Brugarolas, James

4545 Background: The treatment landscape of front-line nccRCC has evolved with recent trials demonstrating the efficacy of combination systemic therapy. However, the efficacy of treatment after combination therapy is unknown. This study evaluates the efficacy of VEGF-based regimens in nccRCC patients (pts) previously treated with combination regimens. Methods: ORACLE is a real-world, multi-center, retrospective database that includes nccRCC patients that received combination systemic therapies (IO+IO, IO+VEGF and VEGF+ mTOR) in any line. Subsequent treatments were categorized as VEGF only regimens (cabozantinib vs other VEGF), IO+ VEGF and VEGF+ mTOR. The primary endpoint was objective response rate (ORR) assessed by investigator review using RECIST 1.1. Secondary endpoints included disease control rate (DCR), defined as the proportion of patients achieving complete or partial responses or stable disease, time to treatment progression (TTP), calculated from the date of VEGF-based initiation to progression or last follow-up using the Kaplan-Meier method. Differences between groups were estimated with the log-rank test, and categorical outcomes were compared with the chi-square test. Results: 105 pts who received VEGF – based regimens after combination therapy were included in the analysis. Baseline characteristics: median age: 59years, 71 % male, 58% white, 25% black, 87% ECOG 0-2. IMDC-risk categories included:21% favorable, 59% intermediate and 20% poor risk. Histology included papillary (40%), unclassified (32%), chromophobe (16%) and other rare subtypes (12%). Prior combination therapies included IO+IO: 62%, IO+ VEGF: 34% and VEGF+ mTORi:4%. 70% pts received combination therapy in the first line setting while the remainder received combination therapy in a second or later line. Outcomes with subsequent treatments are described in Table1. IMDC risk score correlated with TTP. Conclusions: Modest antitumor activity was observed with VEGF- based approaches in combination therapy refractory nccRCC. Optimal management of nccRCC remains an unmet need. Outcomes of nccRCC patients by treatment and histologic type. Outcomes per Treatment n ORR (%) DCR (%) mTTP (mo.) Cabozantinib 56 18 47 3.6 VEGF/mTOR 19 16 42 9.3 IO+VEGF 17 29 47 5.6 Other VEGF 13 15 46 5.5 Outcomes per Histology Papillary 42 19 43 6.5 Unclassified 33 21 42 6.1 Chromophobe 17 29 59 8.9 Other * 13 0 46 NR

Abstract Background The mechanisms underlying metastatic latency in renal cell carcinoma (RCC) remain poorly understood. Methods This study evaluated 2 large independent cohorts for differences in tumor biology between patients who developed metastases early (≤1 year after nephrectomy) and those with late onset (>3 years). Results In the discovery cohort (n = 161), late metastatic RCC was associated with clear cell histology (88.9% vs 78.7%), lower pathological stage (pT1-2; 40.3% vs 18.0%), and favorable histopathological features including low grade (40.0% vs 2.3%), less sarcomatoid (5.6% vs 21.8%), and reduced necrosis (37.7% vs 78.3%; all P < .02). Late metastatic RCC tumors exhibited increased angiogenesis (63.5% vs 19.4%) and reduced inflammation (78.8% vs 50.0%; all P < .02) profiles. Genomic driver analyses revealed comparable rates of PBRM1 and SETD2 loss in late and early metastatic RCC, while BAP1 loss was significantly less common in late metastatic RCC (7.5% vs 27.1%; P < .02). In multivariable models, BAP1/PBRM1/SETD2 status and tumor necrosis emerged as key discriminators of late metastatic RCCs. These findings were confirmed in the second cohort (n = 307). Late metastatic RCC was enriched for fatty acid oxidation and angiogenesis pathways, supporting a less aggressive phenotype. This was further evidenced by a lower engraftment rate in murine models (0% vs 36.5%; P < .001) and significantly longer overall survival from the time of metastasis (median survival doubled, P < .001). Interestingly, late metastatic RCC shared genomic and phenotypic features with RCC that metastasizes to the pancreas, suggesting a common underlying biology influencing both metastatic latency and pancreatic tropism. Conclusions Overall, these findings advocate for recognition of late metastatic RCC because of its distinct biology and improved prognosis.

Abstract Intratumoral heterogeneity arising from tumor evolution poses significant challenges biologically and clinically. Dissecting this complexity may benefit from deep learning (DL) algorithms, which can infer molecular features from ubiquitous hematoxylin and eosin (H&E)–stained tissue sections. Although DL algorithms have been developed to predict some driver mutations from H&E images, the ability of these DL algorithms to resolve intratumoral mutation heterogeneity at subclonal spatial resolution is unexplored. Here, we apply DL to a paradigm of intratumoral heterogeneity, clear cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC), the most common type of kidney cancer. Matched IHC and H&E images were leveraged to develop DL models for predicting intratumoral genetic heterogeneity of the three most frequently mutated ccRCC genes, BAP1, PBRM1, and SETD2. DL models were generated on a large cohort (N = 1,282) and tested on several independent cohorts, including a TCGA cohort (N = 363 patients) and two tissue microarray (TMA) cohorts (N = 118 and 365 patients). These models were also expanded to a patient-derived xenograft (PDX) TMA, affording analysis of homotopic and heterotopic interactions of tumor and stroma. The status of all three genes could be inferred by DL, with BAP1 showing the highest sensitivity and performance within and across tissue samples (AUC = 0.87–0.89 on holdout). BAP1 results were validated on independent human (AUC = 0.77–0.84) and PDX (AUC = 0.80) cohorts. Finally, BAP1 predictions correlated with clinical outputs such as disease-specific survival. Overall, these data show that DL models can resolve intratumoral heterogeneity in cancer with potential diagnostic, prognostic, and biological implications. Significance: This work demonstrates the potential for deep learning analysis of histopathologic images to serve as a fast, low-cost method to assess genetic intratumoral heterogeneity. See related commentary by Song et al., p. 2672

Abstract Brain metastases are a challenging manifestation of renal cell carcinoma. We have a limited understanding of brain metastasis tumor and immune biology, drivers of resistance to systemic treatment, and their overall poor prognosis. Current data support a multimodal treatment strategy with radiation treatment and/or surgery. Nonetheless, the optimal approach for the management of brain metastases from renal cell carcinoma remains unclear. To improve patient care, the authors sought to standardize practical management strategies. They performed an unstructured literature review and elaborated on the current management strategies through an international group of experts from different disciplines assembled via the network of the International Kidney Cancer Coalition. Experts from different disciplines were administered a survey to answer questions related to current challenges and unmet patient needs. On the basis of the integrated approach of literature review and survey study results, the authors built algorithms for the management of single and multiple brain metastases in patients with renal cell carcinoma. The literature review, consensus statements, and algorithms presented in this report can serve as a framework guiding treatment decisions for patients. CA Cancer J Clin. 2022;72:454‐489.

26 Background: NKTR-262 is a novel intratumoral prodrug designed to promote tumor antigen release, an immune stimulatory environment, and antigen presentation. NKTR-214 increases CD8+ T cells and NK cells in the tumor microenvironment. The combination of NKTR-262 with NKTR-214 accesses innate and adaptive immunity to provide an abscopal response and systemic tumor immunity. The Phase 1b/2 REVEAL trial is enrolling. Methods: In a 3+3 Phase 1 design, pts who are relapsed/refractory to ≥1 CPI receive escalating doses of intratumoral (IT) NKTR-262 followed by combined q3w treatment of IT NKTR-262 and fixed-dose intravenous (IV) NKTR-214 (0.006 mg/kg). Phase 1 will evaluate PK, safety, efficacy, and determine recommended Phase 2 dose. Scans are conducted every 9 wks (± 1 wk). Peripheral blood (PB) and tumor tissue are collected to measure biomarkers of immune activation. In Phase 2 expansion, NKTR-262 + NKTR-214 ± IV nivolumab (360 mg) will be assessed in specific tumor cohorts of IO-naïve and experienced pts. Results: As of 06 Nov 2018, 11 pts had received at least one cycle of NKTR-262 + NKTR-214 therapy. 7/11 pts were efficacy evaluable with at least one on-treatment scan (4 MEL, 2 SARC, 1 CRC). 2/4 R/R melanoma pts had uPRs with 100% (scan 2) and 40% (scan 1) reductions in target lesions per RECIST 1.1, respectively. Both patients remain on treatment. Two SARC pts had stable disease at scan 1. No pts experienced G3 or higher TRAEs or immune-related adverse events (AEs). Most common G1-2 AEs were transient flu-like symptoms. Gene expression analysis of tumor and PB show dose-dependent induction (4 to 16-fold) of TLR target genes. Consistent with the mechanism of action for NKTR-214, PB flow cytometry shows an average 13-fold increase from baseline in Ki67+ CD8+T cells in 6 pts. Conclusions: NKTR-262 + NKTR-214 engage the immune activation cascade from local tumor antigen production to anti-tumor T cell response. Initial dose levels of NKTR-262 with fixed-dose NKTR-214 were well-tolerated with early evidence of clinical activity. These data support continued evaluation of the combination +/- nivolumab. Clinical trial information: NCT03435640.

Purpose Enhancer of zeste homolog 2 (EZH2), a chromatin remodeler, is implicated in the pathogenesis of clear cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC). However, the effect of EZH2 on outcomes in localized ccRCC is unclear, and molecular biomarkers are not currently integrated into prognostic models or adjuvant therapy trials. Methods We performed Cox regression to evaluate the association of tumor-based EZH2 gene and protein expression with survival in three independent cohorts: a cohort from The Cancer Genome Atlas (n = 532), a cohort from University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center (n = 122), and a cohort from Mayo Clinic (n = 1,338). Analyses were adjusted for the prognostic stage, size, grade, and necrosis (SSIGN) score as well as within low-, intermediate-, and high-risk SSIGN groups. Results Patients in The Cancer Genome Atlas cohort with EZH2-high gene expression were 1.5 times more likely to experience overall death than patients with EZH2-low expression (95% CI, 1.1 to 2.3; P = .028). Patients in the University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center cohort with EZH2-high protein expression were two times more likely to experience overall death than patients with EZH2-low expression (95% CI, 1.1 to 4.4; P = .034). Similarly, patients in the Mayo Clinic cohort with EZH2-high protein expression were 1.4 times more likely to experience overall death (95% CI, 1.2 to 1.7; P < .001). Patients in the Mayo Clinic cohort with EZH2-high protein expression were nearly two times more likely to experience RCC-specific death (95% CI, 1.5 to 2.6; P < .001); EZH2 protein expression was particularly prognostic among patients with low-risk SSIGN tumors (HR, 6.1; 95% CI, 3.4 to 11.1; P < .001). Conclusion EZH2 expression accurately predicts risk of RCC death beyond existing clinicopathologic models, particularly in low- and intermediate-risk SSIGN tumors. Further studies are required to incorporate molecular biomarkers into surveillance guidelines and adjuvant clinical trials.

414 Background: While mutations in PBRM1 (~40%) and BAP1(~10%) are associated with clinical outcomes and pathologic features in clear cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC), the impact of protein expression of these genes remains unknown. Herein, we quantify PBRM1/BAP1 protein expression in a large cohort of patients with localized ccRCC and associate expression with cancer-specific survival (CSS) and pathologic features. Methods: We utilized the Mayo Clinic Renal Registry and identified 1,416 patients who underwent nephrectomy to treat clinically localized ccRCC between 1/3/1990 and 4/14/2009. We used immunohistochemistry (IHC) to detect PBRM1/BAP1 expression, and a central pathologist blinded to the outcomes scored tumors as either positive or negative. Tumors with heterogeneous or equivocal staining were excluded from this analysis. We generated Cox proportional hazard regression models for associations with ccRCC-SS, and we employed Mann-Whitney U tests for associations with pathologic features. Results: Of the 1,416 samples, 1,232 (87%) were PBRM1/BAP1 positive or negative, 163 (11%) had heterogeneous staining, and 21 (1%) could not be assessed. The distribution and association of PBRM1/BAP1 phenotypes with clinical outcomes are listed in the table below. PBRM1+/BAP1+ tumors have the best CSS, and PBRM1-/BAP1- have the worst. In addition, PBRM1/BAP1 expression strongly associated with the tumor size, stage, grade, and tumor necrosis (p<0.0001). Conclusions: This study is the first and largest to quantify PRBM1/BAP1 protein expression in ccRCC tumors. We were able to quantify PBRM1/BAP1 through IHC in the vast majority of tumors (87%), and PRBM1/BAP1 expression strongly associates with both CSS and pathologic tumor characteristics. Our data confirms our previous findings of the importance of PRBM1/BAP1 in the molecular pathogenesis of ccRCC. [Table: see text]