Comparative analysis of efficacy and safety of combined immunotherapy and immune targeted therapy in the first-line treatment of advanced renal cell carcinoma: a real-world study

Aim. To compare of efficacy and safety of combined immune therapy (dual immune-oncology – IO combination therapies, IO-IO) and immune targeted therapy (ITT) in the first line treatment of patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC) treated in real world clinical practice. Materials and methods. The ambispective study enrolled patients with metastatic RCC aged ≥18 years, with measurable neoplastic lesions, who were treated with first-line IO-IO therapy or ITT. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS). Results. The study included data from 126 patients treated with IO-IO [46 (36.5%) patients of the IMDC intermediate and poor prognostic groups] or ITT [80 (63.5%) patients of all IMDC prognostic groups]. In a median follow-up of all patients of 16.1 (0.1–44.9) months, the median PFS was 16.1 (10.9–21.3) months, the median overall survival (OS) was not reached; one-year OS was 83.0%; the objective response rate on the first line of therapy was 44.4% with a complete response rate of 3.2%. The rate of tumor control was 88.1%. In the overall population, ITT versus IO-IO provided a significant benefit in terms of ORR (51.2% vs 32.6%; p=0.032), PFS (median 22.9 months vs 8.0 months; p=0.004) and one-year OS (87.5% vs 65.2%; p=0.042). In the IPTW population, multivariate analysis confirmed the independent prognostic significance of the treatment regimen for PFS (hazard ratio, 2.3; 95% confidence interval, 1.1–4.8; p=0.037) and OS (hazard ratio, 2.3; 95% confidence interval 1.1–4.8; p=0.037). No difference in the safety profile of IO-IO and ITT was identified. Conclusion. The results support the hypothesis that ITT is more effective than IO-IO in the first-line treatment of advanced RCC in patients of IMDC intermediate and poor prognostic groups.