Analyses on impact of tumor burden at progression and changes in IMDC from baseline in patients (pts) with advanced renal cell carcinoma (aRCC) treated with lenvatinib + pembrolizumab (L+P) in the phase 3 CLEAR trial.

531 Background: L+P significantly improved efficacy vs sunitinib in treatment-naïve pts with aRCC in the CLEAR trial (Motzer 2021). We report data from further analyses on the impact of tumor burden at the time of progression and shifts in IMDC scores in the L+P arm of the CLEAR study. Methods: Study design has been reported (Motzer 2021). Data cutoff for analyses was July 31, 2022 (median follow-up: ~4 years; Motzer 2024). Data herein are limited to the L+P arm of CLEAR. Medians for survival from either progression or randomization (i.e., overall survival) were estimated by Kaplan-Meier method, and 95% CIs were estimated via generalized Brookmeyer and Crowley method. Survival was assessed according to percent changes from baseline in target lesion diameters of pts at progression (on L+P) by tertiles (T1: ≤-61%; T2: >-61%-≤-34%; T3: >-34%-≤51%). Changes in IMDC score from baseline were reported at 6 months to assess treatment impact on prognosis. Results: Pts with a larger percentage decrease in sums of target lesion diameters at progression had longer median survival (months [95% CI]) from time of progression vs pts with smaller percentage decreases in tumor size (T1 [n=59], 35.6 [28.4-39.2]; T2 [n=58], 24.4 [15.5-34.5]; T3 [n=59], 20.2 [16.4-26.9]). Similar trends were observed with overall survival (from randomization; T1, not estimable [49.9-NE]; T2, 43.0 [33.0-NE]; T3, 31.5 [22.4-34.4]). Most pts, irrespective of tumor shrinkage at progression, received subsequent systemic anticancer medication during survival follow-up (T1: 63%; T2: 59%; T3: 71%). Pts received an anti-VEGF therapy (46%; 45%; 59%) as their first subsequent medication more frequently than any other medications. The most frequently used anti-VEGF therapies were cabozantinib (22%; 29%; 29%), sunitinib (12%; 3%; 20%), and axitinib (7%; 3%; 8%). At 6 months, IMDC score stayed the same or decreased from baseline in most pts; ≤10% of pts had increases in IMDC score, regardless of score at baseline (Table). Conclusions: Pts in the L+P arm with lower disease burden at progression showed improved prognosis, highlighting the importance of deep tumor response when considering treatment sequence. IMDC risk scores were typically constant or improved in pts treated with L+P; data are limited by missing pts. Clinical trial information: NCT02811861 . L+P arm IMDC score at 6 months, n (%) Baseline IMDC score a Decreased by ≥1 points Remained constant Increased by 1 point Increased by ≥2 points Missing b 0 (n=110) NA 84 (76) 9 (8) 2 (2) 15 (14) 1 (n=137) 25 (18) 82 (60) 8 (6) 2 (1) 20 (15) 2 (n=72) 34 (47) 18 (25) 5 (7) 1 (1) 14 (19) 3 (n=26) 18 (69) 0 0 0 8 (31) 4 (n=5) 4 (80) 0 0 0 1 (20) 5 (n=1) 1 (100) 0 0 0 0 Total (n=355) 84 (24) 186 (52) 22 (6) 5 (1) 58 (16) a 4 pts had a missing score at baseline. b IMDC prognostic score was derived based on total risk score from 6 prognostic factors at baseline and month 6 (+/- 2 weeks).

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Clinical Oncology
Published
2025-02-10
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.2025.43.5_suppl.531
Primary Topic
Renal cell carcinoma treatment
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Analyses on impact of tumor burden at progression and changes in IMDC from baseline in patients (pts) with advanced renal cell carcinoma (aRCC) treated with lenvatinib + pembrolizumab (L+P) in the phase 3 CLEAR trial.

Masatoshi Eto, Viktor Grünwald, Roberto Sabbatini, Hakim Saal et al.
Journal of Clinical Oncology
Renal cell carcinoma treatment
article

Analyses on impact of tumor burden at progression and changes in IMDC from baseline in patients (pts) with advanced renal cell carcinoma (aRCC) treated with lenvatinib + pembrolizumab (L+P) in the phase 3 CLEAR trial.

Masatoshi Eto, Viktor Grünwald, Roberto Sabbatini, Hakim Saal, Sun Young Rha, Jaime R. Merchan, Joseph E. Burgents, Daniel Keizman, Ian Brown, Toni K. Choueiri, Robert John Motzer, Ulka N. Vaishampayan, Saby George, Jens Bedke, В. Б. Матвеев, Michael D. Staehler, Min Ren, Thomas E. Hutson, Philippe Barthélémy, Tom Waddell
article en

Abstract

531 Background: L+P significantly improved efficacy vs sunitinib in treatment-naïve pts with aRCC in the CLEAR trial (Motzer 2021). We report data from further analyses on the impact of tumor burden at the time of progression and shifts in IMDC scores in the L+P arm of the CLEAR study. Methods: Study design has been reported (Motzer 2021). Data cutoff for analyses was July 31, 2022 (median follow-up: ~4 years; Motzer 2024). Data herein are limited to the L+P arm of CLEAR. Medians for survival from either progression or randomization (i.e., overall survival) were estimated by Kaplan-Meier method, and 95% CIs were estimated via generalized Brookmeyer and Crowley method. Survival was assessed according to percent changes from baseline in target lesion diameters of pts at progression (on L+P) by tertiles (T1: ≤-61%; T2: >-61%-≤-34%; T3: >-34%-≤51%). Changes in IMDC score from baseline were reported at 6 months to assess treatment impact on prognosis. Results: Pts with a larger percentage decrease in sums of target lesion diameters at progression had longer median survival (months [95% CI]) from time of progression vs pts with smaller percentage decreases in tumor size (T1 [n=59], 35.6 [28.4-39.2]; T2 [n=58], 24.4 [15.5-34.5]; T3 [n=59], 20.2 [16.4-26.9]). Similar trends were observed with overall survival (from randomization; T1, not estimable [49.9-NE]; T2, 43.0 [33.0-NE]; T3, 31.5 [22.4-34.4]). Most pts, irrespective of tumor shrinkage at progression, received subsequent systemic anticancer medication during survival follow-up (T1: 63%; T2: 59%; T3: 71%). Pts received an anti-VEGF therapy (46%; 45%; 59%) as their first subsequent medication more frequently than any other medications. The most frequently used anti-VEGF therapies were cabozantinib (22%; 29%; 29%), sunitinib (12%; 3%; 20%), and axitinib (7%; 3%; 8%). At 6 months, IMDC score stayed the same or decreased from baseline in most pts; ≤10% of pts had increases in IMDC score, regardless of score at baseline (Table). Conclusions: Pts in the L+P arm with lower disease burden at progression showed improved prognosis, highlighting the importance of deep tumor response when considering treatment sequence. IMDC risk scores were typically constant or improved in pts treated with L+P; data are limited by missing pts. Clinical trial information: NCT02811861 . L+P arm IMDC score at 6 months, n (%) Baseline IMDC score a Decreased by ≥1 points Remained constant Increased by 1 point Increased by ≥2 points Missing b 0 (n=110) NA 84 (76) 9 (8) 2 (2) 15 (14) 1 (n=137) 25 (18) 82 (60) 8 (6) 2 (1) 20 (15) 2 (n=72) 34 (47) 18 (25) 5 (7) 1 (1) 14 (19) 3 (n=26) 18 (69) 0 0 0 8 (31) 4 (n=5) 4 (80) 0 0 0 1 (20) 5 (n=1) 1 (100) 0 0 0 0 Total (n=355) 84 (24) 186 (52) 22 (6) 5 (1) 58 (16) a 4 pts had a missing score at baseline. b IMDC prognostic score was derived based on total risk score from 6 prognostic factors at baseline and month 6 (+/- 2 weeks).

Journal of Clinical OncologyVol. 43(5_suppl)
University of Modena and Reggio Emilia (IT), Merck & Co., Inc., Rahway, NJ, USA (United States) (US), Roswell Park Comprehensive Cancer Center (US), Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center (US), Kyushu University (JP), Harvard University (US), University of Miami (US), Yonsei University (KR), University of Michigan (US), Tel Aviv Sourasky Medical Center (IL), Texas Oncology (US), Institut de Cancérologie Strasbourg (FR), Ministry of Health of the Russian Federation (RU), Dana-Farber Cancer Institute (US), Essen University Hospital (DE), München Klinik (DE), The Christie NHS Foundation Trust (GB), Eisai (United Kingdom) (GB), Eisai (United States) (US), Sylvester Comprehensive Cancer Center (US), Klinikum Stuttgart (DE)
Openalex Percentile: Top 96%
Renal cell carcinoma treatment
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.