Back to Authors

Sircar, Kanishka

https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9515-697X

Mayo Clinic

The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center

Citations 4

NCCN Guidelines® Insights: Testicular Cancer, Version 2.2025
Lin, Daniel W. , Feldman, Darren R., Aggarwal, Rahul , Drakaki, Alexandra , Eggener, Scott E. , Humphrey, Peter A. , Leuva, Harshraj , Levine, Ellis G., Maughan, Benjamin L. , Reichert, Zachery R. , Rwigema, Jean‐Claude M. , Shah, Sumit, Singla, Nirmish, Sircar, Kanishka , Zhumkhawala, Ali , Sliker, Bailee , Gilligan, Timothy D. , Adra, Nabil , Bagrodia, Aditya , Yamoah, Kosj , Chandrasekar, Thenappan , Costa, Daniel Nobrega da , Drakaki, Alexandra , Emamekhoo, Hamid , Geynisman, Daniel M. , Graham, Laura , Luckenbaugh, Amy N. , McGregor, Bradley A. , Monk, Paul , Picus, Joel , Pierorazio, Phillip , Rais‐Bahrami, Soroush , Saylor, Philip J. , Shah, Ankeet , Shah, Sumit, VanderWeele, David James , Montgomery, Sarah E.

Journal of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network | April 9, 2025 | Volume: 23 | Issue: 4 | Pages: No page available

10.6004/jnccn.2025.0018 Get It

The NCCN Guidelines for Testicular Cancer provide recommendations for the multidisciplinary approach to the diagnostic workup, treatment, and follow-up for testicular germ cell tumors, including both seminoma and nonseminoma. These NCCN Guidelines Insights discuss the current treatment recommendations and supporting clinical data for seminomas as presented in Version 2.2025 of the NCCN Guidelines for Testicular Cancer.
CABOSUN II: Results from a phase 2, open-label, multi-center randomized study of cabozantinib (CABO) vs. sunitinib (SUN) for non-clear cell renal cell carcinoma (NCCRCC).
Johns, Andrew , Zurita, Amado J. , Pagliaro, Lance C. , Bilen, Mehmet Asım , Tamboli, Pheroze, Sircar, Kanishka , Campbell, Matthew T. , Msaouel, Pavlos , Jonasch, Eric W. , Hahn, Andrew W. , Gao, Jianjun , Shah, Amishi Yogesh , Goswami, Sangeeta , Venkatesan, Aradhana M. , Rao, Priya , Tidwell, Rebecca S. , Tannir, Nizar

Journal of Clinical Oncology | June 4, 2023 | Volume: 41 | Issue: 16_suppl | Pages: 4597-4597

10.1200/jco.2023.41.16_suppl.4597 Get It

4597 Background: NCCRCC are a diverse group of rare diseases with limited data to guide treatment. CABO is highly effective in clear cell RCC, but it is unknown whether it is superior to SUN, the historic standard of care for metastatic NCCRCC. Methods: CABOSUN II (NCT03541902) was a randomized phase II study at 3 centers for patients (pts) with metastatic NCCRCC. Sixty pts were planned to detect CABO as better than SUN with a 1-sided test. Pts were randomized 1:1 to CABO 60mg daily or SUN 50mg daily (4 weeks on, 2 weeks off). SUN dose modification to 2 weeks on, 1 week off was allowed for toxicity. Stratification was by papillary RCC (PRCC) vs. non-PRCC (NPRCC), good/intermediate vs. poor risk disease by IMDC criteria, and prior TKI use. The primary outcome was progression-free survival (PFS) by RECIST v1.1 compared between the 2 arms using the log-rank test. Secondary outcomes were objective response rate (ORR), overall survival (OS), and adverse event (AE) rates (2-sided tests). Results: 32 pts were randomized to CABO (N=15) or SUN (N=17) between 9/2018 and 6/2021. The trial stopped early due to a change in standard therapy for PRCC not based on these pts’ outcomes. Age range was 22-88 years with medians 57 and 61 for CABO and SUN. Pts were primarily white (84%) and male (72%), with good/intermediate risk (88%), and these were balanced between arms. More pts on the CABO arm had bone metastases (62% vs. 24%). NPRCC were chromophobe (N=6; 5 randomized to SUN), unclassified (N=5), and MiT family translocation (N=3; all randomized to CABO). With median follow-up of 33.3 months and 20 PFS events, median PFS for CABO vs. SUN was 8.2 vs. 13.8 months (1-sided p=0.96). There were no statistically significant differences in ORR or OS between the arms. AEs were in line with previous studies. Conclusions: CABO was not superior to SUN for metastatic NCCRCC in this study. Both arms had high rates of stable disease or better. Despite stratification by PRCC or NPRCC, there were major differences in NPRCC subtypes between the arms that may have impacted the results. More pts with chromophobe histology, an often indolent subtype, received SUN while all pts with MiT family translocation, a relatively aggressive subtype, received CABO. Permitted SUN dose modifications may have also influenced outcomes. While the PAPMET study showed CABO to be superior to SUN for PRCC, optimal treatments for rare, NPRCC remain a pressing need. Clinical trial information: NCT03541902 . [Table: see text]
Macrophage HIF-1α Is an Independent Prognostic Indicator in Kidney Cancer
Cowman, Sophie J. , Fuja, Daniel G. , Liu, Xian-De , Tidwell, Rebecca S. , Sirohi, Deepika , Agarwal, Archana, Emerson, Lyska L. , Tripp, Sheryl R. , Mohlman, Jeffrey S., Stonhill, Miekan , Garcia, Guillermina, Conley, Christopher J. , Olalde, Adam A. , Sargis, Timothy, Ramírez‐Torres, Adela , Wood, Christopher G. , Sircar, Kanishka , Tamboli, Pheroze, Maughan, Benjamin L. , Spike, Benjamin T. , Ho, Thai H. , Agarwal, Neeraj , Koh, Mei Yee , Tidwell, Rebecca S Slack , Agarwal, Archana M , Emerson, Lyska L , Olalde, Adam A , Boucher, Kenneth , Ho, Thai , Koh, Mei Yee , Kandula, Neelima, Karam, Jose Antonio , Jonasch, Eric W.

Clinical Cancer Research | June 25, 2020 | Volume: 26 | Issue: 18 | Pages: 4970-4982

10.1158/1078-0432.ccr-19-3890 Get It

Abstract Purpose: Clear cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC) is frequently associated with inactivation of the von Hippel–Lindau tumor suppressor, resulting in activation of HIF-1α and HIF-2α. The current paradigm, established using mechanistic cell-based studies, supports a tumor promoting role for HIF-2α, and a tumor suppressor role for HIF-1α. However, few studies have comprehensively examined the clinical relevance of this paradigm. Furthermore, the hypoxia-associated factor (HAF), which regulates the HIFs, has not been comprehensively evaluated in ccRCC. Experimental Design: To assess the involvement of HAF/HIFs in ccRCC, we analyzed their relationship to tumor grade/stage/outcome using tissue from 380 patients, and validated these associations using tissue from 72 additional patients and a further 57 patients treated with antiangiogenic therapy for associations with response. Further characterization was performed using single-cell mRNA sequencing (scRNA-seq), RNA-in situ hybridization (RNA-ISH), and IHC. Results: HIF-1α was primarily expressed in tumor-associated macrophages (TAMs), whereas HIF-2α and HAF were expressed primarily in tumor cells. TAM-associated HIF-1α was significantly associated with high tumor grade and increased metastasis and was independently associated with decreased overall survival. Furthermore, elevated TAM HIF-1α was significantly associated with resistance to antiangiogenic therapy. In contrast, high HAF or HIF-2α were associated with low grade, decreased metastasis, and increased overall survival. scRNA-seq, RNA-ISH, and Western blotting confirmed the expression of HIF-1α in M2-polarized CD163-expressing TAMs. Conclusions: These findings highlight a potential role of TAM HIF-1α in ccRCC progression and support the reevaluation of HIF-1α as a therapeutic target and marker of disease progression.
Testicular Cancer, Version 2.2020, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology
Gilligan, Timothy D. , Lin, Daniel W. , Aggarwal, Rahul , Chism, David D. , Cost, Nicholas G. , Derweesh, Ithaar , LaGrange, Chad A. , Levine, Ellis , Longo, Thomas A., Lowrance, Will, Rais‐Bahrami, Soroush , Sircar, Kanishka , Smith, David C. , Tzou, Katherine S., Vaena, Daniel A. , Vaughn, David J. , Yamzon, Jonathan , Johnson-Chilla, Alyse, Keller, Jennifer , Pluchino, Lenora A. , Tzou, Katherine, Emamekhoo, Hamid , Feldman, Darren Richard , Geynisman, Daniel M. , Hancock, Steven Lee , McGregor, Bradley A. , Monk, Paul , Picus, Joel , Pierorazio, Phillip , Saylor, Philip J. , Yamoah, Kosj

Journal of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network | December 5, 2019 | Volume: 17 | Issue: 12 | Pages: 1529-1554

10.6004/jnccn.2019.0058 Get It

Testicular cancer is relatively uncommon and accounts for <1% of all male tumors. However, it is the most common solid tumor in men between the ages of 20 and 34 years, and the global incidence has been steadily rising over the past several decades. Several risk factors for testicular cancer have been identified, including personal or family history of testicular cancer and cryptorchidism. Testicular germ cell tumors (GCTs) comprise 95% of malignant tumors arising in the testes and are categorized into 2 main histologic subtypes: seminoma and nonseminoma. Although nonseminoma is the more clinically aggressive tumor subtype, 5-year survival rates exceed 70% with current treatment options, even in patients with advanced or metastatic disease. Radical inguinal orchiectomy is the primary treatment for most patients with testicular GCTs. Postorchiectomy management is dictated by stage, histology, and risk classification; treatment options for nonseminoma include surveillance, systemic therapy, and nerve-sparing retroperitoneal lymph node dissection. Although rarely occurring, prognosis for patients with brain metastases remains poor, with >50% of patients dying within 1 year of diagnosis. This selection from the NCCN Guidelines for Testicular Cancer focuses on recommendations for the management of adult patients with nonseminomatous GCTs.