C Rothermundt1, J von Rappard2, T Eisen3, B Escudier4, V Grünwald5, J Larkin6, D McDermott7, J Oldenburg8, C Porta9, B Rini10, M Schmidinger11, C N Sternberg12, P M Putora13. 1. Department of Haematology and Oncology, Kantonsspital St. Gallen, 9007, St. Gallen, Switzerland. christian.rothermundt@kssg.ch. 2. Department of Nephrology, University Hospital Bern, Bern, Switzerland. 3. Department of Oncology, Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Cambridge, Cambridge, UK. 4. Gustave Roussy, Villejuif, France. 5. Klinik für Hämatologie, Hämostaseologie, Onkologie und Stammzelltransplantation, Medizinische Hochschule Hannover, Hannover, Germany. 6. The Royal Marsden Hospital, London, UK. 7. Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, MA, USA. 8. Department of Medical Oncology, Norwegian Radium Hospital, Oslo, Norway. 9. Policlinico San Matteo Pavia Fondazione IRCCS, Pavia, Italy. 10. Department of Solid Tumor Oncology, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA. 11. Abteilung für Onkologie, Allgemeines Krankenhaus, Universitätskliniken, Vienna, Austria. 12. Department of Medical Oncology, San Camillo and Forlanini Hospitals, Rome, Italy. 13. Department of Radiation Oncology, Kantonsspital St. Gallen, St. Gallen, Switzerland.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Second-line systemic treatment options for metastatic clear cell renal cell cancer (mccRCC) are diverse and treatment strategies are variable among experts. Our aim was to investigate the approach for the second-line treatment after first-line therapy with a tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI). Recently two phase III trials have demonstrated a potential role for nivolumab (NIV) and cabozantinib (CAB) in this setting. We aimed to estimate the impact of these trials on clinical decision making. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Eleven international experts were asked to provide their treatment strategies for second-line systemic therapy for mccRCC in the current setting and once NIV and CAB will be approved and available. The treatment strategies were analyzed with the objective consensus approach. RESULTS: The analysis of the decision trees revealed everolimus (EVE), axitinib (AXI), NIV and TKI switch (sTKI) as therapeutic options after first-line TKI therapy in the current situation and mostly NIV and CAB in the future setting. The most commonly used criteria for treatment decisions were duration of response, TKI tolerance and zugzwang a composite of several related criteria. CONCLUSION: In contrast to the first-line setting, recommendations for second-line systemic treatment of mccRCC among experts were not as heterogeneous. The agents mostly used after disease progression on a first-line TKI included: EVE, AXI, NIV and sTKI. In the future setting of NIV and CAB availability, NIV was the most commonly chosen drug, whereas several experts identified situations where CAB would be preferred.
BACKGROUND: Second-line systemic treatment options for metastatic clear cell renal cell cancer (mccRCC) are diverse and treatment strategies are variable among experts. Our aim was to investigate the approach for the second-line treatment after first-line therapy with a tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI). Recently two phase III trials have demonstrated a potential role for nivolumab (NIV) and cabozantinib (CAB) in this setting. We aimed to estimate the impact of these trials on clinical decision making. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Eleven international experts were asked to provide their treatment strategies for second-line systemic therapy for mccRCC in the current setting and once NIV and CAB will be approved and available. The treatment strategies were analyzed with the objective consensus approach. RESULTS: The analysis of the decision trees revealed everolimus (EVE), axitinib (AXI), NIV and TKI switch (sTKI) as therapeutic options after first-line TKI therapy in the current situation and mostly NIV and CAB in the future setting. The most commonly used criteria for treatment decisions were duration of response, TKI tolerance and zugzwang a composite of several related criteria. CONCLUSION: In contrast to the first-line setting, recommendations for second-line systemic treatment of mccRCC among experts were not as heterogeneous. The agents mostly used after disease progression on a first-line TKI included: EVE, AXI, NIV and sTKI. In the future setting of NIV and CAB availability, NIV was the most commonly chosen drug, whereas several experts identified situations where CAB would be preferred.
Entities:
Keywords:
Algorithm; Consensus; Diagnostic nodes; Renal cell cancer
Authors: T Hundsberger; A F Hottinger; U Roelcke; P Roth; D Migliorini; P Y Dietrich; K Conen; G Pesce; E Hermann; A Pica; M W Gross; D Brügge; L Plasswilm; M Weller; P M Putora Journal: J Neurooncol Date: 2015-10-12 Impact factor: 4.130
Authors: Toni K Choueiri; Bernard Escudier; Thomas Powles; Paul N Mainwaring; Brian I Rini; Frede Donskov; Hans Hammers; Thomas E Hutson; Jae-Lyun Lee; Katriina Peltola; Bruce J Roth; Georg A Bjarnason; Lajos Géczi; Bhumsuk Keam; Pablo Maroto; Daniel Y C Heng; Manuela Schmidinger; Philip W Kantoff; Anne Borgman-Hagey; Colin Hessel; Christian Scheffold; Gisela M Schwab; Nizar M Tannir; Robert J Motzer Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2015-09-25 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Thomas E Hutson; Bernard Escudier; Emilio Esteban; Georg A Bjarnason; Ho Yeong Lim; Kenneth B Pittman; Peggy Senico; Andreas Niethammer; Dongrui Ray Lu; Subramanian Hariharan; Robert J Motzer Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2013-12-02 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Thomas Powles; Michael Staehler; Börje Ljungberg; Karim Bensalah; Steven E Canfield; Saeed Dabestani; Rachel H Giles; Fabian Hofmann; Milan Hora; Markus A Kuczyk; Thomas Lam; Lorenzo Marconi; Axel S Merseburger; Alessandro Volpe; Axel Bex Journal: Eur Urol Date: 2016-06-24 Impact factor: 20.096
Authors: Christian Rothermundt; Alexandra Bailey; Linda Cerbone; Tim Eisen; Bernard Escudier; Silke Gillessen; Viktor Grünwald; James Larkin; David McDermott; Jan Oldenburg; Camillo Porta; Brian Rini; Manuela Schmidinger; Cora Sternberg; Paul M Putora Journal: Oncologist Date: 2015-08-03
Authors: Paul Martin Putora; Cedric M Panje; Alexandros Papachristofilou; Alan Dal Pra; Thomas Hundsberger; Ludwig Plasswilm Journal: Radiat Oncol Date: 2014-12-05 Impact factor: 3.481
Authors: Tobias Klatte; Kate Fife; Sarah J Welsh; Manavi Sachdeva; James N Armitage; Tevita 'Aho; Antony C Riddick; Athena Matakidou; Tim Eisen; Grant D Stewart Journal: World J Urol Date: 2017-12-18 Impact factor: 4.226
Authors: Christian Rothermundt; Galina F Fischer; Sebastian Bauer; Jean-Yves Blay; Viktor Grünwald; Antoine Italiano; Bernd Kasper; Attila Kollár; Lars H Lindner; Aisha Miah; Stefan Sleijfer; Silvia Stacchiotti; Paul Martin Putora Journal: Oncologist Date: 2017-11-30
Authors: Thomas Hundsberger; Paul Martin Putora; Galina Farina Fischer; Detlef Brügge; Nicolaus Andratschke; Brigitta Gertrud Baumert; Davide Giovanni Bosetti; Francesca Caparrotti; Evelyn Herrmann; Alexandros Papachristofilou; Susanne Rogers; Lucia Schwyzer; Daniel Rudolf Zwahlen Journal: BMC Cancer Date: 2022-05-04 Impact factor: 4.638
Authors: Cédric M Panje; Markus Glatzer; Joscha von Rappard; Christian Rothermundt; Thomas Hundsberger; Valentin Zumstein; Ludwig Plasswilm; Paul Martin Putora Journal: BMC Med Res Methodol Date: 2017-08-16 Impact factor: 4.615