Annelies Verbiest1, Gabrielle Couchy2, Sylvie Job3, Jessica Zucman-Rossi2, Laure Caruana2, Evelyne Lerut4, Raymond Oyen5, Aurélien de Reyniès3, Brigitte Laguerre6, Nathalie Rioux-Leclercq7, Agnieszka Wozniak8, Steven Joniau9, Hendrik Van Poppel9, Kathleen Van Den Eynde4, Benoit Beuselinck10. 1. Laboratory of Experimental Oncology, Department of Oncology, University of Leuven, Leuven, Belgium; Department of General Medical Oncology, University Hospitals Leuven, Leuven Cancer Institute, Leuven, Belgium. 2. Inserm, UMR-1162, Génomique fonctionnelle des tumeurs solides, Institut Universitaire Hématologie, Paris, France. 3. Programme Cartes d'Identité des Tumeurs, Ligue Nationale Contre le Cancer, Paris, France. 4. Department of Pathology, University Hospitals Leuven, Leuven, Belgium. 5. Department of Radiology, University Hospitals Leuven, Leuven, Belgium. 6. Department of Medical Oncology, Centre Eugène Marquis, Rennes, France. 7. Department of Pathology, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Rennes, Rennes, France. 8. Laboratory of Experimental Oncology, Department of Oncology, University of Leuven, Leuven, Belgium. 9. Department of Urology, University Hospitals Leuven, Leuven, Belgium. 10. Laboratory of Experimental Oncology, Department of Oncology, University of Leuven, Leuven, Belgium; Department of General Medical Oncology, University Hospitals Leuven, Leuven Cancer Institute, Leuven, Belgium; Inserm, UMR-1162, Génomique fonctionnelle des tumeurs solides, Institut Universitaire Hématologie, Paris, France. Electronic address: benoit.beuselinck@uzleuven.be.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: We previously described 4 molecular subtypes of metastatic clear cell renal cell carcinoma (mccRCC), named ccrcc1-4 (Beuselinck et al, 2015). These have both prognostic and predictive value for patients treated with first-line sunitinib, with distinctive objective response rate (ORR), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS). The ccrcc2 and ccrcc3 tumors have the best outcomes, followed by ccrcc1 and then ccrcc4. We hypothesized that these molecular subtypes would show similar outcomes with first-line pazopanib treatment. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We classified 28 mccRCC tumors treated with pazopanib as first-line therapy, as described previously. The primary endpoints were PFS and OS from the start of pazopanib. A secondary endpoint was ORR. Because there were only 2 ccrcc3 tumors, they were pooled with the ccrcc2 tumors for outcome analysis. RESULTS: PFS was 9 months for the ccrcc2 and ccrcc3 tumors, 5 months for ccrcc1 tumors, and 3 months for the ccrcc4 tumors (P = .011). The corresponding OS duration was 69, 19, and 5 months (P = .003). The corresponding ORR was 50%, 33%, and 0%. The corresponding mean tumor size decreased by 34%, 6%, and 2% (P = .032). The ccrcc1-4 classification was a stronger predictor of outcome than the International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium score on univariate analysis (P = .011 vs. P = .094 for PFS and P = .003 vs. .013 for OS). Both remained independent on bivariate analysis. CONCLUSION: The molecular subtypes of mccRCC are associated with outcome on pazopanib as first-line therapy. The prognostic and predictive value of the ccrcc1-4 molecular classification requires validation in prospective trials.
BACKGROUND: We previously described 4 molecular subtypes of metastatic clear cell renal cell carcinoma (mccRCC), named ccrcc1-4 (Beuselinck et al, 2015). These have both prognostic and predictive value for patients treated with first-line sunitinib, with distinctive objective response rate (ORR), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS). The ccrcc2 and ccrcc3 tumors have the best outcomes, followed by ccrcc1 and then ccrcc4. We hypothesized that these molecular subtypes would show similar outcomes with first-line pazopanib treatment. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We classified 28 mccRCC tumors treated with pazopanib as first-line therapy, as described previously. The primary endpoints were PFS and OS from the start of pazopanib. A secondary endpoint was ORR. Because there were only 2 ccrcc3 tumors, they were pooled with the ccrcc2 tumors for outcome analysis. RESULTS: PFS was 9 months for the ccrcc2 and ccrcc3 tumors, 5 months for ccrcc1 tumors, and 3 months for the ccrcc4 tumors (P = .011). The corresponding OS duration was 69, 19, and 5 months (P = .003). The corresponding ORR was 50%, 33%, and 0%. The corresponding mean tumor size decreased by 34%, 6%, and 2% (P = .032). The ccrcc1-4 classification was a stronger predictor of outcome than the International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium score on univariate analysis (P = .011 vs. P = .094 for PFS and P = .003 vs. .013 for OS). Both remained independent on bivariate analysis. CONCLUSION: The molecular subtypes of mccRCC are associated with outcome on pazopanib as first-line therapy. The prognostic and predictive value of the ccrcc1-4 molecular classification requires validation in prospective trials.