Optimal sequence strategy with nivolumab and targeted therapy in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC).

Authors

null

Juliette Logeart

Hôpital Européen Georges-Pompidou, Paris, France

Juliette Logeart , Audrey Simonaggio , Reza Thierry Elaidi , Sophie Hans , Constance Thibault , Stephane Oudard , Yann-Alexandre Vano

Organizations

Hôpital Européen Georges-Pompidou, Paris, France, HEGP, Paris, France, Department of Medical Oncology, Georges Pompidou European Hospital, Paris, France, Hôpital Curie, Paris, France, Institut Gustave Roussy, Villejuif, France, Georges Pompidou Hospital, Paris, France, Department of Medical Oncology, Georges Pompidou Hospital, University Paris Descartes, Paris, France

Research Funding

No funding received
None.

Background: Nivolumab is an approved standard tretatment for pts with mRCC after one VEGFR-TKI failure. Some reports suggest that Nibolumab provides similar response rate across treatment line. Nevetheless, no comparative data has been reported on the sequence of 2nd line Nivolumab followed by TKI vs TKI followed by Nivolumab in 3rd or later line. Objective: To determine the optimal sequence of Nivolumab monotherapy and anti-VEGFR-TKI in mRCC beginning from the 2nd line. Methods: We included in a French expert center all patients with mRCC who received real-life experienced of anti-PD1 nivolumab monotherapy in 2nd line setting or later were included in a French expert center. Clinical characteristics were prospectively recorded including IDMC prognostic factors. Patients who did not receive TKI on the 1st line were excluded. Survival outcomes and subgroups analysis were performed using log rank test and univariate cox regression analysis. Results: 91 patients with mRCC received Nivolumab between January 2006 and May 2018, 58 pts received nivolumab in 2nde line (63%) and 33 in 3rd line and more. Median follow-up was 18.9 [0.1;143] months starting from the beginning of the 2nd line. All received first line anti-VEGFR TKI, 83%/11% sunitinib/pazopanib. At the beginning of 2nd line, IMDC prognostic groups were Fav 19%/Int 56%/ Poor 24%, with similar repartition (p=0,8) between pts treated with Nivolumab vs others. PFS at 6 months for 2nd line was in favor of patients treated by targeted treatments with respectively 63% (IC95% [46%;80%]) and 34% (IC95% [23%;49%]), p=0,06. OS at 24 months for 2nd line was significatively higher for patients treated by targeted treatments with 72% (IC95% [56;87%]) and 46% (IC95% [31%;61%]), p=0,007. Conclusions: We report for the first time the optimal timing to sequence Nivolumab – targeted therapy in patients with mRCC. We found better PFS and OS when Nivolumab is given after the 2nde line of treatment. Subgroups analysis including IMDC prognostic groups and duration of fist line TKI will be presented at the meeting.

Disclaimer

This material on this page is ©2024 American Society of Clinical Oncology, all rights reserved. Licensing available upon request. For more information, please contact licensing@asco.org

Abstract Details

Meeting

2020 Genitourinary Cancers Symposium

Session Type

Poster Session

Session Title

Poster Session C: Renal Cell Cancer

Track

Renal Cell Cancer

Sub Track

Therapeutics

Citation

J Clin Oncol 38, 2020 (suppl 6; abstr 700)

Abstract #

700

Poster Bd #

G20

Abstract Disclosures

Similar Abstracts

First Author: Aihetaimujiang Anwaier

Abstract

2024 ASCO Genitourinary Cancers Symposium

Real-world metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) treatment trends in Mexico: A public vs private sector analysis.

First Author: Iván Romarico González Espinoza

First Author: Daniel M. Geynisman