Browsing by Author "Vaishampayan, Ulka"

Now showing 1 - 3 of 3
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    A phase II trial of sitravatinib + nivolumab after progression on immune checkpoint inhibitor in patients with metastatic clear cell RCC
    (Oxford University Press, 2025) Hahn, Andrew W.; Adra, Nabil; Vaishampayan, Ulka; Xiao, Lianchun; Dizman, Nazli; Yuan, Ying; Mukhida, Sagar S.; Campbell, Matthew T.; Gao, Jianjun; Zurita, Amado J.; Jonasch, Eric; Tannir, Nizar M.; Shah, Amishi Y.; Msaouel, Pavlos; Medicine, School of Medicine
    Background: Sitravatinib, an oral multi-kinase inhibitor targeting VEGFR, TAM, and MET, has been shown to resensitize the tumor microenvironment to immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) by reducing immune-suppressive myeloid cells in metastatic clear cell RCC (ccRCC). ICI is the standard first-line (1L) treatment of metastatic ccRCC, and there is unmet need for improved treatment outcomes after progression on ICI. We hypothesized that sitravatinib plus nivolumab would revert an immunosuppressive tumor microenvironment (TME) to improve clinical outcomes. Methods: In this investigator-initiated, phase II, multicenter trial (NCT04904302), patients with progressive metastatic ccRCC after 1-2 lines of treatment were enrolled into 3 cohorts: (1) 1L nivolumab + ipilimumab, (2) 1L pembrolizumab + axitinib, (3) prior cabozantinib or lenvatinib and ICI. Starting dose of sitravatinib was 100 mg PO daily and nivolumab was 480 mg IV every 4 weeks. The co-primary endpoints were objective response rate (ORR) and disease control rate (DCR) at 24 weeks. The study was designed to enroll 88 patients with an interim analysis for futility in each cohort using a BOP2 design, but it was terminated early due to discontinuation of sitravatinib development. Results: Fourteen patients were enrolled with 2 in cohort A, 6 in cohort B, and 6 in cohort C. Across all cohorts, the ORR was 15.4% (2/13, 1 not evaluable) and DCR at 24 weeks was 35.7% (5/14). DCR at 24 months was 63% for Cohort A + B and 0% for Cohort C. Median progression free survival was 5.5 mo [95% CI 3.8-not reached (NR)], and median overall survival was 13.3 mo (95% CI 8.77-NR). Six patients (42.9%) experienced a grade 3-4 adverse event (AE) and 2 patients (14.3%) experienced an immune-mediated AE. Conclusion: In this small phase 2 trial with limited sample size due to early termination, sitravatinib plus nivolumab demonstrated a manageable safety profile and produced modest clinical benefit. The observed responses occurred in patients who did not receive prior treatment with cabozantinib or lenvatinib.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Genetic Risk Assessment for Hereditary Renal Cell Carcinoma: Clinical Consensus Statement
    (Wiley, 2021) Bratslavsky, Gennady; Mendhiratta, Neil; Daneshvar, Michael; Brugarolas, James; Ball, Mark W.; Metwalli, Adam; Nathanson, Katherine L.; Pierorazio, Phillip M.; Boris, Ronald S.; Singer, Eric A.; Carlo, Maria I.; Daly, Mary B.; Henske, Elizabeth P.; Hyatt, Colette; Middleton, Lindsay; Morris, Gloria; Jeong, Anhyo; Narayan, Vivek; Rathmell, W. Kimryn; Vaishampayan, Ulka; Lee, Bruce H.; Battle, Dena; Hall, Michael J.; Hafez, Khaled; Jewett, Michael A.S.; Karamboulas, Christina; Pal, Sumanta K.; Hakimi, A. Ari; Kutikov, Alexander; Iliopoulos, Othon; Linehan, W. Marston; Jonasch, Eric; Srinivasan, Ramaprasad; Shuch, Brian; Urology, School of Medicine
    Background: Although renal cell carcinoma (RCC) is believed to have a strong hereditary component, there is a paucity of published guidelines for genetic risk assessment. A panel of experts was convened to gauge current opinions. Methods: A North American multidisciplinary panel with expertise in hereditary RCC, including urologists, medical oncologists, clinical geneticists, genetic counselors, and patient advocates, was convened. Before the summit, a modified Delphi methodology was used to generate, review, and curate a set of consensus questions regarding RCC genetic risk assessment. Uniform consensus was defined as ≥85% agreement on particular questions. Results: Thirty-three panelists, including urologists (n = 13), medical oncologists (n = 12), genetic counselors and clinical geneticists (n = 6), and patient advocates (n = 2), reviewed 53 curated consensus questions. Uniform consensus was achieved on 30 statements in specific areas that addressed for whom, what, when, and how genetic testing should be performed. Topics of consensus included the family history criteria, which should trigger further assessment, the need for risk assessment in those with bilateral or multifocal disease and/or specific histology, the utility of multigene panel testing, and acceptance of clinician-based counseling and testing by those who have experience with hereditary RCC. Conclusions: In the first ever consensus panel on RCC genetic risk assessment, 30 consensus statements were reached. Areas that require further research and discussion were also identified, with a second future meeting planned. This consensus statement may provide further guidance for clinicians when considering RCC genetic risk assessment. Lay summary: The contribution of germline genetics to the development of renal cell carcinoma (RCC) has long been recognized. However, there is a paucity of guidelines to define how and when genetic risk assessment should be performed for patients with known or suspected hereditary RCC. Without guidelines, clinicians struggle to define who requires further evaluation, when risk assessment or testing should be done, which genes should be considered, and how counseling and/or testing should be performed. To this end, a multidisciplinary panel of national experts was convened to gauge current opinion on genetic risk assessment in RCC and to enumerate a set of recommendations to guide clinicians when evaluating individuals with suspected hereditary kidney cancer.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Long-term progression-free survival of patients with metastatic melanoma or renal cell carcinoma following high-dose interleukin-2
    (BMJ, 2021-02-04) Clark, Joseph I.; Curti, Brendan; Davis, Elizabeth J.; Kaufman, Howard; Amin, Asim; Alva, Ajjai; Logan, Theodore F.; Hauke, Ralph; Miletello, Gerald P.; Vaishampayan, Ulka; Johnson, Douglas B.; White, Richard L.; Wiernik, Peter H.; Dutcher, Janice P.; Medicine, School of Medicine
    High-dose interleukin-2 (HD IL-2) was approved in the 1990s after demonstrating durable complete responses (CRs) in some patients with metastatic melanoma (mM) and metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). Patients who achieve this level of disease control have also demonstrated improved survival compared with patients who progress, but limited data are available describing the long-term course. The aim of this study was to better characterize long-term survival following successful HD IL-2 treatment in patients with no subsequent systemic therapy. Eleven HD IL-2 treatment centers identified patients with survival ≥5 years after HD IL-2, with no subsequent systemic therapy. Survival was evaluated from the date of IL-2 treatment to June 2017. Treatment courses consisted of 2 1-week cycles of HD IL-2. Patients were treated with HD IL-2 alone, or HD IL-2 followed by local therapy to achieve maximal response. 100 patients are reported: 54 patients with mM and 46 patients with mRCC. Progression-free survival (PFS) after HD IL-2 ranges from 5+ years to 30+ years, with a median follow-up of 10+ years. 27 mRCC and 32 mM are alive ≥10 years after IL-2. Thus, a small subset of patients with mM and mRCC achieve long-term PFS (≥5 years) after treatment with HD IL-2 as their only systemic therapy. The ability of HD IL-2 therapy to induce prolonged PFS should be a major consideration in studies of new immunotherapy combinations for mM and mRCC.