Nivolumab for Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma: Results of a Randomized Phase II Trial.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Purpose
Nivolumab is a fully human immunoglobulin G4 programmed death-1 immune checkpoint inhibitor antibody that restores T-cell immune activity. This phase II trial assessed the antitumor activity, dose-response relationship, and safety of nivolumab in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC).Patients and methods
Patients with clear-cell mRCC previously treated with agents targeting the vascular endothelial growth factor pathway were randomly assigned (blinded ratio of 1:1:1) to nivolumab 0.3, 2, or 10 mg/kg intravenously once every 3 weeks. The primary objective was to evaluate the dose-response relationship as measured by progression-free survival (PFS); secondary end points included objective response rate (ORR), overall survival (OS), and safety.Results
A total of 168 patients were randomly assigned to the nivolumab 0.3- (n = 60), 2- (n = 54), and 10-mg/kg (n = 54) cohorts. One hundred eighteen patients (70%) had received more than one prior systemic regimen. Median PFS was 2.7, 4.0, and 4.2 months, respectively (P = .9). Respective ORRs were 20%, 22%, and 20%. Median OS was 18.2 months (80% CI, 16.2 to 24.0 months), 25.5 months (80% CI, 19.8 to 28.8 months), and 24.7 months (80% CI, 15.3 to 26.0 months), respectively. The most common treatment-related adverse event (AE) was fatigue (24%, 22%, and 35%, respectively). Nineteen patients (11%) experienced grade 3 to 4 treatment-related AEs.Conclusion
Nivolumab demonstrated antitumor activity with a manageable safety profile across the three doses studied in mRCC. No dose-response relationship was detected as measured by PFS. These efficacy and safety results in mRCC support study in the phase III setting.
SUBMITTER: Motzer RJ
PROVIDER: S-EPMC4806782 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:PurposeThe objective response rate (ORR) for single-agent anti-programmed death receptor 1 (anti-PD-1) therapy is modest in patients with metastatic or recurrent head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC). We aimed to test whether radiotherapy may act synergistically with anti-PD-1 therapy to improve response through the abscopal effect.Patients and methodsWe conducted a single-center, randomized, phase II trial of nivolumab (anti-PD-1 therapy) versus nivolumab plus stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) in patients with metastatic HNSCC. Patients had at least two metastatic lesions: one that could be safely irradiated and one measurable by RECIST version 1.1. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1), stratified by human papillomavirus status, to nivolumab (3 mg/kg intravenously every 2 weeks) or nivolumab (same dose) plus SBRT (9 Gy × 3) to 1 lesion. The primary end point was ORR in nonirradiated lesions, which was assessed by RECIST in patients with at least one available set of on-treatment images; safety was assessed in a per-protocol population.ResultsBetween March 11, 2016, and June 22, 2018, 62 patients were randomly assigned to nivolumab (n = 30) or nivolumab plus SBRT (n = 32). There was no statistically significant ORR difference between arms (34.5% [95% CI, 19.9% to 52.7%] v 29.0% [95% CI, 16.1% to 46.6%]; P = .86). There was no significant difference in overall survival (P = .75), progression-free survival (P = .79), or response duration (P = .26). Grade 3-5 toxicities were similar (13.3% v 9.7%; P = .70).ConclusionWe found no improvement in response and no evidence of an abscopal effect with the addition of SBRT to nivolumab in unselected patients with metastatic HNSCC.
| S-EPMC8462641 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundNivolumab is approved for mRCC patients who have received prior anti-angiogenic therapy but the duration of therapy required for sustained clinical benefit is unknown. A phase II clinical trial to investigate the feasibility of intermittent nivolumab dosing was conducted.MethodsPatients ≥18 years of age with mRCC who were previously treated with at least one antiangiogenic therapy were eligible. Patients were treated with nivolumab for twelve weeks. Patients who had RECIST PD were removed from the trial. Patients who did not initially achieve ≥10% reduction in tumor burden (TB) continued nivolumab per standard of care. Patients with ≥10% TB reduction entered a treatment-free observation phase with re-imaging every 12 weeks. Nivolumab was restarted in patients with a ≥ 10% TB increase and again held with TB reduction ≥10%. This intermittent nivolumab dosing continued until RECIST PD while on nivolumab. The primary objective was feasibility of intermittent nivolumab, defined as the proportion of patients eligible for intermittent therapy who elect to receive intermittent nivolumab. Intermittent nivolumab would be considered "feasible" if the acceptance rate was ≥80%. Forty patients provides > 95% power with 0.05 type I error, assuming a null acceptance rate of 50%. With the approval of the combination of ipilimumab/nivolumab (April 2018) in front-line mRCC, this cohort was closed prior to completed pre-planned approval.ResultsOf the 14 patients enrolled, 13 (93%) were male with a median age 65. All had a prior nephrectomy and 12 (86%) were intermediate-risk by IMDC criteria. Five patients (36%) met the criteria for the intermittent phase of the trial (median TB decrease 46%) and all agreed to intermittent therapy. With a median follow-up of 48 weeks, only one patient restarted therapy. The four remaining patients have a sustained response for a median of 34 weeks (range, 16-53) off therapy. No patients developed RECIST PD while off therapy.ConclusionsThis prospective experience of intermittent nivolumab dosing in mRCC supports further investigation of intermittent immunotherapy dosing strategies in RCC.Trial registrationNCT03126331 (Intermittent Nivolumab in Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Patients; Date of registration 4/27/2017; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03126331 ).
| S-EPMC6524207 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Objectives:In the present study, we explored the real-world efficacy of the immuno-oncology checkpoint inhibitor nivolumab and the tyrosine kinase inhibitor cabozantinib in the second-line setting. Methods:Using the International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium (imdc) dataset, a retrospective analysis of patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mrcc) treated with nivolumab or cabozantinib in the second line after prior therapy targeted to the vascular endothelial growth factor receptor (vegfr) was performed. Baseline characteristics and imdc risk factors were collected. Overall survival (os) and time to treatment failure (ttf) were calculated using Kaplan-Meier curves. Overall response rates (orrs) were determined for each therapy. Multivariable Cox regression analysis was performed to determine survival differences between cabozantinib and nivolumab treatment. Results:The analysis included 225 patients treated with nivolumab and 53 treated with cabozantinib. No significant difference in median os was observed: 22.10 months [95% confidence interval (ci): 17.18 months to not reached] with nivolumab and 23.70 months (95% ci: 15.52 months to not reached) with cabozantinib (p = 0.61). The ttf was also similar at 6.90 months (95% ci: 4.60 months to 9.20 months) with nivolumab and 7.39 months (95% ci: 5.52 months to 12.85 months) with cabozantinib (p = 0.20). The adjusted hazard ratio (hr) for nivolumab compared with cabozantinib was 1.30 (95% ci: 0.73 to 2.3), p = 0.38. When adjusted by imdc criteria and age, the hr was 1.32 (95% ci: 0.74 to 2.38), p = 0.35. Conclusions:Real-world imdc data indicate comparable os and ttf for nivolumab and cabozantinib. Both agents are reasonable therapeutic options for patients progressing after initial first-line vegfr-targeted therapy.
| S-EPMC6476457 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:Anlotinib is a tyrosine kinase inhibitor inhibiting angiogenesis. This multicenter, randomized phase II trial aimed to investigate the efficacy and safety of anlotinib in comparison with sunitinib as first-line treatment for patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). MATERIALS AND METHODS:Patients with mRCC from 13 clinical centers were randomly assigned in a 2:1 ratio to receive anlotinib (n = 90) or sunitinib (n = 43). Anlotinib was given orally at a dose of 12 mg once daily (2 weeks on/1 week off), and sunitinib was given orally at 50 mg once daily (4 weeks on/2 weeks off). The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS). Secondary endpoints included overall survival (OS), objective response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR), and safety. RESULTS:The median PFS was similar with anlotinib and sunitinib (17.5 vs. 16.6 months, p > .05). The median OS (30.9 vs. 30.5 months, p > .05), ORR (30.3% vs. 27.9%), and 6-week DCR (97.8% vs. 93.0%) were similar in the two groups. Adverse events (AEs) of grade 3 or 4 were significantly less frequent with anlotinib than with sunitinib (28.9% vs. 55.8%, p < .01), especially in terms of thrombocytopenia and neutropenia. AEs occurring at a lower frequency with anlotinib were hand-foot syndrome, eyelid edema, hair depigmentation, skin yellowing, neutropenia, thrombocytopenia, and anemia. The incidence of serious AEs was lower with anlotinib than with sunitinib. CONCLUSION:The clinical efficacy of anlotinib was similar to that of sunitinib as the first-line treatment for mRCC, but with a more favorable safety profile. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE:This study evaluated the efficacy and safety of anlotinib for the first-line treatment of metastatic renal cell carcinoma. Anlotinib, which was developed independently in China, is a new tyrosine kinase inhibitor inhibiting multiple kinases involved in angiogenesis and tumor proliferation. Results indicated that the efficacy of anlotinib is comparable to and the safety is better than that of sunitinib.
| S-EPMC6693716 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PurposeMEDI0680 is a humanized anti-programmed cell death-1 (PD-1) antibody, and durvalumab is an anti-PD-L1 antibody. Combining treatment using these antibodies may improve efficacy versus blockade of PD-1 alone. This phase II study evaluated antitumor activity and safety of MEDI0680 plus durvalumab versus nivolumab monotherapy in immunotherapy-naïve patients with advanced clear-cell renal cell carcinoma who received at least one prior line of antiangiogenic therapy.Patients and methodsPatients received either MEDI0680 (20 mg/kg) with durvalumab (750 mg) or nivolumab (240 mg), all intravenous, every 2 weeks. The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed objective response rate (ORR). Secondary endpoints included best overall response, progression-free survival (PFS), safety, overall survival (OS), and immunogenicity. Exploratory endpoints included changes in circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA), baseline tumor mutational burden, and tumor-infiltrated immune cell profiles.ResultsSixty-three patients were randomized (combination, n = 42; nivolumab, n = 21). ORR was 16.7% [7/42; 95% confidence interval (CI), 7.0-31.4] with combination treatment and 23.8% (5/21; 95% CI, 8.2-47.2) with nivolumab. Median PFS was 3.6 months in both arms; median OS was not reached in either arm. Because of adverse events, 23.8% of patients discontinued MEDI0680 and durvalumab and 14.3% of patients discontinued nivolumab. In the combination arm, reduction in ctDNA fraction was associated with longer PFS. ctDNA mutational analysis did not demonstrate an association with response in either arm. Tumor-infiltrated immune profiles showed an association between immune cell activation and response in the combination arm.ConclusionsMEDI0680 combined with durvalumab was safe and tolerable; however, it did not improve efficacy versus nivolumab monotherapy.
| S-EPMC9365340 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PurposeBNC105P inhibits tubulin polymerization, and preclinical studies suggest possible synergy with everolimus. In this phase I/II study, efficacy and safety of the combination were explored in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC).Experimental designA phase I study in patients with clear cell mRCC and any prior number of therapies was conducted using a classical 3 + 3 design to evaluate standard doses of everolimus with increasing doses of BNC105P. At the recommended phase II dose (RP2D), patients with clear cell mRCC and one to two prior therapies (including ≥ 1 VEGF-TKI) were randomized to BNC105P with everolimus (arm A) or everolimus alone (arm B). The primary endpoint of the study was 6-month progression-free survival (6MPFS). Secondary endpoints included response rate, PFS, overall survival, and exploratory biomarker analyses.ResultsIn the phase I study (N = 15), a dose of BNC105P at 16 mg/m(2) with everolimus at 10 mg daily was identified as the RP2D. In the phase II study, 139 patients were randomized, with 69 and 67 evaluable patients in arms A and B, respectively. 6MPFS was similar in the treatment arms (arm A: 33.82% vs. arm B: 30.30%, P = 0.66) and no difference in median PFS was observed (arm A: 4.7 mos vs. arm B: 4.1 mos; P = 0.49). Changes in matrix metalloproteinase-9, stem cell factor, sex hormone-binding globulin, and serum amyloid A protein were associated with clinical outcome with BNC105P.ConclusionsAlthough the primary endpoint was not met in an unselected population, correlative studies suggest several biomarkers that warrant further prospective evaluation.
| S-EPMC4526387 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PurposeImmune-related RECIST (irRECIST) were designed to capture atypical responses seen with immunotherapy. We hypothesized that, in patients with metastatic clear cell renal cell carcinoma (mccRCC), candidate biomarkers for nivolumab response would show improved association with clinical endpoints capturing atypical responders (irRECIST) compared with standard clinical endpoints (RECISTv1.1).Experimental designEndpoints based on RECISTv1.1 [objective response rate (ORR)/progression-free survival (PFS)] or irRECIST [immune-related ORR (irORR)/immune-related PFS (irPFS)] were compared in patients enrolled in the CheckMate-010 trial. Pretreatment tumors were analyzed by PD-L1 and PD-L2 IHC, and by multiplex immunofluorescence for CD8, PD-1, TIM-3, and LAG-3. T-cell activation signatures were assessed by RNA sequencing.ResultsMedian irPFS was significantly longer than median PFS. irORR was not significantly different from ORR, but immune-related progressive disease (irPD) rate was significantly lower than progressive disease (PD) rate. Tumor cell (TC) PD-L1 expression was not associated with PFS or ORR, but patients with TC PD-L1 ≥1% had longer median irPFS and higher irORR. High percentage of CD8+ tumor-infiltrating cells (TIC) that are PD-1+TIM-3-LAG-3- (% CD8+PD-1+TIM-3-LAG-3- TIC) correlated with high levels of T-cell activation and was associated with longer median irPFS and higher irORR. Notably, combination of TC PD-L1 expression with % CD8+PD-1+TIM-3-LAG-3- TIC identified three groups of patients for which irPFS and irORR were significantly different.ConclusionsAtypical responders to nivolumab were identified in the CheckMate-010 trial. We observed improved association of candidate biomarkers for nivolumab response with endpoints defined by irRECIST compared with RECISTv1.1. TC PD-L1 expression in combination with PD-1 expression on CD8+ TIC may predict outcome on nivolumab in mccRCC.
| S-EPMC6445699 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Nivolumab, an anti-PD-1 immune checkpoint inhibitor, improved overall survival versus everolimus in a phase 3 trial of previously treated patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). We investigated immunomodulatory activity of nivolumab in a hypothesis-generating prospective mRCC trial.Nivolumab was administered intravenously every 3 weeks at 0.3, 2, or 10 mg/kg to previously treated patients and 10 mg/kg to treatment-naïve patients with mRCC. Baseline and on-treatment biopsies and blood were obtained. Clinical activity, tumor-associated lymphocytes, PD-L1 expression (Dako immunohistochemistry; ?5% vs. <5% tumor membrane staining), tumor gene expression (Affymetrix U219), serum chemokines, and safety were assessed.In 91 treated patients, median overall survival [95% confidence interval (CI)] was 16.4 months [10.1 to not reached (NR)] for nivolumab 0.3 mg/kg, NR for 2 mg/kg, 25.2 months (12.0 to NR) for 10 mg/kg, and NR for treatment-naïve patients. Median percent change from baseline in tumor-associated lymphocytes was 69% (CD3+), 180% (CD4+), and 117% (CD8+). Of 56 baseline biopsies, 32% had ?5% PD-L1 expression, and there was no consistent change from baseline to on-treatment biopsies. Transcriptional changes in tumors on treatment included upregulation of IFN?-stimulated genes (e.g., CXCL9). Median increases in chemokine levels from baseline to C2D8 were 101% (CXCL9) and 37% (CXCL10) in peripheral blood. No new safety signals were identified.Immunomodulatory effects of PD-1 inhibition were demonstrated through multiple lines of evidence across nivolumab doses. Biomarker changes from baseline reflect nivolumab pharmacodynamics in the tumor microenvironment. These data may inform potential combinations. Clin Cancer Res; 22(22); 5461-71. ©2016 AACR.
| S-EPMC5106340 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundNivolumab plus ipilimumab has demonstrated improved survival for treatment-naïve advanced clear cell renal cell carcinoma (RCC). A series of clinical trials evaluated the effect of salvage nivolumab plus ipilimumab in patients without an objective response to nivolumab. Given the size and heterogeneity of these studies, we performed a pooled analysis to better inform the activity of nivolumab plus ipilimumab after nivolumab.Patients and methodsEligible patients included those with advanced clear cell RCC having received no prior immunotherapy. The primary objective was confirmed objective response rate (ORR) by investigator-assessment. Secondary objectives included progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS).ResultsThe analysis included 410 patients with clear cell RCC, of whom 340 (82.9%) had IMDC intermediate/poor risk disease, and 137 (33.4%) had prior treatment. The 16-18-week ORR to nivolumab prior to nivolumab plus ipilimumab was 22.7% (n = 93), and best ORR to nivolumab was 25.1% (n = 103). Two hundred and thirty (56.1%) patients treated with nivolumab received nivolumab plus ipilimumab at a median of 16 weeks (IQR 9-19) after initiation of nivolumab [27.0% (n = 62) with stable disease and 73.0% (n = 168) with progressive disease to nivolumab]. The ORR to nivolumab plus ipilimumab was 12.6% (n = 29). Six-month PFS on nivolumab plus ipilimumab was 37% (95% CI, 27-47). Median follow-up was 34.3 months and 3-year OS was 59% (95% CI, 53-64) from nivolumab start.ConclusionA small subset of patients lacking a response to nivolumab derive benefit from salvage nivolumab plus ipilimumab. When possible, both drugs should be given in concomitantly, rather in an adaptive fashion.
| S-EPMC10994246 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:RECORD-1 demonstrated clinical benefit of everolimus in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) previously treated with sunitinib, sorafenib, or both; prior treatment with cytokines, bevacizumab, and chemotherapy was also permitted. RECORD-4 prospectively assessed everolimus in a purely second-line setting. METHODS:Patients with clear-cell mRCC were enrolled into one of three cohorts based on first-line therapy with sunitinib, other anti-VEGF agents, or cytokines. Patients were treated with everolimus 10 mg/day until progression (RECIST, v1.0) or intolerance. The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS) per investigator review. Data cutoff was 1 September 2014, for the primary analysis and 26 June 2015, for the final overall survival (OS) analysis. RESULTS:Enrolled patients (N = 134) previously received sunitinib (n = 58), other anti-VEGF therapy (n = 62; sorafenib, 23; bevacizumab, 16; pazopanib, 13; tivozanib, 5; and axitinib, 3), or cytokines (n = 14). Overall median age was 59 years, and most patients were men (68%) and of favorable/intermediate MSKCC risk (52/37%). Overall median PFS was 7.8 months [95% confidence interval (CI) 5.7-11.0]; in the cohorts, it was 5.7 months (95% CI 3.7-11.3) with previous sunitinib, 7.8 months (95% CI 5.7-11.0) with other previous anti-VEGF therapy, and 12.9 months [95% CI 2.6-not estimable (NE)] with previous cytokines. Overall, 67% of patients achieved stable disease as their best objective response. At final OS analysis, total median OS was 23.8 months (95% CI 17.0-NE) and, in the cohorts, it was 23.8 months (95% CI 13.7-NE) with previous sunitinib, 17.2 months (95% CI 11.9-NE) with other previous anti-VEGF therapy, and NE (95% CI 15.9-NE) with previous cytokine-based therapy. Overall, 56% of patients experienced grade 3 or 4 adverse events (regardless of relationship to study drug). CONCLUSIONS:These results confirm the PFS benefit of second-line everolimus after first-line sunitinib or other anti-VEGF therapies. The safety profile of everolimus was consistent with previous experience. CLINICAL TRIAL NAME AND IDENTIFIER:Everolimus as Second-line Therapy in Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma (RECORD-4), ClinicalTrials.gov identifier, NCT01491672.
| S-EPMC5006123 | biostudies-literature