Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2024;16(18-19):1095-1103.
doi: 10.1080/1750743X.2024.2385881. Epub 2024 Aug 19.

Prognostic value of type of prior TKI in pretreated metastatic renal cell carcinoma patients receiving nivolumab

Alessandra Damassi  1 , Malvina Cremante  1 , Alessio Signori  2 , Sara Elena Rebuzzi  3   4 , Andrea Malgeri  5 , Marilena Di Napoli  6 , Orazio Caffo  7 , Francesca Vignani  8 , Alessia Cavo  9 , Giandomenico Roviello  10 , Veronica Prati  11 , Marianna Tudini  12 , Francesco Atzori  13 , Marco Messina  14 , Franco Morelli  15 , Giuseppe Prati  16 , Franco Nolè  17 , Fabio Catalano  1 , Veronica Murianni  1 , Pasquale Rescigno  18   19 , Giuseppe Luigi Banna  20   21 , Giuseppe Fornarini  1 , Sebastiano Buti  22   23
Affiliations

Prognostic value of type of prior TKI in pretreated metastatic renal cell carcinoma patients receiving nivolumab

Alessandra Damassi et al. Immunotherapy. 2024.

Abstract

Aim: To define the prognostic significance of first-line TKI in mRCC patients receiving nivolumab.Materials and methods: A total of 571 mRCC patients who received ≥second line nivolumab were included in this subanalysis. The correlation between prior TKI (sunitinib vs. pazopanib) and overall response rate (ORR), disease control rate, progression-free survival and overall survival were investigated. Additionally, the impact of TKI choice according to the International Metastatic RCC Database Consortium prognostic score was examined.Results: There was no significant difference between sunitinib and pazopanib groups in terms of mPFS, mOS, overall response rate and disease control rate. Moreover, no difference between sunitinib and pazopanib was found according to the International Metastatic RCC Database Consortium prognostic score.Conclusion: There is no conclusive evidence favoring pazopanib or sunitinib treatment before initiating nivolumab therapy in metastatic renal cell carcinoma patients.

Keywords: IMDC score; meet-URO score; metastatic renal cell carcinoma; nivolumab; treatment sequence; tyrosine kinase inhibitor.

Plain language summary

[Box: see text].

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

S Buti received honoraria as a speaker at scientific events and advisory role by BMS, Pfizer, MSD, Ipsen, Roche, Eli Lilly, AstraZeneca, Pierre-Fabre, Novartis, Merck, Gentili, Astellas. G Fornarini services advisory boards for Astellas, Janssen, Pfizer, Bayer, MSD, Merck and received travel accommodation from Astellas, Janssen, Bayer. SE Rebuzzi received honoraria as a speaker at scientific events and travel accommodation from BMS, Amgen, GSK, Ipsen, Astellas, Janssen, MSD. P Rescigno services advisory boards for MSD, AstraZeneca and Janssen. GL Banna reports personal fees from AstraZeneca and Astellas for the speaker bureau. F Morelli received grants from MSD and Pfizer. ***. The authors have no other competing interests or relevant affiliations with any organization or entity with the subject matter or materials discussed in the manuscript apart from those disclosed.

Figures

Figure 1.
Figure 1.
OS and PFS in the overall population, according to TKI treatment. OS curves (Figure 1A) and PFS curves (Figure 1B) according to Sunitinib versus Pazopanib treatment..
Figure 2.
Figure 2.
OS according to IMDC score at first-line and TKI treatment. OS curves according to Sunitinib versus Pazopanib treatment in Favorable-risk (Figure 2A) and Intermediate/Poor-risk (Figure 2B) patients.
Figure 3.
Figure 3.
PFS according to IMDC score at first-line and TKI treatment. PFS curves according to Sunitinib versus Pazopanib treatment in Favorable-risk (Figure 3A) and Intermediate/Poor-risk (Figure 3B) patients.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. de Velasco G, Bex A, Albiges L, et al. Sequencing and combination of systemic therapy in metastatic renal cell carcinoma. Eur Urol Oncol. 2019;2:505–514. doi: 10.1016/j.euo.2019.06.022 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Garje R, An J, Greco A, et al. The future of immunotherapy-based combination therapy in metastatic renal cell carcinoma. Cancers (Basel). 2020;12:143. doi: 10.3390/cancers12010143 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Motzer RJ, Escudier B, McDermott DF, et al. Nivolumab versus everolimus in advanced renal- cell carcinoma. N Engl J Med. 2015;373:1803–1813. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1510665 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Motzer RJ, Escudier B, George S, et al. Nivolumab versus everolimus in patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma: updated results with long-term follow-up of the randomized, open-label, phase 3 CheckMate 025 trial. Cancer. 2020;126:4156–4167. doi: 10.1002/cncr.33033 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Heng DY, Xie W, Regan MM, et al. Prognostic factors for overall survival in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma treated with vascular endothelial growth factor-targeted agents: results from a large, multicenter study. J Clin Oncol. 2009;27:5794–5799. doi: 10.1200/jco.2009.27.15_suppl.5041 - DOI - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms