Untreated Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Research Articles

Efficacy of avelumab in the treatment of oncourological malignances. Results of registration studies and own experience

Background. In the JAVELIN Bladder 100 trial, 1st line maintenance with avelumab in combination with best supportive care significantly increased (9.2 months) overall survival compared to best supportive care in patients with locally advanced or metastatic urothelial cancer without progression after 1st line platinum-based chemotherapy: 29.7 months versus 20.5 months, respectively. Trial results led to inclusion of avelumab into the international guidelines as a standard of care with the highest level of evidence. Combined therapy with avelumab + axitinib in patients with previously untreated metastatic renal cell carcinoma showed higher progression-free survival and objective response rate compared to sunitinib in all IMDC (International Metastatic Renal Cancer Database Consortium) groups. Avelumab + axitinib is one of the immuno-oncology combinations with proven effectiveness for progression-free survival and objective response rate.Aim. To evaluate the effectiveness of avelumab in treatment of oncological urological diseases in routine clinical practice. Materials and methods. At the N.A. Lopatkin Scientific Research Institute of Urology and Interventional Radiology - branch of the National Medical Research Radiology Center, 12 patients with locally advanced inoperable and metastatic urothelial cancer without progression after 1st line platinum-based chemotherapy in combination with gemcitabine received maintenance avelumab therapy. Median follow-up was 10 months. Primary endpoints were overall survival from the start of avelumab maintenance therapy and safety.Combined therapy with avelumab + axitinib was administered in 18 patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma. Median follow-up was 9 (3-16) months. Overall survival, progression-free survival, response rate and safety in the overall population and according to IMDC groups were evaluated.Results. At data cut-off (March 2023) with median follow-up of 10 months, overall survival was 100 %, progression-free survival was 66.7 % (among patients who received more than 3 infusions - 100 %). Progression-free survival was higher in patients with tumors of the lower urinary tract compared to upper (72.5 % versus 60 %), complete response to induction platinum-based chemotherapy compared to partial response and stable disease (100 % versus 66.7 %) and presence of metastases in the lymph nodes only compared to visceral and bone metastases (100 % versus 66.7 %). Adverse events were observed in 4 (66.7 %) patients.Among 18 patients who received avelumab + axitinib, complete response was observed in 2 (11.1 %) patients, partial response in 6 (33.3 %) patients, stable disease in 9 (50 %) patients, disease progression in 1 (5.6 %) patient. Response to therapy was observed in patients of all prognosis groups; for large (>5 cm) metastases in the lungs, soft tissues, lymph nodes and bones response was observed 3 months after treatment start. Overall survival for this follow-up duration was 100 %, progression-free survival was 96.4 ± 11.2 %. Adverse events were observed in 8 (44.4 %) patients, and in 6 (75 %) of them they were grade I—II and did not require infusion regimen correction or axitinib dose reduction.Conclusion. Avelumab maintenance therapy in the 1st line is the standard of care for patients with locally advanced and metastatic urothelial cancer without disease progression during 1st line platinum-based chemotherapy. Maintenance therapy allows to achieve better overall survival and progression-free survival irrespective of the choice of platinum regimen (cisplatin or carboplatin), response to platinum-based chemotherapy, number of chemotherapy cycles, tumor localization and advancement.Experience of the N.A. Lopatkin Scientific Research Institute of Urology and Interventional Radiology confirms results of the JAVELIN Bladder 100 trial on the effectiveness of avelumab maintenance therapy in routine clinical practice. Combination drug therapy with avelumab and axitinib in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma is an effective and safe treatment method which allows to achieve fast objective response and has good tolerability in patients irrespective of IMDC group or metastasis location. Effectiveness and favorable safety profile of avelumab + axitinib combination were proven in the context of routine clinical practice.

Characterization of Patients With Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Experiencing Complete Response to First-line Therapies: Results From the International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium.

Clinical trials have demonstrated higher complete response rates in the immuno-oncology-based combination arms than in the tyrosine kinase inhibitor arms in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma. We aimed to characterize real-world patients who experienced complete response to the contemporary first-line therapies. Using the International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium, response-evaluable patients who received frontline immuno-oncology-based combination therapy or tyrosine kinase inhibitor monotherapy were analyzed. Baseline characteristics of patients and post-landmark overall survival were compared based on best overall response, as per RECIST 1.1. A total of 52 (4.6%) of 1,126 and 223 (3.0%) of 7,557 patients experienced complete response to immuno-oncology-based and tyrosine kinase inhibitor therapies, respectively (P = .005). An adjusted odds ratio for complete response achieved by immuno-oncology-based combination therapy (vs tyrosine kinase inhibitor monotherapy) was 1.56 (95% CI 1.11-2.17; P = .009). Among patients who experienced complete response, the immuno-oncology-based cohort had a higher proportion of non-clear cell histology (15.9% and 4.7%; P = .016), sarcomatoid dedifferentiation (29.8% and 13.5%; P = .014), and multiple sites of metastases (80.4% and 50.0%; P < .001) than the tyrosine kinase inhibitor cohort. Complete response was independently associated with post-landmark overall survival benefit in both the immuno-oncology-based and tyrosine kinase inhibitor cohorts, giving respective adjusted hazard ratios of 0.17 (95% CI 0.04-0.72; P = .016) and 0.28 (95% CI 0.21-0.38; P < .001). The complete response rate was not as high in the real-world population as in the clinical trial population. Among those who experienced complete response, several adverse clinicopathological features were more frequently observed in the immuno-oncology-based cohort than in the tyrosine kinase inhibitor cohort. Complete response was an indicator of favorable overall survival.

Evaluation of tumor microenvironment and biomarkers of immune checkpoint inhibitor response in metastatic renal cell carcinoma

BackgroundImmunotherapy combinations including ipilimumab and nivolumab are now the standard of care for untreated metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). Biomarkers of response are lacking to predict patients who will have...

Real-world efficacy and safety of nivolumab plus ipilimumab in untreated metastatic renal cell carcinoma, and the impact of previous nephrectomy on clinical outcome: Japanese multi-institutional retrospective study.

In metastatic renal-cell carcinoma (mRCC), recent clinical trials have shown efficacy of first-line combination therapy, as evidenced by better clinical outcome over target therapy. However, there are insufficient real-world evidences in mRCC patients in Japan. We performed a multicenter retrospective study of 72 mRCC patients who received nivolumab plus ipilimumab as first-line treatment between September 2018 and July 2021. Patient's characteristics, clinical outcomes and safety were retrospectively reviewed. We analyzed overall response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS) in patients treated with combination therapy. Of all patients, the median age was 70years (range, 36-86) and the major type of histology was clear cell RCC (n = 55; 76.4%). Progressive disease (n = 25; 34.8%) and irAEs (n = 22; 30.6%) were the most common causes for discontinuing treatment. Median PFS and OS seemed similar between patients who discontinued treatment because of irAEs and for patients who did not (p = 0.360 and p = 0.069, respectively). Importantly, for patients with synchronous metastatic disease at diagnosis (n = 56), nephrectomy before initiating nivolumab plus ipilimumab had a significantly positive impact on better OS when compared to that in patients without nephrectomy (p = 0.028). This study confirms efficacy and safety of nivolumab plus ipilimumab for mRCC patients in real-world settings. Furthermore, nivolumab plus ipilimumab was associated with a better outcome in patients who had undergone nephrectomy at diagnosis for synchronous mRCC.

Combination Immune Checkpoint Blockade Regimens for Previously Untreated Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma: The Winship Cancer Institute of Emory University Experience.

IntroductionThere are three combination immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI)–based regimens in the first-line setting for metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). Currently, there is limited real-world data for clinical outcomes and toxicity in mRCC patients treated with first-line ICI-based regimens.MethodsWe performed a retrospective review of 49 mRCC patients treated with ICI-based combination regimens in the standard of care setting at the Winship Cancer Institute of Emory University from 2015–2020. We collected baseline data from the electronic medical record including demographic information and disease characteristics. Immune-related adverse events (irAEs) were collected from clinic notes and laboratory values. The primary clinical outcomes measured were overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), and objective response rate (ORR).ResultsThe median age was 65 years, and most patients (80%) were males. The majority were White (86%) and had clear cell RCC (83%). Most patients had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status score of 0 (43%) or 1 (45%). Approximately one-half (49%) had at least three sites of distant metastatic disease. Most patients (88%) received nivolumab and ipilimumab. More than one-half (53%) of patients experienced an irAE, with 13 (27%) patients having treatment delayed and 18% discontinuing treatment for toxicity. The median OS was not reached, and the median PFS was 8.0 months per a Kaplan-Meier estimation. More than half of patients (53%) had a PFS > 6 months, and 22% had PFS > 1 year. The ORR was 33% for the entire cohort, and 7% of patients had a complete response.ConclusionWe presented real-world efficacy and toxicity data for front-line ICI combination treatment regimens. The ORR and median PFS were lower in our cohort of patients compared to the available data in the clinical trial setting. This was likely because of more advanced disease in this study. Future studies should provide additional data that will allow comparisons between different ICI combination regimens for untreated mRCC.

PIVOT IO 011: A phase 1/2 study of bempegaldesleukin (BEMPEG; NKTR-214) plus nivolumab (NIVO) and tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) versus NIVO and TKI alone in patients (pts) with previously untreated advanced or metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC).

TPS403 Background: The current standard of care for advanced RCC (aRCC) utilizes immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) and targeted agents. Novel combinations of these agents, such as NIVO + TKIs, have demonstrated clinical benefit over TKI monotherapy. In CheckMate 9ER, NIVO + cabozantinib (CABO) in aRCC demonstrated clinically meaningful efficacy results and a favorable safety profile, and was FDA approved (01/2021). High-dose interleukin-2 (IL-2) was used historically for durable responses in mRCC but had unfavorable toxicity with complex inpatient treatment regimens. BEMPEG, an immunostimulatory IL-2 cytokine prodrug, is engineered to deliver a controlled, sustained, and preferential signal to the clinically validated IL-2 pathway. Preferential binding of BEMPEG to the IL-2 heterodimeric receptor (IL-2Rβγ) activates and expands CD8+ T cells and NK cells over immunosuppressive Tregs. In the phase 1/2 PIVOT-02 study, BEMPEG + NIVO displayed encouraging antitumor activity in pts with mRCC, with a tolerable safety profile. The clinical activity and the manageable, non-overlapping toxicity profiles of the individual agents in this combination warrants exploration of triplet regimens in previously untreated aRCC. Methods: PIVOT IO 011 (NCT04540705) is a 2-part, phase 1/2, randomized, open-label study assessing the safety and efficacy of BEMPEG + NIVO + TKI triplet in pts with untreated aRCC or mRCC. In Part 1, pts will receive BEMPEG + NIVO + TKI (Part 1A: axitinib [AXI] or Part 1B: CABO; n≈6–24 pts in each TKI arm). While BEMPEG + NIVO dosing will remain consistent across phases, each TKI will have 2 doses evaluated in Part 1, and results will determine the recommended phase 2 dose for AXI/CABO in Part 2. In Part 2, pts will be randomized 1:1 to receive either BEMPEG + NIVO + CABO or NIVO + CABO (N≈250), stratified by IMDC prognostic score and prior nephrectomy status. If the CABO triplet has an unacceptable toxicity profile, Part 2 may be amended to use the AXI triplet. Key inclusion criteria: aRCC or mRCC with clear cell component; no prior systemic therapy for RCC, except 1 prior adjuvant/neoadjuvant therapy for completely resectable RCC (must have included an anti–VEGF agent with recurrence ≥6 months after last dose); and Karnofsky PS ≥70%. Key exclusion criteria: active CNS brain/leptomeningeal metastases; active, known, or suspected autoimmune disease; and inadequately treated adrenal insufficiency. Primary endpoints in Part 1: dose-limiting toxicities and safety; and in Part 2: overall response rate per RECIST v1.1 by investigator. Secondary endpoints in Part 2: progression-free survival, overall survival, safety. Duration of BEMPEG + NIVO will be ≤2 years, and treatment with TKI will continue until disease progression. The study is currently recruiting. Clinical trial information: NCT04540705.

A Multicentre Retrospective Study of Nivolumab Plus Ipilimumab for Untreated Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma.

To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of nivolumab plus ipilimumab for untreated metastatic renal cell carcinoma in real-world clinical practice in Japan based on 1-year follow-up results. This multicentre, retrospective study analysed 45 metastatic renal cell carcinoma patients who received nivolumab plus ipilimumab between August 2018 and January 2019 in Japan. Data were extracted from patients' medical records. Subgroup analyses were performed based on baseline demographic data and treatment history. The objective response rate was 42.5% (complete response rate: 10.0%). The 12-month overall survival rate was 81.4% and the progression-free survival rate was 56.1%. Thirty-five patients (77.8%) showed any grade treatment-related adverse events and 17 (37.8%) showed grade ≥3 treatment-related adverse events, with no significant difference in safety between subgroups. The effectiveness and safety of nivolumab plus ipilimumab in real-world clinical practice with 1-year follow-up were comparable with those of the CheckMate 214 trial.

Association of tumor burden with outcome in first-line therapy with nivolumab plus ipilimumab for previously untreated metastatic renal cell carcinoma.

To investigate the prognostic impact of tumor burden in patients receiving nivolumab plus ipilimumab as first-line therapy for previously untreated metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). We retrospectively evaluated 62 patients with IMDC intermediate- or poor-risk mRCC, treated with nivolumab plus ipilimumab as first-line therapy at five affiliated institutions. Tumor burden was defined as the sum of diameters of baseline targeted lesions according to the RECIST version.1.1. We categorized the patients into two groups based on the median value of tumor burden (i.e., high vs. low). The association of tumor burden with progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS) and objective response rate (ORR) with nivolumab plus ipilimumab treatment was analyzed. The median tumor burden was 63.0 cm (interquartile range: 34.2-125.8). PFS was significantly shorter in patients with high tumor burden (n=31) than in those with low tumor burden (n=31) (median: 6.08 [95% CI: 2.73-9.70] vs. 12.5 [4.77-24.0] months, P=0.0134). In addition, OS tended to be shorter in patients with high tumor burden; however, there was no statistically significant difference (1-year rate: 77.3 vs. 96.7%, P=0.166). ORR was not significantly different between patients with high and low tumor burden (35 vs. 55%, P=0.202). Multivariate analysis of PFS further showed that tumor burden was an independent factor (HR: 2.22 [95% CI: 1.11-4.45], P=0.0242). Tumor burden might be a useful factor for outcome prediction, at least for PFS prediction, in patients receiving nivolumab plus ipilimumab for mRCC. Further prospective studies are warranted to confirm our findings.

First-Line Immunotherapy Combinations in Advanced Renal Cell Carcinoma: A Rapid Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND: Combination or multi-agent therapy including immune checkpoint inhibitors has shifted the landscape of the treatment of advanced/metastatic renal cell carcinoma. There are several approved immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) combinations featuring antibodies against programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1) receptor or its ligand 1 (PD-L1) combined with other immune checkpoint inhibitors, multi-targeted tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs), or other agents active in renal cell carcinoma. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to compile the evidence of available first-line combination therapies compared to sunitinib monotherapy in advanced renal cell carcinoma. METHODS: A systematic literature search was conducted according to the PRISMA statement to identify all randomized Phase III clinical trial data in previously untreated metastatic renal cell carcinoma featuring an immune checkpoint inhibitor combination compared against sunitinib. A two-stage selection process was utilized to determine eligible studies. Of a total of 124 studies and 94 additional abstracts, 6 studies were considered for final analysis. These studies were evaluated for progression free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), Grade III or higher adverse events (AEs), objective response rate (ORR), and complete response rate (CRR). RESULTS: 6 studies with 5,121 patients met our search criteria. For OS, ICI combination therapy was favored over sunitinib with an estimated combined hazard ratio of 0.74 (0.67–0.81 95% CI). For PFS, ICI combination therapy was favored over sunitinib with an estimated combined hazard ratio of 0.65 (0.52–0.82, 95% CI). The combination of nivolumab and ipilimumab had the longest duration of response and less incidence of grade III or higher adverse events compared to the combination of anti-PD-1/PD-L1 with TKI. The combination of anti-PD-1/PD-L1 with TKI had higher rates of overall response and longer PFS than the combination of nivolumab/ipilimumab. CONCLUSIONS: This meta-analysis supports the recommendation of immune checkpoint inhibitor combination therapy over sunitinib monotherapy for previously untreated advanced renal cell carcinoma by virtue of improved PFS and OS. The choice of which ICI combination therapy to use may be guided by patient-specific characteristics including IMDC risk status, adverse effect profile, and need for early response.

Prognostic Impact of Early Treatment Interruption of Nivolumab Plus Ipilimumab Due to Immune-Related Adverse Events as First-Line Therapy for Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma: A Multi-Institution Retrospective Study.

It remains unclear how early treatment interruption of nivolumab plus ipilimumab due to immune-related adverse events affects the outcome of previously untreated metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). To investigate the prognostic impact of the early interruption of nivolumab plus ipilimumab, used as first-line therapy for mRCC. We retrospectively evaluated 59 intermediate- or poor-risk mRCC patients who received nivolumab plus ipilimumab as first-line therapy. Based on whether early treatment interruption was implemented within the initial four treatment cycles (i.e., 3 months) or not, progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and objective response rate (ORR) were compared. The prognostic association was further compared with that of 186 patients treated with tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) as first-line therapy. Twenty-three of the 59 patients (39%) experienced interruption of nivolumab plus ipilimumab therapy. The patients with interruption had longer PFS (p = 0.0055), similar OS (p = 0.366), and likely higher ORR (p = 0.0660) than those without interruption. Of the patients treated with TKIs, 60 of 186 (32%) experienced interruption, with shorter PFS (p = 0.0121), similar OS (p = 0.378), and similar ORR (p = 0.738) than those without interruption. In the 23 patients with nivolumab plus ipilimumab interruption, high-dose corticosteroids were administered in seven patients (30%). PFS (p = 0.638), OS (p = 0.968), or ORR (p = 0.760) did not differ based on corticosteroid administration. Early treatment interruption, which exerted a negative effect for TKIs, was a preferable event for nivolumab plus ipilimumab when considering PFS. Furthermore, early administration of high-dose corticosteroids did not diminish the anti-tumor effect of nivolumab plus ipilimumab.

Atezolizumab plus Bevacizumab Versus Sunitinib for Patients with Untreated Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma and Sarcomatoid Features: A Prespecified Subgroup Analysis of the IMmotion151 Clinical Trial

Patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma with sarcomatoid features (sRCC) have a poor prognosis and have shown limited responsiveness to inhibition of the VEGF pathway. We conducted a prespecified analysis of the randomised, phase 3 IMmotion151 trial in previously untreated patients with advanced or metastatic RCC to assess the effectiveness of atezolizumab + bevacizumab versus sunitinib in a subgroup of patients with sarcomatoid features. Patients whose tumour had any component of sarcomatoid features were included and received atezolizumab + bevacizumab (n = 68) or sunitinib (n = 74). Baseline characteristics were similar between the groups. Median progression-free survival was significantly longer in the group receiving atezolizumab + bevacizumab overall (8.3 vs 5.3 mo; hazard ratio [HR] 0.52 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.34–0.79) and in the subset of patients with PD-L1–positive tumours (8.6 vs 5.6 mo; HR 0.45, 95% CI 0.26–0.77). More patients receiving atezolizumab + bevacizumab achieved an objective response (49% vs 14%), including complete responses (10% vs 3%), and reported greater symptom improvements versus sunitinib. Safety was consistent with the known profiles of each drug and with that reported in the overall safety-evaluable population of IMmotion151. This analysis supports enhanced activity of atezolizumab + bevacizumab in patients with sRCC. Patient summaryIn this report, we looked at patients with a specific type of kidney cancer (tumours with sarcomatoid features) that has been hard to treat. A treatment with two drugs (atezolizumab and bevacizumab) appeared to help patients live longer without the disease getting worse than another drug (sunitinib) that is often used. Patients who took the two drugs also said they were better able to carry out their everyday activities than patients who took sunitinib. The combination of these two drugs may work better in patients with this type of advanced kidney cancer.

Considerations for the Next Clinical Trial Evaluating the Role of Cytoreductive Nephrectomy for Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma

Trials SWOG 8949 and EORTC 30947 had the same eligibility criteria and established the role of cytoreductive nephrectomy for metastatic renal cell carcinoma. The more recently published CARMENA trial calls into question the need for cytoreductive nephrectomy. A systematic comparison of CARMENA and SWOG 8949 suggests that cytoreductive nephrectomy may be beneficial for patients receiving immunotherapy but not targeted therapy. The approval of immune checkpoint inhibitors for previously untreated metastatic renal cell carcinoma underlines the need for another randomized phase 3 trial of cytoreductive nephrectomy for patients receiving powerful modern immunotherapies.

Atezolizumab plus bevacizumab versus sunitinib in patients with previously untreated metastatic renal cell carcinoma (IMmotion151): a multicentre, open-label, phase 3, randomised controlled trial

A phase 2 trial showed improved progression-free survival for atezolizumab plus bevacizumab versus sunitinib in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma who express programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1). Here, we report results of IMmotion151, a phase 3 trial comparing atezolizumab plus bevacizumab versus sunitinib in first-line metastatic renal cell carcinoma. In this multicentre, open-label, phase 3, randomised controlled trial, patients with a component of clear cell or sarcomatoid histology and who were previously untreated, were recruited from 152 academic medical centres and community oncology practices in 21 countries, mainly in Europe, North America, and the Asia-Pacific region, and were randomly assigned 1:1 to either atezolizumab 1200 mg plus bevacizumab 15 mg/kg intravenously once every 3 weeks or sunitinib 50 mg orally once daily for 4 weeks on, 2 weeks off. A permuted-block randomisation (block size of 4) was applied to obtain a balanced assignment to each treatment group with respect to the stratification factors. Study investigators and participants were not masked to treatment allocation. Patients, investigators, independent radiology committee members, and the sponsor were masked to PD-L1 expression status. Co-primary endpoints were investigator-assessed progression-free survival in the PD-L1 positive population and overall survival in the intention-to-treat (ITT) population. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02420821. Of 915 patients enrolled between May 20, 2015, and Oct 12, 2016, 454 were randomly assigned to the atezolizumab plus bevacizumab group and 461 to the sunitinib group. 362 (40%) of 915 patients had PD-L1 positive disease. Median follow-up was 15 months at the primary progression-free survival analysis and 24 months at the overall survival interim analysis. In the PD-L1 positive population, the median progression-free survival was 11·2 months in the atezolizumab plus bevacizumab group versus 7·7 months in the sunitinib group (hazard ratio [HR] 0·74 [95% CI 0·57-0·96]; p=0·0217). In the ITT population, median overall survival had an HR of 0·93 (0·76-1·14) and the results did not cross the significance boundary at the interim analysis. 182 (40%) of 451 patients in the atezolizumab plus bevacizumab group and 240 (54%) of 446 patients in the sunitinib group had treatment-related grade 3-4 adverse events: 24 (5%) in the atezolizumab plus bevacizumab group and 37 (8%) in the sunitinib group had treatment-related all-grade adverse events, which led to treatment-regimen discontinuation. Atezolizumab plus bevacizumab prolonged progression-free survival versus sunitinib in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma and showed a favourable safety profile. Longer-term follow-up is necessary to establish whether a survival benefit will emerge. These study results support atezolizumab plus bevacizumab as a first-line treatment option for selected patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma. F Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd and Genentech Inc.

Study of Cabozantinib in Combination With Nivolumab and Ipilimumab in Patients With Previously Untreated Advanced or Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma

Study of Cabozantinib in Combination With Nivolumab and Ipilimumab in Patients With Previously Untreated Advanced or Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma

873P - Safety and tolerability of atezolizumab (atezo) plus bevacizumab (bev) vs sunitinib (sun) in untreated metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC): Pooled analysis of IMmotion150 and IMmotion151

873P - Safety and tolerability of atezolizumab (atezo) plus bevacizumab (bev) vs sunitinib (sun) in untreated metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC): Pooled analysis of IMmotion150 and IMmotion151

LBA31 - Molecular correlates differentiate response to atezolizumab (atezo) + bevacizumab (bev) vs sunitinib (sun): Results from a phase III study (IMmotion151) in untreated metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC)

LBA31 - Molecular correlates differentiate response to atezolizumab (atezo) + bevacizumab (bev) vs sunitinib (sun): Results from a phase III study (IMmotion151) in untreated metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC)

Comparison of adverse event costs of nivolumab combined with ipilimumab versus sunitinib for previously untreated metastatic renal cell carcinoma.

e16561Background: In the phase 3, open-label, randomized CheckMate 214 trial, nivolumab (N) combined with ipilimumab (I) (N 3 mg/kg + I 1 mg/kg every 3 weeks for 4 doses followed by N 3 mg/kg every...

A phase 3, randomized, open-label study of nivolumab combined with cabozantinib vs sunitinib in patients with previously untreated advanced or metastatic renal cell carcinoma (RCC; CheckMate 9ER).

TPS4598Background: Over the past decade, treatment options for advanced RCC have evolved to include multiple agents targeting the vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) pathway. In addition, the...

IMmotion151: A Randomized Phase III Study of Atezolizumab Plus Bevacizumab vs Sunitinib in Untreated Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma (mRCC)

578 Background: Atezolizumab (atezo; anti–PD-L1) + bevacizumab (bev; anti-VEGF) showed first-line (1L) anti-tumor activity with a manageable safety profile in PD-L1+ mRCC pts in a Phase II study (McDermott ASCO-GU 2017). Here we describe the first randomized Phase III trial of a PD-L1/PD-1 pathway inhibitor combined with an anti-VEGF agent in 1L mRCC. Methods: IMmotion151 (NCT02420821) enrolled treatment-naïve pts regardless of prognostic risk group randomized 1:1 to receive atezo 1200 mg IV q3w + bev 15 mg/kg IV q3w or sunitinib (sun) 50 mg PO QD 4 wk on/2 wk off. Pts were stratified by PD-L1 status (&lt; 1% vs ≥ 1% PD-L1 expression on tumor-infiltrating immune cells [IC]; SP142 IHC assay). Coprimary endpoints: progression-free survival (PFS; by investigator per RECIST v1.1) in PD-L1+ pts (≥ 1% IC) and overall survival (OS) in intent-to-treat (ITT) pts. Secondary endpoints included PFS in ITT pts, ORR and DOR. Results: Baseline characteristics were comparable between arms within PD-L1+ (40% of ITT) and ITT pts. Median survival follow-up was 15 mo. PFS HR for atezo + bev vs sun was 0.74 (95% CI 0.57, 0.96) in PD-L1+ pts and 0.83 (95% CI 0.70, 0.97) in ITT pts. OS was immature at first interim analysis. PFS benefit was consistent across analyzed subgroups, including MSKCC risk, liver metastases and sarcomatoid histology. In PD-L1+ pts, ORR was 43% and DOR was not reached for atezo + bev vs 35% and 12.9 mo for sun. 40% of atezo + bev–treated pts and 54% of sun-treated pts had treatment-related Gr 3-4 AEs; 12% and 8% of treatment-related all-Gr AEs led to discontinuation, respectively. Conclusions: The study showed longer PFS for atezo + bev vs sun in PD-L1+ pts. Improved PFS was also observed in ITT pts. Safety was consistent with that of the individual agents. These results support the use of atezo + bev as a 1L treatment option in mRCC. Clinical trial information: NCT02420821. [Table: see text]

LBA39 - IMmotion150: Novel radiological endpoints and updated data from a randomized phase II trial investigating atezolizumab (atezo) with or without bevacizumab (bev) vs sunitinib (sun) in untreated metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC)

LBA39 - IMmotion150: Novel radiological endpoints and updated data from a randomized phase II trial investigating atezolizumab (atezo) with or without bevacizumab (bev) vs sunitinib (sun) in untreated metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC)