Search

Background and Objective: Combinations of VEGFR-TKIs plus ICI against PD1/PD-L1 are the standard first-line therapy for patients with mRCC, irrespective of the prognostic class. This study aims to investigate the feasibility and safety of withdrawing the VEGFR-TKI but continuing the anti- PD1/PD-L1 in patients who achieve response to their combination., Methods: This was a single-arm phase 2 trial in patients with treatment naïve mRCC with prior nephrectomy, without symptomatic/bulky disease and no liver metastases. Enrolled patients received axitinib+avelumab, after 36 weeks of therapy those who achieved tumor response interrupted axitinib and continued avelumab maintenance until disease progression. The primary endpoint was the rate of patients without progression eight weeks after the axitinib interruption. Secondary endpoints were the median value for progression free (mPFS) and overall survival (mOS) and the safety in the overall population., Key Findings and Limitations: 79 patients were enrolled and 75 evaluated for efficacy. A total of 29 (38%) patients had axitinib withdrawn, as per the study design, with 72% of them having no progression after eight weeks and thus achieving the primary endpoint. The mPFS of the overall population was 24 months while the mOS was not reached. The ORR was 76% (12% CR, 64% PR), with 19% of patients having stable disease. In the patients who discontinued axitinib, the incidence of AEs of any grade was 59% and 3% for grade 3 or 4. This study was limited by the lack of the comparative arm., Conclusions and Clinical Implications: The TIDE-A study demonstrates that the withdrawal of VEGFR-TKI with ICI maintenance is feasible for selected mRCC patients with evidence of response to the VEGFR-TKI+ICI combination employed in first-line therapy. Axitinib interruption with avelumab maintenance led to decreased side effects and should be further investigated as a new strategy to delay tumor progression., (Copyright © 2024 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Background: Platinum-based chemotherapy (PBCT) is the standard first-line treatment for advanced urothelial carcinoma (UC). Potential cross-sensitivity can be hypothesized between platinum drugs and poly-ADP ribose-polymerase (PARP) inhibitors., Objective: To compare maintenance treatment with the PARP inhibitor niraparib plus best supportive care (BSC) versus BSC alone in patients with advanced UC without disease progression after first-line PBCT., Design, Setting, and Participants: Meet-URO12 is a randomized, multicenter, open-label phase 2 trial. Patients with advanced UC, without disease progression after four to six cycles of PBCT, with Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status 0 or 1, were enrolled between August 2019 and March 2021. Randomization was stratified by ECOG performance status (0/1) and response to PBCT (objective response/stable disease)., Intervention: Patients were randomized (2:1) to experimental arm A (niraparib 300 or 200 mg daily according to body weight and baseline platelets, plus BSC) or control arm B (BSC alone)., Outcome Measurements and Statistical Analysis: The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS). The analysis was performed on an intention-to-treat basis. The secondary endpoints reported in this primary analysis are progression-free rate at 6 mo and safety (adverse event rate)., Results and Limitations: Fifty-eight patients were randomized (39 in arm A and 19 in arm B). The median age was 69 yr, ECOG performance status was 0 in 66% and 1 in 34%; and the best response with chemotherapy was objective response in 55% and stable disease in 45%. The median PFS was 2.1 mo in arm A and 2.4 mo in arm B (hazard ratio 0.92; 95% confidence interval 0.49-1.75, p = 0.81). The 6-mo progression-free rates were 28.2% and 26.3%, respectively. The most common adverse events with niraparib were anemia (50%, grade [G]3 11%), thrombocytopenia (37%, G3-4 16%), neutropenia (21%, G3 5%), fatigue (32%, G3 16%), constipation (32%, G3 3%), mucositis (13%, G3 3%), and nausea (13%, G3 3%). The main limitation of the study is the small sample size: in March 2021, approval of maintenance avelumab for the same setting rendered randomization of patients in the control arm to BSC alone unethical, and accrual was stopped prematurely., Conclusions: Addition of maintenance niraparib to BSC after first-line PBCT did not demonstrate a significant improvement in PFS in patients with UC. These results do not support the conduction of a phase 3 trial with single agent niraparib in this population., Patient Summary: In this trial, we tested the efficacy of niraparib as maintenance treatment in patients affected by advanced urothelial cancer after the completion of first-line chemotherapy. We could not demonstrate a significant improvement in progression-free survival with maintenance niraparib., (Copyright © 2022 European Association of Urology. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)