Dataset Information

Novel Risk Scoring System for Patients with Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Treated with Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:The International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium (IMDC) criteria are the gold standard for risk-stratifying patients with metastatic renal cell cancer (mRCC). We developed a novel risk scoring system for patients with mRCC treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs). METHODS:We performed a retrospective analysis of 100 ICI-treated patients with mRCC at Winship Cancer Institute from 2015 to 2018. Several baseline variables were collected, including markers of inflammation, body mass index (BMI), and sites of metastatic disease, and all were considered for inclusion in our risk scoring system. Upon variable selection in multivariable model, monocyte-to-lymphocyte ratio (MLR), BMI, and number and sites of metastases at baseline were used for risk score calculation. Patients were categorized using four-level risk groups as good (risk score = 0), intermediate (risk score = 1), poor (risk score = 2), or very poor (risk score = 3-4). Cox's proportional hazard model and the Kaplan-Meier method were implemented for survival outcomes. RESULTS:Most patients were male (66%) with clear cell renal cell carcinoma (72%). The majority (71%) received anti-programmed cell death protein-1 monotherapy. Our risk scoring criteria had higher Uno's concordance statistics than IMDC in predicting overall survival (OS; 0.71 vs. 0.57) and progression-free survival (0.61 vs. 0.58). Setting good risk (MLR <0.93, BMI ?24, and D_Met = 0) as the reference, the OS hazard ratios were 29.5 (95% confidence interval [CI], 3.64-238.9), 6.58 (95% CI, 0.84-51.68), and 3.75 (95% CI, 0.49-28.57) for very poor, poor, and intermediate risk groups, respectively. CONCLUSION:Risk scoring using MLR, BMI, and number and sites of metastases may be an effective way to predict survival in patients with mRCC receiving ICI. These results should be validated in a larger, prospective study. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE:A risk scoring system was created for patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors. The results of this study have significant implications for practicing oncologists in the community and academic setting. Importantly, these results identify readily available risk factors that can be used clinically to risk-stratify patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma who are treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors.

SUBMITTER: Martini DJ

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7066702 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Mar

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Novel Risk Scoring System for Patients with Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Treated with Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors.

Martini Dylan J DJ Liu Yuan Y Shabto Julie M JM Carthon Bradley C BC Hitron Emilie Elise EE Russler Greta Anne GA Caulfield Sarah S Kissick Haydn T HT Harris Wayne B WB Kucuk Omer O Master Viraj A VA Bilen Mehmet Asim MA

The oncologist 20191205 3

<h4>Background</h4>The International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium (IMDC) criteria are the gold standard for risk-stratifying patients with metastatic renal cell cancer (mRCC). We developed a novel risk scoring system for patients with mRCC treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs).<h4>Methods</h4>We performed a retrospective analysis of 100 ICI-treated patients with mRCC at Winship Cancer Institute from 2015 to 2018. Several baseline variables were collected, includ ...[more]

PMID: 32162798

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundRenin-angiotensin system inhibitors (RASi) have been shown to improve outcomes in studies of multiple malignancies by effects on the tumor microenvironment to enhance the immune repertoire and improve drug delivery. Repurposing RASi to treat metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) in combination with immune-checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) may improve survival coupled with tolerability and cost efficacy. We evaluated the impact of RASi on outcomes in mRCC patients receiving ICI.MethodsThis multicenter, retrospective cohort study included mRCC patients treated with ICI with or without RASi. The patients from Dana-Farber Cancer Institute (DFCI) were used as a discovery cohort, and the patients from University of California San Diego (UCSD) were used for validation. Receipt of an ICI (PD1/L1 and/or CTLA-4 inhibitors) was required. RASi use was defined as receipt of a RASi at baseline and for a minimum of 30 days after ICI initiation. For both the discovery and validation cohorts, the primary outcome assessed was overall survival (OS) and the secondary endpoints were time-to-treatment failure (TTF), and objective response rate (ORR).ResultsOverall, 229 patients who received an ICI were included: 100 patients from DFCI and 129 patients from UCSD. Concomitant RASi were administered in 30 patients (30%) in the DFCI cohort and 59 (45%) in the UCSD cohort. Median age at ICI initiation was 62.5 years in both cohorts. Median follow-up was 3.8 [IQR 3-5.3] years in the DFCI cohort, and 2.3 [IQR 1.4-3.6] years in the UCSD cohort. In the DFCI cohort, RASi was significantly associated with longer OS (adjusted-HR 0.35 [95% CI, 0.17-0.70], P = .003) and TTF (adjusted-HR 0.57 [0.36-0.92], P = .02). In the validation cohort, RASi was associated with TTF (adjusted HR, 0.60 [0.39-0.92], P = .02) and not statistically associated with OS (adjusted-HR 0.60 [0.34-1.06], P = .07). The propensity analysis, matching 83 patients from both cohorts receiving RASi while on ICI with 83 who did not, showed that RASi significantly improved OS (HR 0.59 [0.37-0.95], P = .03) and TTF (HR 0.60 [0.43-0.85], P = .0034).ConclusionsRASi was associated with improved OS and TTF in mRCC patients receiving ICI. This provides a rationale for prospective randomized studies combining ICI and RASi in mRCC patients.

Project description:BackgroundImmune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) are an important treatment for metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). These agents may cause immune-related adverse events (irAEs), and the relationship between irAEs and outcomes is poorly understood. We investigated the association between irAEs and clinical outcomes in patients with mRCC treated with ICIs.MethodsWe performed a retrospective study of 200 patients with mRCC treated with ICIs at Winship Cancer Institute from 2015 to 2020. Data on irAEs were collected from clinic notes and laboratory values and grades were determined using Common Terminology Criteria in Adverse Events version 5.0. The association with overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) was modeled by Cox proportional hazards model. Logistic regression models were used to define odds ratios (ORs) for clinical benefit (CB). Landmark analysis and extended Cox models were used to mitigate lead-time bias by treating irAEs as a time-varying covariate.ResultsMost patients (71.0%) were male, and one-third of patients (33.0%) experienced at least one irAE, most commonly involving the endocrine glands (13.0%), gastrointestinal tract (10.5%), or skin (10.0%). Patients who experienced irAEs had significantly longer OS (hazard ratio [HR], 0.52; p = .013), higher chance of CB (OR, 2.10; p = .023) and showed a trend toward longer PFS (HR, 0.71; p = .065) in multivariate analysis. Patients who had endocrine irAEs, particularly thyroid irAEs, had significantly longer OS and PFS and higher chance of CB. In a 14-week landmark analysis, irAEs were significantly associated with prolonged OS (p = .045). Patients who experienced irAEs had significantly longer median OS (44.5 vs. 18.2 months, p = .005) and PFS (7.5 vs. 3.6 months, p = .003) without landmark compared with patients who did not.ConclusionWe found that patients with mRCC treated with ICIs who experienced irAEs, particularly thyroid irAEs, had significantly improved clinical outcomes compared with patients who did not have irAEs. This suggests that irAEs may be effective clinical biomarkers in patients with mRCC treated with ICIs. Future prospective studies are warranted to validate these findings.Implications for practiceThis study found that early onset immune-related adverse events (irAEs) are associated with significantly improved clinical outcomes in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs). In this site-specific irAE analysis, endocrine irAEs, particularly thyroid irAEs, were significantly associated with improved clinical outcomes. These results have implications for practicing medical oncologists given the increasing use of ICIs for the treatment of mRCC. Importantly, these results suggest that early irAEs and thyroid irAEs at any time on treatment with ICIs may be clinical biomarkers of clinical outcomes in patients with mRCC treated with ICIs.

Project description:BackgroundImmune-checkpoint-inhibitors (ICIs) have become the cornerstone of metastatic renal-cell-carcinoma (mRCC) therapy. However, data are limited regarding clinical outcomes by race. In this study, we compared the real-world outcomes between African American (AA) and Caucasian mRCC patients treated with ICIs.MethodsWe performed a retrospective study of 198 patients with mRCC who received ICI at the Emory Winship Cancer Institute from 2015-2020. Clinical outcomes were measured by overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall response rate (ORR) defined as a complete or partial response maintained for at least 6 months per response evaluation criteria in solid tumors version 1.1. Univariate and multivariable analyses were carried out for OS and PFS by Cox proportional-hazard model and ORR by logistical-regression model. Descriptive statistics compared rates of immune-related adverse events (irAEs) and non-clear-cell-RCC (nccRCC) histology were assessed using Chi-square test.ResultsOur cohort was comprised of 38 AA and 160 Caucasian patients. Most were diagnosed with clear-cell-RCC (ccRCC) (78%) and more than half received (57%) PD-1/PD-L1 monotherapy. Most patients were intermediate or poor-risk groups (83%). Comparing to Caucasians, our AA cohort contained more females and nccRCC cases. Kaplan-Meier method showed AAs had no statistically different median OS (17 vs 25 months, p=0.368) and PFS (3.1 vs 4.4 months, p=0.068) relative to Caucasian patients. On multivariable analysis, AA patients had significantly shorter PFS (HR=1.52, 95% CI: 1.01-2.3, p=0.045), similar ORR (OR=1.04, 95% CI: 0.42-2.57, p=0.936) and comparable OS (HR=1.09, 95% CI: 0.61-1.95, p=0.778) relative to Caucasians.ConclusionsOur real-world analysis of ICI-treated mRCC patients showed that AAs experienced shorter PFS but similar OS relative to Caucasians. This similarity in survival outcomes is reassuring for the use of ICI amongst real-world patient populations, however, the difference in treatment response is poorly represented in early outcomes data from clinical trials. Thus, the literature requires larger prospective studies to validate these findings.

Dataset Information

Novel Risk Scoring System for Patients with Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Treated with Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors.

Publications

Novel Risk Scoring System for Patients with Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Treated with Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets