Recent advances in the frontline treatment of metastatic renal cell carcinoma

IF 1.4 Q4 ONCOLOGY
C. Porta, M. Rizzo
{"title":"Recent advances in the frontline treatment of metastatic renal cell carcinoma","authors":"C. Porta, M. Rizzo","doi":"10.20517/2394-4722.2021.86","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"We aim to describe the most recent advances in the upfront treatment of metastatic renal cell carcinoma, and to provide criteria though often subjective which could be used for treatment selection, by means of a critical review of the results of novel trials of immune-based combinations, coupled with personal considerations and experiences. To date, 5 immune-based combinations have been tested within large phase III trials; four of them yielded a significant overall survival benefit (Ipilimumab + Nivolumab, Pembrolizumab + Axitinib, Nivolumab + Cabozantinib and Pembrolizumab + Lenvatinib), while the combination of Avelumab + Axitinib, although reaching study primary endpoint, determined just a significant progression-free survival benefit. In terms of safety, the excess of adverse events is overall counterbalanced to the higher activity of the combinations. Overall, all the discussed immune-based combinations were ultimately approved by different regulatory authorities, and are indeed included in the most important international guidelines. Waiting for longer follow-ups and more mature trial data, as well as for real-world experiences, in the absence of validated biomarkers, our 1st line treatment choice cannot but rely on methodologically incorrect treatment comparisons, personal preferences, and experience.","PeriodicalId":15167,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Cancer Metastasis and Treatment","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2021-07-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Cancer Metastasis and Treatment","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.20517/2394-4722.2021.86","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: 1

Abstract

We aim to describe the most recent advances in the upfront treatment of metastatic renal cell carcinoma, and to provide criteria though often subjective which could be used for treatment selection, by means of a critical review of the results of novel trials of immune-based combinations, coupled with personal considerations and experiences. To date, 5 immune-based combinations have been tested within large phase III trials; four of them yielded a significant overall survival benefit (Ipilimumab + Nivolumab, Pembrolizumab + Axitinib, Nivolumab + Cabozantinib and Pembrolizumab + Lenvatinib), while the combination of Avelumab + Axitinib, although reaching study primary endpoint, determined just a significant progression-free survival benefit. In terms of safety, the excess of adverse events is overall counterbalanced to the higher activity of the combinations. Overall, all the discussed immune-based combinations were ultimately approved by different regulatory authorities, and are indeed included in the most important international guidelines. Waiting for longer follow-ups and more mature trial data, as well as for real-world experiences, in the absence of validated biomarkers, our 1st line treatment choice cannot but rely on methodologically incorrect treatment comparisons, personal preferences, and experience.
转移性肾细胞癌一线治疗的最新进展
我们的目标是描述转移性肾细胞癌前期治疗的最新进展,并通过对基于免疫的联合治疗的新试验结果的批判性回顾,结合个人考虑和经验,提供可用于治疗选择的标准,尽管通常是主观的。迄今为止,已在大型III期试验中测试了5种基于免疫的组合;其中4个获得了显著的总生存获益(Ipilimumab + Nivolumab, Pembrolizumab + Axitinib, Nivolumab + Cabozantinib和Pembrolizumab + Lenvatinib),而Avelumab + Axitinib的组合虽然达到了研究的主要终点,但仅确定了显著的无进展生存获益。就安全性而言,过量的不良事件总体上抵消了组合的较高活性。总的来说,所有讨论的基于免疫的组合最终都得到了不同监管机构的批准,并且确实被纳入了最重要的国际指南。等待更长的随访和更成熟的试验数据,以及现实世界的经验,在缺乏有效的生物标志物的情况下,我们的一线治疗选择只能依赖于方法学上不正确的治疗比较、个人偏好和经验。
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
3.20
自引率
5.30%
发文量
460
×
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