Dylan J Martini1,2, Yuan Liu3, Julie M Shabto1,2, Bradley C Carthon1,2, Emilie Elise Hitron1,2, Greta Anne Russler1,2, Sarah Caulfield2,4, Haydn T Kissick5,2, Wayne B Harris1,2, Omer Kucuk1,2, Viraj A Master5, Mehmet Asim Bilen6,2. 1. Department of Hematology and Medical Oncology, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, Georgia, USA. 2. Winship Cancer Institute of Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia, USA. 3. Departments of Biostatistics and Bioinformatics, Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia, USA. 4. Department of Pharmaceutical Services, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, Georgia, USA. 5. Department of Urology, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, Georgia, USA. 6. Department of Hematology and Medical Oncology, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, Georgia, USA mehmet.a.bilen@emory.edu.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium (IMDC) criteria are the gold standard for risk-stratifying patients with metastatic renal cell cancer (mRCC). We developed a novel risk scoring system for patients with mRCC treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs). METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis of 100 ICI-treated patients with mRCC at Winship Cancer Institute from 2015 to 2018. Several baseline variables were collected, including markers of inflammation, body mass index (BMI), and sites of metastatic disease, and all were considered for inclusion in our risk scoring system. Upon variable selection in multivariable model, monocyte-to-lymphocyte ratio (MLR), BMI, and number and sites of metastases at baseline were used for risk score calculation. Patients were categorized using four-level risk groups as good (risk score = 0), intermediate (risk score = 1), poor (risk score = 2), or very poor (risk score = 3-4). Cox's proportional hazard model and the Kaplan-Meier method were implemented for survival outcomes. RESULTS: Most patients were male (66%) with clear cell renal cell carcinoma (72%). The majority (71%) received anti-programmed cell death protein-1 monotherapy. Our risk scoring criteria had higher Uno's concordance statistics than IMDC in predicting overall survival (OS; 0.71 vs. 0.57) and progression-free survival (0.61 vs. 0.58). Setting good risk (MLR <0.93, BMI ≥24, and D_Met = 0) as the reference, the OS hazard ratios were 29.5 (95% confidence interval [CI], 3.64-238.9), 6.58 (95% CI, 0.84-51.68), and 3.75 (95% CI, 0.49-28.57) for very poor, poor, and intermediate risk groups, respectively. CONCLUSION: Risk scoring using MLR, BMI, and number and sites of metastases may be an effective way to predict survival in patients with mRCC receiving ICI. These results should be validated in a larger, prospective study. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: A risk scoring system was created for patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors. The results of this study have significant implications for practicing oncologists in the community and academic setting. Importantly, these results identify readily available risk factors that can be used clinically to risk-stratify patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma who are treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors.
BACKGROUND: The International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium (IMDC) criteria are the gold standard for risk-stratifying patients with metastatic renal cell cancer (mRCC). We developed a novel risk scoring system for patients with mRCC treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs). METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis of 100 ICI-treated patients with mRCC at Winship Cancer Institute from 2015 to 2018. Several baseline variables were collected, including markers of inflammation, body mass index (BMI), and sites of metastatic disease, and all were considered for inclusion in our risk scoring system. Upon variable selection in multivariable model, monocyte-to-lymphocyte ratio (MLR), BMI, and number and sites of metastases at baseline were used for risk score calculation. Patients were categorized using four-level risk groups as good (risk score = 0), intermediate (risk score = 1), poor (risk score = 2), or very poor (risk score = 3-4). Cox's proportional hazard model and the Kaplan-Meier method were implemented for survival outcomes. RESULTS: Most patients were male (66%) with clear cell renal cell carcinoma (72%). The majority (71%) received anti-programmed cell death protein-1 monotherapy. Our risk scoring criteria had higher Uno's concordance statistics than IMDC in predicting overall survival (OS; 0.71 vs. 0.57) and progression-free survival (0.61 vs. 0.58). Setting good risk (MLR <0.93, BMI ≥24, and D_Met = 0) as the reference, the OS hazard ratios were 29.5 (95% confidence interval [CI], 3.64-238.9), 6.58 (95% CI, 0.84-51.68), and 3.75 (95% CI, 0.49-28.57) for very poor, poor, and intermediate risk groups, respectively. CONCLUSION: Risk scoring using MLR, BMI, and number and sites of metastases may be an effective way to predict survival in patients with mRCC receiving ICI. These results should be validated in a larger, prospective study. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: A risk scoring system was created for patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors. The results of this study have significant implications for practicing oncologists in the community and academic setting. Importantly, these results identify readily available risk factors that can be used clinically to risk-stratify patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma who are treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors.
Authors: Mehmet Asim Bilen; Giselle Marie Almeida Dutcher; Yuan Liu; Deepak Ravindranathan; Haydn T Kissick; Bradley C Carthon; Omer Kucuk; Wayne B Harris; Viraj A Master Journal: Clin Genitourin Cancer Date: 2018-01-04 Impact factor: 2.872
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; 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: Paul C Tumeh; Matthew D Hellmann; Omid Hamid; Katy K Tsai; Kimberly L Loo; Matthew A Gubens; Michael Rosenblum; Christina L Harview; Janis M Taube; Nathan Handley; Neharika Khurana; Adi Nosrati; Matthew F Krummel; Andrew Tucker; Eduardo V Sosa; Phillip J Sanchez; Nooriel Banayan; Juan C Osorio; Dan L Nguyen-Kim; Jeremy Chang; I Peter Shintaku; Peter D Boasberg; Emma J Taylor; Pamela N Munster; Alain P Algazi; Bartosz Chmielowski; Reinhard Dummer; Tristan R Grogan; David Elashoff; Jimmy Hwang; Simone M Goldinger; Edward B Garon; Robert H Pierce; Adil Daud Journal: Cancer Immunol Res Date: 2017-04-14 Impact factor: 12.020
Authors: Aly-Khan A Lalani; Wanling Xie; Dylan J Martini; John A Steinharter; Craig K Norton; Katherine M Krajewski; Audrey Duquette; Dominick Bossé; Joaquim Bellmunt; Eliezer M Van Allen; Bradley A McGregor; Chad J Creighton; Lauren C Harshman; Toni K Choueiri Journal: J Immunother Cancer Date: 2018-01-22 Impact factor: 13.751