Robert A. Figlin, MD, FACP
As the future of renal cell carcinoma (RCC) treatment heads toward the combination of immune-oncology agents—such as nivolumab (Opdivo) and ipilimumab (Yervoy)—or the combination of targeted therapies with checkpoint inhibitors, balancing toxicity with predicted efficacious outcomes management remains a top concern for physicians, explains Robert A. Figlin, MD.
State of the Science Summit™ on Genitourinary Cancers, Figlin, director, Division of Hematology/Oncology, professor of biomedical sciences and medicine, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, discussed the expanding RCC armamentarium and balancing the benefits and risks of standard and emerging treatments to achieve optimal outcomes.
OncLive: What new agents have entered the treatment landscape in kidney cancer?
Over the past decade and a half we have had tremendous progress in kidney cancer. Originally, there was the approval of high-dose interleukin-2 in 1992. Now, we have a whole series of agents targeting the VEGF-receptor pathway, such as sunitinib (Sutent), pazopanib (Votrient), cabozantinib (Cabometyx), and others. There are also commercially available agents targeting the mTOR pathway that are either replacing our [frontline] standard of care, such as cabozantinib, or are soon to replace our standard of care, such as the combination of ipilimumab and nivolumab. This…immuno-oncology approach to kidney cancer has resulted in improvements in progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and the possibility of durable remissions.
What does the safety profile look like with some of these agents?
The agents we use in kidney cancer have pretty standard toxicity profiles, especially when they're inhibiting the VEGF pathway. They produce hypertension, hand-foot syndrome, fatigue, and some changes in endocrine function, such as hyperthyroidism. Over the past decade, doctors have come to understand how to manage the side effects and how to modify the treatments to maintain the effectiveness of the drugs.
How is intermittent dosing of sunitinib better versus continuous dosing of other agents in RCC?
Sunitinib was approved by the FDA in 2006 for continuous dosing for 4 weeks on and 2 weeks off (4/2). Since then, we have realized through retrospective analyses, prospective studies, and personal experience that the 2-weeks-on/1-week-off (2/1) schedule is equally effective. It produces less toxicity and has indications of improved efficacy, because we are able to maintain patients on full doses for a longer period of time. In my practice, I start people on the 4/2 schedule. If they require changes as a result of toxicity, I quickly switch to the 2/1 schedule rather than dose reductions.
What are the key elements to consider with treatment selection for relapsed/refractory patients? As genitourinary cancer experts, the key is to balance the benefits and the risks with the patient’s and family’s therapy goals. The longer the person can be maintained on close to full doses of therapy, the greater chance the person will have with improved PFS, OS, and potentially durable remissions. I'm looking for positive outcomes that balance their life with their treatment; this is with the understanding that the treatment is going to be chronic and continuous. Ultimately, we have to obtain the balance between the toxicity profile for that person and the benefits.
What does the future of kidney cancer look like?
We have the antiangiogenic agents with targeted therapy and checkpoint inhibitors, such as CTLA-4 inhibition and nivolumab. There is clear evidence that combinations are the future, specifically the combination of checkpoint inhibitors with targeted agents. Whether this is avelumab and a targeted agent, atezolizumab (Tecentriq) plus a targeted agent, or pembrolizumab and a targeted agent has yet to be seen.
... to read the full story