Regina Barragan-Carrillo, Eddy Saad, Renee-Maria Saliby, Maxine Sun, Laurence Albiges, Axel Bex, Daniel Heng, Arnaud Mejean, Robert J. Motzer, Elizabeth R. Plimack, Thomas Powles, Brian I. Rini, Tian Zhang, Toni K. Choueiri
{"title":"First and Second-line Treatments in Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma","authors":"Regina Barragan-Carrillo, Eddy Saad, Renee-Maria Saliby, Maxine Sun, Laurence Albiges, Axel Bex, Daniel Heng, Arnaud Mejean, Robert J. Motzer, Elizabeth R. Plimack, Thomas Powles, Brian I. Rini, Tian Zhang, Toni K. Choueiri","doi":"10.1016/j.eururo.2024.10.019","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<h3>Background and objective</h3>The treatment landscape for metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) has evolved significantly in recent years, leading to improved outcomes. The aim of this review is to provide clinicians with a practical guide for selecting first- and second-line treatments on the basis of current evidence.<h3>Methods</h3>We critically evaluated systemic treatment strategies for mRCC. A comprehensive literature search was conducted in PubMed and Embase, alongside manual searches of guidelines and conference proceedings up to October 2024. A narrative review was performed to reach a consensus, with voting used to resolve differing opinions among authors.<h3>Key findings and limitations</h3>First-line treatment options include immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI)-based combinations or tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs). Four combination regimens have been approved internationally. Owing to the lack of head-to-head trials and standardized biomarkers, treatment decisions rely on factors such as International Metastatic RCC Database Consortium (IMDC) risk score, functional status, safety profiles, sarcomatoid features, use of immunosuppressive drugs, and need for immediate response. Despite advances, many patients will experience disease progression on ICI-based therapy, necessitating further treatment. The need for standardized second-line approaches remains unmet. TKIs, alone or with everolimus, show promising efficacy, while HIF2a inhibitors offer newer options with a favorable toxicity profile. Rechallenge with ICIs after early progression is not recommended.<h3>Conclusions and clinical implications</h3>For optimal mRCC treatment selection, clinicians must carefully balance efficacy, toxicity, and patient preferences, especially when transitioning between first- and second-line therapies, to provide individualized care.","PeriodicalId":12223,"journal":{"name":"European urology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":25.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European urology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2024.10.019","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background and objective
The treatment landscape for metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) has evolved significantly in recent years, leading to improved outcomes. The aim of this review is to provide clinicians with a practical guide for selecting first- and second-line treatments on the basis of current evidence.
Methods
We critically evaluated systemic treatment strategies for mRCC. A comprehensive literature search was conducted in PubMed and Embase, alongside manual searches of guidelines and conference proceedings up to October 2024. A narrative review was performed to reach a consensus, with voting used to resolve differing opinions among authors.
Key findings and limitations
First-line treatment options include immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI)-based combinations or tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs). Four combination regimens have been approved internationally. Owing to the lack of head-to-head trials and standardized biomarkers, treatment decisions rely on factors such as International Metastatic RCC Database Consortium (IMDC) risk score, functional status, safety profiles, sarcomatoid features, use of immunosuppressive drugs, and need for immediate response. Despite advances, many patients will experience disease progression on ICI-based therapy, necessitating further treatment. The need for standardized second-line approaches remains unmet. TKIs, alone or with everolimus, show promising efficacy, while HIF2a inhibitors offer newer options with a favorable toxicity profile. Rechallenge with ICIs after early progression is not recommended.
Conclusions and clinical implications
For optimal mRCC treatment selection, clinicians must carefully balance efficacy, toxicity, and patient preferences, especially when transitioning between first- and second-line therapies, to provide individualized care.
期刊介绍:
European Urology is a peer-reviewed journal that publishes original articles and reviews on a broad spectrum of urological issues. Covering topics such as oncology, impotence, infertility, pediatrics, lithiasis and endourology, the journal also highlights recent advances in techniques, instrumentation, surgery, and pediatric urology. This comprehensive approach provides readers with an in-depth guide to international developments in urology.