Supplementation with CBM588, a bifidogenic live bacterial product, has been associated with improved clinical outcomes in persons with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) receiving nivolumab and ipilimumab. However, its effect on those receiving tyrosine kinase inhibitor-based combinations is unknown. In this open-label, randomized, investigator-initiated, phase 1 study, 30 participants with locally advanced or mRCC with histological confirmation of clear cell, papillary or sarcomatoid component were randomized in a 2:1 fashion to receive cabozantinib (an inhibitor of vascular endothelial growth factor receptor, MET and AXL) and nivolumab (anti-programmed cell death protein 1) with or without CBM588 as first-line treatment. Metagenomic sequencing was performed on stool samples to characterize their gut microbiome at baseline and 13 weeks into treatment. The primary endpoint was a change in the relative abundance of Bifidobacterium spp.; secondary endpoints included objective response rate (ORR), progression-free survival (PFS) and toxicity profile. The primary endpoint of the study was not met and the addition of CBM588 to cabozantinib and nivolumab did not result in a difference in the relative abundance of Bifidobacterium spp. or alpha diversity (as measured by the Shannon index). However, ORR was significantly higher in participants treated with CBM588 compared to those in the control arm (14 of 19, 74% versus 2 of 10, 20%; P = 0.01). PFS at 6 months was 84% (16 of 19) and 60% (6 of 10) in the experimental and control arms, respectively. No significant difference in toxicity profile was seen between the study arms. Our results provide a preliminary signal of improved clinical activity with CBM588 in treatment-naive participants with mRCC receiving cabozantinib and nivolumab. Further investigation is needed to confirm these findings and better characterize the underlying mechanism driving this effect.ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT05122546

SARS-CoV-2 is the novel coronavirus that is the causative agent of COVID-19, a sometimes-lethal respiratory infection responsible for a world-wide pandemic. The envelope (E) protein, one of four structural proteins encoded in the viral genome, is a 75-residue integral membrane protein whose transmembrane domain exhibits ion channel activity and whose cytoplasmic domain participates in protein-protein interactions. These activities contribute to several aspects of the viral replication-cycle, including virion assembly, budding, release, and pathogenesis. Here, we describe the structure and dynamics of full-length SARS-CoV-2 E protein in hexadecylphosphocholine micelles by NMR spectroscopy. We also characterized its interactions with four putative ion channel inhibitors. The chemical shift index and dipolar wave plots establish that E protein consists of a long transmembrane helix (residues 8–43) and a short cytoplasmic helix (residues 53–60) connected by a complex linker that exhibits some internal mobility. The conformations of the N-terminal transmembrane domain and the C-terminal cytoplasmic domain are unaffected by truncation from the intact protein. The chemical shift perturbations of E protein spectra induced by the addition of the inhibitors demonstrate that the N-terminal region (residues 6–18) is the principal binding site. The binding affinity of the inhibitors to E protein in micelles correlates with their antiviral potency in Vero E6 cells: HMA ≈ EIPA > DMA >> Amiloride, suggesting that bulky hydrophobic groups in the 5’ position of the amiloride pyrazine ring play essential roles in binding to E protein and in antiviral activity. An N15A mutation increased the production of virus-like particles, induced significant chemical shift changes from residues in the inhibitor binding site, and abolished HMA binding, suggesting that Asn15 plays a key role in maintaining the protein conformation near the binding site. These studies provide the foundation for complete structure determination of E protein and for structure-based drug discovery targeting this protein.

Over the last decade, the treatment paradigm of metastatic renal cell carcinoma has rapidly evolved, with notable changes in the front-line setting. Combination therapies involving the use of either doublet therapy with immune checkpoint inhibitors or combination VEGFR-directed therapies with immune checkpoint inhibitors have significantly improved clinical outcomes, including prolonged overall survival and durable response to treatment. We aim to highlight the Food and Drug Administration-approved front-line therapy options, the navigation of treatment selection, and the future directions of metastatic renal cell carcinoma therapies.

Objectives: To characterise the restrictiveness of eligibility criteria in contemporary renal cell carcinoma (RCC) trials, using recommendations from the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO)‐Friends of Cancer Research (FCR) initiative. Methods: vPhase I–III trials assessing systemic therapies in patients with RCC starting between 30 June 2012 and 30 June 2022 were identified. Eligibility criteria regarding brain metastases, prior or concurrent malignancies, hepatitis B virus (HBV) or hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection, and human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection were identified and stratified into three groups: exclusion, conditional inclusion, and not reported. Descriptive statistics were used to determine the frequency of eligibility criteria. Fisher's exact test or chi‐square test were used to calculate their associations with certain trial characteristics. Results: A total of 423 RCC trials were initially identified of which 112 (26.5%) had sufficient accessible information. Exclusion of patients with HIV infection, HBV/HCV infection, brain metastases, and prior or concurrent malignancies were reported in 74.1%, 53.6%, 33.0%, and 8.0% of trials, respectively. In the context of HIV and HBV/HCV infection, patients were largely excluded from trials evaluating immunotherapy (94.4% and 77.8%, respectively). In addition, brain metastases were excluded in trials assessing targeted therapy (36.4%), combined therapy (33.3%), and immunotherapy (22.2%). Exclusion of patients with prior or concurrent malignancies was less frequently reported, accounting for 9.1%, 8.3%, and 5.6% targeted therapy, combined therapy and immunotherapy trials, respectively. Conclusion: A substantial proportion of RCC trials utilise restrictive eligibility criteria, excluding patients with fairly prevalent comorbidities. Implementing the ASCO‐FCR recommendations will ensure resulting data are more inclusive and aligned with patient populations in the real‐world.