Prognostic and predictive molecular biomarkers in metastatic renal cell carcinoma patients treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors: a systematic review

: Introduction: In recent years, the treatment landscape of metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) has been improved using immune-checkpoint inhibitors (ICI). Nevertheless, the number of patients experiencing clinical benefit from immunotherapy is still limited, while others obtain more benefit from tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKI). The identification of prognostic and predictive factors would be crucial to better select patients most likely to benefit from immunotherapy among the other potentially available therapeutic options.Areas covered: This systematic review summarizes the current knowledge (2010-2019) on molecular prognostic and predictive biomarkers, assessed in peripheral blood and/or from tumor tissue, in mRCC patients treated with ICI.Expert opinion: Among all the biomarkers analyzed, PD-L1 expression on tumor tissue is the most studied. It has an unfavorable prognostic role for patients treated with TKI, which seems to be overcome by ICI-based combinations. Nevertheless, no clear predictive role of immunotherapy efficacy has been observed for PD-L1 in mRCC. Emerging evidence regarding pro-angiogenic or pro-immunogenic genomic and transcriptomic signatures suggests a potential predictive role in patients treated with ICI-based combinations. The rationale for TKI-ICI combinations is based on tumor microenvironment and genomic background, which represent the target of these two main therapeutic options for mRCC

Multimodal treatment for local recurrent malignant gliomas: resurgery and/or reirradiation followed by chemotherapy

The therapeutic management of recurrent malignant gliomas (MGs) is not determined. Therefore, the efficacy of a multimodal approach and a combination systemic therapy was investigated. A retrospective analysis of 26 MGs patients at first relapse treated with multimodal therapy (chemotherapy plus surgery and/or reirradiation) or chemotherapy alone was performed. Second-line chemotherapy consisted of fotemustine (FTM) in combination with bevacizumab (BEV) (cFTM/BEV) or followed by third-line BEV (sFTM/BEV). Subgroup analyses were performed. Multimodal therapy provided a higher overall response rate (ORR) (73 vs. 47%), disease control rate (DCR) (82 vs. 67%), median progression-free survival (mPFS) (11 vs. 7 months; P=0.08) and median overall survival (mOS) (13 vs. 8 months; P=0.04) compared with chemotherapy. Concomitant FTM/BEV resulted in higher ORR (84 vs. 36%), DCR (92 vs. 57%), mPFS (10 vs. 5 months; P=0.22) and mOS (11 vs. 5.2 months; P=0.15) compared with sFTM/BEV. Methylated patients did not experience additional survival benefits with multimodality treatment but had higher mPFS (10 vs 7.1 months; P=0.33) and mOS (11 vs. 8 months; P=0.33) with cFTM/BEV. Unmethylated patients experienced the greatest survival benefit with the multimodal approach (mPFS: 10 vs. 5 months; mOS 11 vs 6 months; both P=0.02) and cFTM/BEV (mPFS: 5 vs. 2 months; mOS 6 vs. 3.2 months; both P=0.01). In conclusion, in recurrent MGs, multimodal therapy and cFTM/BEV provide survival and response benefits. Methylated patients benefit from a cFTM/BEV but not from a multimodal approach. Notably, unmethylated patients had the highest survival benefit with the two strategies

Retrospective analysis to evaluate the efficacy and the safety of Bevacizumab in the treatment of recurrent malignant gliomas

Abstract Background There is no consensus therapy recommended for recurrent malignant gliomas (MGs). In 2009, Bevacizumab (BEV) was approved by the FDA as single-agent for recurrent glioblastoma (GBM). The aim of this retrospective study was to evaluate the efficacy and the safety of BEV alone or in combination with Fotemustine (FTM) in recurrent MGs. This represents an interim analysis of a larger study on BEV in MGs patients. Methods We analyzed 17 recurrent MGs patients, 12 GBM (70.6%) and 5 anaplastic gliomas (29.4%), underwent first-line therapy with Stupp regimen. BEV was administered as off-label therapy, at a dose of 10 mg/kg every 14 days, in 13 patients as third-line therapy and in 4 patients as second-line therapy associated with FTM. The assessment of MGMT methylation and IDH1 mutation was conducted. Results One complete response (5.9%), 7 partial responses (41.2%), 3 stable diseases (17.6%) and 6 progression diseases (35.3%) were assessed using RANO criteria. Median PFS (mPFS) and OS (mOS) were 5 and 8.3 months respectively, with a 6 months-PFS of 41.2%. Methylated patients and wild-type IDH1 patients showed longer mPFS and mOS without statistical significance. Six patients (35.3%) experienced long response with high number of cycles (11-40), long PFS (11-40 months) and OS (12-42 months). BEV was well-tolerated with grade 1-2 proteinuria and hypertension in 53% and 47.1% of patients respectively. Only one patient developed grade 3 proteinuria after 30 cycles and another one developed pulmonary embolism. No other grade 3-4 toxicities were observed. Conclusions This retrospective study showed the efficacy and the safety of BEV alone or in association with FTM in the treatment of MGs. The protocol (No: Beva-Glio/Sep 2016)

Predictive score using clinical and blood biomarkers in advanced non-small cell lung cancer (aNSCLC) patients treated with immunotherapy

n/

Peripheral blood biomarkers as prognostic factors for immunotherapy in advanced non-small cell lung cancer (aNSCLC) patients

n/

Application of the Meet-URO score to metastatic renal cell carcinoma patients treated with second- and third-line cabozantinib

open18Background: The addition of neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) and bone metastases to the International Metastatic RCC Database Consortium (IMDC) score (by the Meet-URO score) has been shown to better stratify pretreated metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) patients receiving nivolumab. This study aimed to validate the Meet-URO score in patients receiving cabozantinib to assess its predictivity and prognostic role. Methods: A multicenter retrospective analysis evaluated mRCC patients receiving ⩾second-line cabozantinib. NLR, IMDC score and bone metastases were assessed before the start of cabozantinib. The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS). Harrell's c-index was calculated to compare the accuracy of the prediction of the two scores. Results: Overall, 174 mRCC patients received cabozantinib as second and third line (51.7% and 48.3%, respectively) with a median follow-up of 6.8 months. A shorter median overall survival (mOS) was observed for the IMDC poor-risk group, NLR ⩾3.2 and the presence of bone metastases, while the IMDC intermediate-risk group had a similar mOS to the favourable-risk one. Applying the Meet-URO score, three risk groups were identified: group 1 (55.2% of patients) with a score of 0-3, group 2 (38.5%) with a score of 4-8 and group 3 (6.3%) with a score of 9. Compared to group 1 (mOS: 39.4 months), a statistically significant worse mOS was observed in group 2 (11.2 months) and group 3 (3.2 months) patients, respectively. The Meet-URO c-index score was 0.640, showing a higher discriminative ability than the IMDC score (c-index: 0.568). Conclusion: This analysis showed that the Meet-URO score provides a more accurate prognostic stratification than the IMDC score in mRCC patients treated with ⩾second-line cabozantinib besides nivolumab. Moreover, it is an easy-to-use tool with no additional costs for clinical practice (web-calculator is available at: https://proviso.shinyapps.io/Meet-URO15_score/). Future investigations will include the application of the Meet-URO score to the first-line immunotherapy-based combination therapies.openRebuzzi, Sara Elena; Cerbone, Luigi; Signori, Alessio; Santoni, Matteo; Murianni, Veronica; De Giorgi, Ugo; Procopio, Giuseppe; Porta, Camillo; Milella, Michele; Basso, Umberto; Massari, Francesco; Maruzzo, Marco; Iacovelli, Roberto; Battelli, Nicola; Carmisciano, Luca; Banna, Giuseppe Luigi; Buti, Sebastiano; Fornarini, GiuseppeRebuzzi, Sara Elena; Cerbone, Luigi; Signori, Alessio; Santoni, Matteo; Murianni, Veronica; De Giorgi, Ugo; Procopio, Giuseppe; Porta, Camillo; Milella, Michele; Basso, Umberto; Massari, Francesco; Maruzzo, Marco; Iacovelli, Roberto; Battelli, Nicola; Carmisciano, Luca; Banna, Giuseppe Luigi; Buti, Sebastiano; Fornarini, Giusepp

Early primary tumor response in metastatic RCC patients treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors-based combinations

Background: 25-30% of renal cell carcinoma presents with metastases (mRCC) at diagnosis. The activity of immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI)-combinations on the primary tumor (PT) is debated. Patients andMethods: mRCC patients (pts) with PT who received first-line nivolumab plus ipilimumab (N/I) or pembrolizumab plus axitinib (P/A) were included. We investigated the early primary tumor response (EPTR) at the first radiological assessment. Results: 73 pts were included. The median early reduction of the PT longest diameter was 12.4% with P/A versus 6.2% with N/I (p = 0.42). We evaluated if the type of EPTR could affect the metastases response. Among pts with PT stable disease (SD), 8.3% had metastatic disease progression (PD) with P/A and 34.8% with N/I. Early PT partial response (PR) was associated with no metastatic PD with both N/I and P/A. The 2 pts with PT PD had also metastatic PD to P/A. Of the 3 PT with PD to N/I, 1 had metastatic SD and 2 PD. In the overall population, of the 94.1% without PT progression (PR+SD), 47.5% had metastatic PR, 35.6% SD, 16.9% PD. Conclusions: ICIs-combinations achieved an early PT PR in about 10-20%, without any complete responses. Only a small percentage of PT had an early PD, mainly associated with metastatic PD. However, among those PT without an early progression, metastatic PR can be achieved in approximately 50% of cases

Application of the Meet-URO score to metastatic renal cell carcinoma patients treated with second- and third-line cabozantinib

Background: The addition of neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) and bone metastases to the International Metastatic RCC Database Consortium (IMDC) score (by the Meet-URO score) has been shown to better stratify pretreated metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) patients receiving nivolumab. This study aimed to validate the Meet-URO score in patients receiving cabozantinib to assess its predictivity and prognostic role. Methods: A multicenter retrospective analysis evaluated mRCC patients receiving ⩾second-line cabozantinib. NLR, IMDC score and bone metastases were assessed before the start of cabozantinib. The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS). Harrell's c-index was calculated to compare the accuracy of the prediction of the two scores. Results: Overall, 174 mRCC patients received cabozantinib as second and third line (51.7% and 48.3%, respectively) with a median follow-up of 6.8 months. A shorter median overall survival (mOS) was observed for the IMDC poor-risk group, NLR ⩾3.2 and the presence of bone metastases, while the IMDC intermediate-risk group had a similar mOS to the favourable-risk one. Applying the Meet-URO score, three risk groups were identified: group 1 (55.2% of patients) with a score of 0-3, group 2 (38.5%) with a score of 4-8 and group 3 (6.3%) with a score of 9. Compared to group 1 (mOS: 39.4 months), a statistically significant worse mOS was observed in group 2 (11.2 months) and group 3 (3.2 months) patients, respectively. The Meet-URO c-index score was 0.640, showing a higher discriminative ability than the IMDC score (c-index: 0.568). Conclusion: This analysis showed that the Meet-URO score provides a more accurate prognostic stratification than the IMDC score in mRCC patients treated with ⩾second-line cabozantinib besides nivolumab. Moreover, it is an easy-to-use tool with no additional costs for clinical practice (web-calculator is available at: https://proviso.shinyapps.io/Meet-URO15_score/). Future investigations will include the application of the Meet-URO score to the first-line immunotherapy-based combination therapies

The prognostic value of peripheral blood inflammatory indices early variation in patients (pts) with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) treated with nivolumab (Δ-Meet-URO analysis)

Background: Immunotherapy has improved the treatment landscape of mRCC pts and identifying biomarkers for patients’ selection is clinically needed. Inflammatory indices from peripheral blood showed a prognostic value in different tumors and therapies, including immunotherapy. These biomarkers are inexpensive and readily available in clinical practice. We aimed to assess the prognostic role of the dynamic evaluation of these indices in immunotherapy-naïve pretreated mRCC pts. Methods: The Meet-URO 15 multicentric retrospective study enrolled 571 pretreated mRCC pts receiving nivolumab. The Δ-Meet-URO was a secondary analysis on the early variation through the first four cycles of therapy compared with baseline (difference, delta - Δ) of white blood cells, platelets and inflammatory indices, including neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR), platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio (PLR) and systemic immune-inflammation index (SII, platelets x NLR), their comparison with baseline values and correlation with treatment response, overall (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). The baseline and Δ cut-offs were identified by ROC curves for OS. Results: The analysis was performed on 422 mRCC pts (74% of the entire cohort). Patients with ΔNeutrophils < 730 at 2nd, 3rd and 4th cycles were more responders (p < 0.001, p = 0.003 and p < 0.001) with longer mPFS (11 vs 6.1 months, p = 0.033) and mOS (46.9 vs 20.8 months, p = 0.046) compared to ΔNeutrophils ≥ 730. There was a significant interaction between baseline and ΔNeutrophils on PFS (p = 0.047). Pts with baseline neutrophils ≥ 4330/mm3 had longer mPFS when ΔNeutrophils < 730 (p = 0.002), whilst no difference was observed in those pts with baseline neutrophils < 4330/mm3 according to ΔNeutrophils (p = 0.46). Similar non-significant trends were observed in mOS. Patients with ΔNLR < 0.5 at 3rd and 4th cycles were more responders (p = 0.004 and p = 0.001, respectively) with doubled mPFS (12.1 vs 6.4 months, p = 0.007) and mOS (46.9 vs 21.7 months, p = 0.062) compared to ΔNLR ≥ 0.5. No significant interaction between baseline NLR and ΔNLR was observed in PFS and OS, suggesting a similar association between ΔNLR and PFS or OS, regardless of the baseline NLR cut-off of 3.2. The multivariable analyses confirmed all these results. Conclusions: The early assessment of NLR and neutrophils variations during immunotherapy for mRCC pts is a promising, affordable and non-invasive prognostic tool. Prospective and external validation analyses are warranted

The prognostic role of nephrectomy in patients (pts) with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) treated with immunotherapy according to the novel prognostic Meet-URO score: Subanalysis of the Meet-URO 15 study

Background: Most of mRCC pts with favorable and intermediate prognosis, according to the IMDC classification, are offered a nephrectomy. However, in the immunotherapy era, the role of nephrectomy is still unclear. In the Meet-URO 15 study we reported the higher prognostic accuracy of the Meet-URO score compared to the IMDC score, by the addition of the neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) and the presence of bone metastases to the IMDC score, identifying five categories with progressively worse prognosis. For this reason, we aimed to explore the prognostic impact of the previous nephrectomy (PN) on mRCC pts receiving immunotherapy and according to the Meet-URO score groups. Methods: The Meet-URO 15 study was a multicentric retrospective analysis on 571 pretreated mRCC pts receiving nivolumab. Univariable analysis of the correlation between PN and overall survival (OS) and multivariate analysis adjusted for IMDC score, therapy line, NLR and metastatic sites were performed. The interaction of PN with the Meet-URO prognostic groups was then evaluated. Results: 503/571 pts (88%) underwent PN. A reduced risk of death (HR = 0.44; 95% CI: 0.32-0.60; p< 0.001) and higher mOS and OS rate were observed in pts with PN than without (mOS: 36 vs 13 monhts; 1-year-OS 72% vs 52% and 2-year-OS 57% vs 24%, respectively). The reduced risk of death for pts who underwent PN was confirmed at the multivariate analysis (HR = 0.69; 95% CI: 0.49-0.97; p= 0.032). The percentage of pts receiving PN progressively reduced through the five Meet-URO prognostic groups (PN: group 1: 98%, group 2: 95%, group 3: 84%, group 4: 79%, group 5: 59%). No significant interaction was observed between the PN and Meet-URO score when all the five groups were considered (p= 0.17). A significant interaction was observed when the Meet-URO groups 1,2 and 3 were taken together (HR = 0.40; 95% CI: 0.25-0.63; p< 0.001), highlighting the significant protective role of the PN on OS for these three groups. For the Meet-URO groups 4 and 5, the interaction was indeed not significant (HR = 0.81; 95% CI: 0.51-1.30; p= 0.39). Conclusions: PN has a favourable prognostic impact on pretreated mRCC pts receiving immunotherapy. This benefit may be limited to mRCC pts with more favorable diseases as belonging to Meet-URO prognostic groups 1, 2 and 3. Further analysis of the type of PN (i.e., radical vs cytoreductive) is ongoing and confirmatory prospective evaluations are warranted