Purpose To report updated analyses of the phase III CheckMate 214 trial with extended minimum follow-up assessing long-term outcomes with first-line nivolumab plus ipilimumab (NIVO+IPI) versus (vs) sunitinib (SUN) in patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma (aRCC). Methods Patients with aRCC with a clear cell component were stratified by International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium risk and randomised to NIVO (3 mg/kg) plus IPI (1 mg/kg) every three weeks ×4 doses, followed by NIVO (3 mg/kg) every two weeks; or SUN (50 mg) once per day ×4 weeks (6-week cycle). Efficacy endpoints included overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS) and objective response rate (ORR) per independent radiology review committee in patients with intermediate/poor-risk disease (I/P; primary), intent-to-treat patients (ITT; secondary) and in patients with favourable-risk disease (FAV; exploratory). Results Overall, 1096 patients were randomised (ITT: NIVO+IPI, n=550, SUN, n=546; I/P: NIVO+IPI, n=425, SUN, n=422; FAV: NIVO+IPI, n=125, SUN, n=124). After 4 years minimum follow-up, OS (HR; 95% CI) remained superior with NIVO+IPI vs SUN in ITT (0.69; 0.59 to 0.81) and I/P patients (0.65; 0.54 to 0.78). Four-year PFS probabilities were 31.0% vs 17.3% (ITT) and 32.7% vs 12.3% (I/P), with NIVO+IPI vs SUN. ORR remained higher with NIVO+IPI vs SUN in ITT (39.1% vs 32.4%) and I/P (41.9% vs 26.8%) patients. In FAV patients, the HRs (95% CI) for OS and PFS were 0.93 (0.62 to 1.40) and 1.84 (1.29 to 2.62); ORR was lower with NIVO+IPI vs SUN. However, more patients in all risk groups achieved complete responses with NIVO+IPI: ITT (10.7% vs 2.6%), I/P (10.4% vs 1.4%) and FAV (12.0% vs 6.5%). Probability (95% CI) of response ≥4 years was higher with NIVO+IPI vs SUN (ITT, 59% (0.51 to 0.66) vs 30% (0.21 to 0.39); I/P, 59% (0.50 to 0.67) vs 24% (0.14 to 0.36); and FAV, 60% (0.41 to 0.75) vs 38% (0.22 to 0.54)) regardless of risk category. Safety remained favourable with NIVO+IPI vs SUN. Conclusion After long-term follow-up, NIVO+IPI continues to demonstrate durable efficacy benefits vs SUN, with manageable safety. Trial registration details ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02231749.

Antibiotics (ABX) compromise the efficacy of programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1) blockade in cancer patients, but the mechanisms underlying their immunosuppressive effects remain unknown. By inducing the down-regulation of mucosal addressin cell adhesion molecule 1 (MAdCAM-1) in the ileum, post-ABX gut recolonization by Enterocloster species drove the emigration of enterotropic α4β7 ⁺ CD4 ⁺ regulatory T 17 cells into the tumor. These deleterious ABX effects were mimicked by oral gavage of Enterocloster species, by genetic deficiency, or by antibody-mediated neutralization of MAdCAM-1 and its receptor, α4β7 integrin. By contrast, fecal microbiota transplantation or interleukin-17A neutralization prevented ABX-induced immunosuppression. In independent lung, kidney, and bladder cancer patient cohorts, low serum levels of soluble MAdCAM-1 had a negative prognostic impact. Thus, the MAdCAM-1–α4β7 axis constitutes an actionable gut immune checkpoint in cancer immunosurveillance.

Purpose: Papillary renal cell carcinomas (pRCC) are the most common nonclear cell RCC subtype. Germline mutations of the MET oncogene at 7q31 have been detected in patients with hereditary type I pRCC and in 13% of sporadic type I pRCC. Recent report of MET inhibition strengthened the role of c-Met inhibition across pRCC. Experimental Design: We collected 220 frozen samples of sporadic pRCC through the French RCC Network and quality controlled for percentage of malignant cells >70%. Gene expression was assessed on 98 pRCC using human whole-genome Agilent 8 × 60K arrays. Copy number alterations were analyzed using Agilent Human 2 × 400K and 4× 180K array for type II pRCC and comparative genomic microarray analysis method for type I pRCC. MET gene sequencing was performed on type I pRCC. Results: MET expression level was high across all pRCC. We identified copy number alterations (gain) in 46% of type II pRCC and in 81% of type I pRCC. Correlation between DNA copy number alterations and mRNA expression level was highly significant. Eleven somatic mutations of MET gene were identified amongst 51 type I pRCC (21.6%), including 4 new mutations. We validated LRRK2 cokinase as highly correlated to MET expression. Conclusion: The present report expands the role of MET activation as a potential target across all pRCC subtypes. These data support investigating MET inhibitors in pRCC in correlation with MET activation status. Clin Cancer Res; 20(13); 3411–21. ©2014 AACR.

The treatment landscape of metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) has been transformed with the advent of antiangiogenics, notably tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) targeting vascular endothelial growth factor receptor (VEGFR), and immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs). Both treatment options have improved outcomes of patients and modified the natural history of mRCC. Clinical investigations have focused on evaluating combination regimens containing ICIs and VEGFR-directed TKIs. Namely, the combinations of axitinib plus pembrolizumab (KEYNOTE-426) and axitinib plus avelumab (JAVELIN RENAL 101) have shown improved outcomes compared with sunitinib in treatment-naïve patients with mRCC. In this review, we discuss the clinical data of single-agent TKIs and ICIs in mRCC and the rationale for the combination ICIs and TKIs based on preclinical and clinical evidence. We also explore the current challenges for regimen selection and development of predictive biomarkers.