Stereotactic radiotherapy combined with immunotherapy or targeted therapy for metastatic renal cell carcinoma
Kroeze, Stephanie G C; Fritz, Corinna; Schaule, Jana; Siva, Shankar; Kahl, Klaus H; Sundahl, Nora; Blanck, Oliver; Kaul, David; Adebahr, Sonja; Verhoeff, Joost J C; Skazikis, Georgios; Roeder, Falk; Geier, Michael; Eckert, Franziska; Guckenberger, Matthias
(2021) BJU International, volume 127, issue 6, pp. 703 - 711
(Article)
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the safety and efficacy of stereotactic radiotherapy (SRT) in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) concurrently receiving targeted therapy (TT) or immunotherapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Data on patients with mRCC were extracted from a retrospective international multicentre register study (TOaSTT), investigating SRT concurrent (≤30 days) with
... read more
TT/immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) therapy. Overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), local metastasis control (LC) and time to systemic therapy switch were analysed using Kaplan-Meier curves and log-rank testing. Clinical and treatment factors influencing survival were analysed using multivariate Cox regression. Acute and late SRT-induced toxicity were defined according to the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events v.4.03. RESULTS: Fifty-three patients who underwent 128 sessions of SRT were included, of whom 58% presented with oligometastatic disease (OMD). ICIs and TT were received by 32% and 68% of patients, respectively. Twenty patients (37%) paused TT for a median (range) of 14 (2-21) days. ICI therapy was not paused in any patient. A median (range) of 1 (1-5) metastatic tumour was treated per patient, with a median (range) SRT dose of 65 (40-129.4) Gy (biologically effective dose). The OS, LC and PFS rates at 1 year were 71%, 75% and 25%, respectively. The median OS and PFS were not significantly different among patients receiving TT vs those receiving ICIs (P = 0.329). New lesions were treated with a repeat radiotherapy course in 46% of patients. After 1 year, 62% of patients remained on the same systemic therapy as at the time of SRT; this was more frequent for ICI therapy compared to TT (83% vs 36%; P = 0.035). OMD was an independent prognostic factor for OS (P = 0.004, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.035-0.528) and PFS (P = 0.004; 95% CI 0.165-0.717) in multivariate analysis. Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (ECOG-PS) was the other independent prognostic factor for OS (P = 0.001, 95% CI 0.001-0.351). Acute grade 3 toxicity was observed in two patients, and late grade 3 toxicity in one patient. No grade 4 or 5 toxicity was observed. CONCLUSION: Combined treatment with TT or immunotherapy and concurrent SRT was safe, without signals of increased severe toxicity. As we observed no signal of excess toxicity, full-dose SRT should be considered to achieve optimal metastasis control in patients receiving TT or immunotherapy. Favourable PFS and OS were observed for patients with oligometastatic RCC with a good ECOG-PS, which should form the basis for prospective testing of this treatment strategy in properly designed clinical trials.
show less
Download/Full Text
The full text of this publication is not available.
Keywords: #KidneyCancer, #kcsm, #uroonc, concurrent, immunotherapy, oligometastases, renal cell carcinoma, stereotactic, targeted therapy, Urology, Journal Article
ISSN: 1464-4096
Publisher: Wiley-Blackwell
Note: Funding Information: N. Sundahl reports non‐financial support from Bayer, MSD, Bristol‐Myers Squibb and Astellas, outside the submitted work. S. Siva reports personal fees from the National Health and Medical Research Council and Cancer Council Victoria Colebatch Fellowship outside the submitted work. G. Skazikis reports grants from the University of Zurich, during the conduct of the study. M. Geier reports personal fees from Roche and Bristol‐Myers Squibb outside the submitted work. D. Kaul reports personal fees from Novocure outside the submitted work. S. Adebahr reports personal fees from the German Consortium of Translational Cancer Research (DKTK), during the conduct of the study. K. H. Kahl reports personal fees from Bristol Myers Squibb, MSD, Merck, AstraZeneca, Varian, Elekta and Zeiss Meditec, outside the submitted work. J. J. C. Verhoeff, O. Blanck, M. Guckenberger, J. Schaule, F. Roeder, F. Eckert and C. Fritz declare no conflicts of interest. Funding Information: N. Sundahl reports non-financial support from Bayer, MSD, Bristol-Myers Squibb and Astellas, outside the submitted work. S. Siva reports personal fees from the National Health and Medical Research Council and Cancer Council Victoria Colebatch Fellowship outside the submitted work. G. Skazikis reports grants from the University of Zurich, during the conduct of the study. M. Geier reports personal fees from Roche and Bristol-Myers Squibb outside the submitted work. D. Kaul reports personal fees from Novocure outside the submitted work. S. Adebahr reports personal fees from the German Consortium of Translational Cancer Research (DKTK), during the conduct of the study. K. H. Kahl reports personal fees from Bristol Myers Squibb, MSD, Merck, AstraZeneca, Varian, Elekta and Zeiss Meditec, outside the submitted work. J. J. C. Verhoeff, O. Blanck, M. Guckenberger, J. Schaule, F. Roeder, F. Eckert and C. Fritz declare no conflicts of interest. This work was financially supported by Varian Medical Systems. Varian Medical Systems was not involved in the study design, collection, analysis and interpretation of data, the writing of the report or in the decision to submit the article for publication. Funding Information: This work was financially supported by Varian Medical Systems. Varian Medical Systems was not involved in the study design, collection, analysis and interpretation of data, the writing of the report or in the decision to submit the article for publication. Publisher Copyright: © 2020 The Authors BJU International © 2020 BJU International Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd
(Peer reviewed)