Conference Coverage

First-line avelumab/axitinib for RCC benefits wide range of patients

View on the News

Comparative studies needed

“For first-line therapy of metastatic clear-cell renal cancer, we now have two regimens that have demonstrated a survival advantage over first-line sunitinib,” Walter M. Stadler, MD, said in an interview. For first-line therapy, there is the combination of nivolumab and ipilimumab in intermediate- and poor-risk patients and also the combination of pembrolizumab and axitinib.

Dr. Walter Stadler

Dr. Walter Stadler

The combination of avelumab and axitinib in JAVELIN Renal 101 “demonstrates a progression free – but not yet an overall survival – advantage. Whether this is due to the immaturity of the data, crossover to immunotherapy in the control group, or a true difference in these regimens remains to be determined. Comparative studies, and studies evaluating less-aggressive dosing regimens for these expensive drugs are needed” he said.

Dr. Stadler is the Fred C. Buffett Professor of Medicine and Surgery, chief of the section of hematology/oncology, director of the genitourinary oncology program, and deputy director of the Comprehensive Cancer Center at the University of Chicago.


 

REPORTING FROM GUCS 2019


JAVELIN Renal 101 complemented two other noteworthy trials exploring first-line checkpoint inhibitors for which new data were reported at the symposium. One, KEYNOTE-426 (NCT02853331), established that the combination of the immune checkpoint inhibitor pembrolizumab (Keytruda) and axitinib was superior to sunitinib. The other, CheckMate 214 (NCT02231749), established that the combination of two immune checkpoint inhibitors, nivolumab (Opdivo) and ipilimumab (Yervoy), was superior to sunitinib.

Weighing new options

“So a new standard of care in 2019 is present: The majority of patients with advanced clear cell RCC will be eligible to receive the combination of a checkpoint inhibitor and axitinib,” commented invited discussant Lori Wood, MD, a professor in the division of medical oncology at Dalhousie University, Halifax, Canada. “The questions now are: Which treatment should we choose? can we afford it? and perhaps more importantly, can we safely deliver this therapy to all patients?”

Dr. Lori Wood, Dalhousie University, Nova Scotia

Dr. Lori Wood

When it comes to selecting among the three combinations above, “I don’t think PD-L1 expression is going to help us at all,” she said. In contrast, IMDC risk category is likely still helpful because, in CheckMate 214, there was no progression-free or overall survival benefit of ipilimumab/nivolumab in patients with favorable-risk disease.

Differences in rates of discontinuation of all treatment because of treatment-related adverse events are hard to assess because CheckMate 214 had restrictions on allowing patients in the combination group to receive single-agent nivolumab, according to Dr. Wood. Financial costs are a major consideration, but so are time and staffing costs: Compared with single-agent sunitinib, the combinations as much as triple physician visits, nurse visits, infusions, and unscheduled visits.

Pages

Recommended Reading

CT features associated with (some) ccRCC subtypes
AVAHO
No ADT-dementia link in large VA prostate cancer cohort study
AVAHO
Checkpoint inhibitor/TKI combo improves PFS of RCC over sunitinib
AVAHO
Severe adverse events seen in placebo arm of cancer clinical trials
AVAHO