Gender-specific outcomes in immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy for advanced or metastatic urothelial cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

PURPOSE To analyze gender-specific differences in survival parameters in advanced or metastatic urothelial cancer patients undergoing immune checkpoint inhibition. METHODS The primary aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to evaluate gender-specific differences in disease-free (DFS), progression-free (PFS), cancer-specific survival (CSS), event-free survival (EFS), overall survival (OS) and objective response rate (ORR). The sources MEDLINE, Embase and Cochrane Library were systematically searched from January 2010 to June 2022. No restrictions were made concerning language, study region or publication type. A comparison of gender-specific differences in survival parameters was performed using a random-effects meta-analysis. A risk of bias assessment was done using the ROBINS-I tool. RESULTS Five studies were included. In a random-effect meta-analysis of the studies, PCD4989g and IMvigor 211 with both using atezolizumab, females were more likely to have better objective response rate (ORR) than men (OR 2.24; 95% CI 1.20-4.16; p = 0.0110). In addition, females had a comparable median OS to men (MD 1.16; 95% CI - 3.15-5.46; p = 0.598). In summary, comparing all results, a tendency was seen toward better response rates and survival parameters in female patients. The risk of bias assessment yielded an overall low risk of bias. CONCLUSIONS There is a tendency toward better outcomes in women for immunotherapy in advanced or metastatic urothelial cancer, but only for the antibody atezolizumab women have a significantly better ORR. Unfortunately, many studies fail to report gender-specific outcomes. Therefore, further research is essential when aiming for individualized medicine. This research should address immunological confounders

Image-Guided Robotic Radiosurgery for the Treatment of Lung Metastases of Renal Cell Carcinoma—A Retrospective, Single Center Analysis

Pulmonary metastases are the most frequent site of metastases in renal cell carcinoma (RCC). Metastases directed treatment remains an important treatment option despite advances in systemic therapies. However, the safety and efficacy of robotic radiosurgery (RRS) for the treatment of lung metastases of RCC remains unclear. Patients with metastatic RCC and lung metastases treated by RRS were retrospectively analyzed for overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), local recurrence free survival (LRFS) and adverse events. The Kaplan–Meier method was used for survival analysis and the common terminology criteria for adverse events (CTCAE; Version 5.0) classification for assessment of adverse events. A total of 50 patients were included in this study. Median age was 64 (range 45–92) years at the time of RRS. Prior to RRS, 20 patients (40.0%) had received either tyrosine kinase inhibitors or immunotherapy and 27 patients (54.0%) were treatment naïve. In our patient cohort, the median PFS was 13 months (range: 2–93). LRFS was 96.7% after two years with only one patient revealing progressive disease of the treated metastases 13 months after RRS. Median OS was 35 months (range 2–94). Adverse events were documented in six patients (12%) and were limited to grade 2. Fatigue (n = 4) and pneumonitis (n = 2) were observed within 3 months after RRS. In conclusion, RRS is safe and effective for patients with metastatic RCC and pulmonary metastases. Radiation induced pneumonitis is specific in the treatment of pulmonary lesions, but not clinically relevant and survival rates seem favorable in this highly selected patient cohort. Future directions are the implementation of RRS in multimodal treatment approaches for oligometastatic or oligoprogressive disease

Safety and Efficacy of Robotic Radiosurgery for Visceral and Lymph Node Metastases of Renal Cell Carcinoma: A Retrospective, Single Center Analysis

Despite rapid advances of systemic therapy options in renal cell carcinoma (RCC), local tumor or metastases treatment remains important in selected patients. Here, we assess the safety and efficacy of robotic radiosurgery (RRS) as an ablative therapy for visceral and lymph node metastases of RCC. Patients with histologically confirmed RCC and radiologically confirmed progression of visceral or lymph node metastases underwent RRS and were retrospectively analyzed. Overall survival and progression free survival were calculated by the Kaplan–Meier method and log-rank test. Sixty patients underwent RRS and were included in the analysis. Patients presented for RRS treatment with a median age at RRS treatment of 64 years (range 42–83), clear cell histology (88.3%) and favorable international metastatic renal cell carcinoma database (IMDC) risk score (58.3%). Treatment parameters differed for the number of fractions (median visceral metastases: 1, range 1–5; median lymph node metastases: 1, range 0–5; p = 0.003) and prescription dose (median visceral metastases 24 Gy, range 8–26; median lymph node metastases 18 Gy, range 7–26, p < 0.001). The median overall survival was 65.7 months (range: 2.9–108.6), the median progression free survival was 17.4 months (range: 2.7–70.0) and local tumor control was achieved in 96.7% of patients. Adverse events were limited to 8.3% of patients, with one grade 4 toxicity within 6 weeks after RRS therapy. RRS is a safe and effective treatment option in selected patients with metastatic RCC in a multimodal approach. Further research is warranted to confirm our findings prospectively

Safety and Efficacy of Robotic Radiosurgery for Visceral and Lymph Node Metastases of Renal Cell Carcinoma: A Retrospective, Single Center Analysis

Despite rapid advances of systemic therapy options in renal cell carcinoma (RCC), local tumor or metastases treatment remains important in selected patients. Here, we assess the safety and efficacy of robotic radiosurgery (RRS) as an ablative therapy for visceral and lymph node metastases of RCC. Patients with histologically confirmed RCC and radiologically confirmed progression of visceral or lymph node metastases underwent RRS and were retrospectively analyzed. Overall survival and progression free survival were calculated by the Kaplan–Meier method and log-rank test. Sixty patients underwent RRS and were included in the analysis. Patients presented for RRS treatment with a median age at RRS treatment of 64 years (range 42–83), clear cell histology (88.3%) and favorable international metastatic renal cell carcinoma database (IMDC) risk score (58.3%). Treatment parameters differed for the number of fractions (median visceral metastases: 1, range 1–5; median lymph node metastases: 1, range 0–5; p = 0.003) and prescription dose (median visceral metastases 24 Gy, range 8–26; median lymph node metastases 18 Gy, range 7–26, p < 0.001). The median overall survival was 65.7 months (range: 2.9–108.6), the median progression free survival was 17.4 months (range: 2.7–70.0) and local tumor control was achieved in 96.7% of patients. Adverse events were limited to 8.3% of patients, with one grade 4 toxicity within 6 weeks after RRS therapy. RRS is a safe and effective treatment option in selected patients with metastatic RCC in a multimodal approach. Further research is warranted to confirm our findings prospectively