N. Dizman, P. Bergerot, C. Bergerot, J. Hsu, S. Pal
{"title":"转移性肾细胞癌的一线免疫检查点抑制剂联合靶向治疗:单中心经验","authors":"N. Dizman, P. Bergerot, C. Bergerot, J. Hsu, S. Pal","doi":"10.3233/KCA-190056","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: Both late and early phase immune checkpoint inhibitor (CPI) combination trials indicate an impending role of combinations in the first-line treatment of metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). Sequencing the options following failure of CPI combinations is an emerging conundrum. Objective: To present our single-center clinical experience with targeted therapies (TT) following first-line CPI combinations. Methods: mRCC patients who received TT following failure of a combination regimen with CPI were identified from an institutional database. Clinical information including tumor characteristics, survival outcomes, and adverse events was retrieved from medical records. Descriptive statistics and Kaplan-Meier survival functions were performed. Results: Of 11 patients identified, median age was 63 (31–79) and 8 (73%) patients were male. First-line treatment was a CPI and TT combination in 7 (64%) patients while the rest received combination of two CPIs. The majority of patients (82%) were intermediate risk category at the initiation of targeted therapies. TTs utilized included cabozantinib (46%), lenvatinib and everolimus (27%), sunitinib (18%), and temsirolimus (9%). Best response was stable disease for 10 (91%) and partial response for 1 (9%) patient. In a median follow up of 9.1 months (range, 4.9–34.1), median progression free survival was 7.7 (95% CI 4.6–10.8) months. Progression has occurred in 7 patients, and 3 patients remain on treatment. One patient discontinued treatment due to toxicity. Conclusions: In our report, TTs demonstrate effective disease control and safety. Further exploration in prospective setting","PeriodicalId":17823,"journal":{"name":"Kidney Cancer","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2019-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.3233/KCA-190056","citationCount":"3","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Targeted Therapies Following First-Line Immune Checkpoint Inhibitor Combination in Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma: A Single Center Experience\",\"authors\":\"N. Dizman, P. Bergerot, C. Bergerot, J. Hsu, S. Pal\",\"doi\":\"10.3233/KCA-190056\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Background: Both late and early phase immune checkpoint inhibitor (CPI) combination trials indicate an impending role of combinations in the first-line treatment of metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). Sequencing the options following failure of CPI combinations is an emerging conundrum. Objective: To present our single-center clinical experience with targeted therapies (TT) following first-line CPI combinations. Methods: mRCC patients who received TT following failure of a combination regimen with CPI were identified from an institutional database. Clinical information including tumor characteristics, survival outcomes, and adverse events was retrieved from medical records. Descriptive statistics and Kaplan-Meier survival functions were performed. Results: Of 11 patients identified, median age was 63 (31–79) and 8 (73%) patients were male. First-line treatment was a CPI and TT combination in 7 (64%) patients while the rest received combination of two CPIs. The majority of patients (82%) were intermediate risk category at the initiation of targeted therapies. TTs utilized included cabozantinib (46%), lenvatinib and everolimus (27%), sunitinib (18%), and temsirolimus (9%). Best response was stable disease for 10 (91%) and partial response for 1 (9%) patient. In a median follow up of 9.1 months (range, 4.9–34.1), median progression free survival was 7.7 (95% CI 4.6–10.8) months. Progression has occurred in 7 patients, and 3 patients remain on treatment. One patient discontinued treatment due to toxicity. Conclusions: In our report, TTs demonstrate effective disease control and safety. Further exploration in prospective setting\",\"PeriodicalId\":17823,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Kidney Cancer\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.3233/KCA-190056\",\"citationCount\":\"3\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Kidney Cancer\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3233/KCA-190056\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"ONCOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Kidney Cancer","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3233/KCA-190056","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3
摘要
背景:晚期和早期免疫检查点抑制剂(CPI)联合试验表明,联合治疗在转移性肾细胞癌(mRCC)的一线治疗中即将发挥作用。CPI组合失败后的选择排序是一个新出现的难题。目的:介绍一线CPI联合用药后靶向治疗(TT)的单中心临床经验。方法:从机构数据库中确定在联合方案与CPI失败后接受TT治疗的mRCC患者。临床信息包括肿瘤特征、生存结果和不良事件从医疗记录中检索。进行描述性统计和Kaplan-Meier生存函数分析。结果:11例患者中位年龄为63岁(31-79岁),男性8例(73%)。7例(64%)患者采用CPI和TT联合一线治疗,其余患者采用两种CPI联合治疗。大多数患者(82%)在开始靶向治疗时属于中等风险类别。使用的替代药物包括卡博赞替尼(46%)、lenvatinib和依维莫司(27%)、舒尼替尼(18%)和替西莫司(9%)。最佳反应是10例(91%)患者病情稳定,1例(9%)患者部分缓解。中位随访时间为9.1个月(范围4.9-34.1),中位无进展生存期为7.7个月(95% CI 4.6-10.8)。7例患者出现进展,3例患者仍在接受治疗。一名患者因中毒而停止治疗。结论:在我们的报告中,TTs显示出有效的疾病控制和安全性。远景环境下的进一步探索
Targeted Therapies Following First-Line Immune Checkpoint Inhibitor Combination in Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma: A Single Center Experience
Background: Both late and early phase immune checkpoint inhibitor (CPI) combination trials indicate an impending role of combinations in the first-line treatment of metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). Sequencing the options following failure of CPI combinations is an emerging conundrum. Objective: To present our single-center clinical experience with targeted therapies (TT) following first-line CPI combinations. Methods: mRCC patients who received TT following failure of a combination regimen with CPI were identified from an institutional database. Clinical information including tumor characteristics, survival outcomes, and adverse events was retrieved from medical records. Descriptive statistics and Kaplan-Meier survival functions were performed. Results: Of 11 patients identified, median age was 63 (31–79) and 8 (73%) patients were male. First-line treatment was a CPI and TT combination in 7 (64%) patients while the rest received combination of two CPIs. The majority of patients (82%) were intermediate risk category at the initiation of targeted therapies. TTs utilized included cabozantinib (46%), lenvatinib and everolimus (27%), sunitinib (18%), and temsirolimus (9%). Best response was stable disease for 10 (91%) and partial response for 1 (9%) patient. In a median follow up of 9.1 months (range, 4.9–34.1), median progression free survival was 7.7 (95% CI 4.6–10.8) months. Progression has occurred in 7 patients, and 3 patients remain on treatment. One patient discontinued treatment due to toxicity. Conclusions: In our report, TTs demonstrate effective disease control and safety. Further exploration in prospective setting