Sumanta K. Pal, MD, FASCO, on Cabozantinib Efficacy in SWOG 1500 for Papillary RCC

Video

Pal discussed findings from the SWOG 1500 trial investigating sunitinib versus either cabozantinib, crizotinib, or savolitinib to treat patients with metastatic papillary RCC.

CancerNetwork® spoke with Sumanta K. Pal, MD, FASCO, at the 2021 American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) Genitourinary Cancer Symposium (GU) regarding the SWOG 1500 trial (NCT02761057) investigating sunitinib (Sutent) versus cabozantinib (Cabometyx), crizotinib (Xalkori), or savolitinib to treat patients with metastatic papillary renal cell carcinoma.

Transcription:

This is a really big study. This is the first time that we have a systemic therapy regimen that’s shown benefit in papillary kidney cancer. This is quite groundbreaking; truly, this is one of those findings that you can hear at ASCO GU over the weekend and take back to the clinic on Monday morning and implement. You know, the study is the first to show that a targeted therapy, or systemic therapy for that matter, has any benefit within this disease space. And specifically, we showed a significant benefit in progression-free survival response rate with cabozantinib over sunitinib.

I think that in SWOG 1500, one of the main messages is that there’s a rare disease embedded within every cancer type, whether it’s lung cancer, ovarian cancer, [or] breast cancer. I think SWOG 1500 really proves that we can band together and do studies that really get at the biology of those rare tumor types. So, I’d encourage investigators across disciplines to use our study as a model.

Reference:

Pal SK, Tangen C, Murchie I, et al. Sunitinib versus cabozantinib, crizotinib or savolitinib in metastatic papillary renal cell carcinoma (pRCC): Results from the randomized phase II SWOG 1500 study. J Clin Oncol. 2021;39(suppl 6):270. doi:10.1200/JCO.2021.39.6_suppl.270

Recent Videos
A third of patients had a response [to lifileucel], and of the patients who have a response, half of them were alive at the 4-year follow-up.
We are seeing that, in those patients who have relapsed/refractory melanoma with survival measured as a few weeks and no effective treatments, about a third of these patients will have a response.
We have the current CAR [T-cell therapies], which target CD19; however, we need others.
“Every patient [with multiple myeloma] should be offered CAR T before they’re offered a bispecific, with some rare exceptions,” said Barry Paul, MD.
Barry Paul, MD, listed cilta-cel, anito-cel, and arlo-cel as 3 of the CAR T-cell therapies with the most promising efficacy in patients with multiple myeloma.
Jose Sandoval Sus, MD, discussed standard CAR T-cell therapies in patients across multiple high-risk lymphoma indications.
Elucidating nonresponses to bispecific T-cell engagers may be an important research consideration in the multiple myeloma field.
Barriers to access and financial toxicities are challenges that must be addressed for CAR T-cell therapies in LBCL, according to Jose Sandoval Sus, MD.
Fixed treatment durations with bispecific antibodies followed by observation may help in mitigating infection-related AEs, according to Shebli Atrash, MD.
Shebli Atrash, MD, stated that MRD should be considered carefully as an end point, given potential recurrence despite MRD negativity.
Related Content