Loading...
In the initial management of metastatic clear-cell renal cell carcinoma, both the tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) cabozantinib and the immune checkpoint inhibitor nivolumab have demonstrated improvement in overall survival as single agents. Investigators conducted an international randomized phase 3 trial comparing the combination of cabozantinib (40 mg/day) plus nivolumab (240 mg intravenously every 2 weeks) to a prior standard of care, the TKI sunitinib (50 mg/day; 4 weeks on, 2 weeks off). The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS).
Of 651 patients with previously untreated metastatic renal cancer with a clear-cell component, approximately 80% had International Metastatic Renal-Cell Carcinoma Database good or intermediate risk scores and 11% had sarcomatoid features.
At a median follow-up of 18 months, median PFS was 16.6 in the combination group versus 8.3 months in the sunitinib group (hazard ratio, 0.51; P<0.001). At 12 months, the probability of PFS was 57.6% versus 36.9% in the combination and sunitinib groups, and overall survival was 85.7% versus 75.6% (HR, 0.60; P=0.001). Objective responses occurred in 55.7% versus 27.1% (P<0.001), respectively, with complete responses in 8.0% versus 4.6%. Grade 3 or higher adverse events of any cause were observed in 75.3% of the combination group and 70.6% of the sunitinib group; adverse events led to discontinuation of study agents in 19.7% and 16.9%, respectively.
Choueiri TK et al. Nivolumab plus cabozantinib versus sunitinib for advanced renal-cell carcinoma. N Engl J Med 2021 Mar 4; 384:829. (https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa2026982)
Comment
The combination of cabozantinib plus nivolumab is a highly active regimen in untreated patients with clear-cell renal cancer and has recently received FDA approval. Along with recent phase 3 trial results for lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab (NEJM JW Oncol Hematol Feb 25 2021; [e-pub] and N Engl J Med 2021 Feb 13; [e-pub]), we will likely have up to four regimens to select from for initial therapy. In the absence of comparative data, clinicians may be best served by selecting a single regimen with which to develop expertise, while awaiting developments that may help predict which regimen may be more appropriate for an individual patient.