Real world evidence from a retrospective multi-center analysis on first-line therapy for metastatic renal cell carcinoma with chromophobe histology.

488 Background: Chromophobe (chRCC) renal cell carcinoma are rare cancers and obtain a worse prognosis. We evaluated real-world treatment outcomes of 1 st line treatment in these cohort in Germany. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed patients with metastatic chRCC treated at 17 German tertiary cancer centres being treated from 2008-2023. Adverse events (AE) were reported according to CTCAE 5.0, objective response rate (ORR) according to local standard of radiological and clinical judgement. Progression free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were calculated from start of treatment to progression or death, respectively and determined by KM plots. Results: We included 39 patients with a median age of 59 (IQR 55-71) years. ECOG PS was 0/1/≥2 in 70/17/12%. IMDC risk was favorable/intermediate/poor in 13/61/26%. 87% received prior nephrectomy. Lymphatic (58%), pulmonary (37%) bone (34%) and metastases were the most common metastatic sites. 52% patients received first-line IO-combinations (IO-IO: 43%, TKI-IO: 57%) and 48% patients TKI-monotherapy, predominantly sunitinib. Subsequent therapy was mostly Cabozantinib (after IO-IO), Lenvatinib/Everolimus (after IO-TKI) or Nivolumab (after TKI mono). AE of all grades occurred in 59% and 71% during IO-based therapy or TKI monotherapy, and CTCAE grade ≥3 in 29% or 25%, respectively. ORR and survival outcomes with median follow-up of 14 months (IQR 7-28) are described in the table. Conclusions: IO-combinations are frequently applied in chRCC. Our data suggests that first-line IO-/TKI-based combinations yields higher ORR compared to IO-/IO-based combinations and single agent TKI, but did not translate into an improved PFS or OS. The retrospective nature and small sample size are major limitations of our analysis. However, the rarity of metastatic chRCC contributes to inconsistent findings not only in our dataset but also across previously published studies, making it difficult to establish clear treatment guidelines. Further research is essential to refine treatment strategies for patients with metastatic chRCC. ORR and survival outcomes of study population. Parameter All therapies (n=31) IO/IO (n=8) IO/TKI (n=10) TKI (n=13) ORR (CR+PR) 19% 12,5% 30% 15% SD 16% 12,5% 40% 0% PD 65% 75% 30% 85% ORR vs. SD vs. PD - p=0.05 Parameter All therapies IO/IO IO/TKI TKI mPFS, months, 95% CI 3 (0,0-10,2) 3 (2,4-3,6) 8 (0,0-19,2) 4 (0,0-10,2) - P=0.077 mOS; months, 95% CI 24 (22,7-25,3) 12 (2,3-21,7) NR (NR-NR) 24 (22,5-25,5) - p=0.183

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Clinical Oncology
Published
2025-02-10
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.2025.43.5_suppl.488
Citations
1
Primary Topic
Renal cell carcinoma treatment
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
1.52
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Real world evidence from a retrospective multi-center analysis on first-line therapy for metastatic renal cell carcinoma with chromophobe histology.

Viktor Grünwald, Luka Flegar, Marc Rehlinghaus, Philipp Ivanyi et al.
1 citations
Journal of Clinical Oncology
Renal cell carcinoma treatment
1.52
article

Real world evidence from a retrospective multi-center analysis on first-line therapy for metastatic renal cell carcinoma with chromophobe histology.

Viktor Grünwald, Luka Flegar, Marc Rehlinghaus, Philipp Ivanyi, Anna-Lisa Volk, Stefanie Zschaebitz, Katrin Schlack, Daniel Seidl, Sameh Hijazi, Axel Heidenreich, Christopher Darr, Angelika Mattigk, Jozefina Casuscelli, Pia Paffenholz, Tim Nestler, Thomas Hilser, Analena Handke, M. Klee, Emily Rinderknecht
article en
1 citations

Abstract

488 Background: Chromophobe (chRCC) renal cell carcinoma are rare cancers and obtain a worse prognosis. We evaluated real-world treatment outcomes of 1 st line treatment in these cohort in Germany. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed patients with metastatic chRCC treated at 17 German tertiary cancer centres being treated from 2008-2023. Adverse events (AE) were reported according to CTCAE 5.0, objective response rate (ORR) according to local standard of radiological and clinical judgement. Progression free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were calculated from start of treatment to progression or death, respectively and determined by KM plots. Results: We included 39 patients with a median age of 59 (IQR 55-71) years. ECOG PS was 0/1/≥2 in 70/17/12%. IMDC risk was favorable/intermediate/poor in 13/61/26%. 87% received prior nephrectomy. Lymphatic (58%), pulmonary (37%) bone (34%) and metastases were the most common metastatic sites. 52% patients received first-line IO-combinations (IO-IO: 43%, TKI-IO: 57%) and 48% patients TKI-monotherapy, predominantly sunitinib. Subsequent therapy was mostly Cabozantinib (after IO-IO), Lenvatinib/Everolimus (after IO-TKI) or Nivolumab (after TKI mono). AE of all grades occurred in 59% and 71% during IO-based therapy or TKI monotherapy, and CTCAE grade ≥3 in 29% or 25%, respectively. ORR and survival outcomes with median follow-up of 14 months (IQR 7-28) are described in the table. Conclusions: IO-combinations are frequently applied in chRCC. Our data suggests that first-line IO-/TKI-based combinations yields higher ORR compared to IO-/IO-based combinations and single agent TKI, but did not translate into an improved PFS or OS. The retrospective nature and small sample size are major limitations of our analysis. However, the rarity of metastatic chRCC contributes to inconsistent findings not only in our dataset but also across previously published studies, making it difficult to establish clear treatment guidelines. Further research is essential to refine treatment strategies for patients with metastatic chRCC. ORR and survival outcomes of study population. Parameter All therapies (n=31) IO/IO (n=8) IO/TKI (n=10) TKI (n=13) ORR (CR+PR) 19% 12,5% 30% 15% SD 16% 12,5% 40% 0% PD 65% 75% 30% 85% ORR vs. SD vs. PD - p=0.05 Parameter All therapies IO/IO IO/TKI TKI mPFS, months, 95% CI 3 (0,0-10,2) 3 (2,4-3,6) 8 (0,0-19,2) 4 (0,0-10,2) - P=0.077 mOS; months, 95% CI 24 (22,7-25,3) 12 (2,3-21,7) NR (NR-NR) 24 (22,5-25,5) - p=0.183

Journal of Clinical OncologyVol. 43(5_suppl)
Philipps University of Marburg (DE), German Cancer Research Center (DE), University of Cologne (DE), Heidelberg University (DE), University Hospital Heidelberg (DE), LMU Klinikum (DE), Medizinische Hochschule Hannover (DE), Universitätsklinik Marien Hospital Herne (DE), Düsseldorf University Hospital (DE), University Hospital Münster (DE), National Center for Tumor Diseases (DE), University Hospital Schleswig-Holstein (DE), Essen University Hospital (DE), Diakonie-Klinikum Stuttgart (DE), University Hospital Cologne (DE), University Hospital Ulm (DE), Bundeswehrzentralkrankenhaus Koblenz (DE), Deutsches Konsortium für Translationale Krebsforschung (DE), Heinrich Heine University Düsseldorf (DE), University of Regensburg (DE), Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München (DE), Ruhr University Bochum (DE), University of Lübeck (DE)
Openalex Percentile: Top 22%
Renal cell carcinoma treatment
1.52
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.