转移性肾细胞癌的一线和二线疗法

IF 25.3 1区 医学 Q1 UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY
Regina Barragan-Carrillo, Eddy Saad, Renee-Maria Saliby, Maxine Sun, Laurence Albiges, Axel Bex, Daniel Heng, Arnaud Mejean, Robert J. Motzer, Elizabeth R. Plimack, Thomas Powles, Brian I. Rini, Tian Zhang, Toni K. Choueiri
{"title":"转移性肾细胞癌的一线和二线疗法","authors":"Regina Barragan-Carrillo, Eddy Saad, Renee-Maria Saliby, Maxine Sun, Laurence Albiges, Axel Bex, Daniel Heng, Arnaud Mejean, Robert J. Motzer, Elizabeth R. Plimack, Thomas Powles, Brian I. Rini, Tian Zhang, Toni K. Choueiri","doi":"10.1016/j.eururo.2024.10.019","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<h3>Background and objective</h3>The treatment landscape for metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) has evolved significantly in recent years, leading to improved outcomes. The aim of this review is to provide clinicians with a practical guide for selecting first- and second-line treatments on the basis of current evidence.<h3>Methods</h3>We critically evaluated systemic treatment strategies for mRCC. A comprehensive literature search was conducted in PubMed and Embase, alongside manual searches of guidelines and conference proceedings up to October 2024. A narrative review was performed to reach a consensus, with voting used to resolve differing opinions among authors.<h3>Key findings and limitations</h3>First-line treatment options include immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI)-based combinations or tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs). Four combination regimens have been approved internationally. Owing to the lack of head-to-head trials and standardized biomarkers, treatment decisions rely on factors such as International Metastatic RCC Database Consortium (IMDC) risk score, functional status, safety profiles, sarcomatoid features, use of immunosuppressive drugs, and need for immediate response. Despite advances, many patients will experience disease progression on ICI-based therapy, necessitating further treatment. The need for standardized second-line approaches remains unmet. TKIs, alone or with everolimus, show promising efficacy, while HIF2a inhibitors offer newer options with a favorable toxicity profile. Rechallenge with ICIs after early progression is not recommended.<h3>Conclusions and clinical implications</h3>For optimal mRCC treatment selection, clinicians must carefully balance efficacy, toxicity, and patient preferences, especially when transitioning between first- and second-line therapies, to provide individualized care.","PeriodicalId":12223,"journal":{"name":"European urology","volume":"121 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":25.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"First and Second-line Treatments in Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma\",\"authors\":\"Regina Barragan-Carrillo, Eddy Saad, Renee-Maria Saliby, Maxine Sun, Laurence Albiges, Axel Bex, Daniel Heng, Arnaud Mejean, Robert J. Motzer, Elizabeth R. Plimack, Thomas Powles, Brian I. Rini, Tian Zhang, Toni K. Choueiri\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.eururo.2024.10.019\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<h3>Background and objective</h3>The treatment landscape for metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) has evolved significantly in recent years, leading to improved outcomes. The aim of this review is to provide clinicians with a practical guide for selecting first- and second-line treatments on the basis of current evidence.<h3>Methods</h3>We critically evaluated systemic treatment strategies for mRCC. A comprehensive literature search was conducted in PubMed and Embase, alongside manual searches of guidelines and conference proceedings up to October 2024. A narrative review was performed to reach a consensus, with voting used to resolve differing opinions among authors.<h3>Key findings and limitations</h3>First-line treatment options include immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI)-based combinations or tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs). Four combination regimens have been approved internationally. Owing to the lack of head-to-head trials and standardized biomarkers, treatment decisions rely on factors such as International Metastatic RCC Database Consortium (IMDC) risk score, functional status, safety profiles, sarcomatoid features, use of immunosuppressive drugs, and need for immediate response. Despite advances, many patients will experience disease progression on ICI-based therapy, necessitating further treatment. The need for standardized second-line approaches remains unmet. TKIs, alone or with everolimus, show promising efficacy, while HIF2a inhibitors offer newer options with a favorable toxicity profile. Rechallenge with ICIs after early progression is not recommended.<h3>Conclusions and clinical implications</h3>For optimal mRCC treatment selection, clinicians must carefully balance efficacy, toxicity, and patient preferences, especially when transitioning between first- and second-line therapies, to provide individualized care.\",\"PeriodicalId\":12223,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European urology\",\"volume\":\"121 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":25.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-06\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European urology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2024.10.019\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European urology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2024.10.019","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景和目的近年来,转移性肾细胞癌(mRCC)的治疗格局发生了显著变化,从而改善了治疗效果。本综述旨在为临床医生提供实用指南,帮助他们在现有证据的基础上选择一线和二线治疗方法。我们在PubMed和Embase上进行了全面的文献检索,并手动检索了截至2024年10月的指南和会议论文集。主要发现和局限性一线治疗方案包括基于免疫检查点抑制剂(ICI)的联合疗法或酪氨酸激酶抑制剂(TKIs)。国际上已批准了四种联合疗法。由于缺乏头对头试验和标准化生物标志物,治疗决定取决于国际转移性 RCC 数据库联盟 (IMDC) 的风险评分、功能状态、安全性概况、肉瘤特征、免疫抑制剂的使用以及是否需要立即治疗等因素。尽管取得了进步,但许多患者在接受基于 ICI 的治疗后仍会出现疾病进展,需要进一步治疗。对标准化二线治疗方法的需求仍未得到满足。TKIs(单独使用或与依维莫司联合使用)显示出良好的疗效,而HIF2a抑制剂则提供了毒性较低的新选择。结论和临床意义为优化 mRCC 治疗选择,临床医生必须仔细权衡疗效、毒性和患者偏好,尤其是在一线和二线疗法之间转换时,以提供个体化治疗。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
First and Second-line Treatments in Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma

Background and objective

The treatment landscape for metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) has evolved significantly in recent years, leading to improved outcomes. The aim of this review is to provide clinicians with a practical guide for selecting first- and second-line treatments on the basis of current evidence.

Methods

We critically evaluated systemic treatment strategies for mRCC. A comprehensive literature search was conducted in PubMed and Embase, alongside manual searches of guidelines and conference proceedings up to October 2024. A narrative review was performed to reach a consensus, with voting used to resolve differing opinions among authors.

Key findings and limitations

First-line treatment options include immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI)-based combinations or tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs). Four combination regimens have been approved internationally. Owing to the lack of head-to-head trials and standardized biomarkers, treatment decisions rely on factors such as International Metastatic RCC Database Consortium (IMDC) risk score, functional status, safety profiles, sarcomatoid features, use of immunosuppressive drugs, and need for immediate response. Despite advances, many patients will experience disease progression on ICI-based therapy, necessitating further treatment. The need for standardized second-line approaches remains unmet. TKIs, alone or with everolimus, show promising efficacy, while HIF2a inhibitors offer newer options with a favorable toxicity profile. Rechallenge with ICIs after early progression is not recommended.

Conclusions and clinical implications

For optimal mRCC treatment selection, clinicians must carefully balance efficacy, toxicity, and patient preferences, especially when transitioning between first- and second-line therapies, to provide individualized care.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
European urology
European urology 医学-泌尿学与肾脏学
CiteScore
43.00
自引率
2.60%
发文量
1753
审稿时长
23 days
期刊介绍: European Urology is a peer-reviewed journal that publishes original articles and reviews on a broad spectrum of urological issues. Covering topics such as oncology, impotence, infertility, pediatrics, lithiasis and endourology, the journal also highlights recent advances in techniques, instrumentation, surgery, and pediatric urology. This comprehensive approach provides readers with an in-depth guide to international developments in urology.
×
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