0
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Real-world effectiveness of nivolumab plus ipilimumab and second-line therapy in Japanese untreated patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma: 2-year analysis from a multicenter retrospective clinical study (J-cardinal study)

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          Nivolumab plus ipilimumab combination therapy is one of the standard therapies for untreated renal cell carcinoma patients with an International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium intermediate/poor risk. We have previously reported the 1-year analysis results of the effectiveness and safety of nivolumab plus ipilimumab combination therapy in the real-world setting in Japan. Here, we report the effectiveness of nivolumab plus ipilimumab combination therapy and of second-line therapy, using 2-year analysis.

          Methods

          This retrospective observational study enrolled Japanese patients with previously untreated metastatic renal cell carcinoma who initiated nivolumab plus ipilimumab combination therapy between August 2018 and January 2019. Data were collected from patients’ medical records at baseline and at 3 months, 1 year and 2 years after the last enrollment.

          Results

          Of the 45 patients enrolled, 10 patients (22.2%) each had non-clear cell renal cell carcinoma and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status ≥2 at baseline. Median follow-up period was 24.0 months; objective response rate was 41.5%, with 6 patients achieving complete response; median progression-free survival was 17.8 months and 24-month progression-free survival and overall survival rates were 41.6 and 59.1%, respectively. Second-line therapy achieved an objective response rate of 20%; median progression-free survival was 9.8 months. Median progression-free survival 2 was 26.4 months.

          Conclusions

          The effectiveness of nivolumab plus ipilimumab combination therapy at 2-year analysis in the real-world setting in Japan was comparable to that reported in CheckMate 214. The current analysis also demonstrated the effectiveness of second-line therapy after nivolumab plus ipilimumab combination therapy.

          Abstract

          The effectiveness of nivolumab plus ipilimumab for untreated renal cell carcinoma patients in the real-world setting in Japan at 2-year analysis was comparable to that of CheckMate 214.

          Related collections

          Most cited references51

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          New response evaluation criteria in solid tumours: revised RECIST guideline (version 1.1).

          Assessment of the change in tumour burden is an important feature of the clinical evaluation of cancer therapeutics: both tumour shrinkage (objective response) and disease progression are useful endpoints in clinical trials. Since RECIST was published in 2000, many investigators, cooperative groups, industry and government authorities have adopted these criteria in the assessment of treatment outcomes. However, a number of questions and issues have arisen which have led to the development of a revised RECIST guideline (version 1.1). Evidence for changes, summarised in separate papers in this special issue, has come from assessment of a large data warehouse (>6500 patients), simulation studies and literature reviews. HIGHLIGHTS OF REVISED RECIST 1.1: Major changes include: Number of lesions to be assessed: based on evidence from numerous trial databases merged into a data warehouse for analysis purposes, the number of lesions required to assess tumour burden for response determination has been reduced from a maximum of 10 to a maximum of five total (and from five to two per organ, maximum). Assessment of pathological lymph nodes is now incorporated: nodes with a short axis of 15 mm are considered measurable and assessable as target lesions. The short axis measurement should be included in the sum of lesions in calculation of tumour response. Nodes that shrink to <10mm short axis are considered normal. Confirmation of response is required for trials with response primary endpoint but is no longer required in randomised studies since the control arm serves as appropriate means of interpretation of data. Disease progression is clarified in several aspects: in addition to the previous definition of progression in target disease of 20% increase in sum, a 5mm absolute increase is now required as well to guard against over calling PD when the total sum is very small. Furthermore, there is guidance offered on what constitutes 'unequivocal progression' of non-measurable/non-target disease, a source of confusion in the original RECIST guideline. Finally, a section on detection of new lesions, including the interpretation of FDG-PET scan assessment is included. Imaging guidance: the revised RECIST includes a new imaging appendix with updated recommendations on the optimal anatomical assessment of lesions. A key question considered by the RECIST Working Group in developing RECIST 1.1 was whether it was appropriate to move from anatomic unidimensional assessment of tumour burden to either volumetric anatomical assessment or to functional assessment with PET or MRI. It was concluded that, at present, there is not sufficient standardisation or evidence to abandon anatomical assessment of tumour burden. The only exception to this is in the use of FDG-PET imaging as an adjunct to determination of progression. As is detailed in the final paper in this special issue, the use of these promising newer approaches requires appropriate clinical validation studies.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Nivolumab plus Ipilimumab versus Sunitinib in Advanced Renal-Cell Carcinoma

            Nivolumab plus ipilimumab produced objective responses in patients with advanced renal-cell carcinoma in a pilot study. This phase 3 trial compared nivolumab plus ipilimumab with sunitinib for previously untreated clear-cell advanced renal-cell carcinoma.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Nivolumab versus Everolimus in Advanced Renal-Cell Carcinoma.

              Nivolumab, a programmed death 1 (PD-1) checkpoint inhibitor, was associated with encouraging overall survival in uncontrolled studies involving previously treated patients with advanced renal-cell carcinoma. This randomized, open-label, phase 3 study compared nivolumab with everolimus in patients with renal-cell carcinoma who had received previous treatment.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Journal
                Jpn J Clin Oncol
                Jpn J Clin Oncol
                jjco
                Japanese Journal of Clinical Oncology
                Oxford University Press
                0368-2811
                1465-3621
                November 2022
                03 August 2022
                03 August 2022
                : 52
                : 11
                : 1345-1352
                Affiliations
                Department of Urology , Faculty of Medicine, University of Tsukuba , Ibaraki, Japan
                Department of Urology, Aichi Cancer Center Hospital , Aichi, Japan
                Department of Urology, Iwate Medical University , Iwate, Japan
                Department of Urology, Chiba University Graduate School of Medicine , Chiba, Japan
                Department of Urology, Hirosaki University Graduate School of Medicine , Aomori, Japan
                Department of Urology, Tokyo Medical and Dental University , Tokyo, Japan
                Department of Urology , Molecular Oncology, Graduate School of Medicine and Dental Sciences, Niigata University , Niigata, Japan
                Department of Urology, Yokohama City University Graduate School of Medicine , Kanagawa, Japan
                Department of Nephro-Urologic Surgery and Andrology, Mie University Graduate School of Medicine , Mie, Japan
                Department of Nephro-urology, Nagoya City University Graduate School of Medical Sciences , Aichi, Japan
                Oncology Medical, Bristol-Myers Squibb K.K. , Tokyo, Japan
                Oncology Medical Affairs, Ono Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd. , Tokyo, Japan
                Department of Urology, Iwate Medical University , Iwate, Japan
                Author notes
                For reprints and all correspondence: Takahiro Kojima, Department of Urology, Aichi Cancer Center Hospital, 1-1 Kanokoden, Chikusa-ku, Nagoya-shi, Aichi 464-8681, Japan. E-mail: t.kojima@ 123456aichi-cc.jp
                Author information
                https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4150-9631
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9968-7468
                https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2720-9640
                Article
                hyac124
                10.1093/jjco/hyac124
                9631464
                35920793
                e4856e76-ae37-44ff-a984-ced0e9babb3a
                © The Author(s) 2022. Published by Oxford University Press.

                This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License ( https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted reuse, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

                History
                : 4 March 2022
                : 12 July 2022
                : 14 July 2022
                Page count
                Pages: 8
                Funding
                Funded by: ONO Pharmaceutical and Bristol-Myers Squibb;
                Categories
                Original Article
                AcademicSubjects/MED00300

                Oncology & Radiotherapy
                nivolumab,ipilimumab,renal cell carcinoma,real-world,japan
                Oncology & Radiotherapy
                nivolumab, ipilimumab, renal cell carcinoma, real-world, japan

                Comments

                Comment on this article