Advanced renal cell carcinoma management: the Latin American Cooperative Oncology Group (LACOG) and the Latin American Renal Cancer Group (LARCG) consensus update

PURPOSE

Renal cell carcinoma is an aggressive disease with a high mortality rate. Management has drastically changed with the new era of immunotherapy, and novel strategies are being developed; however, identifying systemic treatments is still challenging. This paper presents an update of the expert panel consensus from the Latin American Cooperative Oncology Group and the Latin American Renal Cancer Group on advanced renal cell carcinoma management in Brazil.

METHODS

A panel of 34 oncologists and experts in renal cell carcinoma discussed and voted on the best options for managing advanced disease in Brazil, including systemic treatment of early and metastatic renal cell carcinoma as well as nonclear cell tumours. The results were compared with the literature and graded according to the level of evidence.

RESULTS

Adjuvant treatments benefit patients with a high risk of recurrence after surgery, and the agents used are pembrolizumab and sunitinib, with a preference for pembrolizumab. Neoadjuvant treatment is exceptional, even in initially unresectable cases. First-line treatment is mainly based on tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) and immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs); the choice of treatment is based on the International Metastatic Database Consortium (IMCD) risk score. Patients at favourable risk receive ICIs in combination with TKIs. Patients classified as intermediate or poor risk receive ICIs, without preference for ICI + ICIs or ICI + TKIs. Data on nonclear cell renal cancer treatment are limited. Active surveillance has a place in treating favourable-risk patients. Either denosumab or zoledronic acid can be used for treating metastatic bone disease.

CONCLUSION

Immunotherapy and targeted therapy are the standards of care for advanced disease. The utilization and sequencing of these therapeutic agents hinge upon individual risk scores and responses to previous treatments. This consensus reflects a commitment to informed decision-making, drawn from professional expertise and evidence in the medical literature.

Perioperative systemic therapy in renal cell carcinoma

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Renal cell carcinoma (RCC) is the most common kidney neoplasm. Localized RCC can be cured with nephrectomy. However, a proportion of patients will recur with incurable distant metastatic disease. There is a clear need for treatments to reduce the risk of RCC recurrence and thus improve survival. This review describes the landscape of perioperative therapy for RCC, focusing on more recent trials involving immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs).

RECENT FINDINGS

ICIs have significantly changed outcomes in advanced RCC. Four trials investigating the role of perioperative ICI for RCC are now reported. Only one trial utilizing adjuvant pembrolizumab (Keynote-564) has shown a disease-free survival benefit in resected RCC.

SUMMARY

Patients with resected RCC should be counselled on their risk of recurrence and the potential option of adjuvant pembrolizumab, recognizing that overall survival data are not yet available.

Adjuvant therapy for renal cell carcinoma: A systematic review of current landscape and future directions

The advent of tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) and immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) has been transformative for the treatment of advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC). Their efficacy post-surgical resection remains a contentious point. Various phase 3 RCTs have assessed their potency. Amongst evaluated agents, sunitinib and pembrolizumab have demonstrated notable disease-free survival benefits. Sunitinib's potential is diminished due to absence of clear overall survival (OS) benefits and side-effect profile. Pembrolizumab shows better tolerance, conclusive OS data are forthcoming. This scenario underscores the pressing need for advanced risk stratification methods and discovery of novel biomarkers. Existing strategies, largely pre-dating TKI and ICI therapeutic era, lack sufficient accuracy in predicting relapse-risk. Our review offers a comprehensive analysis of key phase 3 RCTs, focusing on TKIs, mTOR-inhibitors, and ICIs for adjuvant RCC treatment. The intent is to shed light on the intricate landscape of RCC treatment, guiding future research directions for optimizing patient outcomes.

Adjuvant and Neoadjuvant Therapy in Renal Cell Carcinoma

In locally advanced RCC, 6 phase 3 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were designed in the perioperative setting with immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) monotherapy or combinations. Adjuvant trials with atezolizumab, pembrolizumab, and nivolumab with ipilimumab reported results, as did the only perioperative trial with nivolumab. Of these, only 1 year of adjuvant pembrolizumab improved disease-free survival (DFS) versus placebo, with the other trials showing no improvement in DFS. In the purely neoadjuvant setting, phase 1 b/2 ICI trials have demonstrated safety, efficacy, and dynamic changes of immune infiltrates, and provide a rationale for randomized trial concepts.

Top advances of the year: Genitourinary cancer

There have been significant advances in the treatment of urology cancers, with a number of practice-changing treatments. There is now greater clarity on the role of the use of immunotherapies in renal cell carcinoma. The use of triplet combinations with immune checkpoint inhibition with anti-vascular endothelial growth factor tyrosine kinase inhibitors in the front-line setting for metastatic disease (COSMIC313) has been explored. The use of adjuvant therapy has been complicated by a series of negative immune therapy trials. Promising results with the HIF-2α transcription factor inhibitor, belzutifan, alone or in combination with other agents, have been reported. Antibody drug conjugates, including enfortumab vedotin and sacituzumab govitecan, have continued to show activity in urothelial cancer with promising clinical outcomes. This has led to further exploration of the combination of these novel agents with immunotherapy and accelerated Food and Drug Administration approvals. Data are also discussed regarding intensification for front-line therapy of metastatic castrate sensitive prostate cancer. The combination of androgen-signaling inhibitors, docetaxel, and androgen deprivation therapy (PEACE-1, ARASENS), as well as the use of abiraterone acetate for adjuvant therapy in high-risk disease (STAMPEDE), is included. There is also growing evidence for the use of the radioligand therapy 177 Lu-PSMA-617 in metastatic castrate resistant disease, with an established overall survival benefit in this patient population (VISION, TheraP). PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARY: There have been many advancements in the treatment of cancers of the kidney, bladder, and prostate in the past year. Several studies using new therapies or new combinations of therapies have improved the chances of patients living longer with these cancers, especially those with advanced disease. Here, we discuss a selection of the most compelling recently published data that have changed the way these cancers are treated, as well as those that are expected to change treatment in the near future.

SEOM SOGUG clinical guideline for treatment of kidney cancer (2022)

Renal cancer is the seventh most common cancer in men and the tenth in women. The aim of this article is to review the diagnosis, treatment, and follow-up of renal carcinoma accompanied by recommendations with new evidence and treatment algorithms. A new pathologic classification of RCC by the World Health Organization (WHO) was published in 2022 and this classification would be considered a "bridge" to a future molecular classification. For patients with localized disease, surgery is the treatment of choice with nephron-sparing surgery recommended when feasible. Adjuvant treatment with pembrolizumab is an option for intermediate-or high-risk cases, as well as patients after complete resection of metastatic disease. More data are needed in the future, including positive overall survival data. Clinical prognostic classification, preferably IMDC, should be used for treatment decision making in mRCC. Cytoreductive nephrectomy should not be deemed mandatory in individuals with intermediate-poor IMDC/MSKCC risk who require systemic therapy. Metastasectomy can be contemplated in selected subjects with a limited number of metastases or long metachronous disease-free interval. For the population of patients with metastatic ccRCC as a whole, the combination of pembrolizumab-axitinib, nivolumab-cabozantinib, or pembrolizumab-lenvatinib can be considered as the first option based on the benefit obtained in OS versus sunitinib. In cases that have an intermediate IMDC and poor prognosis, the combination of ipilimumab and nivolumab has demonstrated superior OS compared to sunitinib. As for individuals with advanced RCC previously treated with one or two antiangiogenic tyrosine-kinase inhibitors, nivolumab and cabozantinib are the options of choice. When there is progression following initial immunotherapy-based treatment, we recommend treatment with an antiangiogenic tyrosine-kinase inhibitor. While no clear sequence can be advocated, medical oncologists and patients should be aware of the recent advances and new strategies that improve survival and quality of life in the setting of metastatic RC.

Meta-analysis of perioperative immunotherapy in renal cell carcinoma: Available, but the jury is still out

INTRODUCTION

While surgical management of renal cell carcinoma (RCC) is curative for many patients, others may relapse and could benefit from adjuvant treatments. Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) have been proposed as a potential adjuvant therapy for improving survival in these patients, but the benefit/risk ratio of ICI in the perioperative setting remains unclear.

METHODS

A systematic review and a meta-analysis of phase III trials of perioperative ICI (anti PD1/PD-L1 alone or in combination with anti-CTLA4 agents) in RCC was conducted.

RESULTS

The analysis included results from 4 phase III trials, comprising 3,407 patients. ICI did not show a significant increase in disease-free survival (Hazard Ratio [HR] 0.85; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.69-1.04; p: 0.11) or overall survival [OS] (HR 0.73; 95% CI 0.40-1.34; p: 0.31). High-grade adverse events were more frequent in the immunotherapy arm (OR 2.65; 95% CI 1.53-4.59; p: <0.001), and high-grade treatment-related adverse events were 8 times more frequent in the experimental arm (OR: 8.07; 95% CI: 3.14-20.75; p: <0.001). Subgroup analyses showed statistically significant differences favoring the experimental arm in females (HR: 0.71; 95 CI 0.55-0.92; p: 0.009), in sarcomatoid differentiation (HR: 0.60 95% CI 0.41-0.89; p: 0.01), and PD-L1 positive tumors (HR HR: 0.74; 95% CI 0.61-0.90; p: 0.003). No significant effect was found in patients according to age, type of nephrectomy (radical vs. partial), and stage (M1 without evidence of disease vs. M0 patients).

CONCLUSION

Our comprehensive meta-analysis generally suggests that immunotherapy does not confer a survival advantage in the perioperative setting for RCC, with the exception of one positive study. While the overall results are not statistically significant, individual patient factors and other variables may play a role in determining who benefits from immunotherapy. Therefore, despite the mixed findings, immunotherapy may still be a viable treatment option for certain patients, and further studies are needed to determine which patient subgroups would be most likely to benefit.

Adjuvant immunotherapy for locally advanced renal cell carcinoma

INTRODUCTION

Locally advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC) presents a therapeutic challenge due to 20-40% relapse risk post-nephrectomy. There has been substantial interest in utilizing immunotherapy interrupting the PD-1/PD-L1 axis in the perioperative space, especially in the adjuvant setting, in order to minimize such risk.

AREAS COVERED

We conducted a PubMed search using the terms 'adjuvant' and 'RCC.' We begin by examining landmark studies in the postoperative space for locally advanced RCC, with special emphasis on immunotherapeutic biologics. Important considerations are outlined in an effort to explain the conflicting data on the benefit of adjuvant immunotherapy as well as to adequately assess the magnitude of potential benefit of the recently approved adjuvant pembrolizumab. Relevant contemporary challenges and opportunities as well as future directions of the field are also discussed.

EXPERT OPINION

Systemic immunotherapy with monoclonal antibodies targeting the PD-1/PD-L1 axis likely holds promise, either alone or potentially in combinations, in minimizing recurrence risk for locally advanced RCC. However, emphasis on post-protocol care, robust endpoint selection, and continued work and validation on predictive biomarkers are needed to confidently select those patients that may benefit the most and minimize biologic and financial toxicity.

Comparison of patients with renal cell carcinoma in adjuvant therapy trials to a real-world population

PURPOSE

To compare characteristics and outcomes of patients included versus those not in adjuvant therapy trials post complete resection of renal cell carcinoma (RCC).

METHODS

Adult patients following complete resection for clear cell RCC between January 1, 2011, and March 31, 2021, were included. Patients had intermediate high, high risk nonmetastatic disease (modified UCLA Integrated Staging System) or fully resected metastatic (M1) disease as per the inclusion criteria of adjuvant studies. Demographic, clinical, and outcomes between trial and nontrial patients were compared.

RESULTS

Of 1,459 eligible patients, 63 (4.3%) participated in an adjuvant trial. Disease characteristics were similar between groups. Trial patients were younger (mean age 58.1 vs. 63.6 years; P < 0.0001) and had lower Charlson Comorbidity Index scores (mean 4.2 vs. 4.9; P = 0.009). Unadjusted disease-free survival (DFS) at 5 years for trial patients was 48.6% and 39.2% for nontrial patients (HR 0.71, 0.48-1.05, P = 0.08). Median DFS was higher for trial patients in comparison to nontrial patients (4.4 years, IQR 1.7- not reached; vs. 3.0 years, IQR 0.8-8.6; P = 0.08). Cancer specific survival (CSS) at 5 years for trial patients was 85.2% in comparison to 78.6% for nontrial patients (HR 0.45, 0.22-0.92, P = 0.03). Unadjusted estimated overall survival (OS) at 5 years was 80.8% for trial patients and 74.8% (HR 0.42, 0.18-0.94; P = 0.04) for nontrial patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients in adjuvant trials were younger and healthier with longer CSS and OS in comparison to those not included in adjuvant trials. These findings may have implications when we generalize trial results to real world patients.

The Promise of Neoadjuvant and Adjuvant Therapies for Renal Cancer

Because metachronous metastatic disease will develop in 20% to 40% of patients with presumed localized renal cell carcinoma (RCC) treated surgically, research is focused on neoadjuvant and adjuvant systemic therapy, to improve disease-free and overall survival. Neoadjuvant therapies trialed include anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) agents, or combination therapies (immunotherapy with TKI), and aim to improve resectability of locoregional RCC. Adjuvant therapies trialed include cytokines, anti-VEGF TKI agents, or immunotherapy. These therapeutics can facilitate the surgical extirpation of the primary kidney tumor in the neoadjuvant setting and improve disease-free survival in the adjuvant setting.

Adjuvant immunotherapy in renal cell carcinoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

To synthesise available data regarding the disease-free survival (DFS) benefit of adjuvant immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) for patients with renal cell carcinoma (RCC) and evaluate the overall safety profile of ICIs in this setting.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We utilised PubMed, Embase, and relevant conference proceedings to identify phase III randomised controlled trials comparing adjuvant ICIs vs placebo/observation for RCC. The primary outcome of interest was DFS. Variables for subgroup analyses were programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression, sarcomatoid features, nephrectomy type, and disease-risk category. Secondary outcomes included Grade ≥3 adverse events (AEs), immune-related AEs, and treatment discontinuation due to AEs. All outcomes were analysed using random-effects models owing to inter-study heterogeneity.

RESULTS

Among the four included studies, one demonstrated a significant DFS benefit. There was considerable clinical and statistical heterogeneity (I2  = 64%) due to differences in inclusion criteria and interventions. While pooled results across the four studies did not demonstrate a significant benefit in DFS overall (hazard ratio [HR] 0.85, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.69-1.04) there was significant benefit among patients with positive PD-L1 expression (HR 0.72, 95% CI 0.55-0.94) and sarcomatoid features (HR 0.59, 95% CI 0.38-0.91).

CONCLUSION

The evidence base to date regarding ICIs as adjuvant therapy in RCC is mixed - conclusions are limited by considerable heterogeneity between studies. However, pooled analyses suggest that patients with positive PD-L1 expression or sarcomatoid features are most likely to benefit from adjuvant immunotherapy.

Adjuvant therapy options in renal cell carcinoma - targeting the metastatic cascade

Localized renal cell carcinoma (RCC) is primarily managed with nephrectomy, which is performed with curative intent. However, disease recurs in ~20% of patients. Treatment with adjuvant therapies is used after surgery with the intention of curing additional patients by disrupting the establishment, maturation or survival of micrometastases, processes collectively referred to as the metastatic cascade. Immune checkpoint inhibitors and vascular endothelial growth factor receptor (VEGFR)-targeting tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) have shown efficacy in the treatment of metastatic RCC, increasing the interest in the utility of these agents in the adjuvant setting. Pembrolizumab, an inhibitor of the immune checkpoint PD1, is now approved by the FDA and is under review by European regulatory agencies for the adjuvant treatment of patients with localized resected clear cell RCC based on the results of the KEYNOTE-564 trial. However, the optimal use of immunotherapy and VEGFR-targeting TKIs for adjuvant treatment of RCC is not completely understood. These agents disrupt the metastatic cascade at multiple steps, providing biological rationale for further investigating the applications of these therapeutics in the adjuvant setting. Clinical trials to evaluate adjuvant therapeutics in RCC are ongoing, and clinical considerations must guide the practical use of immunotherapy and TKI agents for the adjuvant treatment of localized resected RCC.

Post nephrectomy management of localized renal cell carcinoma. From risk stratification to therapeutic evidence in an evolving clinical scenario

Standard treatment for localized non-metastatic renal cell carcinoma (RCC) is radical or partial nephrectomy. However, after radical surgery, patients with stage II-III have a substantial risk of relapse (around 35%). To date a unique standardized classification for the risk of disease recurrence still lack. Moreover, in the last years great attention has been focused in developing systemic therapies with the aim of improving the disease-free survival (DFS) of high-risk patients, with negative results from adjuvant VEGFR-TKIs. Therefore, there is still a need for developing effective treatments for radically resected RCC patients who are at intermediate/high risk of relapse. Recently, interesting results came from immune-checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) targeting the PD-1/PD-L1 pathway, with a significant benefit in terms of disease-free survival from adjuvant pembrolizumab. However, the conflicting results of diverse clinical trials investigating different ICI-based regimens in the adjuvant setting, together with the still immature data on the overall survival advantage of immunotherapy, requires careful considerations. Furthermore, several questions remain unanswered, primarily regarding the selection of patients who could benefit the most from immunotherapy. In this review, we have summarized the main clinical trials investigating adjuvant therapy in RCC, with a particular focus on immunotherapy. Moreover, we have analyzed the crucial issue of patients' stratification according to the risk of disease recurrence, and we have described the possible future prospective and novel agents under evaluation for perioperative and adjuvant therapies.

Adjuvant Therapy for Renal Cell Carcinoma: Hype or Hope?

Renal cell carcinoma (RCC) is the third most common genitourinary cancer accounting for approximately 180,000 deaths worldwide in 2020. Although over two-thirds of patients initially present localized disease, up to 50% of them may progress to metastatic disease. Adjuvant therapy aims to reduce the recurrence risk and improve outcomes in several types of cancers but is currently an unmet need in RCC. The results achieved with tyrosine kinase inhibitors in metastatic RCC led to the evaluation of these target therapies in an early setting with conflicting results for disease-free survival and no overall survival (OS) benefit. Likewise, the results of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) in an adjuvant setting are conflicting. Available data did not show an improvement in OS with ICIs in the early phase, although a positive trend for pembrolizumab has been recorded, receiving the Food and Drug Administration's approval in this setting. However, the disappointing results of several ICIs and the heterogeneous pattern of RCC warrant biomarker identification and subgroup analyses to evaluate which patients could benefit from adjuvant therapy. In this review, we will discuss the rationale for adjuvant treatment in RCC, summarizing the results of the most important adjuvant therapy trials and current applications, to outline possible future directions.

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.

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

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

The role of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) as adjuvant treatment in renal cell carcinoma (RCC): A systematic review and meta-analysis

Pembrolizumab, a PD-1 ICI is approved for the adjuvant treatment of postnephrectomy patients with clear cell RCC in some countries worldwide. However, recent negative data from randomized clinical trials (RCT) with another ICIs makes the benefit of this treatment uncertain. A systematic review and study-level meta-analysis was performed to evaluate the benefit of disease-free survival (DFS) with adjuvant ICI treatment for patients with localized and/or metastatic resected RCC. Using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) statement, a systematic search was performed in PUBMED/MEDLINE, Scopus and EMBASE up to September 15, 2022. The statistical analysis was performed by ProMeta 3 software in intention-to-treat (ITT) population and in predetermined subgroups. Four RCT totalizing 3407 patients were included in this analysis. Systemic immunotherapy was pembrolizumab, atezolizumab, nivolumab, and ipilimumab plus nivolumab in 496, 390, 404, and 405 patients, respectively. In the ITT population there was a nonstatistically significant DFS benefit with adjuvant ICI (HR: 0.85, 95% CI: 0.69-1.04). Regarding the subgroups, there was a DFS benefit for PD-L1 positive (HR: 0.72; 95% CI: 0.55-0.94), intermediate-high risk patients (HR: 0.77; 95% CI: 0.63-0.94), and patients with sarcomatoid component (HR: 0.66; 95% CI: 0.43-0.99). This meta-analysis did not demonstrate a statistically significant DFS benefit in overall population, however considering the heterogeneity between the RCTs the use of adjuvant ICI should be individualized.

Paradigm change in urological, gynaecological and breast cancer management: A new practice-changing data from ASCO 2022 annual meeting

Changing medical practice has been a constant process based on many scientific findings for years. In the oncology community, the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO), one of the major annual conferences, presented the latest updates on practice-changing in cancer. At the recent meeting of 2022, held this year on June 2-6, researchers presented essential findings in urological, gynecological, and breast cancer management. In urological cancer, olaparib + abiraterone was demonstrated thru the PROpel trial to benefit in first-line treatment mCRPC regardless of the HRR stratification factor, along with the adjuvant therapy everolimus, for fully resected RCC in the EVEREST trial. In gynecological cancer, tisotumab vedotin demonstrated a potential role in improving clinical outcomes in 1st line r/mCC thru InnovaTV-205. In breast cancer, trastuzumab deruxtecan showed significant benefit for redefined human epidermal growth factors receptor 2 status in HER2 low BC patients, where current targeted-HER2 therapies are ineffective in the DESTINY-BREAST 04 study. The use of Immuno-based combinations in the medical management of TNBC patients has been supported thru several recent studies, showing positive results and outcomes, as demonstrated by the expert's opinions in Rizzo et al. research papers. In this article, we resumed the different renowned and what we considered intriguing to review studies presented during these three long sessions at the ASCO 2022 meeting.

The Continuing Question of Adjuvant Therapy in Clear Cell Renal Cell Carcinoma

Treatment advances in kidney cancer continually evolve. The focus of treatment options continues with oral vascular endothelial growth factor receptor (VEGFR) tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) or intravenous immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs). Multiple trials exploring the role of adjuvant treatment after cytoreductive nephrectomy in high-risk clear cell renal cell carcinoma are currently ongoing. The discovery of biomarkers may help determine which patients benefit from these treatments, but these are not yet available outside clinical studies. Trials with combination therapies are also ongoing, especially using novel therapies with new mechanisms of action, and will hopefully provide more clues on proper patient and therapy selection in the adjuvant setting.

Optimal Choice of Adjuvant Treatment for Renal Cell Carcinoma Following Nephrectomy

Renal cell carcinoma (RCC) is the fourteenth most common cancer worldwide. In about 55% of cases, it is diagnosed at a localised and/or locally advanced stage and therefore amenable to a curative approach. Although nephrectomy still represents the cornerstone of non-metastatic RCC (nmRCC) treatment, a relapse is observed in about 25–30% of patients undergoing curative surgery. Prognosis is drastically influenced by lymph nodal involvement. After the first disappointing results with a cytokine-based strategy, tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) were tested as adjuvant agents. Despite their efficacy in the metastatic setting, results in terms of disease-free survival (DFS) are not unequivocal and the overall survival (OS) benefit has not been demonstrated. Moreover, their toxicity profile induced a remarkable percentage of patients to discontinue the treatment. On the contrary, the KEYNOTE-564 trial showed the benefit of adjuvant pembrolizumab compared with placebo in terms of DFS with promising results in term of OS. Patients included were at intermediate or high risk of relapse, or patients with no evidence of disease after metastasectomy (M1 NED). The updated analysis presented at the American Society of Clinical Oncology Genito-Urinary (ASCO GU) 2022 confirmed the benefit of pembrolizumab versus placebo over time, although OS data are still immature. A longer follow-up and the several ongoing trials with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) will provide further data about adjuvant immuno-oncology (IO). Furthermore, the patients’ selection based on clinical or biological features will be crucial in order to identify who benefits most from treatments.