Real-world Data of Nivolumab for Patients With Advanced Renal Cell Carcinoma in the Netherlands:An Analysis of Toxicity, Efficacy, and Predictive Markers

Background: Nivolumab, a programmed death 1 inhibitor, has been approved as second-line treatment for advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC) in Europe since 2016. We investigated the toxicity and efficacy of nivolumab as well as potential predictive biomarkers in the Dutch population. Patients and Methods: This was a retrospective, multicenter study of the Dutch national registry of nivolumab for the treatment of advanced RCC. The main outcome parameters included toxicity, objective response rate (ORR), overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), time to progression (TTP), and time to treatment failure (TTF). In addition, potential predictive and prognostic biomarkers for outcomes were evaluated. Results: Data on 264 patients were available, of whom 42% were International Metastatic RCC Database Consortium (IMDC) poor risk at start of nivolumab, 16% had ≥ 3 lines of previous therapy, 7% had non–clear-cell RCC, 11% had brain metastases, and 20% were previously treated with everolimus. Grade 3/4 immune-related adverse events occurred in 15% of patients. The median OS was 18.7 months (95% confidence interval, 13.7-23.7 months). Progression occurred in 170 (64.4%) of 264 patients, with a 6-and 12-months TTP of 49.8% and 31.1%, respectively. The ORR was 18.6% (49 of 264; 95% confidence interval, 14%-23%). Elevated baseline lymphocytes were associated with improved PFS (P =.038) and elevated baseline lactate dehydrogenase with poor OS, PFS, and TTF (P =.000). On-treatment increase in eosinophils by week 8 predicted improved OS (P =.003), PFS (P =.000), and TTF (P =.014), whereas a decrease of neutrophils was associated with significantly better TTF (P =.023). Conclusions: The toxicity and efficacy of nivolumab for metastatic RCC after previous lines of therapy are comparable with the results in the pivotal phase III trial and other real-world data. On-treatment increase in eosinophil count is a potential biomarker for efficacy and warrants further investigation

Cytoreductive nephrectomy and exposure to sunitinib - a post hoc analysis of the Immediate Surgery or Surgery After Sunitinib Malate in Treating Patients With Metastatic Kidney Cancer (SURTIME) trial

Objective To analyse if exposure to sunitinib in the Immediate Surgery or Surgery After Sunitinib Malate in Treating Patients With Metastatic Kidney Cancer (SURTIME) trial, which investigated opposite sequences of cytoreductive nephrectomy (CN) and systemic therapy, is associated with the overall survival (OS) benefit observed in the deferred CN arm. Patients and Methods A post hoc analysis of SURTIME trial data. Variables analysed included number of patients receiving sunitinib, time from randomisation to start sunitinib, overall response rate by Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors (RECIST) version 1.1, and duration of drug exposure and dose in the intention-to-treat population of the immediate and deferred arm. Descriptive methods and 95% confidence-intervals (CI) were used. Results In the deferred arm, 97.7% (95% CI 89.3-99.6%; n = 48) received sunitinib vs 80% (95% CI 66.9-88.7%, n = 40) in the immediate arm. Following immediate CN, 19.6% progressed 4 weeks after CN and the median time to start sunitinib was 39.5 vs 4.5 days in the deferred arm. At week 16, 46.0% had progressed at metastatic sites in the immediate CN arm vs 32.7% in the deferred arm. Sunitinib dose reductions, escalations and interruptions were not statistically significantly different between arms. Among patients who received sunitinib in the immediate or deferred arm the median total sunitinib treatment duration was 172.5 vs 248 days. Reduction of target lesions was more profound in the deferred arm. Conclusions In comparison to the deferred CN approach, immediate CN impairs administration, onset, and duration of sunitinib. Starting with systemic therapy leads to early and more profound disease control and identification of progression prior to planned CN, which may have contributed to the observed OS benefit

Cytoreductive nephrectomy and exposure to sunitinib – a post hoc analysis of the Immediate Surgery or Surgery After Sunitinib Malate in Treating Patients With Metastatic Kidney Cancer (SURTIME) trial

Objective: To analyse if exposure to sunitinib in the Immediate Surgery or Surgery After Sunitinib Malate in Treating Patients With Metastatic Kidney Cancer (SURTIME) trial, which investigated opposite sequences of cytoreductive nephrectomy (CN) and systemic therapy, is associated with the overall survival (OS) benefit observed in the deferred CN arm. Patients and Methods: A post hoc analysis of SURTIME trial data. Variables analysed included number of patients receiving sunitinib, time from randomisation to start sunitinib, overall response rate by Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors (RECIST) version 1.1, and duration of drug exposure and dose in the intention-to-treat population of the immediate and deferred arm. Descriptive methods and 95% confidence-intervals (CI) were used. Results: In the deferred arm, 97.7% (95% CI 89.3–99.6%; n = 48) received sunitinib vs 80% (95% CI 66.9–88.7%, n = 40) in the immediate arm. Following immediate CN, 19.6% progressed 4 weeks after CN and the median time to start sunitinib was 39.5 vs 4.5 days in the deferred arm. At week 16, 46.0% had progressed at metastatic sites in the immediate CN arm vs 32.7% in the deferred arm. Sunitinib dose reductions, escalations and interruptions were not statistically significantly different between arms. Among patients who received sunitinib in the immediate or deferred arm the median total sunitinib treatment duration was 172.5 vs 248 days. Reduction of target lesions was more profound in the deferred arm. Conclusions: In comparison to the deferred CN approach, immediate CN impairs administration, onset, and duration of sunitinib. Starting with systemic therapy leads to early and more profound disease control and identification of progression prior to planned CN, which may have contributed to the observed OS benefit

Cytoreductive nephrectomy and exposure to sunitinib - a post-hoc analysis of the SURTIME trial.

To analyze if exposure to sunitinib in the SURTIME trial which investigated opposite sequences of cytoreductive nephrectomy (CN) and systemic therapy is associated with the overall survival (OS) benefit observed in the deferred CN arm. A post-hoc analysis of SURTIME trial data. Variables analysed included number of patients receiving sunitinib, time from randomisation to start sunitinib, overall response rate (ORR) by RECIST 1.1, and duration of drug exposure and dose in the intention-to-treat population of the immediate and deferred arm. Descriptive methods and 95% confidence-intervals (CI) were used. In the deferred arm, 97.7%(CI:89.3-99.6; n=48) received sunitinib versus 80% (CI:66.9-88.7,n=40) in the immediate arm. Following immediate CN, 19.6% progressed 4 weeks after CN and median time to start sunitinib was 39.5 days versus 4.5 days in the deferred arm. At week 16, 46.0% had progressed at metastatic sites in the immediate CN arm versus 32.7% in the deferred arm. Sunitinib dose reductions, escalations and interruptions were not statistically significantly different between arms. Among patients who received sunitinib in the immediate or deferred arm the median total sunitinib treatment duration was 172.5 versus 248 days. Reduction of target lesions was more profound in the deferred arm. In comparison to the deferred CN approach, immediate CN impairs administration, onset, and duration of sunitinib. Starting with systemic therapy leads to early and more profound disease control and identification of progression prior to planned CN which may have contributed to the observed OS benefit

Real-world Data of Nivolumab for Patients With Advanced Renal Cell Carcinoma in the Netherlands: An Analysis of Toxicity, Efficacy, and Predictive Markers

BACKGROUND: Nivolumab, a programmed death 1 inhibitor, has been approved as second-line treatment for advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC) in Europe since 2016. We investigated the toxicity and efficacy of nivolumab as well as potential predictive biomarkers in the Dutch population. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This was a retrospective, multicenter study of the Dutch national registry of nivolumab for the treatment of advanced RCC. The main outcome parameters included toxicity, objective response rate (ORR), overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), time to progression (TTP), and time to treatment failure (TTF). In addition, potential predictive and prognostic biomarkers for outcomes were evaluated. RESULTS: Data on 264 patients were available, of whom 42% were International Metastatic RCC Database Consortium (IMDC) poor risk at start of nivolumab, 16% had ≥ 3 lines of previous therapy, 7% had non-clear-cell RCC, 11% had brain metastases, and 20% were previously treated with everolimus. Grade 3/4 immune-related adverse events occurred in 15% of patients. The median OS was 18.7 months (95% confidence interval, 13.7-23.7 months). Progression occurred in 170 (64.4%) of 264 patients, with a 6-and 12-months TTP of 49.8% and 31.1%, respectively. The ORR was 18.6% (49 of 264; 95% confidence interval, 14%-23%). Elevated baseline lymphocytes were associated with improved PFS (P = .038) and elevated baseline lactate dehydrogenase with poor OS, PFS, and TTF (P = .000). On-treatment increase in eosinophils by week 8 predicted improved OS (P = .003), PFS (P = .000), and TTF (P = .014), whereas a decrease of neutrophils was associated with significantly better TTF (P = .023). CONCLUSIONS: The toxicity and efficacy of nivolumab for metastatic RCC after previous lines of therapy are comparable with the results in the pivotal phase III trial and other real-world data. On-treatment increase in eosinophil count is a potential biomarker for efficacy and warrants further investigation

Global economic burden of unmet surgical need for appendicitis

Background There is a substantial gap in provision of adequate surgical care in many low- and middle-income countries. This study aimed to identify the economic burden of unmet surgical need for the common condition of appendicitis. Methods Data on the incidence of appendicitis from 170 countries and two different approaches were used to estimate numbers of patients who do not receive surgery: as a fixed proportion of the total unmet surgical need per country (approach 1); and based on country income status (approach 2). Indirect costs with current levels of access and local quality, and those if quality were at the standards of high-income countries, were estimated. A human capital approach was applied, focusing on the economic burden resulting from premature death and absenteeism. Results Excess mortality was 4185 per 100 000 cases of appendicitis using approach 1 and 3448 per 100 000 using approach 2. The economic burden of continuing current levels of access and local quality was US $92 492 million using approach 1 and$73 141 million using approach 2. The economic burden of not providing surgical care to the standards of high-income countries was $95 004 million using approach 1 and$75 666 million using approach 2. The largest share of these costs resulted from premature death (97.7 per cent) and lack of access (97.0 per cent) in contrast to lack of quality. Conclusion For a comparatively non-complex emergency condition such as appendicitis, increasing access to care should be prioritized. Although improving quality of care should not be neglected, increasing provision of care at current standards could reduce societal costs substantially

Global economic burden of unmet surgical need for appendicitis

Background There is a substantial gap in provision of adequate surgical care in many low- and middle-income countries. This study aimed to identify the economic burden of unmet surgical need for the common condition of appendicitis. Methods Data on the incidence of appendicitis from 170 countries and two different approaches were used to estimate numbers of patients who do not receive surgery: as a fixed proportion of the total unmet surgical need per country (approach 1); and based on country income status (approach 2). Indirect costs with current levels of access and local quality, and those if quality were at the standards of high-income countries, were estimated. A human capital approach was applied, focusing on the economic burden resulting from premature death and absenteeism. Results Excess mortality was 4185 per 100 000 cases of appendicitis using approach 1 and 3448 per 100 000 using approach 2. The economic burden of continuing current levels of access and local quality was US $92 492 million using approach 1 and$73 141 million using approach 2. The economic burden of not providing surgical care to the standards of high-income countries was $95 004 million using approach 1 and$75 666 million using approach 2. The largest share of these costs resulted from premature death (97.7 per cent) and lack of access (97.0 per cent) in contrast to lack of quality. Conclusion For a comparatively non-complex emergency condition such as appendicitis, increasing access to care should be prioritized. Although improving quality of care should not be neglected, increasing provision of care at current standards could reduce societal costs substantially