Initial active surveillance for patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma: 10 years' experience at a regional cancer Centre

Abstract A subset of patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) follow an indolent disease course and may benefit from initial active surveillance (AS). However, selecting patients suitable for this approach is challenging. To investigate this we sought to define outcomes of patients with mRCC suitable for initial AS. All patients with mRCC clinically selected for initial AS at the Edinburgh Cancer Centre between January 2010 and December 2020 were identified. Key inflammatory biomarkers (haemoglobin, white cell count, neutrophil count, platelets, C‐reactive protein [CRP], albumin, corrected calcium) and the International Metastatic RCC Database Consortium (IMDC) risk score were measured. The relationship between these and time to systemic anticancer therapy (tSACT) and overall survival (OS) was analysed. Data were available for 160 patients. Estimated median overall survival was 88.0 (interquartile range [IQR] 34.0–127.0) months. Median tSACT was 31.8 (IQR 12.0–76.3) months. On multivariate analysis, only CRP was predictive of tSACT (HR 2.47 [95% CI:1.59–3.85] p  10 mg/L were more likely to commence SACT within 1 year than those with CRP≤10 mg/L (41% vs. 18%, Relative Risk 2.16 (95% CI:1.18–3.96) (p = 0.012)). IMDC risk score was not predictive of tSACT or OS. Active surveillance is an appropriate initial management option for selected patients with mRCC. CRP, a biomarker of systemic inflammation, may provide additional objective information to assist clinical decision‐making in patients with mRCC being considered for initial AS. Although this is a retrospective observational study, the cohort is well defined and includes all patients managed with initial AS in an inclusive real‐world setting

MAJOR DEPRESSION AND SURVIVAL IN PEOPLE WITH CANCER

OBJECTIVE: The question of whether depression is associated with worse survival in people with cancer remains unanswered because of methodological criticism of the published research on the topic. We aimed to study the association in a large methodologically robust study. METHODS: We analyzed data on 20,582 patients with breast, colorectal, gynecological, lung, and prostate cancers who had attended cancer outpatient clinics in Scotland, United Kingdom. Patients had completed two-stage screening for major depression as part of their cancer care. These data on depression status were linked to demographic, cancer, and subsequent mortality data from national databases. We estimated the association of major depression with survival for each cancer using Cox regression. We adjusted for potential confounders and interactions between potentially time-varying confounders and the interval between cancer diagnosis and depression screening, and used multiple imputation for missing depression and confounder data. We pooled the cancer-specific results using fixed-effects meta-analysis. RESULTS: Major depression was associated with worse survival for all cancers, with similar adjusted hazard ratios (HRs): breast cancer (HR = 1.42, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.15-1.75), colorectal cancer (HR = 1.47, 95% CI = 1.11-1.94), gynecological cancer (HR = 1.36, 95% CI = 1.08-1.71), lung cancer (HR = 1.39, 95% CI = 1.24-1.56), and prostate cancer (HR = 1.76, 95% CI = 1.08-2.85). The pooled HR was 1.41 (95% CI = 1.29-1.54, p < .001, I2 = 0%). These findings were not materially different when we only considered the deaths (90%) that were attributed to cancer. CONCLUSIONS: Major depression is associated with worse survival in patients with common cancers. The mechanisms of this association and the clinical implications require further study

The immunopeptidome from a genomic perspective:Establishing the noncanonical landscape of MHC class I–associated peptides

G.B., D.B., K.W., A.P., R.F., T.R.H., S.K., and J.A.A. received support from Fundacja na rzecz Nauki Polskiej (FNP) (grant ID: MAB/3/2017). D.R.G. received support from Genome Canada & Genome BC (grant ID: 264PRO). D.J.H. received support from NuCana plc (grant ID: SMD0-ZIUN05). H.A. received support from Swedish Cancer Foundation (grant ID: 211709). H.G. received support from United Kingdom Research and Innovation (UKRI) (grant ID: EP/S02431X/1). C.P. received support from Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia (FCT) through LASIGE Research Unit (grant ID: UIDB/00408/2020 and UIDP/00408/2020). A.L. F.M.Z., C.P., A.R., A.P., and J.A.A. received support from European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme (grant ID: 101017453). C.B. received support from Agence Nationale de la Recherche (ANR) through GRAL LabEX (grant ID: ANR-10-LABX-49-01) and CBH-EUR-GS 32 (grant ID: ANR-17-EURE0003). S.N.S. received support from Cancer Research UK (CRUK) and the Chief Scientist's Office of Scotland (CSO): Experimental Cancer Medicine Centre (ECMC) (grant ID: ECMCQQR-2022/100017). A.L. received support from Chief Scientist's Office of Scotland (CSO) NRS Career Researcher Fellowship. R.O.N. received support from CRUK Cambridge Centre Thoracic Cancer Programme (grant ID: CTRQQR-2021\100012).Tumor antigens can emerge through multiple mechanisms, including translation of non-coding genomic regions. This non-canonical category of antigens has recently gained attention; however, our understanding of how they recur within and between cancer types is still in its infancy. Therefore, we developed a proteogenomic pipeline based on deep learning de novo mass spectrometry to enable the discovery of non-canonical MHC-associated peptides (ncMAPs) from non-coding regions. Considering that the emergence of tumor antigens can also involve post-translational modifications, we included an open search component in our pipeline. Leveraging the wealth of mass spectrometry-based immunopeptidomics, we analyzed 26 MHC class I immunopeptidomic studies of 9 different cancer types. We validated the de novo identified ncMAPs, along with the most abundant post-translational modifications, using spectral matching and controlled their false discovery rate (FDR) to 1%. Interestingly, the non-canonical presentation appeared to be 5 times enriched for the A03 HLA supertype, with a projected population coverage of 54.85%. Here, we reveal an atlas of 8,601 ncMAPs with varying levels of cancer selectivity and suggest 17 cancer-selective ncMAPs as attractive targets according to a stringent cutoff. In summary, the combination of the open-source pipeline and the atlas of ncMAPs reported herein could facilitate the identification and screening of ncMAPs as targeting agents for T-cell therapies or vaccine development.Publisher PDFPeer reviewe

Adjuvant Pembrolizumab after Nephrectomy in Renal-Cell Carcinoma

BACKGROUND: Patients with renal-cell carcinoma who undergo nephrectomy have no options for adjuvant therapy to reduce the risk of recurrence that have high levels of supporting evidence. METHODS: In a double-blind, phase 3 trial, we randomly assigned, in a 1:1 ratio, patients with clear-cell renal-cell carcinoma who were at high risk for recurrence after nephrectomy, with or without metastasectomy, to receive either adjuvant pembrolizumab (at a dose of 200 mg) or placebo intravenously once every 3 weeks for up to 17 cycles (approximately 1 year). The primary end point was disease-free survival according to the investigator's assessment. Overall survival was a key secondary end point. Safety was a secondary end point. RESULTS: A total of 496 patients were randomly assigned to receive pembrolizumab, and 498 to receive placebo. At the prespecified interim analysis, the median time from randomization to the data-cutoff date was 24.1 months. Pembrolizumab therapy was associated with significantly longer disease-free survival than placebo (disease-free survival at 24 months, 77.3% vs. 68.1%; hazard ratio for recurrence or death, 0.68; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.53 to 0.87; P = 0.002 [two-sided]). The estimated percentage of patients who remained alive at 24 months was 96.6% in the pembrolizumab group and 93.5% in the placebo group (hazard ratio for death, 0.54; 95% CI, 0.30 to 0.96). Grade 3 or higher adverse events of any cause occurred in 32.4% of the patients who received pembrolizumab and in 17.7% of those who received placebo. No deaths related to pembrolizumab therapy occurred. CONCLUSIONS: Pembrolizumab treatment led to a significant improvement in disease-free survival as compared with placebo after surgery among patients with kidney cancer who were at high risk for recurrence. (Funded by Merck Sharp and Dohme, a subsidiary of Merck; KEYNOTE-564 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03142334.)

Pembrolizumab versus placebo as post-nephrectomy adjuvant therapy for clear cell renal cell carcinoma (KEYNOTE-564): 30-month follow-up analysis of a multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial

BACKGROUND: The first interim analysis of the KEYNOTE-564 study showed improved disease-free survival with adjuvant pembrolizumab compared with placebo after surgery in patients with clear cell renal cell carcinoma at an increased risk of recurrence. The analysis reported here, with an additional 6 months of follow-up, was designed to assess longer-term efficacy and safety of pembrolizumab versus placebo, as well as additional secondary and exploratory endpoints. METHODS: In the multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 KEYNOTE-564 trial, adults aged 18 years or older with clear cell renal cell carcinoma with an increased risk of recurrence were enrolled at 213 hospitals and cancer centres in North America, South America, Europe, Asia, and Australia. Eligible participants had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1, had undergone nephrectomy 12 weeks or less before randomisation, and had not received previous systemic therapy for advanced renal cell carcinoma. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) via central permuted block randomisation (block size of four) to receive pembrolizumab 200 mg or placebo intravenously every 3 weeks for up to 17 cycles. Randomisation was stratified by metastatic disease status (M0 vs M1), and the M0 group was further stratified by ECOG performance status and geographical region. All participants and investigators involved in study treatment administration were masked to the treatment group assignment. The primary endpoint was disease-free survival by investigator assessment in the intention-to-treat population (all participants randomly assigned to a treatment). Safety was assessed in the safety population, comprising all participants who received at least one dose of pembrolizumab or placebo. As the primary endpoint was met at the first interim analysis, updated data are reported without p values. This study is ongoing, but no longer recruiting, and is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03142334. FINDINGS: Between June 30, 2017, and Sept 20, 2019, 994 participants were assigned to receive pembrolizumab (n=496) or placebo (n=498). Median follow-up, defined as the time from randomisation to data cutoff (June 14, 2021), was 30·1 months (IQR 25·7-36·7). Disease-free survival was better with pembrolizumab compared with placebo (HR 0·63 [95% CI 0·50-0·80]). Median disease-free survival was not reached in either group. The most common all-cause grade 3-4 adverse events were hypertension (in 14 [3%] of 496 participants) and increased alanine aminotransferase (in 11 [2%]) in the pembrolizumab group, and hypertension (in 13 [3%] of 498 participants) in the placebo group. Serious adverse events attributed to study treatment occurred in 59 (12%) participants in the pembrolizumab group and one (&lt;1%) participant in the placebo group. No deaths were attributed to pembrolizumab. INTERPRETATION: Updated results from KEYNOTE-564 support the use of adjuvant pembrolizumab monotherapy as a standard of care for participants with renal cell carcinoma with an increased risk of recurrence after nephrectomy. FUNDING: Merck Sharp &amp; Dohme LLC, a subsidiary of Merck &amp; Co, Inc, Rahway, NJ, USA