Peter Mulders

EAU Guidelines on Renal Cell Carcinoma: 2014 Update.

CONTEXT The European Association of Urology Guideline Panel for Renal Cell Carcinoma (RCC) has prepared evidence-based guidelines and recommendations for RCC management. OBJECTIVES To provide an update of the 2010 RCC guideline based on a standardised methodology that is robust, transparent, reproducible, and reliable. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION For the 2014 update, the panel prioritised the following topics: percutaneous biopsy of renal masses, treatment of localised RCC (including surgical and nonsurgical management), lymph node dissection, management of venous thrombus, systemic therapy, and local treatment of metastases, for which evidence synthesis was undertaken based on systematic reviews adhering to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Relevant databases (Medline, Cochrane Library, trial registries, conference proceedings) were searched (January 2000 to November 2013) including randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and retrospective or controlled studies with a comparator arm. Risk of bias (RoB) assessment and qualitative and quantitative synthesis of the evidence were performed. The remaining sections of the document were updated following a structured literature assessment. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS All chapters of the RCC guideline were updated. For the various systematic reviews, the search identified a total of 10,862 articles. A total of 151 studies reporting on 78,792 patients were eligible for inclusion; where applicable, data from RCTs were included and meta-analyses were performed. For RCTs, there was low RoB across studies; however, clinical and methodological heterogeneity prevented data pooling for most studies. The majority of studies included were retrospective with matched or unmatched cohorts based on single or multi-institutional data or national registries. The exception was for systemic treatment of metastatic RCC, in which several RCTs have been performed, resulting in recommendations based on higher levels of evidence. CONCLUSIONS The 2014 guideline has been updated by a multidisciplinary panel using the highest methodological standards, and provides the best and most reliable contemporary evidence base for RCC management. PATIENT SUMMARY The European Association of Urology Guideline Panel for Renal Cell Carcinoma has thoroughly evaluated available research data on kidney cancer to establish international standards for the care of kidney cancer patients.

Abiraterone in Metastatic Prostate Cancer without Previous Chemotherapy

BACKGROUND Abiraterone acetate, an androgen biosynthesis inhibitor, improves overall survival in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer after chemotherapy. We evaluated this agent in patients who had not received previous chemotherapy. METHODS In this double-blind study, we randomly assigned 1088 patients to receive abiraterone acetate (1000 mg) plus prednisone (5 mg twice daily) or placebo plus prednisone. The coprimary end points were radiographic progression-free survival and overall survival. RESULTS The study was unblinded after a planned interim analysis that was performed after 43% of the expected deaths had occurred. The median radiographic progression-free survival was 16.5 months with abiraterone-prednisone and 8.3 months with prednisone alone (hazard ratio for abiraterone-prednisone vs. prednisone alone, 0.53; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.45 to 0.62; P<0.001). Over a median follow-up period of 22.2 months, overall survival was improved with abiraterone-prednisone (median not reached, vs. 27.2 months for prednisone alone; hazard ratio, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.61 to 0.93; P=0.01) but did not cross the efficacy boundary. Abiraterone-prednisone showed superiority over prednisone alone with respect to time to initiation of cytotoxic chemotherapy, opiate use for cancer-related pain, prostate-specific antigen progression, and decline in performance status. Grade 3 or 4 mineralocorticoid-related adverse events and abnormalities on liver-function testing were more common with abiraterone-prednisone. CONCLUSIONS Abiraterone improved radiographic progression-free survival, showed a trend toward improved overall survival, and significantly delayed clinical decline and initiation of chemotherapy in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer. (Funded by Janssen Research and Development, formerly Cougar Biotechnology; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00887198.).

A Variant Associated with Nicotine Dependence, Lung Cancer and Peripheral Arterial Disease

Smoking is a leading cause of preventable death, causing about 5 million premature deaths worldwide each year. Evidence for genetic influence on smoking behaviour and nicotine dependence (ND) has prompted a search for susceptibility genes. Furthermore, assessing the impact of sequence variants on smoking-related diseases is important to public health. Smoking is the major risk factor for lung cancer (LC) and is one of the main risk factors for peripheral arterial disease (PAD). Here we identify a common variant in the nicotinic acetylcholine receptor gene cluster on chromosome 15q24 with an effect on smoking quantity, ND and the risk of two smoking-related diseases in populations of European descent. The variant has an effect on the number of cigarettes smoked per day in our sample of smokers. The same variant was associated with ND in a previous genome-wide association study that used low-quantity smokers as controls, and with a similar approach we observe a highly significant association with ND. A comparison of cases of LC and PAD with population controls each showed that the variant confers risk of LC and PAD. The findings provide a case study of a gene–environment interaction, highlighting the role of nicotine addiction in the pathology of other serious diseases.

GuidelinesEAU Guidelines on Renal Cell Carcinoma: The 2010 Update

CONTEXT AND OBJECTIVES The European Association of Urology Guideline Group for renal cell carcinoma (RCC) has prepared these guidelines to help clinicians assess the current evidence-based management of RCC and to incorporate the present recommendations into daily clinical practice. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION The recommendations provided in the current updated guidelines are based on a thorough review of available RCC guidelines and review articles combined with a systematic literature search using Medline and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS A number of recent prospective randomised studies concerning RCC are now available with a high level of evidence, whereas earlier publications were based on retrospective analyses, including some larger multicentre validation studies, meta-analyses, and well-designed controlled studies. CONCLUSIONS These guidelines contain information for the treatment of an individual patient according to a current standardised general approach. Updated recommendations concerning diagnosis, treatment, and follow-up can improve the clinical handling of patients with RCC.

Renal cell carcinoma: ESMO Clinical Practice Guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up

B. Escudier1, C. Porta2, M. Schmidinger3, F. Algaba4, J. J. Patard5, V. Khoo6,7, T. Eisen8 & A. Horwich6 on behalf of the ESMO Guidelines Working Group* Institut Gustave Roussy, Villejuif, France; IRCCS San Matteo University Hospital Foundation, Pavia, Italy; Clinical Division of Oncology, Department of Medicine I and Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria; Department of Pathology, Fundació Puigvert, Universitat Autónoma de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain; CHU Bicêtre, Université Paris XI, Kremlin Bicêtre, France; Institute of Cancer Research and Royal Marsden Hospital, London, UK; Monash University, Melbourne, Australia; Cambridge Biomedical Campus, Cambridge, UK

Abiraterone acetate plus prednisone versus placebo plus prednisone in chemotherapy-naive men with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (COU-AA-302): final overall survival analysis of a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 3 study

BACKGROUND Abiraterone acetate plus prednisone significantly improved radiographic progression-free survival compared with placebo plus prednisone in men with chemotherapy-naive castration-resistant prostate cancer at the interim analyses of the COU-AA-302 trial. Here, we present the prespecified final analysis of the trial, assessing the effect of abiraterone acetate plus prednisone on overall survival, time to opiate use, and use of other subsequent therapies. METHODS In this placebo-controlled, double-blind, randomised phase 3 study, 1088 asymptomatic or mildly symptomatic patients with chemotherapy-naive prostate cancer stratified by Eastern Cooperative Oncology performance status (0 vs 1) were randomly assigned with a permuted block allocation scheme via a web response system in a 1:1 ratio to receive either abiraterone acetate (1000 mg once daily) plus prednisone (5 mg twice daily; abiraterone acetate group) or placebo plus prednisone (placebo group). Coprimary endpoints were radiographic progression-free survival and overall survival analysed in the intention-to-treat population. The study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00887198. FINDINGS At a median follow-up of 49.2 months (IQR 47.0-51.8), 741 (96%) of the prespecified 773 death events for the final analysis had been observed: 354 (65%) of 546 patients in the abiraterone acetate group and 387 (71%) of 542 in the placebo group. 238 (44%) patients initially receiving prednisone alone subsequently received abiraterone acetate plus prednisone as crossover per protocol (93 patients) or as subsequent therapy (145 patients). Overall, 365 (67%) patients in the abiraterone acetate group and 435 (80%) in the placebo group received subsequent treatment with one or more approved agents. Median overall survival was significantly longer in the abiraterone acetate group than in the placebo group (34.7 months [95% CI 32.7-36.8] vs 30.3 months [28.7-33.3]; hazard ratio 0.81 [95% CI 0.70-0.93]; p=0.0033). The most common grade 3-4 adverse events of special interest were cardiac disorders (41 [8%] of 542 patients in the abiraterone acetate group vs 20 [4%] of 540 patients in the placebo group), increased alanine aminotransferase (32 [6%] vs four [<1%]), and hypertension (25 [5%] vs 17 [3%]). INTERPRETATION In this randomised phase 3 trial with a median follow-up of more than 4 years, treatment with abiraterone acetate prolonged overall survival compared with prednisone alone by a margin that was both clinically and statistically significant. These results further support the favourable safety profile of abiraterone acetate in patients with chemotherapy-naive metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer. FUNDING Janssen Research & Development.

Multi-Institutional Validation of a New Renal Cancer–Specific Survival Nomogram

PURPOSE We tested the hypothesis that the prediction of renal cancer-specific survival can be improved if traditional predictor variables are used within a prognostic nomogram. PATIENTS AND METHODS Two cohorts of patients treated with either radical or partial nephrectomy for renal cortical tumors were used: one (n = 2,530) for nomogram development and for internal validation (200 bootstrap resamples), and a second (n = 1,422) for external validation. Cox proportional hazards regression analyses modeled the 2002 TNM stages, tumor size, Fuhrman grade, histologic subtype, local symptoms, age, and sex. The accuracy of the nomogram was compared with an established staging scheme. RESULTS Cancer-specific mortality was observed in 598 (23.6%) patients, whereas 200 (7.9%) died as a result of other causes. Follow-up ranged from 0.1 to 286 months (median, 38.8 months). External validation of the nomogram at 1, 2, 5, and 10 years after nephrectomy revealed predictive accuracy of 87.8%, 89.2%, 86.7%, and 88.8%, respectively. Conversely, the alternative staging scheme predicting at 2 and 5 years was less accurate, as evidenced by 86.1% (P = .006) and 83.9% (P = .02) estimates. CONCLUSION The new nomogram is more contemporary, provides predictions that reach further in time and, compared with its alternative, which predicts at 2 and 5 years, generates 3.1% and 2.8% more accurate predictions, respectively.

An adjuvant autologous therapeutic vaccine (HSPPC-96; vitespen) versus observation alone for patients at high risk of recurrence after nephrectomy for renal cell carcinoma: a multicentre, open-label, randomised phase III trial

BACKGROUND Treatment of localised renal cell carcinoma consists of partial or radical nephrectomy. A substantial proportion of patients are at risk for recurrence because no effective adjuvant therapy exists. We investigated the use of an autologous, tumour-derived heat-shock protein (glycoprotein 96)-peptide complex (HSPPC-96; vitespen) as adjuvant treatment in patients at high risk of recurrence after resection of locally advanced renal cell carcinoma. METHODS In this open-label trial, patients were randomly assigned to receive either vitespen (n=409) or observation alone (n=409) after nephrectomy. Randomisation was done in a one to one ratio by a computer-generated pseudo-random number generator, with a block size of four, and was stratified by performance score, lymph node status, and nuclear grade. Vitespen was given intradermally once a week for 4 weeks, then every 2 weeks until vaccine depletion. The primary endpoint was recurrence-free survival. The final analysis of recurrence-free survival was planned to take place after 214 or more events of disease recurrence or deaths before recurrence had occurred. Analysis was by intention to treat (ITT). This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00033904. FINDINGS 48 patients in the vitespen group and 42 in the observation group were excluded from the ITT population because they did not meet post-surgery inclusion criteria; the ITT population thus consisted of 361 patients in the vitespen group and 367 in the observation group. Final analysis of recurrence-free survival was triggered in November, 2005. Re-review of all patients in the ITT population by the clinical events committee identified 149 actual recurrences (73 in the vitespen group and 76 in the observation group), nine deaths before recurrence (two in the vitespen group and seven in the observation group), and 124 patients with baseline metastatic or residual disease (61 in the vitespen group and 63 in the observation group). Thus, after a median follow-up of 1.9 years (IQR 0.9-2.5) in the ITT population, recurrence events were reported in 136 (37.7%) patients in the vitespen group and 146 (39.8%) in the observation group (hazard ratio 0.923, 95% CI 0.729-1.169; p=0.506). After continued follow-up until March, 2007, there had been 70 deaths in the vitespen group and 72 in the observation group (p=0.896); however, overall survival data were not mature, and patients continue to be followed up for survival. In predefined exploratory analyses by AJCC stage, recurrence events in patients with stage I or II disease were reported in 19 (15.2%) patients in the vitespen group and 31 (27.0%) in the observation group (hazard ratio 0.576, 95% CI 0.324-1.023; p=0.056). The most commonly reported adverse events in the vitespen group were injection-site erythema (n=158) and injection-site induration (n=153). One serious adverse event-autoimmune thyroiditis of grade 2 severity-was reported in the vitespen group; no treatment-related grade 3 or 4 adverse events were reported. INTERPRETATION No difference in recurrence-free survival was seen between patients given vitespen and those who received no treatment after nephrectomy for renal cell carcinoma. A possible improvement in recurrence-free survival in patients with early stage disease who received vitespen will require further validation.

Use of the University of California Los Angeles integrated staging system to predict survival in renal cell carcinoma: an international multicenter study.

PURPOSE To evaluate ability of the University of California Los Angeles Integrated Staging System (UISS) to stratify patients with localized and metastatic renal cell carcinoma (RCC) into risk groups in an international multicenter study. PATIENTS AND METHODS 4,202 patients from eight international academic centers were classified according to the UISS, which combines TNM stage, Fuhrman grade, and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status. Distribution of the UISS categories was assessed in the overall population and in each center. RESULTS The UISS stratified both localized and metastatic RCC into three different risk groups (P <.001). For localized RCC, the 5-year survival rates were 92%, 67%, and 44% for low-, intermediate-, and high-risk groups, respectively. A trend toward a higher risk of death was observed in all centers for increasing UISS risk category. For metastatic RCC, the 3-year survival rates were 37%, 23%, and 12% for low-, intermediate-, and high-risk groups, respectively; in 6 of 8 centers, a trend toward a higher risk of death was observed for increasing UISS risk category. A greater variability in survival rates among centers was observed for high-risk patients. CONCLUSION This study defines the general applicability of the UISS for predicting survival in patients with RCC. The UISS is an accurate predictor of survival for patients with localized RCC applicable to external databases. Although the UISS may be useful for patients with metastatic RCC, it may be less accurate in this subset of patients due to the heterogeneity of patients and treatments.

Prospective Multicentre Evaluation of PCA3 and TMPRSS2-ERG Gene Fusions as Diagnostic and Prognostic Urinary Biomarkers for Prostate Cancer ☆

BACKGROUND Prostate cancer antigen 3 (PCA3) and v-ets erythroblastosis virus E26 oncogene homolog (TMPRSS2-ERG) gene fusions are promising prostate cancer (PCa) specific biomarkers that can be measured in urine. OBJECTIVE To evaluate the diagnostic and prognostic value of Progensa PCA3 and TMPRSS2-ERG gene fusions (as individual biomarkers and as a panel) for PCa in a prospective multicentre setting. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS At six centres, post-digital rectal examination first-catch urine specimens prior to prostate biopsies were prospectively collected from 497 men. We assessed the predictive value of Progensa PCA3 and TMPRSS2-ERG (quantitative nucleic acid amplification assay to detect TMPRSS2-ERG messenger RNA [mRNA]) for PCa, Gleason score, clinical tumour stage, and PCa significance (individually and as a marker panel). This was compared with serum prostate-specific antigen and the European Randomised Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer (ERSPC) risk calculator. In a subgroup (n=61) we evaluated biomarker association with prostatectomy outcome. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analysis and receiver operating curves were used. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS Urine samples of 443 men contained sufficient mRNA for marker analysis. PCa was diagnosed in 196 of 443 men. Both PCA3 and TMPRSS2-ERG had significant additional predictive value to the ERSPC risk calculator parameters in multivariate analysis (p<0.001 and resp. p=0.002). The area under the curve (AUC) increased from 0.799 (ERSPC risk calculator), to 0.833 (ERSPC risk calculator plus PCA3), to 0.842 (ERSPC risk calculator plus PCA3 plus TMPRSS2-ERG) to predict PCa. Sensitivity of PCA3 increased from 68% to 76% when combined with TMPRSS2-ERG. TMPRSS2-ERG added significant predictive value to the ERSPC risk calculator to predict biopsy Gleason score (p<0.001) and clinical tumour stage (p=0.023), whereas PCA3 did not. CONCLUSIONS TMPRSS2-ERG had independent additional predictive value to PCA3 and the ERSPC risk calculator parameters for predicting PCa. TMPRSS2-ERG had prognostic value, whereas PCA3 did not. Implementing the novel urinary biomarker panel PCA3 and TMPRSS2-ERG into clinical practice would lead to a considerable reduction of the number of prostate biopsies.