There has been significant progress in the treatment of patients with advanced clear cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC), with improved knowledge of disease biology and the introduction of targeted agents and immunotherapies. In this review, we discuss current and emerging first-line treatment options, including recent approvals of the tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) cabozantinib and the immunotherapy combination of nivolumab (anti-programmed cell death 1 [PD-1])/ipilimumab (anti-cytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated antigen 4 [CTLA-4]), and initial outcomes with the combination of atezolizumab (anti-PD-ligand 1 [PD-L1])/bevacizumab (anti-vascular endothelial growth factor [VEGF]). Key clinical data are reviewed, as these novel first-line treatments offer significant improvement, particularly for patients classified as intermediate/poor risk for whom previously available therapies have demonstrated limited efficacy. Treatment recommendations based on clinical evidence and expert opinion are discussed. We also review ongoing studies investigating combinations of checkpoint inhibitors with TKIs, including cabozantinib and axitinib, and with other novel immunomodulatory agents, and the potential role of single-agent immunotherapy for select patients. With a growing treatment armamentarium, identification and validation of biomarkers will be crucial for optimizing first-line selection and treatment sequences.

Nivolumab plus ipilimumab (NIVO+IPI) has demonstrated superior overall survival (OS) and durable response benefits versus sunitinib (SUN) with long-term follow-up in patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma (aRCC). We report updated analyses with 8 years of median follow-up from CheckMate 214. Patients with aRCC (N = 1096) were randomized to NIVO 3 mg/kg plus IPI 1 mg/kg Q3W × four doses, followed by NIVO (3 mg/kg or 240 mg Q2W or 480 mg Q4W); or SUN (50 mg) once daily for 4 weeks on, 2 weeks off. The endpoints included OS, independent radiology review committee (IRRC)-assessed progression-free survival (PFS), and IRRC-assessed objective response rate (ORR) in intermediate/poor-risk (I/P; primary), intent-to-treat (ITT; secondary), and favorable-risk (FAV; exploratory) patients. With 8 years (99.1 months) of median follow-up, the hazard ratio [HR; 95% confidence interval (CI)] for OS with NIVO+IPI versus SUN was 0.72 (0.62-0.83) in ITT patients, 0.69 (0.59-0.81) in I/P patients, and 0.82 (0.60-1.13) in FAV patients. PFS probabilities at 90 months were 22.8% versus 10.8% (ITT), 25.4% versus 8.5% (I/P), and 12.7% versus 17.0% (FAV), respectively. ORR with NIVO+IPI versus SUN was 39.5% versus 33.0% (ITT), 42.4% versus 27.5% (I/P), and 29.6% versus 51.6% (FAV). Rates of complete response were higher with NIVO+IPI versus SUN in all International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium (IMDC) risk groups (ITT, 12.0% versus 3.5%; I/P, 11.8% versus 2.6%; FAV, 12.8% versus 6.5%). The median duration of response (95% CI) with NIVO+IPI versus SUN was 76.2 versus 25.1 months [59.1 months-not estimable (NE) versus 19.8-33.2 months] in ITT patients, 82.8 versus 19.8 months (54.1 months-NE versus 16.4-26.4 months) in I/P patients, and 61.5 versus 33.2 months (27.8 months-NE versus 24.8-51.4 months) in FAV patients. The incidence of treatment-related adverse events was consistent with previous reports. Exploratory post hoc analyses are reported for FAV patients, those receiving subsequent therapy based on their response status, clinical subpopulations, and adverse events over time. Superior survival, durable response benefits, and a manageable safety profile were maintained with NIVO+IPI versus SUN at 8 years, the longest phase III follow-up for a first-line checkpoint inhibitor combination therapy in aRCC.

Purpose: Patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma with sarcomatoid features (sRCC) have poor prognoses and suboptimal outcomes with targeted therapy. This post hoc analysis of the phase III CheckMate 214 trial analyzed the efficacy of nivolumab plus ipilimumab (NIVO+IPI) versus sunitinib in patients with sRCC. Patients and Methods: Patients with sRCC were identified via independent central pathology review of archival tumor tissue or histologic classification per local pathology report. Patients were randomized 1:1 to receive nivolumab (3 mg/kg) plus ipilimumab (1 mg/kg) every 3 weeks (four doses) then nivolumab 3 mg/kg every 2 weeks, or sunitinib 50 mg orally every day (4 weeks; 6-week cycles). Outcomes in patients with sRCC were not prespecified. Endpoints in patients with sRCC and International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium intermediate/poor-risk disease included overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS) per independent radiology review, and objective response rate (ORR) per RECIST v1.1. Safety outcomes used descriptive statistics. Results: Of 1,096 randomized patients in CheckMate 214, 139 patients with sRCC and intermediate/poor-risk disease and six with favorable-risk disease were identified. With 42 months' minimum follow-up in patients with sRCC and intermediate/poor-risk disease, median OS [95% confidence interval (CI)] favored NIVO+IPI [not reached (NR) (25.2-not estimable [NE]); n = 74] versus sunitinib [14.2 months (9.3–22.9); n = 65; HR, 0.45 (95% CI, 0.3–0.7; P = 0.0004)]; PFS benefits with NIVO+IPI were similarly observed [median 26.5 vs. 5.1 months; HR, 0.54 (95% CI, 0.33–0.86; P = 0.0093)]. Confirmed ORR was 60.8% with NIVO+IPI versus 23.1% with sunitinib, with complete response rates of 18.9% versus 3.1%, respectively. No new safety signals emerged. Conclusions: NIVO+IPI showed unprecedented long-term survival, response, and complete response benefits versus sunitinib in previously untreated patients with sRCC and intermediate/poor-risk disease, supporting the use of first-line NIVO+IPI for this population. See related commentary by Hwang et al., p. 5

Therapeutic approaches for clear cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC) remain limited; however, chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapies may offer novel treatment options. CTX130, an allogeneic CD70-targeting CAR T-cell product, was developed for the treatment of advanced or refractory ccRCC. We report that CTX130 showed favorable preclinical proliferation and cytotoxicity profiles and completely regressed RCC xenograft tumors. We also report results from 16 patients with relapsed/refractory ccRCC who received CTX130 in a phase I, multicenter, first-in-human clinical trial. No patients encountered dose-limiting toxicity, and disease control was achieved in 81.3% of patients. One patient remains in a durable complete response at 3 years. Finally, we report on a next-generation CAR T construct, CTX131, in which synergistic potency edits to CTX130 confer improved expansion and efficacy in preclinical studies. These data represent a proof of concept for the treatment of ccRCC and other CD70+ malignancies with CD70− targeted allogeneic CAR T cells. Significance: Although the role of CAR T cells is well established in hematologic malignancies, the clinical experience in solid tumors has been disappointing. This clinical trial demonstrates the first complete response in a patient with RCC, reinforcing the potential benefit of CAR T cells in the treatment of solid tumors.

Importance: Dysregulated metabolism is a hallmark of renal cell carcinoma (RCC). Glutaminase is a key enzyme that fuels tumor growth by converting glutamine to glutamate. Telaglenastat is an investigational, first-in-class, selective, oral glutaminase inhibitor that blocks glutamine utilization and downstream pathways. Preclinically, telaglenastat synergized with cabozantinib, a VEGFR2/MET/AXL inhibitor, in RCC models.Objective: To compare the efficacy and safety of telaglenastat plus cabozantinib (Tela + Cabo) vs placebo plus cabozantinib (Pbo + Cabo).Design, Setting, and Participants: CANTATA was a randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind, pivotal trial conducted at sites in the US, Europe, Australia, and New Zealand. Eligible patients had metastatic clear-cell RCC following progression on 1 to 2 prior lines of therapy, including 1 or more antiangiogenic therapies or nivolumab plus ipilimumab. The data cutoff date was August 31, 2020. Data analysis was performed from December 2020 to February 2021.Interventions: Patients were randomized 1:1 to receive oral cabozantinib (60 mg daily) with either telaglenastat (800 mg twice daily) or placebo until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity.Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point was progression-free survival (Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1) assessed by blinded independent radiology review.Results: A total of 444 patients were randomized: 221 to Tela + Cabo (median [range] age, 61 [21-81] years; 47 [21%] women and 174 [79%] men) and 223 to Pbo + Cabo (median [range] age, 62 [29-83] years; 68 [30%] women and 155 [70%] men). A total of 276 (62%) patients had received prior immune checkpoint inhibitors, including 128 with prior nivolumab plus ipilimumab, 93 of whom had not received prior antiangiogenic therapy. Median progression-free survival was 9.2 months for Tela + Cabo vs 9.3 months for Pbo + Cabo (HR, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.74-1.21; P = .65). Overall response rates were 31% (69 of 221) with Tela + Cabo vs 28% (62 of 223) with Pbo + Cabo. Treatment-emergent adverse event (TEAE) rates were similar between arms. Grade 3 to 4 TEAEs occurred in 160 patients (71%) with Tela + Cabo and 172 patients (79%) with Pbo + Cabo and included hypertension (38 patients [17%] vs 40 patients [18%]) and diarrhea (34 patients [15%] vs 29 patients [13%]). Cabozantinib was discontinued due to AEs in 23 patients (10%) receiving Tela + Cabo and 33 patients (15%) receiving Pbo + Cabo.Conclusions and Relevance: In this randomized clinical trial, telaglenastat did not improve the efficacy of cabozantinib in metastatic RCC. Tela + Cabo was well tolerated with AEs consistent with the known risks of both agents.Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03428217