Abstract 1900P
Background
The effectiveness of CN is still uncertain despite two significant trials, SURTIME and CARMENA, which aimed to demonstrate its benefits for mccRCC. These trials, conducted with Sunitinib as the standard treatment, did not provide evidence supporting the use of CN.
Methods
We identified stage IV mccRCC only patients (pts) who received IO with or without surgery in the NCDB 2004-2020. Overall survival (OS) was calculated among three groups of IO alone (group (gr)1), IO followed by CN (gr2), CN followed by IO (gr3). Cox models compared OS by treatment group after adjusting for sociodemographic, health, and facility variables.
Results
From 1,549,101 renal cancer cases, 7,367 met our criteria. 2.8% of ccRCC had sarcomatoid histology. Pts in the gr 2 and gr 3 had 63%, 95% CI [0.304 - 0.460] and 47%, 95% CI [0.492-0.571] (P= 0.001) risk reduction in mortality compared to gr 1.Black race compared to white race, Medicare pts compared to privately insured, and pts treated at a comprehensive community cancer center compared to academic center had an increased mortality risk by 15%, 95% CI [1.025-1.290] (P= 0.017), 12%, 95% CI [1.017-1.242] (P= 0.021), 17%, 95% CI [1.092-1.260] (P= 0.001) respectively. Median income quartiles ranging > 63k, had 22% reduction in mortality over income quartiles < 40k, 95% CI [0.696-0.888] (P= 0.044). Regardless of the sequence of CN, partial nephrectomy was minimally used. Pts in gr 3 had a 40% increased mortality risk compared to pts in gr 3, 95% CI [1.126-1.735] (P= 0.002).
Conclusions
Pts receiving CN regardless of sequence with IO did better than IO alone in this national registry-based adjusted analysis for mccRCC. Over the past few decades, the understanding of the role of CN has undergone changes, and while we await additional trial outcomes, the current evidence supports the notion that select mRCC patients can benefit from CN.
Table: 1900P
IO (%) 95% CI | IO⋄CN (%) 95% CI | CN⋄IO (%) 95% CI | |
2 YRS FOLLOW UP | 35.82 [34.44-37.20] | 73.87 [68.48-78.49] | 58.78 [56.75-60.74] |
5 YRS FOLLOW UP | 13.01 [11.32-14.82] | 43.17 [33.94-52.05] | 34 [31.32-36.39] |
Clinical trial identification
Editorial acknowledgement
Legal entity responsible for the study
The authors.
Funding
Has not received any funding.
Disclosure
All authors have declared no conflicts of interest.
Resources from the same session
1888P - 24-month follow up of durvalumab and savolitinib combination in MET-driven clear cell and non-clear cell renal cancer
Presenter: Francesca Jackson-Spence
Session: Poster session 23
1890P - Switch-maintenance therapy with nivolumab in TKI-sensitive patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC): Subgroup analysis for PD-L1 status of a randomized phase II study (NIVOSWITCH)
Presenter: Christopher Darr
Session: Poster session 23
1891P - Determinants of exceptional response to immune checkpoint inhibition in metastatic clear cell renal cell carcinoma
Presenter: Renee Saliby
Session: Poster session 23
1892P - A pooled meta-analysis of salvage nivolumab/ipilimumab (N+I) after nivolumab (N) in patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC)
Presenter: Rana McKay
Session: Poster session 23
1895P - Time to treatment failure (TTF) and treatment beyond progression (TBP) in pretreated metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) patients (pts) receiving nivolumab: A survival outcome and a therapeutic strategy of clinical benefit (meet-uro 15)
Presenter: Sara Elena Rebuzzi
Session: Poster session 23
1896P - Clinical management and outcomes of patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma (aRCC) treated with nivolumab+ipilimumab (N+I): A real-world study
Presenter: Tom Geldart
Session: Poster session 23
1897P - Geographical differences in the management of metastatic de novo renal cell carcinoma in the era of immune-combinations
Presenter: Francesco Massari
Session: Poster session 23
1899P - Comparative effectiveness of second-line (2L) treatment (Rx) with cabozantinib (cabo) in patients (pts) with metastatic clear cell renal cell carcinoma (mccRCC) after first-line (1L) Rx with ipilimumab + nivolumab (ipi+nivo) vs. PD-1/L1 inhibitor (PDI) + tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI)
Presenter: Georges Gebrael
Session: Poster session 23