzymatic and non-enzymatic functions in the regulation of cell proliferation and migration in ccRCC.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings suggested that CD73 might promote the growth of ccRCC and contribute to poor prognosis. Taken together, CD73 may be a potential therapeutic target in ccRCC.

The prognostic value of the previous nephrectomy in pretreated metastatic renal cell carcinoma receiving immunotherapy: a sub-analysis of the Meet-URO 15 study

BACKGROUND

Nephrectomy is considered the backbone of managing patients with localized and selected metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). The prognostic role of nephrectomy has been widely investigated with cytokines and targeted therapy, but it is still unclear in the immunotherapy era.

METHODS

We investigated the Meet-URO-15 study dataset of 571 pretreated mRCC patients receiving nivolumab as second or further lines about the prognostic role of the previous nephrectomy (received in either the localized or metastatic setting) in the overall population and according to the Meet-URO score groups.

RESULTS

Patients who underwent nephrectomy showed a significantly reduced risk of death (HR 0.44, 95% CI 0.32-0.60, p < 0.001) with a longer median overall survival (OS) (35.9 months vs 12.1 months), 1-year OS of 71.6% vs 50.5% and 2-years OS of 56.5% vs 22.0% compared to those who did not. No significant interaction between nephrectomy and the overall five Meet-URO score risk groups was observed (p = 0.17). It was statistically significant when merging group 1 with 2 and 3 and group 4 with 5 (p = 0.038) and associated with a longer OS for the first three prognostic groups (p < 0.001), but not for groups 4 and 5 (p = 0.54).

CONCLUSIONS

Our study suggests an overall positive impact of the previous nephrectomy on the outcome of pretreated mRCC patients receiving immunotherapy. The clinical relevance of cytoreductive nephrectomy, optimal timing and patient selection deserves further investigation, especially for patients with Meet-URO scores of 1 to 3, who are the once deriving benefit in our analyses. However, that benefit is not evident for IMDC poor-risk patients (including the Meet-URO score groups 4 and 5) and a subgroup of IMDC intermediate-risk patients defined as group 4 by the Meet-URO score.

Development and validation of a novel immunotype for prediction of overall survival in patients with clear cell renal cell carcinoma

Background

Clear cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC) is a highly immunogenic tumor. The purpose of the present study was to establish a novel immunotype for different immune infiltration and overall survival (OS) of patients with ccRCC.

Methods

Based on the Cancer Genome Atlas Project (TCGA) database (discovery set), a novel immunotype was established using ssGSEA methods. The databases of Fudan University Shanghai Cancer Center (FUSCC) and Xinhua Hospital Affiliated to Shanghai Jiaotong University School of Medicine (XHH) served as an external validation set. GSEA was carried out to identify the immunotype associated signal transduction pathways.

Results

A total of 652 ccRCC patients were included in our study. We constructed a novel immunotype of ccRCC to classify patients into three groups: high-immunity, moderate-immunity, and low-immunity. The high-immunity and moderate-immunity groups had higher ImmuneScores, ESTIMATEScores, StromalScores, and lower tumor purity than that of the low-immunity group in both sets. Additionally, the patients from the high-immunity and moderate-immunity groups had longer survival than patients from low-immunity group in both discovery set and validation set (HR = 2.54, 95% CI: 1.56–4.13, p < 0.01; HR = 2.75, 95% CI: 1.24–6.11, p = 0.01).

Conclusion

In summary, we defined a novel immunotype of ccRCC. The immune types could be used as a clinical predictive tool to identify ccRCC patients with different survival. In addition, the immune-related biological signaling pathway also brought new insights on the mechanism of ccRCC.

A Rare Presentation of Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Masquerading as Vitritis: A Case Report and Review of Literature

We report a case of a 74-year-old gentleman who presented with floaters and decreased vision in the right eye after cataract surgery. His past medical history was significant for metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) to bone, lung and abdomen which was presumed stable for the last two years while on the tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI), pazopanib. Clinical examination revealed significant vitritis with a distinctive clumping of cells on the pre-retinal surface and posterior hyaloid face. Magnetic resonance imaging of the brain revealed new lesions suspicious for metastases. A diagnostic vitrectomy was performed to determine the nature of the vitritis and clear the visual axis. Cytopathologic evaluation of the vitreous demonstrated clusters of malignant cells that were positive for AE1/AE3 and PAX-8, and negative for the CD20, CD3, RCC, SOX-10 and S-100 immunohistochemical markers. The overall findings favored a metastatic RCC to the vitreous. Choroidal and retinal metastases from mRCC have been previously reported; however, vitreous involvement by mRCC with no evidence of retinal or choroidal mass has not been described. New treatments of mRCC include TKIs which target vascular endothelial growth factor receptors (VEGFRs). Herein, we analyze the factors that could have precipitated this unusual metastasis to the vitreous.

Questions to guide cancer evolution as a framework for furthering progress in cancer research and sustainable patient outcomes

We appear to be faced with ‘two truths’ in cancer—one of major advances and successes and another one of remaining short-comings and significant challenges. Despite decades of research and substantial progress in treating cancer, most patients with metastatic cancer still experience great suffering and poor outcomes. Metastatic cancer, for the vast majority of patients, remains incurable. In the context of advanced disease, many clinical trials report only incremental advances in progression-free and overall survival. At the same time, the breadth and depth of new scientific discoveries in cancer research are staggering. These discoveries are providing increasing mechanistic detail into the inner workings of normal and cancer cells, as well as into cancer–host interactions; however, progress remains frustratingly slow in translating these discoveries into improved diagnostic, prognostic, and therapeutic interventions. Despite enormous advances in cancer research and progress in progression-free survival, or even cures, for certain cancer types—with earlier detection followed by surgical, adjuvant, targeted, or immuno- therapies, we must challenge ourselves to do even better where patients do not respond or experience evolving therapy resistance. We propose that defining cancer evolution as a separate domain of study and integrating the concept of evolvability as a core hallmark of cancer can help position scientific discoveries into a framework that can be more effectively harnessed to improve cancer detection and therapy outcomes and to eventually decrease cancer lethality. In this perspective, we present key questions and suggested areas of study that must be considered—not only by the field of cancer evolution, but by all investigators researching, diagnosing, and treating cancer.

Mesenchymal Epithelial Transition Factor (MET): A Key Player in Chemotherapy Resistance and an Emerging Target for Potentiating Cancer Immunotherapy

The MET protein is a cell surface receptor tyrosine kinase predominately expressed in epithelial cells. Upon binding of its only known ligand, hepatocyte growth factor (HGF), MET homodimerizes, phosphorylates, and stimulates intracellular signalling to drive cell proliferation. Amplification or hyperactivation of MET is frequently observed in various cancer types and it is associated with poor response to conventional and targeted chemotherapy. More recently, emerging evidence also suggests that MET/HGF signalling may play an immunosuppressive role and it could confer resistance to cancer immunotherapy. In this review, we summarized the preclinical and clinical evidence of MET's role in drug resistance to conventional chemotherapy, targeted therapy, and immunotherapy. Previous clinical trials investigating MET-targeted therapy in unselected or MET-overexpressing cancers yielded mostly unfavourable results. More recent clinical studies focusing on MET exon 14 alterations and MET amplification have produced encouraging treatment responses to MET inhibitor therapy. The translational relevance of MET inhibitor therapy to overcome drug resistance in cancer patients is discussed.

Identification of a Methylation-Regulating Genes Prognostic Signature to Predict the Prognosis and Aid Immunotherapy of Clear Cell Renal Cell Carcinoma

Methylation is one of the most extensive modifications of biological macromolecules and affects cell-fate determination, development, aging, and cancer. Several methylation modifications, including 5-methylcytosine and N6-methyladenosine, play an essential role in many cancers. However, little is known about the relationship between methylation and the prognosis of clear cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC). Here, we established a methylation-regulating genes prognostic signature (MRGPS) to predict the prognoses of ccRCC patients. We obtained ccRCC samples from The Cancer Genome Atlas and identified methylation-regulatingd genes (MRGs) from the Gene Set Enrichment Analysis database. We also determined differentially expressed genes (DEGs) and performed cluster analysis to identify candidate genes. Subsequently, we established and validated an MRGPS to predict the overall survival of ccRCC patients. This was also verified in 15 ccRCC samples collected from the Fujian Provincial Hospital via quantitative real-time transcription (qRT-PCR). While 95 MRGs were differentially expressed (DEGs1) between tumor and normal tissues, 17 MRGs were differentially expressed (DEGs2) between cluster 1 and 2. Notably, 13 genes common among DEGs1 and DEGs2 were identified as hub genes. In fact, we established three genes (NOP2, NSUN6, and TET2) to be an MRGPS based on their multivariate Cox regression analysis coefficients (p &lt; 0.05). A receiver operating characteristic curve analysis confirmed this MRGPS to have a good prognostic performance. Moreover, the MRGPS was associated with characteristics of the tumor immune microenvironment and responses to inhibitor checkpoint inhibitors. Data from “IMvigor 210” demonstrated that patients with a low MRGPS would benefit more from atelozumab (p &lt; 0.05). Furthermore, a multivariate analysis revealed that MRGPS was an independent risk factor associated with ccRCC prognosis (p &lt; 0.05). Notably, a nomogram constructed by combining with clinical characteristics (age, grade, stage, and MRGPS risk score) to predict the overall survival of a ccRCC patient had a favorable predictive value. Eventually, our qRT-PCR results showed that tumor tissues had higher NOP2 and NSUN6 expression levels and lower TET2 expression than normal tissues of ccRCC samples. While the proposed MRGPS comprising NOP2, NSUN6, and TET2 can be an alternative prognostic biomarker for ccRCC patients, it is a promising index for personalized ICI treatments against ccRCC.

Antiangiogenic Properties of Axitinib versus Sorafenib Following Sunitinib Resistance in Human Endothelial Cells-A View towards Second Line Renal Cell Carcinoma Treatment

Tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) and immune checkpoint inhibitors predominate as first-line therapy options for renal cell carcinoma. When first-line TKI therapy fails due to resistance development, an optimal second-line therapy has not yet been established. The present investigation is directed towards comparing the anti-angiogenic properties of the TKIs, sorafenib and axitinib on human endothelial cells (HUVECs) with acquired resistance towards the TKI sunitinib. HUVECs were driven to resistance by continuously exposing them to sunitinib for six weeks. They were then switched to a 24 h or further six weeks treatment with sorafenib or axitinib. HUVEC growth, as well as angiogenesis (tube formation and scratch wound assay), were evaluated. Cell cycle proteins of the CDK-cyclin axis (CDK1 and 2, total and phosphorylated, cyclin A and B) and the mTOR pathway (AKT, total and phosphorylated) were also assessed. Axitinib (but not sorafenib) significantly suppressed growth of sunitinib-resistant HUVECs when they were exposed for six weeks. This axinitib-associated growth reduction was accompanied by a cell cycle block at the G0/G1-phase. Both axitinib and sorafenib reduced HUVEC tube length and prevented wound closure (sorafenib > axitinib) when applied to sunitinib-resistant HUVECs for six weeks. Protein analysis revealed diminished phosphorylation of CDK1, CDK2 and pAKT, accompanied by a suppression of cyclin A and B. Both drugs modulated CDK-cyclin and AKT-dependent signaling, associated either with both HUVEC growth and angiogenesis (axitinib) or angiogenesis alone (sorafenib). Axitinib and sorafenib may be equally applicable as second line treatment options, following sunitinib resistance.