Search

Background: Surgery for renal cell carcinoma (RCC) with venous tumour thrombus (VTT) extension into the renal vein (RV) and/or inferior vena cava (IVC) has high peri-surgical morbidity/mortality. NAXIVA assessed the response of VTT to axitinib, a potent tyrosine kinase inhibitor.Methods: NAXIVA was a single-arm, multi-centre, Phase 2 study. In total, 20 patients with resectable clear cell RCC and VTT received upto 8 weeks of pre-surgical axitinib. The primary endpoint was percentage of evaluable patients with VTT improvement by Mayo level on MRI. Secondary endpoints were percentage change in surgical approach and VTT length, response rate (RECISTv1.1) and surgical morbidity.Results: In all, 35% (7/20) patients with VTT had a reduction in Mayo level with axitinib: 37.5% (6/16) with IVC VTT and 25% (1/4) with RV-only VTT. No patients had an increase in Mayo level. In total, 75% (15/20) of patients had a reduction in VTT length. Overall, 41.2% (7/17) of patients who underwent surgery had less invasive surgery than originally planned. Non-responders exhibited lower baseline microvessel density (CD31), higher Ki67 and exhausted or regulatory T-cell phenotype.Conclusions: NAXIVA provides the first Level II evidence that axitinib downstages VTT in a significant proportion of patients leading to reduction in the extent of surgery.Clinical Trial Registration: NCT03494816. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Simple Summary: The drug sunitinib is used in metastatic renal cell carcinoma, but patients respond very differently to this drug. To better tailor sunitinib treatment to the individual patient, clinically useful markers are needed. We explored the DNA of patients with metastatic renal cell cancer to detect variations that determine how a patient would respond to sunitinib treatment. We investigated >8 million genetic variants in large patient cohorts from Europe (n = 550) and Japan (n = 204) and found novel genetic variants in PDLIM3 and DSCAM that are related to survival in sunitinib-treated patients. The mechanistic role of these variants in the action of sunitinib needs to be further explored to define its clinical potential. Our findings are a major step towards achieving personalized treatment for patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma. Individual response to sunitinib in metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) patients is highly variable. Earlier, sunitinib outcome was related to single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in CYP3A5 and ABCB1. Our aim is to provide novel insights into biological mechanisms underlying sunitinib action. We included mRCC patients from the European EuroTARGET consortium (n = 550) and the RIKEN cohort in Japan (n = 204) which were analysed separately and in a meta-analysis of genome-wide association studies (GWAS). SNPs were tested for association with progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) using Cox regression. Summary statistics were combined using a fixed effect meta-analysis. SNP rs28520013 in PDLIM3 and the correlated SNPs rs2205096 and rs111356738 both in DSCAM, showed genome-wide significance (p < 5 × 10−8) with PFS and OS in the meta-analysis. The variant T-allele of rs28520013 associated with an inferior PFS of 5.1 months compared to 12.5 months in non-carriers (p = 4.02 × 10−10, HR = 7.26). T-allele carriers of rs28520013 showed an inferior OS of 6.9 months versus 30.2 months in non-carriers (p = 1.62 × 10−8, HR = 5.96). In this GWAS we identified novel genetic variants in PDLIM3 and DSCAM that impact PFS and OS in mRCC patients receiving sunitinib. The underlying link between the identified genes and the molecular mechanisms of sunitinib action needs to be elucidated. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) treated with targeted systemic therapies have demonstrated favourable outcomes in randomised controlled trials, however real-world evidence is limited. Thus, this study aimed to determine the effectiveness of targeted systemic therapies for patients with mRCC in routine clinical practice in the UK.Methods: A retrospective, observational, longitudinal study based on chart review of newly diagnosed adult mRCC patients treated at two UK hospitals from 2008 to 2015 was conducted. Targeted systemic therapies recommended for use in mRCC patients were evaluated across first to third lines of therapy (1LOT-3LOT). Important exclusions were treatment with cytokine therapy and within non-standard of care clinical trials. Primary outcome measure was overall survival (OS); data were analysed descriptively and using Kaplan-Meyer analysis.Results: 652 patients (65.3% male, 35.0% ≥70 years) were included. In 1LOT, 98.5% of patients received sunitinib or pazopanib. In 2LOT and 3LOT, 99.0 and 94.4% received axitinib or everolimus. Median OS was 12.9, 6.5 and 5.9 months at 1LOT, 2LOT and 3LOT respectively. Estimated OS at 1-year was 52.4% (95% CI: 48.6-56.4%) in 1LOT, 31.5% (25.2-39.5%) in 2LOT and 23.8% (10.1-55.9%) in 3LOT. Median OS from 1LOT in favourable, intermediate and poor MSKCC were 39.7, 15.8 and 6.1 months respectively.Conclusions: In this study, treatment was consistent with current National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) guidelines for mRCC patients. Although the study population favoured poorer prognosis patients, outcomes were more favourable than those for England at the same time. However, overall survival in this 'real-world' population remains poor and indicates significant unmet need for effective and safe treatment options to improve survival among mRCC patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: The efficacy of VEGF-targeting therapies in clinical trials led to their recommendation in clinical guidelines for use across the advanced or metastatic renal cell carcinoma (RCC) treatment landscape, however, tolerability (including off-target effects) has remained a challenge. Tivozanib is a selective inhibitor of all three VEGFRs, with limited off-target interaction, which demonstrates efficacy with improved tolerability relative to multikinase VEGFR-TKIs. Areas covered: Covered here is the clinical development of tivozanib in advanced RCC, including the pivotal Phase III, multicenter, open-label, randomized clinical study comparing tivozanib with sorafenib for the treatment of VEGF- and mTOR therapy-naïve advanced RCC patients. Also covered are ongoing trials, exploring the efficacy and safety of tivozanib in the setting of refractory disease and the utility of tivozanib in combination with checkpoint inhibitors for advanced RCC. Combination of a VEGFR-TKI and immunotherapy is promising in advanced RCC, if the treatment regimens have acceptable tolerability. Here the selectivity of tivozanib may contribute to an acceptable tolerability profile when used in combination therapy. Expert commentary: The approval of tivozanib provides an additional option for the first-line treatment of advanced or metastatic RCC patients in Europe and allows use of a VEGFR-TKI with selectivity for VEGFRs in this setting. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: To test the hypothesis that cytoreductive nephrectomy (CN) improves overall survival (OS) of patients with synchronous metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC), who subsequently receive targeted therapies (TT). Methods: We identified 261 patients who received TT for synchronous mRCC with or without prior CN. To achieve balance in baseline characteristics between groups, we used the inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) method. We conducted OS analyses, including IPTW-adjusted Kaplan-Meier curves, Cox regression models, interaction term, and landmark and sensitivity analyses. Results: Of the 261 patients, 97 (37.2%) received CN and 164 (62.8%) did not. IPTW-adjusted analyses showed a statistically significant OS benefit for patients treated with CN (HR 0.63, 95% CI 0.46-0.83, P = 0.0015). While there was no statistically significant difference in OS at 3 months (P = 0.97), 6 months (P = 0.67), and 12 months (P = 0.11) from diagnosis, a benefit for the CN group was noted at 18 months (P = 0.005) and 24 months (P = 0.004). On interaction term analyses, the beneficial effect of CN increased with better performance status (P = 0.06), in women (P = 0.03), and in patients with thrombocytosis (P = 0.01). Conclusions: IPTW-adjusted analysis of our patient cohort suggests that CN improves OS of patients with synchronous mRCC treated with TT. On the whole, the survival difference appears after 12 months. Specific subgroups may particularly benefit from CN, and these subgroups warrant further investigation in prospective trials. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background. With the advent of targeted therapies, many treatment options in the first-line setting of metastatic clear cell renal cell carcinoma (mccRCC) have emerged. Guidelines and randomized trial reports usually do not elucidate the decision criteria for the different treatment options. In order to extract the decision criteria for the optimal therapy for patients, we performed an analysis of treatment algorithms from experts in the field. Materials and Methods. Treatment algorithms for the treatment of mccRCC from experts of 11 institutions we re obtained, and decision trees were deduced. Treatment options were identified and a list of unified decision criteria determined. The final decision trees were analyzed with a methodology based on diagnostic nodes, which allows for an automated cross-comparison of decision trees. The most common treatment recommendations were determined, and areas of discordance were identified. Results. The analysis revealed heterogeneity in most clinical scenarios. The recommendations selected for first-line treatment of mccRCC included sunitinib, pazopanib, temsirolimus, interferon-α combined with bevacizumab, high-dose interleukin-2, sorafenib, axitinib, everolimus, and best supportive care. The criteria relevant for treatment decisions were performance status, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center risk group, only or mainly lung metastases, cardiac insufficiency, hepatic insufficiency, age, and "zugzwang" (composite of multiple, related criteria). Conclusion. In the present study, we used diagnostic nodes to compare treatment algorithms in the first-line treatment of mccRCC. The results illustrate the heterogeneity of the decision criteria and treatment strategies for mccRCC and how available data are interpreted and implemented differently among experts. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Since the Von Hippel-Lindau (VHL) disease tumour suppressor gene VHL was identified in 1993 as the genetic basis for a rare disorder, it has proved to be of wide medical and scientific interest. VHL tumour suppressor protein (pVHL) plays a key part in cellular oxygen sensing by targeting hypoxia-inducible factors for ubiquitylation and proteasomal degradation. Early inactivation of VHL is commonly seen in clear-cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC), and insights gained from the functional analysis of pVHL have provided the foundation for the routine treatment of advanced-stage ccRCC with novel targeted therapies. However, recent sequencing studies have identified additional driver genes that are involved in the pathogenesis of ccRCC. As our understanding of the importance of VHL matures, it is timely to review progress from its initial description to current knowledge of VHL biology, as well as future prospects for novel medical treatments for VHL disease and ccRCC. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: We investigated potential biomarkers of efficacy in a phase III trial of sunitinib versus interferon-alpha (IFN-α), first-line in metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC), by analyzing plasma levels of vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF)-A, VEGF-C, soluble VEGF receptor-3 (sVEGFR-3) and interleukin (IL)-8. Methods: Seven hundred and fifty mRCC patients were randomized to oral sunitinib 50 mg/day in repeated cycles of a 4-week on/2-week off schedule or IFN-α 9 million units subcutaneously thrice weekly. Plasma samples collected from a subset of 63 patients on days 1 and 28 of cycles 1-4 and at end of treatment were analyzed by ELISA. Results: Baseline characteristics of biomarker-evaluated patients in sunitinib ( N = 33) and IFN-α ( N = 30) arms were comparable to their respective intent-to-treat populations. By univariate Cox regression analysis, low baseline soluble protein levels were associated with lower risk of progression/death (all P < 0.05): in both treatment arms, baseline VEGF-A and IL-8 were associated with overall survival (OS) and baseline VEGF-C with progression-free survival (PFS); in the sunitinib arm, baseline VEGF-A was associated with PFS and baseline sVEGFR-3 with PFS and OS; in the IFN-α arm, baseline IL-8 was associated with PFS. In multivariate analysis, baseline sVEGFR-3 and IL-8 remained independent predictors of OS in the sunitinib arm, while no independent predictors of outcome remained in the IFN-α arm. Pharmacodynamic changes were not associated with PFS or OS for any plasma protein investigated. Conclusions: Our findings suggest that, in mRCC, baseline VEGF-A and IL-8 may have prognostic value, while baseline sVEGFR-3 may predict sunitinib efficacy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose Some targeted anticancer agents are associated with serious ventricular tachyarrhythmias, which may be predicted by electrocardiographic evaluation of drug-related QT prolongation. We studied the effects of nintedanib (BIBF 1120; an oral, triple angiokinase inhibitor targeting vascular endothelial growth factor, fibroblast growth factor, and platelet-derived growth factor receptors) on the QT interval in patients with renal cell carcinoma (RCC) participating in an open-label phase II trial. Methods Treatment-naïve, adult patients with unresectable/metastatic, clear cell RCC received nintedanib 200 mg twice daily. QT intervals were evaluated at baseline (day −1), on day 1 (after the first dose), and on day 15 (steady state) by 12-lead electrocardiograms (ECGs) performed in triplicate. Pharmacokinetic sampling was also undertaken. Results Among 64 evaluable patients, the upper limits of the 2-sided 90 % confidence intervals for the adjusted mean time-matched changes in QTcF interval (corrected for heart rate by Fridericia's method) from baseline to day 1 and 15 (primary ECG endpoint) were well below the regulatory threshold of 10 ms at all times. No relationship between nintedanib exposure and change from baseline in QTcF was seen. Nintedanib was generally well tolerated with no drug-related cardiovascular adverse events. Conclusion Nintedanib administered at 200 mg twice daily was not associated with clinically relevant QT prolongation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: We assessed temporal shifts in the frequency of risk factors for patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma in a multicenter, international data set. Materials and Methods: An international database of 3,748 patients treated with systemic therapy for metastatic renal cell carcinoma from 1975 to 2002 was constructed by pooling clinical trial data. Proportions of previously identified risk factors were examined during 6 specified time cohorts. Overall survival for each cohort was examined using the Kaplan-Meier method. Trends in overall survival from 1973 to 2008 were also examined in 25,271 patients from the SEER (Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results) database. Results: Median overall survival from start of treatment increased with each consecutive time cohort group. In the earliest cohort median overall survival was 0.5 years (95% CI 0.43–0.57), which increased to 1.63 years (95% CI 1.28–1.79) in 2001 to 2002. More patients had a history of nephrectomy in the most recent cohort (p = 0.001). The proportion of patients with low performance status, high lactate dehydrogenase and high adjusted calcium decreased by study entry year (each p <0.01). Analysis of overall survival from the SEER database showed similar improvement in the more contemporary diagnosis cohorts (p <0.001). Two-year overall survival in the earliest and latest diagnosis cohort was 14% (95% CI 13–14) and 22% (95% CI 21–24), respectively. Conclusions: Higher representation of favorable risk factors in recent years may have partly contributed to the improvement in overall survival observed in more recent metastatic renal cell carcinoma clinical trials. These shifts could affect the outcome interpretation. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Summary: Background: Regorafenib inhibits VEGF receptors 1, 2, and 3 and PDGF receptors like other anti-angiogenic tyrosine-kinase inhibitors approved for treatment of advanced renal-cell cancer. Regorafenib also inhibits other potentially important angiogenic kinases like TIE2, activation of which is thought to be important in tumour escape mechanisms. This phase 2, open-label, non-randomised study assessed the safety and efficacy of the multikinase inhibitor regorafenib for treatment of renal-cell carcinoma. Methods: Patients were recruited from 18 academic oncology centres across Europe and USA. Patients with previously untreated metastatic or unresectable clear-cell renal-cell carcinoma received oral regorafenib (160 mg per day) in repeating cycles of 3 weeks on, 1 week off until disease progression or until patients met the criteria for removal from study. The primary efficacy endpoint was the proportion of patients who achieved an objective overall response, assessed in all patients who were evaluable for response. The trial has finished. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00664326. Findings: The study was done between April 30, 2008, and June 1, 2011. We screened 64 patients, of whom 49 received regorafenib. Median duration of treatment was 7·1 months (range 0·7–34·4, IQR 2·5–18·0) and at the time of data cutoff, six patients (12%) were still receiving treatment. 48 patients were assessable for tumour response. 19 patients (39·6%, 90% CI 27·7–52·5) had an objective response, all of which were partial responses. Drug-related adverse events occurred in 48 patients (98%) and drug-related serious adverse events in 17 (35%). Grade 3 drug-related adverse events were common, most frequently hand and foot skin reaction (16 patients, 33%), diarrhoea (five patients, 10%), renal failure (five patients, 10%), fatigue (four patients, 8%), and hypertension (three patients, 6%). Two patients had grade 4 treatment-related adverse events: two cardiac ischaemia or infarction, one hypomagnesaemia, and one pain in the chest or thorax. Four patients died during study treatment or within 30 days of last dose, of which two were deemed likely to be related to the study drug. Interpretation: Regorafenib has antitumour activity as first-line treatment for metastatic or unresectable renal-cell carcinoma. The drug''s safety profile requires close monitoring. Funding: Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

With the advent of targeted agents for the treatment of renal cell carcinoma (RCC), overall survival has improved, and patients are being treated continuously for increasingly long periods of time. This has raised challenges in the management of adverse events (AEs) associated with the six targeted agents approved in RCC—sorafenib, sunitinib, pazopanib, bevacizumab (in combination with interferon alpha), temsirolimus, and everolimus. Suggestions for monitoring and managing AEs have been published, but there are few consensus recommendations. In addition, there is a risk that patients will be subjected to multiple unnecessary investigations. In this review, we aimed to identify the level of supporting evidence for suggested AE management strategies to provide practical guidance on essential monitoring and management that should be undertaken when using targeted agents. Five databases were systematically searched for relevant English language articles (including American Society of Clinical Oncology abstracts) published between January 2007 and March 2011; European Society of Medical Oncology congress abstracts were hand searched. Strategies for AE management were summarized and categorized according to the level of recommendation. A total of 107 articles were identified that describe a large number of different investigations for monitoring AEs and interventions for AE management. We identify and summarize clear recommendations for the management of dermatologic, gastrointestinal, thyroid, cardiovascular, and other AEs, based predominantly on expert opinion. However, because the evidence for the suggested management strategies is largely anecdotal, there is a need for further systematic investigation of management strategies for AEs related to targeted therapies for RCC. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

• Six targeted agents - sorafenib, sunitinib, pazopanib, bevacizumab, temsirolimus and everolimus - have been approved for the treatment of advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC) based on evidence from large randomized controlled trials (RCTs). However, no head-to-head trials have been conducted to evaluate the relative efficacy of these agents in this setting. • Patient populations included in clinical trials do not accurately reflect the wider population of patients with RCC, as certain subgroups, such as the elderly or those with co-morbidities, are typically under-represented. • The optimum choice of therapy should be based on patient characteristics, nature of disease, and history and aims of therapy; however, there is currently no clear guidance for physicians in this decision-making process. • A patient-focussed schema has been developed that acknowledges nine different patient-, disease-, and treatment-related factors relevant to clinical decision-making, and provides a visual indication of the strength of evidence with which a particular agent can be recommended for use in specific subgroups. • To demonstrate the applicability of this tool, a review of all available evidence (published articles, congress presentations and personal communications) for sorafenib in RCC was conducted by a panel of experts, findings from which showed that sorafenib can be recommended for use in various subgroups of differing age, prognosis, performance status, tumour burden and distribution, treatment history and co-morbidity. • This patient-focussed approach has broad application and can be used to assess other agents and tumour types. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) show that six targeted agents - sorafenib, sunitinib, temsirolimus, everolimus, bevacizumab and pazopanib - improve outcome in advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC). The populations enrolled in the pivotal phase III studies differed, and, to date, no head-to-head comparisons allow us to judge relative efficacy and tolerability. Populations recruited to RCTs under-represent certain patient subtypes, notably the elderly and those with comorbidities. Choosing the agent most appropriate in a specific case requires that we take into account the characteristics of the patient, the nature of their disease, and the history and aims of therapy. Data from expanded access programmes and clinical experience may be as relevant as the results of RCTs when making this difficult decision. To show how different sources of data can be integrated, we propose a schema that acknowledges nine patient-, disease-, and treatment-related factors relevant to clinical decision-making and provides an easily understood visual indication of the strength with which a particular agent can be recommended for use in specific subgroups of patients. As an example, we show how this tool shows the suitability of sorafenib in RCC subpopulations of differing age, prognosis, performance status, tumour burden and distribution, treatment history, and comorbidity. This patient-focused approach has broad application to other agents and tumour types. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Patients with renal cell carcinoma (RCC) exhibit a spectrum of clinical outcomes, with some patients following an indolent clinical course and others displaying rapidly advancing disease. As evidence points to RCC being largely refractory to traditional chemotherapy and radiotherapy strategies, immunotherapeutic approaches played a dominant role in the management of metastatic RCC for a quarter of a century. Management of this challenging tumor has been revolutionized by the incorporation of molecularly targeted therapies such as inhibitors of pathways involving tyrosine kinase signaling and the mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR). The improvements in disease stabilization and survival seen with these agents has meant that molecularly targeted therapy now forms the foundation for treating RCC and has resulted in a multitude of studies investigating similar compounds for efficacy in RCC. Despite this, the rationale for using immunomodulatory regimens remains strong and its ongoing place in this era of targeted treatments continues to pose interesting clinical questions. The challenge of maintaining durable responses from our current therapies persists and this review highlights the plethora of options now available in RCC treatment and the directions in which modern management are heading. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Summary: Five targeted agents have shown efficacy in advanced renal cell carcinoma. These agents were evaluated in pivotal phase III clinical trials using different treatment settings and different patient populations. As patients encountered in ‘real life’ clinical practice are frequently under-represented in phase III trials, making treatment decisions based on phase III data alone may have limitations. In order to support treatment decisions for patients who do not fit within the inclusion criteria of many phase III trials, physicians must consider additional data sources such as expanded access programmes, sub- and retrospective analyses, and also clinical experience. The suitability of a specific targeted agent for a given patient group, e.g. elderly, will depend on a number of factors, including disease-, patient- and treatment-related characteristics. Here, we identify the need for an individualised patient-focused approach to the management of advanced renal cell carcinoma in clinical practice. In order to optimise therapy for individual patients, we present a schema providing guidance on the wide range of parameters that should be considered when making treatment decisions. We recommend the integration of this approach into everyday clinical practice. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

The incidence of renal cell cancer (RCC) in the elderly is increasing, yet few older patients have been enrolled in prospective clinical trials to evaluate new anti-RCC therapies. The multi-targeted tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI), sorafenib, is now established as a second-line treatment in advanced RCC after immunotherapy failure, and its toxicity profile is manageable. This review discusses the data on the use of anti-RCC agents in the older patient with special emphasis on sorafenib. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Cytoreductive nephrectomy in combination with adjuvant immunotherapy is an established treatment option for selected patients with metastatic clear-cell renal cell carcinoma (mCC-RCC). Multitargeted antiangiogenic and mammalian target of rapamycin tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) are now established treatment paradigms in patients with mCC-RCC. Given that all the recent seminal TKI trials in mCCRCC provide no evidence base for the use of cytoreductive nephrectomy in the TKI era, it is not presently clear where such a surgical approach fits into the treatment paradigm. This review summarizes the evidence for the management of mCC-RCC and outlines novel approaches to be tested within future trials if the initial proposed phase III trials in this setting, using sunitinib, are successful. Overall, two principal questions need addressing. First, is cytoreductive nephrectomy necessary in the TKI era? Second, if so,what is the most appropriate scheduling of TKI therapy with cytoreductive nephrectomy? [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Sorafenib is a potent, orally active multitargeted kinase inhibitor. In vitro, it blocks signaling through several pathways essential for renal cell and other cancers. A large body of evidence has now accrued demonstrating the activity of sorafenib, after immunotherapy failure, in advanced renal cell cancer. Although radiological responses to single-agent sorafenib by standard response evaluation criteria in solid tumors are rare, prolongation of progression-free survival has been demonstrated and is associated with stabilization of anatomically measurable disease. Compared with other available therapies such as cytotoxic chemotherapy and high-dose intravenous interleukin-2, sorafenib is well-tolerated, and studies with this exciting new agent at earlier stages in this fatal disease are awaited. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background The perception that older cancer patients may be at higher risk than younger patients of toxic effects from cancer therapy but may obtain less clinical benefit from it may be based on the underrepresentation of older patients in clinical trials and the known toxic effects of cytotoxic chemotherapy. It is not known how older patients respond to targeted therapy. Methods This retrospective subgroup analysis of data from the phase 3, randomized Treatment Approach in Renal Cancer Global Evaluation Trial examined the safety and efficacy of sorafenib in older (age ⩾70 years, n = 115) and younger patients (age <70 years, n = 787) who received treatment for advanced renal cell carcinoma. Patient demographics and progression-free survival were recorded. Best tumor response, clinical benefit rate (defined as complete response plus partial response plus stable disease), time to self-reported health status deterioration, and toxic effects were assessed by descriptive statistics. Health-related quality of life was assessed with a Cox proportional hazards model. Kaplan-Meier analyses were used to summarize time-to-event data. Results Median progression-free survival was similar in sorafenib-treated younger patients (23.9 weeks; hazard ratio [HR] for progression compared with placebo = 0.55, 95% confidence interval [Cl] = 0.47 to 0.66) and older patients (26.3 weeks; HR = 0.43, 95% Cl = 0.26 to 0.69). Clinical benefit rates among younger and older sorafenib-treated patients were also similar (83.5% and 84.3%, respectively) and were superior to those of younger and older placebo-treated patients (53.8% and 62.2%, respectively). Adverse events were predictable and manageable regardless of age. Sorafenib treatment delayed the time to self-reported health status deterioration among both older patients (121 days with sorafenib vs 85 days with placebo; HR = 0.66, 95% Cl = 0.43 to 1.03) and younger patients (90 days with sorafenib vs 52 days with placebo; HR = 0.69, 95% Cl = 0.59 to 0.81) and improved quality of life over that time. Conclusions Among patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma receiving sorafenib treatment, outcomes of older (⩾70 years) and younger (<70 years) patients were similar. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article presents medical research into prognostic factors in clinical trials for renal cell carcinoma (RCC). Pathological factors include tumor size, spread into the inferior vena cava, and lymphadenopathy. Nonpathological factors include neutrophil count, thrombocytosis, and performance status. Algorithms have been developed that combine clinical, laboratory, and pathological factors.

Abstract: This review summarises available data and describes planned clinical trials designed to evaluate the potential of targeted agents as adjuvant therapy for renal cell carcinoma (RCC). Advanced RCC is refractory to standard cytotoxic chemotherapy, and clinical trials of adjuvant cytokine therapy in this therapeutic setting have not yet demonstrated clear evidence of clinical benefit. However, molecularly targeted therapies may offer a new approach for adjuvant therapy of this disease. Sorafenib (Nexavar®; Bayer Healthcare, West Haven, CT, USA) and sunitinib (Sutent®; Pfizer Inc, New York, NY, USA) are candidates for adjuvant therapy, because they are efficacious in the treatment of metastatic RCC and have side-effect profiles that can usually be well managed during long-term administration. The clinical benefit and tolerability of these agents as adjuvant therapies are being investigated in three ongoing phase 3 trials: ASSURE (adjuvant sorafenib or sunitinib in unfavourable renal cell carcinoma; Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group 2805), STAR (sunitinib trial in adjuvant renal cancer) and SORCE (a phase 3, randomised, double-blind, controlled study comparing sorafenib with placebo in patients with resected primary renal cell carcinoma at high or intermediate risk of relapse). The results of these studies will address important clinical and translational questions, the answers to which may help define future treatment strategies and guide treatments towards the most appropriate patients. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Abstract: Immunotherapy confers a small but significant overall survival advantage in metastatic renal cell carcinoma (RCC) but a need exists to develop more effective systemic therapies. Angiogenesis has a key role in the pathophysiology of renal cell carcinoma and vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) is an important mediator of this process. Sunitinib, sorafenib and axitinib are new agents which belong to a class of drugs called kinase inhibitors and inhibit the VEGF, platelet-derived growth factor (PDGF) and c-KIT receptor tyrosine kinases. Temsirolimus inhibits the mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR). All these agents have shown significant activity with manageable toxicity in metastatic RCC in phase 2 studies in patients generally pretreated with immunotherapy, whilst prolonged progression-free survival in a phase 3 study has been reported with sorafenib in comparison with placebo. Further phase 3 trials are recruiting and the combination of kinase inhibitors with other therapies is under investigation. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

To present our results on managing loco-regional recurrence of renal cell carcinoma (RCC) with surgical excision, as local recurrence at the site of a previous nephrectomy is resistant to both systemic therapy and radiotherapy.In all, 16 patients were operated on between 1994 and 2003 for local recurrence of RCC. The median (mean, range) age at the time of local recurrence was 57.9 (57.4, 28.9–71.7) years, and the median interval from primary surgery 2.22 (3.88, 0.27–14.46) years. Before surgery eight patients had been given systemic immunotherapy, with no response of their local recurrence.Two patients were deemed inoperable because of direct invasion of the great vessels and the liver by tumour. The remaining 14 patients had recurrence in residual adrenal tissue (two), para-aortic nodes (three), para-caval nodes (two), retrocaval nodes (one), renal bed (six), liver, spleen and stomach (one each), and diaphragm (two). Although complete macroscopic en-bloc clearance was achieved in these patients, only eight had tumour-free margins on histological examination. The histology was consistent with RCC recurrence in all cases. All of the patients were followed with computed tomography at regular intervals. At a median follow-up of 1.0 (1.65, 0.25–6.5) years, five patients remain disease-free, four have local and distant relapse, and five developed distant metastasis only. The presence of tumour at the resection margin was a significant factor in predicting local and distant disease-free survival (P < 0.05).En bloc excision of isolated locally recurrent RCC is possible, and complete surgical extirpation can lead to prolonged disease-free survival. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Anti-angiogenic agents, such as the multi-tyrosine kinase inhibitor sunitinib, are key first line therapies for metastatic clear cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC), but their mechanism of action is not fully understood. Here, we take steps towards validating a computational prediction based on differential transcriptome network analysis that phosphorylated adapter RNA export protein (PHAX) is associated with sunitinib drug treatment. The regulatory impact factor differential network algorithm run on patient tissue samples suggests PHAX is likely an important regulator through changes in genome-wide network connectivity. Immunofluorescence staining of patient tumours showed strong localisation of PHAX to the microvasculature consistent with the anti-angiogenic effect of sunitinib. In normal kidney tissue, PHAX protein abundance was low but increased with tumour grade (G1 vs. G3/4; p < 0.01), consistent with a possible role in cancer progression. In organ culture, ccRCC cells had higher levels of PHAX protein expression than normal kidney cells, and sunitinib increased PHAX protein expression in a dose dependent manner (untreated vs. 100 µM; p < 0.05). PHAX knockdown in a ccRCC organ culture model impacted the ability of sunitinib to cause cancer cell death (p < 0.0001 untreated vs. treated), suggesting a role for PHAX in mediating the efficacy of sunitinib. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The current World Health Organization classification recognises 12 major subtypes of renal cell carcinoma (RCC). Although these subtypes differ on molecular and clinical levels, they are generally managed as the same disease, simply because they occur in the same organ. Specifically, there is a paucity of tools to risk-stratify patients with papillary RCC (PRCC). The purpose of this study was to develop and evaluate a tool to risk-stratify patients with clinically non-metastatic PRCC following curative surgery.Methods: We studied clinicopathological variables and outcomes of 556 patients, who underwent full resection of sporadic, unilateral, non-metastatic (T1-4, N0-1, M0) PRCC at five institutions. Based on multivariable Fine-Gray competing risks regression models, we developed a prognostic scoring system to predict disease recurrence. This was further evaluated in the 150 PRCC patients recruited to the ASSURE trial. We compared the discrimination, calibration and decision-curve clinical net benefit against the Tumour, Node, Metastasis (TNM) stage group, University of California Integrated Staging System (UISS) and the 2018 Leibovich prognostic groups.Results: We developed the VENUSS score from significant variables on multivariable analysis, which were the presence of VEnous tumour thrombus, NUclear grade, Size, T and N Stage. We created three risk groups based on the VENUSS score, with a 5-year cumulative incidence of recurrence equalling 2.9% in low-risk, 15.4% in intermediate-risk and 54.5% in high-risk patients. 91.7% of low-risk patients had oligometastatic recurrent disease, compared to 16.7% of intermediate-risk and 40.0% of high-risk patients. Discrimination, calibration and clinical net benefit from VENUSS appeared to be superior to UISS, TNM and Leibovich prognostic groups.Conclusions: We developed and tested a prognostic model for patients with clinically non-metastatic PRCC, which is based on routine pathological variables. This model may be superior to standard models and could be used for tailoring postoperative surveillance and defining inclusion for prospective adjuvant clinical trials. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article comments on the decision of the British National Institute of Health and Clinical Excellence's rejection of novel treatments for renal cell cancer (RCC). These drugs, including sunitinib, sorafenib and temsorolimus, have been found effective in controlling the progression of RCC. But they are very expensive, averaging 3,000 British pounds per month.

Abstract Context Contradictory data exist with regard to adjuvant vascular endothelial growth factor receptor (VEGFR)-targeted therapy in surgically managed patients for localized renal cell carcinoma (RCC). Objective To systematically evaluate the current evidence regarding the therapeutic benefit (disease-free survival [DFS] and overall survival [OS]) and grade 3–4 adverse events (AEs) for adjuvant VEGFR-targeted therapy for resected localized RCC. Evidence acquisition A critical review of PubMed/Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane Library in January 2018 according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) statement was performed. We identified reports and reviewed them according to the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials and Standards for the Reporting of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies criteria. Of eight full-text articles that were eligible for inclusion, five studies (two of five were updated analyses) were retained in the final synthesis. Study characteristics were abstracted and the number needed to treat (NNT) per trial was estimated. Evidence synthesis The three randomized controlled phase III trials included the following comparisons: sunitinib versus placebo or sorafenib versus placebo (Adjuvant Sorafenib or Sunitinib for Unfavorable Renal Carcinoma [ASSURE] study, n = 1943), sunitinib versus placebo (S-TRAC, n = 615), and pazopanib versus placebo (Pazopanib As Adjuvant Therapy in Localized/Locally Advanced RCC After Nephrectomy study, n = 1135). The NNT ranged from 10 (S-TRAC) to 137 (ASSURE study). The pooled analysis showed that VEGFR-targeted therapy was not statistically significantly associated with improved DFS (hazard ratio [HR random ]: 0.92, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.82–1.03, p = 0.16) or OS (HR random : 0.98, 95% CI: 0.84–1.15, p = 0.84) compared with the control group. The adjuvant therapy group experienced significantly higher odds of grade 3–4 AEs (OR random : 5.89, 95% CI: 4.85–7.15, p < 0.001). In exploratory analyses focusing on patients who started on the full-dose regimen, DFS was improved in patients who received adjuvant therapy (HR random : 0.83, 95% CI: 0.73–0.95, p = 0.005). Conclusions This pooled analysis of reported randomized trials did not reveal a statistically significant effect between adjuvant VEGFR-targeted therapy and improved DFS or OS in patients with intermediate/high-risk local or regional fully resected RCC. Improvement in DFS may be more likely with the use of full-dose regimens, pending further results. However, adjuvant treatment was associated with high-grade AEs. Patient summary Vascular endothelial growth factor receptor–targeted therapy after nephrectomy for localized kidney cancer is not associated with consistent improvements in delaying cancer recurrence or prolonging life and comes at the expense of potentially significant side effects. Take Home Message Adjuvant targeted therapy following complete resection of localized renal cell carcinoma have not consistently demonstrated clinical benefit. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Treatment of non–clear cell renal cell carcinoma (RCC) remains controversial despite several recent prospective studies of targeted therapies (TT). Often Vascular Endothelial growth Factor (VEGF) and Mammalian Target of Rapamycin (mTOR) inhibitors are used, extrapolating the data from use of these agents in clear cell RCC. Methods We performed a retrospective data analysis within the Renal Cross Channel Group to determine metastatic chromophobe RCC (mChRCC) outcomes in the TT era. The end-points were overall response, overall survival (OS) and time to treatment failure (TTF). The two latter were estimated using the Kaplan–Meier method. Results 91 mChRCC patients from 26 centres were included. Median follow-up from the date of first metastasis was 6.1 years (range: 0–13.9). Median OS was 37.9 months (95% confidence interval [CI]: 21.4–46.8) from the diagnosis of metastatic disease. Among the 61 patients who received TT, 50 (82%) were treated with anti-angiogenic (AA) and 11 with mTOR inhibitors. Median TTF and OS in patients receiving a first line of AA was 8.7 months (95% CI: 5.2–10.9) and 22.9 months (95% CI: 17.8–49.2) versus 1.9 months (95% CI: 1.0–6.0) and 3.2 months (95% CI: 2.3–not evaluable) with mTOR inhibitors, respectively. A stratified log-rank test was used to compare AA and mTOR inhibitors TT, while controlling the effect of the International Metastatic RCC Database Consortium risk group and no significant difference between AA and mTOR inhibitors was observed for TTF (p = 0.26) or for OS (p = 0.55). Conclusion We report the largest retrospective cohort of patients with mChRCC treated with TT and no significant difference between AA and mTOR inhibitors was observed for TTF and OS. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: We conducted a phase 3, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of sorafenib, a multikinase inhibitor of tumor-cell proliferation and angiogenesis, in patients with advanced clear-cell renal-cell carcinoma. Methods: From November 2003 to March 2005, we randomly assigned 903 patients with renal-cell carcinoma that was resistant to standard therapy to receive either continuous treatment with oral sorafenib (at a dose of 400 mg twice daily) or placebo; 451 patients received sorafenib and 452 received placebo. The primary end point was overall survival. A single planned analysis of progression-free survival in January 2005 showed a statistically significant benefit of sorafenib over placebo. Consequently, crossover was permitted from placebo to sorafenib, beginning in May 2005. Results: At the January 2005 cutoff, the median progression-free survival was 5.5 months in the sorafenib group and 2.8 months in the placebo group (hazard ratio for disease progression in the sorafenib group, 0.44; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.35 to 0.55; P<0.01). The first interim analysis of overall survival in May 2005 showed that sorafenib reduced the risk of death, as compared with placebo (hazard ratio, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.54 to 0.94; P=0.02), although this benefit was not statistically significant according to the O'Brien–Fleming threshold. Partial responses were reported as the best response in 10% of patients receiving sorafenib and in 2% of those receiving placebo (P<0.001). Diarrhea, rash, fatigue, and hand–foot skin reactions were the most common adverse events associated with sorafenib. Hypertension and cardiac ischemia were rare serious adverse events that were more common in patients receiving sorafenib than in those receiving placebo. Conclusions: As compared with placebo, treatment with sorafenib prolongs progression-free survival in patients with advanced clear-cell renal-cell carcinoma in whom previous therapy has failed; however, treatment is associated with increased toxic effects. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00073307.) N Engl J Med 2007;356:125-34. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Non-clear cell renal cell carcinomas are histologically and genetically diverse kidney cancers with variable prognoses, and their optimum initial treatment is unknown. We aimed to compare the mTOR inhibitor everolimus and the VEGF receptor inhibitor sunitinib in patients with non-clear cell renal cell carcinoma.Methods: We enrolled patients with metastatic papillary, chromophobe, or unclassified non-clear cell renal cell carcinoma with no history of previous systemic treatment. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive everolimus (10 mg/day) or sunitinib (50 mg/day; 6-week cycles of 4 weeks with treatment followed by 2 weeks without treatment) administered orally until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Randomisation was stratified by Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center risk group and papillary histology. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival in the intention-to-treat population using the RECIST 1.1 criteria. Safety was assessed in all patients who were randomly assigned to treatment. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01108445.Findings: Between Sept 23, 2010, and Oct 28, 2013, 108 patients were randomly assigned to receive either sunitinib (n=51) or everolimus (n=57). As of December, 2014, 87 progression-free survival events had occurred with two remaining active patients, and the trial was closed for the primary analysis. Sunitinib significantly increased progression-free survival compared with everolimus (8·3 months [80% CI 5·8-11·4] vs 5·6 months [5·5-6·0]; hazard ratio 1·41 [80% CI 1·03-1·92]; p=0·16), although heterogeneity of the treatment effect was noted on the basis of histological subtypes and prognostic risk groups. No unexpected toxic effects were reported, and the most common grade 3-4 adverse events were hypertension (12 [24%] of 51 patients in the sunitinib group vs one [2%] of 57 patients in the everolimus group), infection (six [12%] vs four [7%]), diarrhoea (five [10%] vs one [2%]), pneumonitis (none vs five [9%]), stomatitis (none vs five [9%]), and hand-foot syndrome (four [8%] vs none).Interpretation: In patients with metastatic non-clear cell renal cell carcinoma, sunitinib improved progression-free survival compared with everolimus. Future trials of novel agents should account for heterogeneity in disease outcomes based on genetic, histological, and prognostic factors.Funding: Novartis and Pfizer. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Tivozanib is a selective inhibitor of vascular endothelial growth factor receptors 1, 2 and 3 tyrosine kinases. This open-label, crossover clinical study (AV-951-09-902) provided access to tivozanib for patients who progressed on sorafenib in TIVO-1, comparing tivozanib with sorafenib in patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC). Methods Patients enrolled in this single-arm, phase 2 crossover study were previously randomised to sorafenib on TIVO-1, progressed and then crossed over to tivozanib. Patients received tivozanib (1.5 mg/day orally; 3 weeks on/1 week off) within 4 weeks after their last sorafenib dose. Findings Crossover patients were exposed to tivozanib for a median of eight cycles. From the start of tivozanib treatment, median progression-free survival was 11.0 months (95% confidence interval [CI]: 7.3–12.7) and median overall survival was 21.6 months (95% CI: 17.0–27.6). Best overall response was partial response in 29 (18%) patients and stable disease in 83 (52%) patients, with a median duration of response of 15.2 and 12.7 months, respectively. About 77% of patients experienced adverse events, most frequently hypertension (26%), followed by diarrhoea (14%) and fatigue (13%); 53% of patients had treatment-related adverse events, including 24% grade ≥3. About 9% and 16% of patients had dose reductions and dose interruptions due to adverse events, respectively. A total of 30% of patients had serious adverse events, and 4% had treatment-related serious adverse events. Interpretation This crossover study of patients with advanced RCC demonstrated potent tivozanib anti-tumour activity. Safety and tolerability profiles were acceptable and consistent with the established adverse event profile of tivozanib. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study introduces the use of ‘error-category mapping’ in the interpretation of pharmacokinetic (PK) model parameter results derived from dynamic contrast-enhanced (DCE-) MRI data. Eleven patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma were enrolled in a multiparametric study of the treatment effects of bevacizumab. For the purposes of the present analysis, DCE-MRI data from two identical pre-treatment examinations were analysed by application of the extended Tofts model (eTM), using in turn a model arterial input function (AIF), an individually-measured AIF and a sample-average AIF. PK model parameter maps were calculated. Errors in the signal-to-gadolinium concentration ([Gd]) conversion process and the model-fitting process itself were assigned to category codes on a voxel-by-voxel basis, thereby forming a colour-coded ‘error-category map’ for each imaged slice. These maps were found to be repeatable between patient visits and showed that the eTM converged adequately in the majority of voxels in all the tumours studied. However, the maps also clearly indicated sub-regions of low Gd uptake and of non-convergence of the model in nearly all tumours. The non-physical condition v e ≥ 1 was the most frequently indicated error category and appeared sensitive to the form of AIF used. This simple method for visualisation of errors in DCE-MRI could be used as a routine quality-control technique and also has the potential to reveal otherwise hidden patterns of failure in PK model applications. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Context: Until the development of novel targeted agents directed against angiogenesis and tumour growth, few treatment options have been available for the treatment of metastatic renal-cell carcinoma (mRCC). Objective: This review discusses current targeted therapies for mRCC and provides consensus statements regarding treatment algorithms. Evidence acquisition: Medical literature was retrieved from PubMed up to April 2011. Additional relevant articles and abstract reviews were included from the bibliographies of the retrieved literature. Evidence synthesis: Targeted treatment for mRCC can be categorized for the following patient groups: previously untreated patients, those refractory to immunotherapy, and those refractory to vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF)–targeted therapy. Sunitinib and bevacizumab combined with interferon alpha are generally considered first-line treatment options in patients with favourable or intermediate prognoses. Temsirolimus is considered a first-line treatment option for poor-risk patients. Either sorafenib or sunitinib may be valid second-line treatments for patients who have failed prior cytokine-based therapies. For patients refractory to treatment with VEGF-targeted therapy, everolimus is now recommended. Pazopanib is a new treatment option in the first- and second-line setting (after cytokine failure). Sequential and combination approaches, and the roles of nephrectomy and tumour metastasectomy will also be discussed. Conclusions: Increasing clinical evidence is clarifying appropriate first- and second-line treatments with targeted agents for patients with mRCC. Based on phase 2 and 3 trials, a sequential approach is most promising, while combination therapy is still investigational. The role of nephrectomy in mRCC is being evaluated in ongoing phase 3 clinical trials. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Background: The phase III Treatment Approaches in Renal cancer Global Evaluation Trial (TARGET) indicated that sorafenib is effective and well tolerated in advanced renal cell carcinoma patients. However, few data have been published on the safety of long-term sorafenib treatment. A retrospective subgroup analysis was performed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of sorafenib in patients in TARGET who received treatment for >1year. Methods: The present subgroup analysis (based on the September 2006 database with updated safety analysis) evaluated the efficacy and safety of sorafenib in all patients in the sorafenib arm of TARGET who were treated for >1 year. The assessments included the overall survival, progression-free survival (PFS), disease control rate (DCR), and safety. The patients remained on therapy post-progression at the discretion of the investigator. Results: In TARGET, 169 patients received treatment with sorafenib for >1year. The median PFS of patients in this subpopulation was 10.9months from the date of randomisation, with a DCR of 92%. The most commonly reported treatment-related adverse events of any grade were diarrhoea (74%), rash/desquamation (51%), hand–foot skin reaction (49%), alopecia (39%), and fatigue (38%). Adverse events were mild to moderate, and presented early in the course of the treatment; there were no unexpected toxicities associated with the long-term administration of sorafenib. Conclusions: Results of this subgroup analysis of patients enrolled in TARGET who received treatment for >1year indicate that long-term treatment with sorafenib is associated with continued efficacy and a well-tolerated safety profile. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Abstract: Over the past few years, considerable advances in the understanding of the pathology and underlying molecular pathways in renal cell carcinoma (RCC) have been translated into the development of targeted therapeutics for this disease. Clear-cell RCC is characterised by the inactivation of the von Hippel-Lindau tumour suppressor gene, resulting in the dysregulation of hypoxia response genes, overproduction of vascular endothelial growth factor, which promotes tumour angiogenesis, proliferation, and metastasis. Novel multitarget tyrosine kinase and angiogenesis inhibitors have achieved a benefit in progression-free and overall survival in patients with advanced RCC in recent prospective randomised trials. This review will describe the most relevant clinical data with the new molecular-targeted agents in RCC and provide an overview of current indications for these compounds. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

The development of therapeutics in oncology is a highly active research area for the pharmaceutical and biotechnology industries, but also has a strong academic base. Many new agents have been developed in recent years, most with specific biological targets. This has mandated the need to look at different ways to streamline the evaluation of new agents. One solution has been the development of adaptive trial designs that allow the evaluation of multiple agents, concentrating on the most promising agents while screening out those which are unlikely to benefit patients. Another way forward has been the growth of partnerships between academia and industry with the shared goal of designing and conducting high quality clinical trials which answer important clinical questions as efficiently as possible. The RAMPART trial (NCT03288532) brings together both of these processes in an attempt to improve outcomes for patients with locally advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC), where no globally acceptable adjuvant strategy after nephrectomy currently exist. RAMPART is led by the MRC CTU at University College London (UCL), in collaboration with other international academic groups and industry. We aim to facilitate the use of data from RAMPART, (dependent on outcomes), for a future regulatory submission that will extend the license of the agents being investigated. We share our experience in order to lay the foundations for an effective trial design and conduct framework and to guide others who may be considering similar collaborations. Trial Registration: ISRCTN #: ISRCTN53348826, NCT #: NCT03288532 , EUDRACT #: 2017–002329-39. CTA #: 20363/0380/001–0001. MREC #: 17/LO/1875. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03288532 RAMPART grant number: MC_UU_12023/25.. RAMPART Protocol version 5.0. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

20–60% of patients with initially locally advanced Renal Cell Carcinoma (RCC) develop metastatic disease despite optimal surgical excision. Adjuvant strategies have been tested in RCC including cytokines, radiotherapy, hormones and oral tyrosine-kinase inhibitors (TKIs), with limited success. The predominant global standard-of-care after nephrectomy remains active monitoring. Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) are effective in the treatment of metastatic RCC; RAMPART will investigate these agents in the adjuvant setting. RAMPART is an international, UK-led trial investigating the addition of ICIs after nephrectomy in patients with resected locally advanced RCC. RAMPART is a multi-arm multi-stage (MAMS) platform trial, upon which additional research questions may be addressed over time. The target population is patients with histologically proven resected locally advanced RCC (clear cell and non-clear cell histological subtypes), with no residual macroscopic disease, who are at high or intermediate risk of relapse (Leibovich score 3–11). Patients with fully resected synchronous ipsilateral adrenal metastases are included. Participants are randomly assigned (3,2:2) to Arm A - active monitoring (no placebo) for one year, Arm B - durvalumab (PD-L1 inhibitor) 4-weekly for one year; or Arm C - combination therapy with durvalumab 4-weekly for one year plus two doses of tremelimumab (CTLA-4 inhibitor) at day 1 of the first two 4-weekly cycles. The co-primary outcomes are disease-free-survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS). Secondary outcomes include safety, metastasis-free survival, RCC specific survival, quality of life, and patient and clinician preferences. Tumour tissue, plasma and urine are collected for molecular analysis (TransRAMPART). ISRCTN #: ISRCTN53348826, NCT #: NCT03288532 , EUDRACT #: 2017–002329-39, CTA #: 20363/0380/001–0001, MREC #: 17/LO/1875, ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03288532 , RAMPART grant number: MC_UU_12023/25, TransRAMPART grant number: A28690 Cancer Research UK, RAMPART Protocol version 5.0. • RAMPART is the first international, academically led adjuvant trial to assess both single and combination immune checkpoint inhibitors in patients with RCC at intermediate and high risk of recurrence after nephrectomy. • RAMPART is a three arm adaptive MAMS platform trial upon which at least one new research arm can be added over the coming years. • The target population is participants with histologically proven RCC (clear cell and non-clear cell), with no residual macroscopic disease, who are at high or intermediate risk of relapse (Leibovich score 3–11). • Patients with synchronous ipsilateral adrenal metastases, resected at the time of nephrectomy are included in RAMPART. • Significant changes have been made to the RAMPART protocol during the COVID-19 pandemic to optimise safety for participants including the option for remote patient consent and clinical assessment. • TransRAMPART is a unique scientific collaboration linked to RAMPART that will provide an opportunity to address pertinent unanswered issues for patients with RCC. • The RAMPART protocol can be found at https://www.rampart-trial.org/. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]