Neoadjuvant and Adjuvant Immune-based Approach for Renal Cell Carcinoma: Pros, Cons, and Future Directions.

IF 8.3 1区 医学 Q1 ONCOLOGY
Laura Marandino, Riccardo Campi, Daniele Amparore, Zayd Tippu, Laurence Albiges, Umberto Capitanio, Rachel H Giles, Silke Gillessen, Alexander Kutikov, James Larkin, Robert J Motzer, Phillip M Pierorazio, Thomas Powles, Morgan Roupret, Grant D Stewart, Samra Turajlic, Axel Bex
{"title":"Neoadjuvant and Adjuvant Immune-based Approach for Renal Cell Carcinoma: Pros, Cons, and Future Directions.","authors":"Laura Marandino, Riccardo Campi, Daniele Amparore, Zayd Tippu, Laurence Albiges, Umberto Capitanio, Rachel H Giles, Silke Gillessen, Alexander Kutikov, James Larkin, Robert J Motzer, Phillip M Pierorazio, Thomas Powles, Morgan Roupret, Grant D Stewart, Samra Turajlic, Axel Bex","doi":"10.1016/j.euo.2024.09.002","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Context: </strong>Immune-oncology strategies are revolutionising the perioperative treatment in several tumour types. The perioperative setting of renal cell carcinoma (RCC) is an evolving field, and the advent of immunotherapy is producing significant advances.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To critically review the potential pros and cons of adjuvant and neoadjuvant immune-based therapeutic strategies in RCC, and to provide insights for future research in this field.</p><p><strong>Evidence acquisition: </strong>We performed a collaborative narrative review of the existing literature.</p><p><strong>Evidence synthesis: </strong>Adjuvant immunotherapy with pembrolizumab is a new standard of care for patients at a higher risk of recurrence after nephrectomy, demonstrating a disease-free survival and overall survival benefit in the phase 3 KEYNOTE-564 trial. Current data do not support neoadjuvant therapy use outside clinical trials. While both adjuvant and neoadjuvant immune-based approaches are driven by robust biological rationale, neoadjuvant immunotherapy may enable a stronger and more durable antitumour immune response. If neoadjuvant single-agent immune checkpoint inhibitors demonstrated limited activity on the primary tumour, immune-based combinations may show increased activity. Overtreatment and a risk of relevant toxicity for patients who are cured by surgery alone are common concerns for both neoadjuvant and adjuvant strategies. Biomarkers helping patient selection and treatment deintensification are lacking in RCC. No results from randomised trials comparing neoadjuvant or perioperative immune-based therapy with adjuvant immunotherapy are available.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Adjuvant immunotherapy is a new standard of care in RCC. Both neoadjuvant and adjuvant immunotherapy strategies have potential advantages and disadvantages. Optimising perioperative treatment strategies is nuanced, with the role of neoadjuvant immune-based therapies yet to be defined. Given strong biological rationale for a pre/perioperative approach, there is a need for prospective clinical trials to determine clinical efficacy. Research investigating biomarkers aiding patient selection and treatment deintensification strategies is needed.</p><p><strong>Patient summary: </strong>Immunotherapy is transforming the treatment of kidney cancer. In this review, we looked at the studies investigating immunotherapy strategies before and/or after surgery for patients with kidney cancer to assess potential pros and cons. We concluded that both neoadjuvant and adjuvant immunotherapy strategies may have potential advantages and disadvantages. While immunotherapy administered after surgery is already a standard of care, immunotherapy before surgery should be better investigated in future studies. Future trials should also focus on the selection of patients in order to spare toxicity for patients who will be cured by surgery alone.</p>","PeriodicalId":12256,"journal":{"name":"European urology oncology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":8.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European urology oncology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.euo.2024.09.002","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Context: Immune-oncology strategies are revolutionising the perioperative treatment in several tumour types. The perioperative setting of renal cell carcinoma (RCC) is an evolving field, and the advent of immunotherapy is producing significant advances.

Objective: To critically review the potential pros and cons of adjuvant and neoadjuvant immune-based therapeutic strategies in RCC, and to provide insights for future research in this field.

Evidence acquisition: We performed a collaborative narrative review of the existing literature.

Evidence synthesis: Adjuvant immunotherapy with pembrolizumab is a new standard of care for patients at a higher risk of recurrence after nephrectomy, demonstrating a disease-free survival and overall survival benefit in the phase 3 KEYNOTE-564 trial. Current data do not support neoadjuvant therapy use outside clinical trials. While both adjuvant and neoadjuvant immune-based approaches are driven by robust biological rationale, neoadjuvant immunotherapy may enable a stronger and more durable antitumour immune response. If neoadjuvant single-agent immune checkpoint inhibitors demonstrated limited activity on the primary tumour, immune-based combinations may show increased activity. Overtreatment and a risk of relevant toxicity for patients who are cured by surgery alone are common concerns for both neoadjuvant and adjuvant strategies. Biomarkers helping patient selection and treatment deintensification are lacking in RCC. No results from randomised trials comparing neoadjuvant or perioperative immune-based therapy with adjuvant immunotherapy are available.

Conclusions: Adjuvant immunotherapy is a new standard of care in RCC. Both neoadjuvant and adjuvant immunotherapy strategies have potential advantages and disadvantages. Optimising perioperative treatment strategies is nuanced, with the role of neoadjuvant immune-based therapies yet to be defined. Given strong biological rationale for a pre/perioperative approach, there is a need for prospective clinical trials to determine clinical efficacy. Research investigating biomarkers aiding patient selection and treatment deintensification strategies is needed.

Patient summary: Immunotherapy is transforming the treatment of kidney cancer. In this review, we looked at the studies investigating immunotherapy strategies before and/or after surgery for patients with kidney cancer to assess potential pros and cons. We concluded that both neoadjuvant and adjuvant immunotherapy strategies may have potential advantages and disadvantages. While immunotherapy administered after surgery is already a standard of care, immunotherapy before surgery should be better investigated in future studies. Future trials should also focus on the selection of patients in order to spare toxicity for patients who will be cured by surgery alone.

肾细胞癌的新辅助和辅助免疫疗法:利弊与未来方向
背景:免疫肿瘤学策略正在彻底改变几种肿瘤类型的围手术期治疗。肾细胞癌(RCC)的围手术期治疗是一个不断发展的领域,免疫疗法的出现正在取得重大进展:批判性地回顾RCC辅助和新辅助免疫治疗策略的潜在利弊,并为该领域的未来研究提供见解:证据综述:pembrolizumab辅助免疫疗法是肾切除术后复发风险较高患者的新治疗标准,在KEYNOTE-564三期试验中显示了无病生存期和总生存期获益。目前的数据并不支持在临床试验之外使用新辅助疗法。虽然辅助治疗和新辅助免疫疗法都是基于可靠的生物学原理,但新辅助免疫疗法可以产生更强、更持久的抗肿瘤免疫反应。如果新辅助单药免疫检查点抑制剂对原发肿瘤的活性有限,那么基于免疫的联合疗法可能会显示出更强的活性。过度治疗以及仅通过手术治愈的患者面临相关毒性风险是新辅助治疗和辅助治疗策略共同面临的问题。RCC缺乏有助于选择患者和减轻治疗强度的生物标志物。目前还没有将新辅助或围手术期免疫疗法与辅助免疫疗法进行比较的随机试验结果:结论:辅助免疫疗法是RCC治疗的新标准。结论:辅助免疫疗法是 RCC 治疗的新标准。新辅助和辅助免疫疗法策略各有利弊。围手术期治疗策略的优化是细致入微的,新辅助免疫疗法的作用尚待明确。鉴于采用术前/围手术期治疗方法有很强的生物学依据,因此需要进行前瞻性临床试验来确定临床疗效。还需要研究生物标志物,以帮助选择患者和简化治疗策略。患者摘要:免疫疗法正在改变肾癌的治疗方法。在这篇综述中,我们研究了肾癌患者手术前和/或手术后的免疫疗法策略,以评估潜在的利弊。我们的结论是,新辅助和辅助免疫疗法策略可能都有潜在的优点和缺点。虽然手术后进行免疫治疗已成为一种标准治疗方法,但在今后的研究中应更好地探讨手术前的免疫治疗。未来的试验还应关注患者的选择,以避免仅通过手术治愈的患者产生毒性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
15.50
自引率
2.40%
发文量
128
审稿时长
20 days
期刊介绍: Journal Name: European Urology Oncology Affiliation: Official Journal of the European Association of Urology Focus: First official publication of the EAU fully devoted to the study of genitourinary malignancies Aims to deliver high-quality research Content: Includes original articles, opinion piece editorials, and invited reviews Covers clinical, basic, and translational research Publication Frequency: Six times a year in electronic format
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信