scholarly journals A case of novel coronavirus disease after combination therapy with nivolumab and ipilimumab for metastatic renal cell carcinoma

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yu Kijima ◽  
Tomokazu Shimizu ◽  
Shinya Kato ◽  
Eri Sekido ◽  
Kana Kano ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Renal Cell Carcinoma ◽  
Combination Therapy ◽  
Cell Carcinoma ◽  
Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma ◽  
Renal Cell ◽  
Novel Coronavirus

Lenvatinib in the management of metastatic renal cell carcinoma: a promising combination therapy?

2018 ◽  
Vol 14 (4) ◽  
pp. 461-467 ◽  
Author(s):  
Delia De Lisi ◽  
Ugo De Giorgi ◽  
Cristian Lolli ◽  
Giuseppe Schepisi ◽  
Vincenza Conteduca ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Renal Cell Carcinoma ◽  
Combination Therapy ◽  
Cell Carcinoma ◽  
Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma ◽  
Renal Cell

Second-line VEGF TKI after IO combination therapy: Results from the International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium (IMDC).

2020 ◽  
Vol 38 (6_suppl) ◽  
pp. 684-684
Author(s):  
Igor Stukalin ◽  
Shaan Dudani ◽  
Connor Wells ◽  
Chun Loo Gan ◽  
Sumanta K. Pal ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Renal Cell Carcinoma ◽  
Combination Therapy ◽  
Cell Carcinoma ◽  
Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma ◽  
Renal Cell ◽  
Cox Regression ◽  
Response Rates ◽  
Second Line ◽  
First Line ◽  
Cox Regression Analysis

684 Background: Immuno-Oncology (IO) combinations are standard of care first-line treatment for metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). Data on therapy with vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKI) post-progression on IO-combination therapy are limited. Methods: Using the IMDC, a retrospective analysis was done on mRCC patients treated with second-line VEGF TKIs after receiving IO combination therapy. Patients received first-line ipilimumab+nivolumab (IOIO) or anti-PD(L)1+anti-VEGF (IOVE). Baseline variables and second-line IMDC risk factors were collected. Overall response rates (ORR), time to treatment failure (TTF) and overall survival (OS) were determined. Multivariable Cox regression analysis was performed. Results: 142 patients were included. 75 patients received IOIO and 67 received IOVE pretreatment. The ORR of 2nd line therapy was 17/46 (37%) and 7/57 (12%) in the IOIO and IOVE pretreated groups, respectively (p<0.01). 2nd-line TTF was 5.4 months (95% CI 4.1-8.3) for the IOIO- and 4.6 months (95% CI 3.7-5.8) for the IOVE-pretreated group (p=0.37). 2nd-line median OS was 17.2 months (95% CI 10.8-35.1) and 11.8 months (95% CI 9.9-21.3) for the prior IOIO and IOVE groups, respectively (p=0.13). The hazard ratio adjusted by IMDC for IOVE vs IOIO pretreatment was 1.22 (95% CI 0.73-2.07, p=0.45) for 2nd line TTF and 1.43 (95% CI 0.74-2.8, p=0.29) for 2nd line OS. Conclusions: VEGF TKIs show activity after combination IO therapy. Response rates are higher in patients treated with VEGF TKIs after first-line IOIO compared to after IOVE. In patients with VEGF TKI after IOIO or IOVE, no difference in OS and TTF was observed.[Table: see text]

scholarly journals TiNivo: safety and efficacy of tivozanib-nivolumab combination therapy in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma

2021 ◽  
Vol 32 (1) ◽  
pp. 97-102 ◽  
Author(s):  
L. Albiges ◽  
P. Barthélémy ◽  
M. Gross-Goupil ◽  
S. Negrier ◽  
M.N. Needle ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Renal Cell Carcinoma ◽  
Combination Therapy ◽  
Cell Carcinoma ◽  
Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma ◽  
Renal Cell ◽  
Safety And Efficacy

scholarly journals Combination therapy for metastatic renal cell carcinoma

2016 ◽  
Vol 4 (5) ◽  
pp. 100-100 ◽  
Author(s):  
Carlo Buonerba ◽  
Giuseppe Di Lorenzo ◽  
Guru Sonpavde
Keyword(s):  
Renal Cell Carcinoma ◽  
Combination Therapy ◽  
Cell Carcinoma ◽  
Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma ◽  
Renal Cell

Combination therapy with nivolumab and tyrosine kinase inhibitors in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma.

2020 ◽  
Vol 38 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e17090-e17090
Author(s):  
Benjamin Garmezy ◽  
Tian Zhang ◽  
Andrew Leonard Laccetti ◽  
Minas P. Economides ◽  
Amishi Yogesh Shah ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Renal Cell Carcinoma ◽  
Weight Loss ◽  
Combination Therapy ◽  
Tyrosine Kinase ◽  
Cell Carcinoma ◽  
Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma ◽  
Renal Cell ◽  
Systemic Treatments ◽  
Metastatic Sites

e17090 Background: Two immunotherapy (IO) and tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) combinations are FDA-approved for patients (pts) with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). Here we present a multicenter off-protocol experience with IO/TKI combinations after progression on monotherapy. Methods: We performed a retrospective analysis of pts with mRCC who received combination non-FDA approved off-protocol IO/TKI combination therapy from 11/2015 – 1/2019 at MD Anderson Cancer Center and Duke Cancer Institute. Results: 48 pts met criteria for study inclusion. At therapy start: median (med) age 65 years; 75% clear cell histology; 68.8% IMDC intermediate risk (20.8% favorable, 10.4% poor); 81.3% prior nephrectomy; med metastatic sites: 2; med prior systemic treatments: 2; most common metastatic sites: lung (58.3%), lymph node (52.1%), and bone (43.8%). Pts received nivolumab (nivo) in combination with the following: cabozantinib (n = 24, 50%), pazopanib (13, 27.1%), axitinib (6, 12.5%), lenvatinib (2, 4.2%), ipilimumab/cabozantinib (3, 6.3%). Med PFS was 13.7 months and med OS was not reached. The two largest cohorts received nivo + cabozantinib (N+C; med dose 40 mg daily) or nivo + pazopanib (N+P; med dose 400 mg daily). The N+C cohort had higher med metastatic sites (3 vs 2) and was more pretreated with agents unique to their IO/TKI combination (med 2 vs 0). In the N+P group, more pts had started on TKI prior to addition of nivo at progression (69.2% vs 45.8%), and fewer had IO monotherapy with TKI addition (30.8% vs 50%). With a med follow up of 14.0 months after combination start, the N+C cohort had a med PFS of 7.3 months (initiated TKI first: 4.8, IO first: 8.2) and med OS of 18.2 months (TKI first: 11.8, IO first: 24.3). The N+P cohort had med follow up of 20.5 months after combination, med PFS of 21.3 months (TKI first: 16.5, IO first: 21.8), and med OS was not reached. In the N+C group, 87.5% experienced any grade adverse event (AE), most common included fatigue (79.2%), diarrhea (42.7%), nausea (29.2%), hypertension (29.2%), and weight loss (25.0%). In the N+P group, 92.3% experienced any grade AE, including fatigue (76.9%), hypertension (38.5%), diarrhea (30.8%), nausea (30.8%), and weight loss (30.8%). There were no grade ≥3 AEs. Conclusions: Slow disease progression on nivo or TKI may be safely controlled with addition of IO/TKI therapy. Med PFS after addition of nivo to TKI appears similar (N+C) and improved (N+P) compared to nivo monotherapy (Checkmate-025). Med PFS after addition of TKI to IO was also similar (N+C) and improved (N+P) compared to historical controls.

Randomized Phase III Trial of Temsirolimus and Bevacizumab Versus Interferon Alfa and Bevacizumab in Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma: INTORACT Trial

2014 ◽  
Vol 32 (8) ◽  
pp. 752-759 ◽  
Author(s):  
Brian I. Rini ◽  
Joaquim Bellmunt ◽  
Jill Clancy ◽  
Kongming Wang ◽  
Andreas G. Niethammer ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Renal Cell Carcinoma ◽  
Combination Therapy ◽  
Cell Carcinoma ◽  
Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma ◽  
Renal Cell ◽  
Clear Cell ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Interferon Alfa ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Cancer Center

PurposeTo prospectively determine the efficacy of combination therapy with temsirolimus plus bevacizumab versus interferon alfa (IFN) plus bevacizumab in metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC).Patients and MethodsIn a randomized, open-label, multicenter, phase III study, patients with previously untreated predominantly clear-cell mRCC were randomly assigned, stratified by prior nephrectomy and Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center prognostic group, to receive the combination of either temsirolimus (25 mg intravenously, weekly) or IFN (9 MIU subcutaneously thrice weekly) with bevacizumab (10 mg/kg intravenously, every 2 weeks). The primary end point was independently assessed progression-free survival (PFS).ResultsMedian PFS in patients treated with temsirolimus/bevacizumab (n = 400) versus IFN/bevacizumab (n = 391) was 9.1 and 9.3 months, respectively (hazard ratio [HR], 1.1; 95% CI, 0.9 to 1.3; P = .8). There were no significant differences in overall survival (25.8 ν 25.5 months; HR, 1.0; P = .6) or objective response rate (27.0% ν 27.4%) with temsirolimus/bevacizumab versus IFN/bevacizumab, respectively. Patients receiving temsirolimus/bevacizumab reported significantly higher overall mean scores in the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy–Kidney Symptom Index (FKSI) –15 and FKSI-Disease Related Symptoms subscale compared with IFN/bevacizumab (indicating improvement); however, no differences in global health outcome measures were observed. Treatment-emergent all-causality grade ≥ 3 adverse events more common (P < .001) with temsirolimus/bevacizumab were mucosal inflammation, stomatitis, hypophosphatemia, hyperglycemia, and hypercholesterolemia, whereas neutropenia was more common with IFN/bevacizumab. Incidence of pneumonitis with temsirolimus/bevacizumab was 4.8%, mostly grade 1 or 2.ConclusionTemsirolimus/bevacizumab combination therapy was not superior to IFN/bevacizumab for first-line treatment in clear-cell mRCC.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document