Shaan Dudani1, Jeffrey Graham2, J Connor Wells1, Ziad Bakouny3, Sumanta K Pal4, Nazli Dizman4, Frede Donskov5, Camillo Porta6, Guillermo de Velasco7, Aaron Hansen8, Marco Iafolla8, Benoit Beuselinck9, Ulka N Vaishampayan10, Lori A Wood11, Elizabeth Liow12, Flora Yan13, Takeshi Yuasa14, Georg A Bjarnason15, Toni K Choueiri3, Daniel Y C Heng16. 1. Tom Baker Cancer Centre, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada. 2. CancerCare Manitoba, Winnipeg, MB, Canada. 3. Dana-Farber Cancer Institute/Brigham and Women's Hospital/Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA. 4. City of Hope Comprehensive Cancer Center, Duarte, CA, USA. 5. Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark. 6. Department of Internal Medicine, University of Pavia and Division of Translational Oncology, IRCCS Istituti Clinici Scientifici Maugeri, Pavia, Italy. 7. University Hospital 12 de Octubre, Madrid, Spain. 8. Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, Toronto, ON, Canada. 9. University Hospitals Leuven, Leuven Cancer Institute, Leuven, Belgium. 10. Karmanos Cancer Center, Detroit, MI, USA. 11. Queen Elizabeth II Health Sciences Centre, Halifax, NS, Canada. 12. Eastern Health, Box Hill, Australia. 13. University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX, USA. 14. Cancer Institute Hospital of Japanese Foundation for Cancer Research, Tokyo, Japan. 15. Sunnybrook Research Institute, Toronto, ON, Canada. 16. Tom Baker Cancer Centre, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada. Electronic address: daniel.heng@albertahealthservices.ca.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: In metastatic renal-cell carcinoma (mRCC), recent data have shown efficacy of first-line ipilimumab and nivolumab (ipi-nivo) as well as immuno-oncology (IO)/vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) inhibitor combinations. Comparative data between these strategies are limited. OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy of ipi-nivo versus IO-VEGF (IOVE) combinations in mRCC, and describe practice patterns and effectiveness of second-line therapies. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Using the International Metastatic Renal-cell Carcinoma Database Consortium (IMDC) dataset, patients treated with any first-line IOVE combination were compared with those treated with ipi-nivo. INTERVENTION: All patients received first-line IO combination therapies. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: First- and second-line response rates, time to treatment failure (TTF), time to next treatment (TNT), and overall survival (OS) were analysed. Hazard ratios were adjusted for IMDC risk factors. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: In total, 113 patients received IOVE combinations and 75 received ipi-nivo. For IOVE combinations versus ipi-nivo, first-line response rates were 33% versus 40% (between-group difference 7%, 95% confidence interval [CI] -8% to 22%, p = 0.4), TTF was 14.3 versus 10.2 mo (p = 0.2), TNT was 19.7 versus 17.9 mo (p = 0.4), and median OS was immature but not statistically different (p = 0.17). Adjusted hazard ratios for TTF, TNT, and OS were 0.71 (95% CI 0.46-1.12, p = 0.14), 0.65 (95% CI 0.38-1.11, p = 0.11), and 1.74 (95% CI 0.82-3.68, p = 0.14), respectively. Sixty-four (34%) patients received second-line treatment. In patients receiving subsequent VEGF-based therapy, second-line response rates were lower in the IOVE cohort than in the ipi-nivo cohort (15% vs 45%; between-group difference 30%, 95% CI 3-57%, p = 0.04; n = 40), though second-line TTF was not significantly different (3.7 vs 5.4 mo; p = 0.4; n = 55). Limitations include the study's retrospective design and sample size. CONCLUSIONS: There were no significant differences in first-line outcomes between IOVE combinations and ipi-nivo. Most patients received VEGF-based therapy in the second line. In this group, second-line response rate was greater in patients who received ipi-nivo initially. PATIENT SUMMARY: There were no significant differences in key first-line outcomes for patients with metastatic renal-cell carcinoma receiving immuno-oncology/vascular endothelial growth factor inhibitor combinations versus ipilimumab and nivolumab.
BACKGROUND: In metastatic renal-cell carcinoma (mRCC), recent data have shown efficacy of first-line ipilimumab and nivolumab (ipi-nivo) as well as immuno-oncology (IO)/vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) inhibitor combinations. Comparative data between these strategies are limited. OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy of ipi-nivo versus IO-VEGF (IOVE) combinations in mRCC, and describe practice patterns and effectiveness of second-line therapies. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Using the International Metastatic Renal-cell Carcinoma Database Consortium (IMDC) dataset, patients treated with any first-line IOVE combination were compared with those treated with ipi-nivo. INTERVENTION: All patients received first-line IO combination therapies. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: First- and second-line response rates, time to treatment failure (TTF), time to next treatment (TNT), and overall survival (OS) were analysed. Hazard ratios were adjusted for IMDC risk factors. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: In total, 113 patients received IOVE combinations and 75 received ipi-nivo. For IOVE combinations versus ipi-nivo, first-line response rates were 33% versus 40% (between-group difference 7%, 95% confidence interval [CI] -8% to 22%, p = 0.4), TTF was 14.3 versus 10.2 mo (p = 0.2), TNT was 19.7 versus 17.9 mo (p = 0.4), and median OS was immature but not statistically different (p = 0.17). Adjusted hazard ratios for TTF, TNT, and OS were 0.71 (95% CI 0.46-1.12, p = 0.14), 0.65 (95% CI 0.38-1.11, p = 0.11), and 1.74 (95% CI 0.82-3.68, p = 0.14), respectively. Sixty-four (34%) patients received second-line treatment. In patients receiving subsequent VEGF-based therapy, second-line response rates were lower in the IOVE cohort than in the ipi-nivo cohort (15% vs 45%; between-group difference 30%, 95% CI 3-57%, p = 0.04; n = 40), though second-line TTF was not significantly different (3.7 vs 5.4 mo; p = 0.4; n = 55). Limitations include the study's retrospective design and sample size. CONCLUSIONS: There were no significant differences in first-line outcomes between IOVE combinations and ipi-nivo. Most patients received VEGF-based therapy in the second line. In this group, second-line response rate was greater in patients who received ipi-nivo initially. PATIENT SUMMARY: There were no significant differences in key first-line outcomes for patients with metastatic renal-cell carcinoma receiving immuno-oncology/vascular endothelial growth factor inhibitor combinations versus ipilimumab and nivolumab.
Authors: Brian I Rini; Elizabeth R Plimack; Viktor Stus; Rustem Gafanov; Robert Hawkins; Dmitry Nosov; Frédéric Pouliot; Boris Alekseev; Denis Soulières; Bohuslav Melichar; Ihor Vynnychenko; Anna Kryzhanivska; Igor Bondarenko; Sergio J Azevedo; Delphine Borchiellini; Cezary Szczylik; Maurice Markus; Raymond S McDermott; Jens Bedke; Sophie Tartas; Yen-Hwa Chang; Satoshi Tamada; Qiong Shou; Rodolfo F Perini; Mei Chen; Michael B Atkins; Thomas Powles Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2019-02-16 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Brian I Rini; Thomas Powles; Michael B Atkins; Bernard Escudier; David F McDermott; Cristina Suarez; Sergio Bracarda; Walter M Stadler; Frede Donskov; Jae Lyun Lee; Robert Hawkins; Alain Ravaud; Boris Alekseev; Michael Staehler; Motohide Uemura; Ugo De Giorgi; Begoña Mellado; Camillo Porta; Bohuslav Melichar; Howard Gurney; Jens Bedke; Toni K Choueiri; Francis Parnis; Tarik Khaznadar; Alpa Thobhani; Shi Li; Elisabeth Piault-Louis; Gretchen Frantz; Mahrukh Huseni; Christina Schiff; Marjorie C Green; Robert J Motzer Journal: Lancet Date: 2019-05-09 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Aly-Khan A Lalani; Bradley A McGregor; Laurence Albiges; Toni K Choueiri; Robert Motzer; Thomas Powles; Christopher Wood; Axel Bex Journal: Eur Urol Date: 2018-10-13 Impact factor: 20.096
Authors: Robert J Motzer; Nizar M Tannir; David F McDermott; Osvaldo Arén Frontera; Bohuslav Melichar; Toni K Choueiri; Elizabeth R Plimack; Philippe Barthélémy; Camillo Porta; Saby George; Thomas Powles; Frede Donskov; Victoria Neiman; Christian K Kollmannsberger; Pamela Salman; Howard Gurney; Robert Hawkins; Alain Ravaud; Marc-Oliver Grimm; Sergio Bracarda; Carlos H Barrios; Yoshihiko Tomita; Daniel Castellano; Brian I Rini; Allen C Chen; Sabeen Mekan; M Brent McHenry; Megan Wind-Rotolo; Justin Doan; Padmanee Sharma; Hans J Hammers; Bernard Escudier Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2018-03-21 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Daniel Y C Heng; Wanling Xie; Meredith M Regan; Lauren C Harshman; Georg A Bjarnason; Ulka N Vaishampayan; Mary Mackenzie; Lori Wood; Frede Donskov; Min-Han Tan; Sun-Young Rha; Neeraj Agarwal; Christian Kollmannsberger; Brian I Rini; Toni K Choueiri Journal: Lancet Oncol Date: 2013-01-09 Impact factor: 41.316
Authors: E A Eisenhauer; P Therasse; J Bogaerts; L H Schwartz; D Sargent; R Ford; J Dancey; S Arbuck; S Gwyther; M Mooney; L Rubinstein; L Shankar; L Dodd; R Kaplan; D Lacombe; J Verweij Journal: Eur J Cancer Date: 2009-01 Impact factor: 9.162
Authors: Daniel Y C Heng; Wanling Xie; Meredith M Regan; Mark A Warren; Ali Reza Golshayan; Chakshu Sahi; Bernhard J Eigl; J Dean Ruether; Tina Cheng; Scott North; Peter Venner; Jennifer J Knox; Kim N Chi; Christian Kollmannsberger; David F McDermott; William K Oh; Michael B Atkins; Ronald M Bukowski; Brian I Rini; Toni K Choueiri Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2009-10-13 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Robert J Motzer; Konstantin Penkov; John Haanen; Brian Rini; Laurence Albiges; Matthew T Campbell; Balaji Venugopal; Christian Kollmannsberger; Sylvie Negrier; Motohide Uemura; Jae L Lee; Aleksandr Vasiliev; Wilson H Miller; Howard Gurney; Manuela Schmidinger; James Larkin; Michael B Atkins; Jens Bedke; Boris Alekseev; Jing Wang; Mariangela Mariani; Paul B Robbins; Aleksander Chudnovsky; Camilla Fowst; Subramanian Hariharan; Bo Huang; Alessandra di Pietro; Toni K Choueiri Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2019-02-16 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Andreas Varkaris; Wenxin Xu; Roger B Davis; Brian Healy; David F McDermott Journal: Clin Genitourin Cancer Date: 2019-12-05 Impact factor: 2.872
Authors: Yasser Ged; Ruby Gupta; Cihan Duzgol; Andrea Knezevic; Natalie Shapnik; Ritesh Kotecha; Martin H Voss; Darren R Feldman; Oguz Akin; Sujata Patil; Robert J Motzer; Brian I Rini; Chung-Han Lee Journal: BMC Urol Date: 2020-07-02 Impact factor: 2.264