Real-world Outcome of Patients with Advanced Renal Cell Carcinoma and Intermediate- or Poor-risk International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium Criteria Treated by Immune-oncology Combinations: Differential Effectiveness by Risk Group?

. 2024 Feb ; 7 (1) : 102-111. [epub] 20230721

Jazyk angličtina Země Nizozemsko Médium print-electronic

Typ dokumentu časopisecké články

Perzistentní odkaz   https://www.medvik.cz/link/pmid37481365
Odkazy

PubMed 37481365
DOI 10.1016/j.euo.2023.07.003
PII: S2588-9311(23)00145-1
Knihovny.cz E-zdroje

BACKGROUND: Renal c carcinoma (RCC) is one of the most common urinary cancers worldwide, with a predicted increase in incidence in the coming years. Immunotherapy, as a single agent, in doublets, or in combination with anti-vascular endothelial growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs), has rapidly become a cornerstone of the RCC therapeutic scenario, but no head-to-head comparisons have been made. In this setting, real-world evidence emerges as a cornerstone to guide clinical decisions. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this retrospective study was to assess the outcome of patients treated with first-line immune combinations or immune oncology (IO)-TKIs for advanced RCC. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Data from 930 patients, 654 intermediate risk and 276 poor risk, were collected retrospectively from 58 centers in 20 countries. Special data such as sarcomatoid differentiation, body mass index, prior nephrectomy, and metastatic localization, in addition to biochemical data such as hemoglobin, platelets, calcium, lactate dehydrogenase, neutrophils, and radiological response by investigator's criteria, were collected. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. The median follow-up was calculated by the inverse Kaplan-Meier method. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: The median follow-up time was 18.7 mo. In the 654 intermediate-risk patients, the median OS and PFS were significantly longer in patients with the intermediate than in those with the poor International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium (IMDC) criteria (38.9 vs 17.3 mo, 95% confidence interval [CI] p < 0.001, and 17.3 vs 11.6 mo, 95% CI p < 0.001, respectively). In the intermediate-risk subgroup, the OS was 55.7 mo (95% CI 31.4-55.7) and 40.2 mo (95% CI 29.6-51.6) in patients treated with IO + TKI and IO + IO combinations, respectively (p = 0.047). PFS was 30.7 mo (95% CI 16.5-55.7) and 13.2 mo (95% CI 29.6-51.6) in intermediate-risk patients treated with IO + TKI and IO + IO combinations, respectively (p < 0.001). In the poor-risk subgroup, the median OS and PFS did not show a statistically significant difference between IO + IO and IO + TKI. Our study presents several limitations, mainly due to its retrospective nature. CONCLUSIONS: Our results showed differences between the IO + TKI and IO + IO combinations in intermediate-risk patients. A clear association with longer PFS and OS in favor of patients who received the IO + TKI combinations compared with the IO-IO combination was observed. Instead, in the poor-risk group, we observed no significant difference in PFS or OS between patients who received different combinations. PATIENT SUMMARY: Renal cancer is one of the most frequent genitourinary tumors. Treatment is currently based on immunotherapy combinations or immunotherapy with tyrosine kinase inhibitors, but there are no comparisons between these.In this study, we have analyzed the clinical course of 930 patients from 58 centers in 20 countries around the world. We aimed to analyze the differences between the two main treatment strategies, combination of two immunotherapies versus immunotherapy + antiangiogenic therapy, and found in real-life data that intermediate-risk patients (approximately 60% of patients with metastatic renal cancer) seem to benefit more from the combination of immunotherapy + antiangiogenic therapy than from double immunotherapy. No such differences were found in poor-risk patients. This may have important implications in daily practice decision-making for these patients.

2nd Propaedeutic Department of Internal Medicine ATTIKON University Hospital School of Medicine National and Kapodistrian University of Athens Athens Greece

Azienda Ospedaliero Universitario Mater Domini Policlinico of Catanzaro Catanzaro Italy

Clinical Oncology Sociedad de oncología y hematología del Cesar Valledupar Colombia

Department of Biomedical Sciences Humanitas University Pieve Emanuele Milan Italy; Department of Oncology IRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital Rozzano Milan Italy

Department of Clinical Oncology and Radiotherapy University Hospital Hradec Kralove Hradec Kralove Czech Republic

Department of Genitourinary Medical Oncology and Clinical Pharmacology National Institute of Oncology Budapest Hungary

Department of Health Sciences Section of Clinical Pharmacology and Oncology University of Florence Florence Italy

Department of Internal Medicine Hematology Oncology Ochsner Medical Center New Orleans LA USA

Department of Medical Oncology Army Hospital Research and Referral New Delhi India

Department of Medical Oncology Centre Hospitalier de Jolimont Haine Saint Paul Belgium

Department of Medical Oncology Hospital Ramón y Cajal Madrid Spain

Department of Medical Oncology IRCCS Istituto Romagnolo per lo Studio deiTumori Dino Amadori Meldola Italy

Department of Medical Oncology Maggiore della Carità University Hospital Novara Italy

Department of Medical Oncology MD Anderson Cancer Center Madrid Madrid Spain

Department of Medical Oncology Università Politecnica delle Marche AOU Ospedali Riunitidelle Marche Ancona Italy

Department of Oncology 1st Faculty of Medicine Charles University and Thomayer University Hospital Prague Czech Republic

Department of Oncology and Radiotherapeutics Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital in Pilsen Charles University Pilsen Czech Republic

Department of Oncology Radiotherapy Prof Dr Alexandru Trestioreanu Institute of Oncology Carol Davila University of Medicine and Pharmacy Bucharest Romania

Department of Oncology San Camillo Forlanini Hospital Rome Italy

Department of Oncology Tays Cancer Center Tampere University Hospital Tampere Finland

Department of Radiological Oncological and Anatomo Pathological Science Sapienza University of Rome Rome Italy

Department of Radiological Oncological and Pathological Sciences Policlinico Umberto 1 Sapienza University of Rome Rome Italy

Department of Surgical Oncological and Oral Sciences Section of Medical Oncology University of Palermo Palermo Italy

Department of Uro oncology Maria Sklodowska Curie National Research Institute of Oncology Warsaw Poland

Department of Urology Medical University of Innsbruck Innsbruck Austria

Department of Urology University Hospital Bonn Bonn Germany

Dipartimento di Oncologia Medica Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori Milan Italy; Oncologia Medica Ospedale Maggiore di Cremona Cremona Italy

Division of Medical Oncology A O U Consorziale Policlinico di Bari Bari Italy

Division of Medical Oncology A O U Consorziale Policlinico di Bari Bari Italy; Interdisciplinary Department of Medicine University of Bari Aldo Moro Bari Italy

Division of Medical Oncology National Cancer Centre Singapore Singapore

Division of Oncology Department of Internal Medicine Medical University of Graz Graz Austria

Division of Oncology Institute for Cancer Research and Treatment Alba Brà Italy

Hematology and Oncology Department Instituto Nacional de Ciencias Médicasy Nutrición Salvador Zubirán Mexico City Mexico

IRCCS Ospedale Policlinico San Martino Genoa Italy

Klinik für Urologie Lübeck Germany

Latin American Cooperative Oncology Group LACOG Porto Alegre Brazil; Hospital Israelita Albert Einstein São Paulo SP Brazil

Latin American Cooperative Oncology Group LACOG Porto Alegre Brazil; Oncology and Hematology Department Hospital Santa Lucia Brasília Brazil

Markey Cancer Center University of Kentucky Lexington KY USA

Medical and Translational Oncology Azienda Ospedaliera Santa Maria Terni Italy

Medical Oncology 1 IRCCS Regina Elena National Cancer Institute Rome Italy

Medical Oncology Department La Paz University Hospital Madrid Spain

Medical Oncology Division of Urogenital and Head and Neck Tumours IEO European Institute of Oncology IRCCS Milan Italy

Medical Oncology IRCCS Azienda Ospedaliero Universitaria di Bologna Bologna Italia

Medical Oncology Ospedale San Paolo Savona Italy; Department of Internal Medicine and Medical Specialties University of Genoa Genoa Italy

Medical Oncology Tawam Hospital Al Ain United Arab Emirates

Medical Oncology Unit Gemelli Molise Hospital Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore Campobasso Italy

Medical Oncology Unit Santa Chiara Hospital Trento Italy

Medical Oncology Unit University Hospital of Parma Department of Medicine and Surgery University of Parma Parma Italy

Oncologia Medica Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Agostino Gemelli IRCCS Roma Italy

Oncology 3 Unit Department of Oncology Istituto Oncologico Veneto IOV IRCCS Padova Italy

Oncology Candiolo Cancer Institute IRCCS FPO Torino Italy

Oncology Unit 2 University Hospital of Pisa Pisa Italy

Oncology Unit A R N A S Civico Palermo Italy

Oncology Unit Macerata Hospital Macerata Italy

Section of Oncology Department of Medicine University of Verona School of Medicine and Verona University Hospital Trust Verona Italy

Struttura Semplice Dipartimentale di Oncologia Medica per la Presa in Carico Globale del Paziente Oncologico Don Tonino Bello 1 R C C S Istituto Tumori Giovanni Paolo 2 Bari Italy

Unità di Oncologia Medica Azienda Ospedaliero Universitaria di Cagliari Cagliari Italy

UOC di Oncologia Azienda Ospedaliera di Rilievo Nazionale Cardarelli di Napoli Naples Italy

UOC Oncologia Azienda Ospedaliera Ospedali Riuniti Marche Nord Italy

UOC Oncologia Medica Ospedale A Murri Fermo Italy

Urologic Oncology Champalimaud Clinical Center Lisbon Portugal

Citace poskytuje Crossref.org

Najít záznam

Citační ukazatele

Nahrávání dat ...

Možnosti archivace

Nahrávání dat ...