Atezolizumab/Bevacizumab Combo Looks Promising in Metastatic Kidney Cancer

April 2017 Vol 8, No 4

Atezolizumab plus bevacizumab showed encouraging responses as a first-line approach to treatment of metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) in a phase 2 trial. Although the trial failed to meet its primary end point—significant improvement in progression-free survival (PFS) compared with sunitinib—the combination of atezolizumab plus bevacizumab reduced the risk of death or disease progression by 36% in patients enriched for programmed death-1 ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression. Median PFS was almost double in the PD-L1+ group treated with the combination versus sunitinib: 14.7 months versus 7.8 months, respectively.

“Results were impressive in PD-L1+ patients. This benefit of atezolizumab plus bevacizumab in the PD-L1+ patients is different from what was found with nivolumab and shows the importance of the biomarker in patients treated with atezolizumab. The combination of atezoliz­umab plus bevacizumab looks attractive in PD-L1+ patients. And the PD-L1 biomarker seems particularly marked with the combination. We could have predicted that the biomarker would be less important with the combination than with atezolizumab monotherapy, but that isn’t what happened,” said presenting author Trevor Powles, MD, Barts Cancer Institute, Queen Mary University, London, UK.

“This study is teaching us how to design and conduct our clinical trials in the future,” he stated.

The hypothesis-generating study was the first to evaluate frontline immunotherapy against the benchmark (ie, sunitinib), and the first study of frontline targeted therapy against the benchmark.

The phase 2 study randomized 305 patients with mRCC in a 1:1:1 ratio to standard-of-care sunitinib versus atezolizumab monotherapy versus atezolizumab plus bevacizumab. Crossover to the combination therapy arm was allowed at disease progression. Both atezolizumab-containing arms were compared with sunitinib.

In the overall intention-to-treat analysis, there was no significant difference in PFS with atezolizumab versus sunitinib or atezolizumab plus bevacizumab versus sunitinib. Median PFS was 6.1 months with atezolizumab alone, 8.4 months with sunitinib, and 11.7 months with the combination of atezolizumab plus bevacizumab.

However, a striking difference was observed in PD-L1+ patients (defined as 1% or greater PD-L1 expression on immunochemistry): a 36% reduction in risk of death or disease progression favoring the combination. In PD-L1+ patients, median PFS was 5.5 months for atezolizumab, 7.8 months for sunitinib, and 14.7 months for the combination.

At the time of data collection, 75% of patients treated with immunotherapy were in response.
In PD-L1+ patients, the overall response rate was 46% for the combination therapy and 28% for atezolizumab alone.

Tolerability was improved in the immunotherapy-containing arms versus sunitinib. The rate of grade 3/4 adverse events was 69% with sunitinib, 63% with the combination, and 40% with atezolizumab alone. Fewer all-cause adverse events were reported in the combination arm versus sunitinib, but more immune-related adverse events.

At progression, 78% of the sunitinib group and 60% of the atezolizumab group crossed over to the combination arm. Analysis of crossovers will be presented in the future.

The phase 2 study led to an ongoing phase 3 trial called IMmotion to evaluate the combination of atezo­lizumab plus bevacizumab as frontline treatment of mRCC in PD-L1+ patients.

The study was sponsored by F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd.

Related Articles
Adding Cisplatin to Standard Regimen Leads to Unprecedented Response Rate in Patients with Stage IV Pancreatic Cancer
June 2017 Vol 8, No 6
The addition of cisplatin to standard therapy with gemcitabine and nab-paclitaxel was associated with a median overall survival that “has not been seen in stage IV pancreatic cancer,” according to Gayle Jameson, MSN, ACNP-BC, Nurse Practitioner Investigator of Clinical Trials, HonorHealth Research Institute, Scottsdale, AZ.
Evidence Supports Active Surveillance for Small Renal Masses
April 2017 Vol 8, No 4
Active surveillance is gaining ground as a strategy for managing small renal masses. According to intermediate follow-up of the prospective Delayed Intervention and Surveillance for Small Renal Masses (DISSRM) registry, active surveillance appears as safe as primary intervention in selected patients. In general, active surveillance is a good option for elderly patients with comorbidities and renal masses <4 cm.
Patients’ Expectations of Treatment off Target
April 2017 Vol 8, No 4
Despite consultations with oncologists about the goal of treatment, more than one-third of men with incurable prostate cancer believed that a cure was possible with the treatments they were about to receive.
Last modified: April 23, 2021

Subscribe to the Journal of Oncology Navigation & Survivorship®

To sign up for our print publication or e-newsletter, please enter your contact information below.

  • First Name *
    Last Name *
     
     
    Profession or Role
    Primary Specialty or Disease State
    Country
  • Please enter your mailing address.

    Address
     
    Address Line 2
    City
     
    State
    Zip Code