Effectiveness of first-line immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) in advanced non-clear cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC).

Authors

null

Jeffrey Graham

University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, MB, Canada

Jeffrey Graham , Connor Wells , Shaan Dudani , Chun Loo Gan , Frede Donskov , Jae-Lyun Lee , Christian K. Kollmannsberger , Sumanta K. Pal , Benoit Beuselinck , Aaron Richard Hansen , Scott A. North , Georg A. Bjarnason , Neeraj Agarwal , Ravindran Kanesvaran , Lori Wood , Sebastien J. Hotte , Rana R. McKay , Toni K. Choueiri , Daniel Yick Chin Heng

Organizations

University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, MB, Canada, Queen's University, Kingston, ON, Canada, Ottawa Hospital Cancer Center, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON, Canada, Royal Melbourne Hospital, Melbourne, Australia, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark, Asan Medical Center and University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Seoul, South Korea, BC Cancer-Vancouver Centre, Vancouver, BC, Canada, Department of Medical Oncology & Therapeutics, City of Hope Comprehensive Cancer Center, Duarte, CA, Leuven Cancer Institute, Universitaire Ziekenhuizen, Leuven, Belgium, Division of Medical Oncology and Hematology, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, University Health Network, Toronto, ON, Canada, University of Alberta Cross Cancer Institute, Edmonton, AB, Canada, Sunnybrook Research Institute, Toronto, ON, Canada, Huntsman Cancer Institute, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, National Cancer Centre Singapore, Singapore, Singapore, Dalhousie University, Halifax, NS, Canada, Juravinski Cancer Centre, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada, University of California San Diego, Moores Cancer Center, La Jolla, CA, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, Tom Baker Cancer Center, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada

Research Funding

No funding received
None.

Background: Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) have demonstrated impressive activity in metastatic clear-cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC) and have become standard treatment options in this setting. Data supporting the effectiveness of ICI based therapy in non-clear cell RCC (nccRCC) is more limited. Methods: We performed a retrospective analysis using the International Metastatic RCC Database Consortium (IMDC). Patients with nccRCC were classified into 3 groups based on first-line therapy: ICI based therapy (in monotherapy or in combination), vascular endothelial growth factor targeted therapy (VEGF-TT) monotherapy, or mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) inhibitor monotherapy. Primary outcome was overall survival (OS). Secondary outcomes were time to treatment failure (TTF) and objective response rate (ORR). We used Kaplan-Meier method to compare OS and TTF between treatment groups and Cox proportional hazards models to adjust for prognostic covariates. Results: We identified 1181 patients with nccRCC. In first-line, 78.2% received VEGF-TT, 15.8% mTOR inhibitors, and 5.5% ICI based therapy, of which 41.5% in monotherapy, 30.8% doublet-ICIs and 27.7% an ICI combined with VEGF-TT. Median OS in the ICI group was 28.6 months, compared to 19.2 and 12.6 in the VEGF-TT and mTOR groups, respectively. Median TTF was 6.9 months vs. 5.1 and 3.9 and ORR was 25% vs. 17.8% and 5.8% in the ICI, VEGF-TT and mTOR groups, respectively. After adjusting for IMDC risk group, histological subtype, and age, the hazard ratio (HR) for OS was 0.58 (95% CI 0.35-0.94, p=0.03) for ICI vs. VEGF-TT and 0.48 (95% CI 0.29-0.80, p=0.005) for ICI vs. mTOR. Conclusions: In advanced nccRCC, first-line ICI based treatment appears to be associated with improved OS compared to VEGF and mTOR targeted therapy. These results need to be confirmed in prospective randomized trials.

VEGF targeted therapy (N=924)mTOR targeted therapy (N=186)ICI based therapy
(N=65)
Histologic subtypePapillary452 (50.0%)112 (60.2%)26 (40.0%)
Chromophobe115 (12.4%)27 (14.5%)12 (18.5%)
Unclassified168 (18.2%)25 (13.4%)16 (24.6%)
Collecting Duct19 (2.1%)5 (2.7%)6 (9.2%)
Translocation39 (4.2%)5 (2.7%)4 (6.2%)
Missing121 (13.1%)12 (6.5%)1 (1.5%)
IMDC groupFavourable181 (19.6%)20 (10.8%)14 (21.5%)
Intermediate503 (54.4%)109 (58.6%)34 (52.3%)
Poor240 (26.0%)57 (30.6%)17 (26.2%)
First-line therapySunitinib (n=632, 68.4%)Temsirolimus (n=141, 75.8%)Nivo + Ipi (n=20, 30.8%)
Pazopanib (n=171, 18.5%) Everolimus (n=45, 24.2%) Atezo + Bev (n=14, 21.5%)
Sorafenib (n=72, 7.8%) Nivo (n=13, 20.0%)
Savolitinib (n=16, 1.7%) Pembro (n=13, 20.0%)
Cabozantinib (n=12, 1.3%) Other (n=5, 7.7%)
Other (n=21, 2.3%)

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

2021 Genitourinary Cancers Symposium

Session Type

Poster Session

Session Title

Poster Session: Renal Cell Cancer

Track

Renal Cell Cancer

Sub Track

Therapeutics

Citation

J Clin Oncol 39, 2021 (suppl 6; abstr 316)

DOI

10.1200/JCO.2021.39.6_suppl.316

Abstract #

316

Poster Bd #

Online Only

Abstract Disclosures