Abstract 5095: Characteristics of patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma (aRCC) who received first-line (1L) nivolumab plus cabozantinib (NIVO+CABO), pembrolizumab plus lenvatinib (PEM+LEN), or nivolumab (NIVO) monotherapy in the real-world (RW) setting
Abstract
Background: Recent advances in immunotherapy have introduced new treatment modalities for aRCC. In absence of guideline recommendations, it is unclear what factors drive providers in selecting 1L treatments for aRCC. To address this gap, we described the baseline demographic and clinical characteristics of patients with aRCC who received 1L NIVO+CABO, PEM+LEN, or NIVO monotherapy in the RW setting.
Methods: In this retrospective cohort study, treating oncologists from a US nationally representative network abstracted electronic health record data from patients with aRCC who initiated 1L NIVO+CABO or NIVO monotherapy (off-label in the US) between 2/1/2021 and 6/12/2023, or PEM+LEN between 9/1/2021 and 6/12/2023. Patient demographic and clinical characteristics were summarized descriptively.
Results: Compared with patients who received NIVO+CABO (n = 200) or PEM+LEN (n = 100), patients who received NIVO (n = 147) were relatively older at 1L initiation (Table). Sex, race, and region of residence were comparable across cohorts. Patients who received NIVO were more likely to have an ECOG PS score of ≥ 2 (59.2%) compared with NIVO+CABO (14.5%) or PEM+LEN (20%) cohorts. The distribution of MSKCC or IMDC risk scores at 1L initiation was comparable across cohorts . Grade 3 or 4 tumors were reported among 56.5%, 41.0%, and 43.5% of those who received NIVO+CABO, PEM+LEN, and NIVO, respectively.
Conclusions: This study suggests that 1L treatment for aRCC using IO monotherapy may be more…
How strong is the evidence?
Evidence Hub reads this as a cohort study, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 200 participants or records.
Read the paper
Related studies
- Global, regional, and national burden of hepatitis B, 1990–2019: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2019
- A meta‐analysis of anal cancer incidence by risk group: Toward a unified anal cancer risk scale
- Global fertility in 204 countries and territories, 1950–2021, with forecasts to 2100: a comprehensive demographic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2021
- Exercise interventions in Alzheimer's disease: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
- Prognostic Significance of Carbonic Anhydrase IX Expression in Cancer Patients: A Meta-Analysis
- Glucocorticoid Resistance: Is It a Requisite for Increased Cytokine Production in Depression? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Go deeper in Evidence Hub
Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.