2019Current OncologyOpen access

Real-World Outcomes of Nivolumab and Cabozantinib in Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma: Results from the International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium

Igor Stukalin, J. Connor Wells, Jeffrey Graham, Takeshi Yuasa, Benoit Beuselinck, Christian K. Kollmansberger, D. Scott Ernst, N. Agarwal, Thanh Le, Frede Donskov, Aaron R. Hansen, Georg A. Bjarnason, S. Srinivas, Lori Wood, Ajjai Alva, Ravindran Kanesvaran, Simon Fu, Ian D. Davis, Toni K. Choueiri, D.Y.C. Heng

Open full text 30 citations

Abstract

Objectives: In the present study, we explored the real-world efficacy of the immuno-oncology checkpoint inhibitor nivolumab and the tyrosine kinase inhibitor cabozantinib in the second-line setting. Methods: Using the International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium (IMDC) dataset, a retrospective analysis of patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (MRCC) treated with nivolumab or cabozantinib in the second line after prior therapy targeted to the vascular endothelial growth factor receptor (VEGFR) was performed. Baseline characteristics and imdc risk factors were collected. Overall survival (OS) and time to treatment failure (TTF) were calculated using Kaplan–Meier curves. Overall response rates (ORRS) were determined for each therapy. Multivariable Cox regression analysis was performed to determine survival differences between cabozantinib and nivolumab treatment. Results: The analysis included 225 patients treated with nivolumab and 53 treated with cabozantinib. No significant difference in median OS was observed: 22.10 months [95% confidence interval (CI): 17.18 months to not reached] with nivolumab and 23.70 months (95% CI: 15.52 months to not reached) with cabozantinib (p = 0.61). The TTF was also similar at 6.90 months (95% CI: 4.60 months to 9.20 months) with nivolumab and 7.39 months (95% CI: 5.52 months to 12.85 months) with cabozantinib (p = 0.20). The adjusted hazard ratio (HR) for nivolumab compared with cabozantinib was 1.30 (95% CI: 0.73 to 2.3), p = 0.38. When adjusted by IMDC criteria and age, the HR was 1.32 (95% CI: 0.74 to 2.38), p = 0.35. Conclusions: Real-world IMDC data indicate comparable OS and TTF for nivolumab and cabozantinib. Both agents are reasonable therapeutic options for patients progressing after initial first-line VEGFR-targeted therapy.

Open-access reader

About this research paper

What this paper is about

Objectives: In the present study, we explored the real-world efficacy of the immuno-oncology checkpoint inhibitor nivolumab and the tyrosine kinase inhibitor cabozantinib in the second-line setting. Methods: Using the International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium (IMDC) dataset, a retrospective analysis of patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (MRCC) treated with nivolumab or cabozantinib in the second line after prior therapy targeted to the vascular endothelial growth factor receptor (VEGFR) was performed. Baseline characteristics and imdc risk factors were collected. Overall survival (OS) and time to treatment failure (TTF) were calculated using Kaplan–Meier curves. Overall response rates (ORRS) were determined for each therapy. Multivariable Cox regression analysis was performed to determine survival differences between cabozantinib and nivolumab treatment. Results: The analysis included 225 patients treated with nivolumab and 53 treated with cabozantinib. No significant difference in median OS was observed: 22.10 months [95% confidence interval (CI): 17.18 months to not reached] with nivolumab and 23.70 months (95% CI: 15.52 months to not reached) with cabozantinib (p = 0.61). The TTF was also similar at 6.90 months (95% CI: 4.60 months to 9.20 months) with nivolumab and 7.39 months (95% CI: 5.52 months to 12.85 months) with cabozantinib (p = 0.20). The adjusted hazard ratio (HR) for nivolumab compared with cabozantinib was 1.30 (95% CI: 0.73 to 2.3), p = 0.38. When adjusted by IMDC criteria and age, the HR was 1.32 (95% CI: 0.74 to 2.38), p = 0.35. Conclusions: Real-world IMDC data indicate comparable OS and TTF for nivolumab and cabozantinib. Both agents are reasonable therapeutic options for patients progressing after initial first-line VEGFR-targeted therapy.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 30 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

Objectives: In the present study, we explored the real-world efficacy of the immuno-oncology checkpoint inhibitor nivolumab and the tyrosine kinase inhibitor cabozantinib in the second-line setting. Methods: Using the International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium (IMDC) dataset, a retrospective analysis of patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (MRCC) treated with nivolumab or cabozantinib in the second line after prior therapy targeted to the vascular endothelial growth factor receptor (VEGFR) was performed. Baseline characteristics and imdc risk factors were collected. Overall survival (OS) and time to treatment failure (TTF) were calculated using Kaplan–Meier curves. Overall response rates (ORRS) were determined for each therapy. Multivariable Cox regression analysis was performed to determine survival differences between cabozantinib and nivolumab treatment. Results: The analysis included 225 patients treated with nivolumab and 53 treated with cabozantinib. No significant difference in median OS was observed: 22.10 months [95% confidence interval (CI): 17.18 months to not reached] with nivolumab and 23.70 months (95% CI: 15.52 months to not reached) with cabozantinib (p = 0.61). The TTF was also similar at 6.90 months (95% CI: 4.60 months to 9.20 months) with nivolumab and 7.39 months (95% CI: 5.52 months to 12.85 months) with cabozantinib (p = 0.20). The adjusted hazard ratio (HR) for nivolumab compared with cabozantinib was 1.30 (95% CI: 0.73 to 2.3), p = 0.38. When adjusted by IMDC criteria and age, the HR was 1.32 (95% CI: 0.74 to 2.38), p = 0.35. Conclusions: Real-world IMDC data indicate comparable OS and TTF for nivolumab and cabozantinib. Both agents are reasonable therapeutic options for patients progressing after initial first-line VEGFR-targeted therapy.

Key concepts: Cabozantinib, Renal cell carcinoma, Medicine, Nivolumab, Oncology, Metastatic Urothelial Carcinoma, Metastatic melanoma, Internal medicine

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Real-World Outcomes of Nivolumab and Cabozantinib in Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma: Results from the International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium — Research Paper | ScholarLens