The Role of Molecular Profiling in Optimizing Treatment Decisions for RCC

News
Video

Molecular profiling is a tool that can best determine first-line therapy options for patients with advanced RCC.

In the past, treatment decisions have been made based on the location and type of the tumor. Today, genetic profiling is an option to help better guide treatment decisions.

Matthew T. Campbell, MD, MS, spoke about using genetic profiling, and how it’s typically not used after first-line therapy. Genetic profiling is specifically useful for those with advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC) because of the identification of negative prognostic markers linking to a preferred treatment option.

Campbell, an associate professor in the Department of Genitourinary Oncology at The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, also highlighted taking into consideration a patient’s quality of life (QOL). He noted that when choosing a treatment option, he considers what kind of QOL would like, and combined with their cancer creates a treatment plan.

Transcript:

In some patients, we will use molecular profiling. As of today, outside of World Health Organization [WHO] classifiers, it doesn’t have a role in terms of us picking frontline therapy. We know that patients with BAP1 mutations have a negative prognostic marker, but it’s not predictive, so what do we use in pathology? We use sarcomatoid dedifferentiation, and if patients have this on their pathology, we will often select nivolumab plus ipilimumab [as a treatment] because response rates are approximately 60%, and complete response rates are approximately 20%. We know that those patients are less responsive to TKI-based treatment.

QOL is hugely important for patients, and this is something that I go to great length in discussing. Nivolumab and ipilimumab have improved QOL compared with sunitinib [Sutent], as did cabozantinib [Cabometyx] plus nivolumab vs sunitinib. This is important. With axitinib [Inlyta] plus pembrolizumab and lenvatinib [Lenvima] plus pembrolizumab, QOL was about the same as sunitinib, which was not great. When we have this [decision-making] conversation, [QOL] is a big part of it. Part of it’s because the cabozantinib dose is lower and tends to be a bit of an easier start for patients, especially those who are frail.

Recent Videos
Ongoing studies in kidney cancer aim to explore determinants of immune-related adverse effects and strategies for mitigating them.
Machine learning-based approaches may play a role in further understanding of how somatic alterations influence responses or resistance to therapy.
Data from a first-in-disease trial assessing a personalized cancer vaccine in RCC require validation at a larger level, according to David Braun, MD, PhD.
Blood-based markers of note in kidney cancer prognosis include circulating tumor DNA and proteomic markers, according to Michael B. Atkins, MD.
Clinical trials still have a role in improving outcomes with immunotherapy among those with kidney cancer.
Current research initiatives in the kidney cancer field include exploring anti–PD-1, anti–LAG-3, and anti–CTLA-4 combination regimens.
One of the largest obstacles to tackle in the kidney cancer landscape will be translating the research on rare kidney cancer subtypes into clinical trials.
Zanzalitinib exhibited favorable data when evaluated alone or in combination with anti-PD-1 immune checkpoint inhibition in phase 1 RCC trials.
The investigational agent exhibited superior efficacy vs pembrolizumab in patients with lung cancer, suggesting potential efficacy in kidney cancer.
“As a community, if we’re looking to help enroll and advocate for patients with rare [kidney cancers], we need to be aware of what is out there,” said A. Ari Hakimi, MD.
Related Content