Brian I Rini1, Robert J Motzer2, Thomas Powles3, David F McDermott4, Bernard Escudier5, Frede Donskov6, Robert Hawkins7, Sergio Bracarda8, Jens Bedke9, Ugo De Giorgi10, Camillo Porta11, Alain Ravaud12, Francis Parnis13, Enrique Grande14, Wei Zhang15, Mahrukh Huseni15, Susheela Carroll15, Roxana Sufan15, Christina Schiff15, Michael B Atkins16. 1. Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN, USA. Electronic address: brian.rini@vumc.org. 2. Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA. 3. Barts Cancer Institute and the Royal Free Hospital, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK. 4. Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, MA, USA. 5. Gustave Roussy, Villejuif, France. 6. Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark. 7. The Christie NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK. 8. Azienda Ospedaliera S. Maria, Terni, Italy. 9. University of Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany. 10. Istituto Scientifico Romagnolo per lo Studio e la Cura dei Tumori, IRCCS, Meldola, Italy. 11. IRCCS San Matteo University Hospital Foundation, Pavia, Italy. 12. CHU Hopitaux de Bordeaux - Hôpital Saint-André, Bordeaux, France. 13. Ashford Cancer Centre Research, Kurralta Park, SA, Australia. 14. MD Anderson Cancer Center Madrid, Madrid, Spain. 15. Genentech Inc., South San Francisco, CA, USA. 16. Georgetown Lombardi Comprehensive Cancer Center, Washington, DC, USA.
Abstract
Patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma with sarcomatoid features (sRCC) have a poor prognosis and have shown limited responsiveness to inhibition of the VEGF pathway. We conducted a prespecified analysis of the randomised, phase 3 IMmotion151 trial in previously untreated patients with advanced or metastatic RCC to assess the effectiveness of atezolizumab + bevacizumab versus sunitinib in a subgroup of patients with sarcomatoid features. Patients whose tumour had any component of sarcomatoid features were included and received atezolizumab + bevacizumab (n = 68) or sunitinib (n = 74). Baseline characteristics were similar between the groups. Median progression-free survival was significantly longer in the group receiving atezolizumab + bevacizumab overall (8.3 vs 5.3 mo; hazard ratio [HR] 0.52 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.34-0.79) and in the subset of patients with PD-L1-positive tumours (8.6 vs 5.6 mo; HR 0.45, 95% CI 0.26-0.77). More patients receiving atezolizumab + bevacizumab achieved an objective response (49% vs 14%), including complete responses (10% vs 3%), and reported greater symptom improvements versus sunitinib. Safety was consistent with the known profiles of each drug and with that reported in the overall safety-evaluable population of IMmotion151. This analysis supports enhanced activity of atezolizumab + bevacizumab in patients with sRCC. PATIENT SUMMARY: In this report, we looked at patients with a specific type of kidney cancer (tumours with sarcomatoid features) that has been hard to treat. A treatment with two drugs (atezolizumab and bevacizumab) appeared to help patients live longer without the disease getting worse than another drug (sunitinib) that is often used. Patients who took the two drugs also said they were better able to carry out their everyday activities than patients who took sunitinib. The combination of these two drugs may work better in patients with this type of advanced kidney cancer.
Patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma with sarcomatoid features (sRCC) have a poor prognosis and have shown limited responsiveness to inhibition of the VEGF pathway. We conducted a prespecified analysis of the randomised, phase 3 IMmotion151 trial in previously untreated patients with advanced or metastatic RCC to assess the effectiveness of atezolizumab + bevacizumab versus sunitinib in a subgroup of patients with sarcomatoid features. Patients whose tumour had any component of sarcomatoid features were included and received atezolizumab + bevacizumab (n = 68) or sunitinib (n = 74). Baseline characteristics were similar between the groups. Median progression-free survival was significantly longer in the group receiving atezolizumab + bevacizumab overall (8.3 vs 5.3 mo; hazard ratio [HR] 0.52 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.34-0.79) and in the subset of patients with PD-L1-positive tumours (8.6 vs 5.6 mo; HR 0.45, 95% CI 0.26-0.77). More patients receiving atezolizumab + bevacizumab achieved an objective response (49% vs 14%), including complete responses (10% vs 3%), and reported greater symptom improvements versus sunitinib. Safety was consistent with the known profiles of each drug and with that reported in the overall safety-evaluable population of IMmotion151. This analysis supports enhanced activity of atezolizumab + bevacizumab in patients with sRCC. PATIENT SUMMARY: In this report, we looked at patients with a specific type of kidney cancer (tumours with sarcomatoid features) that has been hard to treat. A treatment with two drugs (atezolizumab and bevacizumab) appeared to help patients live longer without the disease getting worse than another drug (sunitinib) that is often used. Patients who took the two drugs also said they were better able to carry out their everyday activities than patients who took sunitinib. The combination of these two drugs may work better in patients with this type of advanced kidney cancer.
Authors: Brian Shuch; Ali Amin; Andrew J Armstrong; John N Eble; Vincenzo Ficarra; Antonio Lopez-Beltran; Guido Martignoni; Brian I Rini; Alexander Kutikov Journal: Eur Urol Date: 2014-05-21 Impact factor: 20.096
Authors: Brian Shuch; Jonathan Said; Jeff C La Rochelle; Ying Zhou; Gang Li; Tobias Klatte; Fairooz F Kabbinaavar; Allan J Pantuck; Arie S Belldegrun Journal: J Urol Date: 2009-09-16 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: S Störkel; J N Eble; K Adlakha; M Amin; M L Blute; D G Bostwick; M Darson; B Delahunt; K Iczkowski Journal: Cancer Date: 1997-09-01 Impact factor: 6.860
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: Richard W Joseph; Sherri Z Millis; Estrella M Carballido; David Bryant; Zoran Gatalica; Sandeep Reddy; Alan H Bryce; Nicholas J Vogelzang; Melissa L Stanton; Erik P Castle; Thai H Ho Journal: Cancer Immunol Res Date: 2015-08-25 Impact factor: 11.151
Authors: B Escudier; J P Droz; F Rolland; M J Terrier-Lacombe; G Gravis; P Beuzeboc; B Chauvet; C Chevreau; J C Eymard; T Lesimple; Y Merrouche; S Oudard; F Priou; C Guillemare; S Gourgou; S Culine Journal: J Urol Date: 2002-09 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: Ali Reza Golshayan; Saby George; Daniel Y Heng; Paul Elson; Laura S Wood; Tarek M Mekhail; Jorge A Garcia; Hakan Aydin; Ming Zhou; Ronald M Bukowski; Brian I Rini Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2008-12-08 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Jose A Karam; Maneka Puligandla; Keith T Flaherty; Robert G Uzzo; Surena F Matin; Michael R Pins; Christopher G Wood; Christopher Kane; Michael A S Jewett; Se Eun Kim; Janice P Dutcher; Robert S DiPaola; Naomi B Haas Journal: BJU Int Date: 2021-09-23 Impact factor: 5.969
Authors: Arnav Srivastava; Sai K Doppalapudi; Hiren V Patel; Ramaprasad Srinivasan; Eric A Singer Journal: Curr Opin Oncol Date: 2022-05-01 Impact factor: 3.915
Authors: Michael B Atkins; Opeyemi A Jegede; Naomi B Haas; David F McDermott; Mehmet A Bilen; Mark Stein; Jeffrey A Sosman; Robert Alter; Elizabeth R Plimack; Moshe Ornstein; Michael Hurwitz; David J Peace; Sabina Signoretti; Thomas Denize; Alessia Cimadamore; Catherine J Wu; David Braun; David Einstein; Paul J Catalano; Hans Hammers Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2022-04-20 Impact factor: 50.717
Authors: Michela Roberto; Andrea Botticelli; Martina Panebianco; Anna Maria Aschelter; Alain Gelibter; Chiara Ciccarese; Mauro Minelli; Marianna Nuti; Daniele Santini; Andrea Laghi; Silverio Tomao; Paolo Marchetti Journal: Front Oncol Date: 2021-04-22 Impact factor: 6.244
Authors: Nima Almassi; Emily A Vertosick; Daniel D Sjoberg; Nathan C Wong; Chun Huang; Eugene J Pietzak; Eugene K Cha; Timothy F Donahue; Guido Dalbagni; Bernard H Bochner; Gopa Iyer; Jonathan E Rosenberg; Dean F Bajorin; Hikmat Al-Ahmadie; Alvin C Goh Journal: BJU Int Date: 2021-05-24 Impact factor: 5.969