Real-world assessment of changing treatment patterns and sequence for patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) in the first-line (1L) setting.

Abstract

302 Background: Several immune-oncology (IO) agents and/or tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) have received approval for treatment of mRCC in 1L setting by Food and Drug Administration (FDA) over last few years. Limited data exists on evolving real-world treatment patterns and sequence in mRCC patients receiving these agents, especially at the community oncology setting. Methods: We used data from The US Oncology Network of over 1,300 providers from over 480 sites across United States from 01/01/2018 to 12/31/2020 (study period). Eligible study population included mRCC patients who received ipilimumab + nivolumab (Ipi+nivo) (IO+IO); pembrolizumab + axitinib (Pembro+axi) (IO+TKI); and axitinib (Axi) or cabozantinib (Cabo) or pazopanib (Pazo) or sunitinib (Suni) (TKIs monotherapy) in 1L setting until 09/30/2020. Descriptive statistics were used for cohort characterization. Results: We identified 3,756 mRCC patients, of which 1,538 were eligible including 42% (n=641) IO+IO, 18% (n=279) IO+TKI, and 40% (n=618) TKI monotherapy. The median age for the entire cohort was 67.1 years (range 25.0, 93.3), 70% (n=1,076) were male, 70% (n=1,081) were white, 38% (n=587) had BMI ≥ 30 and 79% (n=1,208) had clear cell histology. Among entire cohort, 87% (n=1,338) had intermediate/poor risk score as per International mRCC Database Consortium risk model. We noted a trend towards increased utilization of IO+IO and IO+TKI following their respective FDA approvals (IO+IO: April 2018, IO+TKI: April 2019) (Table). During the study period, overall, 35% (n=535), 12% (n=184), and 4% (n=62) mRCC patients received second-line (2L), third-line (3L) and fourth-line (4L) treatments, respectively. Cabo (49%) and pazo (12%); cabo (51%) and ipi+nivo (23%); and nivo (45%) and ipi+nivo (20%) were the most common 2L treatments in IO+IO, IO+TKI, and TKI monotherapy cohorts, respectively. Conclusions: This large real-world study examined use of new FDA approved mRCC treatments and their impact on treatment paradigm. The results show a rapid adaptation of these newer treatments in the community oncology settings. A longer follow-up is needed to assess their clinical impact and optimal treatment strategy in subsequent setting.[Table: see text]