Smoking and COVID-19 in patients with cancer: Novel analysis from CCC19 registry

Background: Patients (pts) with thoracic cancers have a high rate of hospitalization and death from COVID-19. Smoking has been associated with increased risk for severe COVID-19. However, there is limited data evaluating the impact of smoking recency on COVID-19 severity in pts with cancer. We aimed to characterize the clinical outcomes of COVID-19 based on the recency of smoking in pts with thoracic cancers (TC) and all other cancers (OC). Methods: Adult pts with cancer and lab-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 and smoking history recorded in the CCC19 registry (NCT0435470) were included. Pts were stratified by cancer type (TC or OC) and further stratified into subgroups based on the recency of smoking cessation: current smoker;former smokers who quit < 1 yr. ago;1-5 yr. ago;6-10 yr. ago;quit > 10 yr. ago;and never smoker. 30-day all-cause mortality was the primary endpoint. Secondary endpoints were any hospitalization;hospitalization with supplemental O2;ICU admission;and mechanical ventilation. Results: From January 2020 to December 2021, 752 pts from TC group and 8,291 pts from OC group met the inclusion criteria. 78% of patients in TC group ever smoked compared to 36% patients in the OC group. In both groups, the majority of never-smokers were females (70% and 60% in TC and OC respectively). The burden of smoking and the rate of pulmonary comorbidities (PC) was higher in the TC group (PC 22-69%) compared to OC group (PC 12-26%) across all smoking strata. Overall, 30-day all-cause mortality was 21% and 11% in pts with TC and OC respectively. Former smokers who quit < 1 year ago in TC group had the highest rate of mortality and severe COVID-19 outcomes. However, in the OC group, there was no consistent trend of higher mortality or severe COVID-19 outcomes in specific subgroups based on smoking recency. Conclusions: To our knowledge this is the largest study evaluating the effect of granular phenotypes of smoking recency on COVID-19 outcomes in pts with cancer. Recent smokers who quit < 1 year ago in TC group had the highest rate of mortality and severe COVID-19. Further analysis exploring the factors (e.g., smoking pack years) associated with severe outcomes in this subgroup is planned.

Complications and severity of COVID-19 in patients with (HNC): A COVID-19 and Cancer Consortium (CCC19) registry analysis

Background: Patients with cancer have worse outcomes from COVID-19 infection. However, the specific impact of COVID-19 on patients with (HNC) is largely unknown. The COVID-19 and Cancer Consortium (CCC19) maintains an international registry (NCT04354701) aimed to investigate the clinical course and complications of COVID-19 in patients with cancer. Here, we report severity of COVID-19 and its complications among HNC patients. Methods: The CCC19 registry was queried for patients with HNC and laboratory confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection. The co-primary outcomes were severity of COVID-19 illness on an ordinal scale (0: no complications;1: hospitalized, no oxygen (O2);2: hospitalized, required O2;3: ICU admission;4: mechanical ventilation (MV);5: death), and severity of complications (mild, moderate, serious). The outcomes were further stratified by demographics, recent treatment (systemic vs local;surgery, radiation (RT) vs systemic), treatment intent (palliative vs curative), and cancer status (remission, responding, stable, progressing). Results: From March 2020 to December 2021, 356 HNC patients were identified. Median age was 65 (interquartile range 58-74), 29% were female, 56% were white, 67% were former or current smokers, 20% had a BMI >30, 15% had an ECOG performance status >2, and 57% had >2 comorbidities. 154 (43%) had no complications, 61 (17%) were hospitalized without O2, 135 (38%) were hospitalized with O2, 50 (14%) required ICU, 32 (9%) required MV, and 74 (21%) died. 88 (25%) had mild, 59 (17%) had moderate, and 132 (37%) had serious complications. 33% of patients who received systemic therapy and 30% who received RT within 3 mo prior to COVID-19 diagnosis died. Mortality was higher in patients receiving palliative when compared to curative intent treatment (44% vs 16%). In addition, 50% of patients with actively progressing cancer, and 45% who had serious complications died. Importantly, 37 (n=12 palliative systemic therapy and n=25 local therapy) patients had a treatment delay due to COVID-19 diagnosis. Conclusions: Our study is the largest cohort to date describing COVID-19 outcomes in HNC patients and suggest a high rate of mortality even in those receiving local and curative intent treatment. Variables stratified by COVID-19 severity. Note: Ordinal levels 3 and 4 not shown due to small case numbers.

Oncology clinical trial disruption during the COVID-19 pandemic: a COVID-19 and cancer outcomes study.

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 disproportionately impacted patients with cancer as a result of direct infection, and delays in diagnosis and therapy. Oncological clinical trials are resource-intensive endeavors that could be particularly susceptible to disruption by the pandemic, but few studies have evaluated the impact of the pandemic on clinical trial conduct. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This prospective, multicenter study assesses the impact of the pandemic on therapeutic clinical trials at two large academic centers in the Northeastern United States between December 2019 and June 2021. The primary objective was to assess the enrollment on, accrual to, and activation of oncology therapeutic clinical trials during the pandemic using an institution-wide cohort of (i) new patient accruals to oncological trials, (ii) a manually curated cohort of patients with cancer, and (ii) a dataset of new trial activations. RESULTS: The institution-wide cohort included 4756 new patients enrolled to clinical trials from December 2019 to June 2021. A major decrease in the numbers of new patient accruals (-46%) was seen early in the pandemic, followed by a progressive recovery and return to higher-than-normal levels (+2.6%). A similar pattern (from -23.6% to +30.4%) was observed among 467 newly activated trials from June 2019 to June 2021. A more pronounced decline in new accruals was seen among academically sponsored trials (versus industry sponsored trials) (P < 0.05). In the manually curated cohort, which included 2361 patients with cancer, non-white patients tended to be more likely taken off trial in the early pandemic period (adjusted odds ratio: 2.60; 95% confidence interval 1.00-6.63), and substantial pandemic-related deviations were recorded. CONCLUSIONS: Substantial disruptions in clinical trial activities were observed early during the pandemic, with a gradual recovery during ensuing time periods, both from an enrollment and an activation standpoint. The observed decline was more prominent among academically sponsored trials, and racial disparities were seen among people taken off trial.

Disruption to care of patients with thoracic malignancies: A COVID-19 and cancer outcomes study

Introduction: Patients with thoracic malignancies are susceptible to severe outcomes from coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). The aim of this study was to evaluate the disruption to care of patients with thoracic malignancies during the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: The COVID-19 and Cancer Outcomes Study (CCOS) is a multicenter prospective cohort study comprised of adult patients with a current or past history of hematological malignancy or invasive solid tumor who had an outpatient medical oncology visit on the index week between March 2 and March 6, 2020 at the Tisch Cancer Institute, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai in New York, NY (MSSM) or the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute in Boston, MA (DFCI). An electronic data capture platform was used to collect patient-, cancer-, and treatment-related variables during the three months prior to the index week (the baseline period) and the following three months (the pandemic period). Two-by-three contingency tables with Fisher's exact tests were computed. All tests were two-tailed and considered statistically significant for p<0.05. All analyses were done in the R statistical environment (v3.6.1). Results: The overall cohort included 2365 patients, of which 313 had thoracic malignancies, 1578 had other solid tumors, and 474 had hematological malignancies. At a median follow-up of 84 days (95% confidence interval, 82-84), 13 patients with thoracic malignancies (4.1%) had developed COVID-19 (vs. other solid: 63 [4.0%] and hematological: 52 [11.0%];p<0.001). When comparing data from the pandemic period to the baseline period, patients with thoracic malignancies had a decrease in the number of in-person outpatient visits (thoracic: 209 [66.8%] vs. other solid: 749 [47.5%] vs. hematological: 260 [54.9%];p<0.001) and an increase in the number of telehealth visits (thoracic: 126 [40.3%] vs. other solid: 465 [29.5%] vs. hematological: 168 [35.4%];p<0.001). During the pandemic period, 33 (10.5%) patients with thoracic malignancies experienced treatment delays due to the pandemic (vs. other solid: 127 [8.0%] and hematological: 79 [16.7%];p<0.001), and 26 (8.3%) patients with thoracic malignancies experienced delays in cancer imaging or diagnostic procedures (vs. other solid: 63 [4.0%] and hematological: 26 [5.5%];p=0.003). Discussion: In this prospective cohort study, patients with thoracic malignancies were not at increased risk of developing COVID-19 compared to patients with other cancers, but experienced significant cancer care disruption during the COVID-19 pandemic with a higher likelihood of decreased in-person visits and increased telehealth visits compared to patients with other malignancies. Focused efforts to ensure continuity of care for this vulnerable patient population are warranted.

Temporal changes in the screening, diagnosis and surgical treatment of genitourinary (GU) malignancies during the COVID-19 pandemic

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic has been associated with a significant disruption in healthcare services including cancer screening and diagnosis. Delays in cancer screening and treatment may lead to increased mortality. We aimed to analyze changes in screening, diagnosis and surgical treatment of common GU malignancies in relation to the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: We evaluated screening, novel diagnoses, and surgical management modalities of prostate cancer (PCa), urothelial carcinoma (UC) and renal cell carcinoma (RCC) within Massachusetts General Brigham, the largest healthcare system in the Northeastern United States, over four 3-month time periods during the pandemic (March 2020- March 2021). The percentage change in screening, diagnoses and management modalities during pandemic periods as compared to the immediate pre-pandemic period (December 2019-March 2020) was calculated as (Nperiod - Ncontrol)/Ncontrol. The difference in "predicted" versus "observed" diagnoses in each pandemic period was compared to the average of the four preceding 3-month periods (March 2019-March 2020) to account for seasonal variation. Results: The first pandemic peak (March-June 2020) was associated with a significant decline across screening, diagnosis and treatment, ranging from -15.7 to -64.8%, followed by a progressive recovery, ranging from -5.9 to +25.1% in the latest period (December 2020-March 2021) (Table). Although 725 diagnoses were "missed" between March and June 2020 as compared to the previous 12 months, 971 diagnoses were "recovered" between June 2020 and March 2021. Conclusions: A substantial disruption in the screening, diagnosis and treatment of GU malignancies was observed early in the pandemic, followed by a progressive rebound and recovery. The highest declines were observed for PSA screening, and the lowest for cystectomy procedures, reflecting triaging of care based on severity during the pandemic.

COVID-19 vaccination and breakthrough infections in patients with cancer.

BACKGROUND: Vaccination is an important preventive health measure to protect against symptomatic and severe COVID-19. Impaired immunity secondary to an underlying malignancy or recent receipt of antineoplastic systemic therapies can result in less robust antibody titers following vaccination and possible risk of breakthrough infection. As clinical trials evaluating COVID-19 vaccines largely excluded patients with a history of cancer and those on active immunosuppression (including chemotherapy), limited evidence is available to inform the clinical efficacy of COVID-19 vaccination across the spectrum of patients with cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We describe the clinical features of patients with cancer who developed symptomatic COVID-19 following vaccination and compare weighted outcomes with those of contemporary unvaccinated patients, after adjustment for confounders, using data from the multi-institutional COVID-19 and Cancer Consortium (CCC19). RESULTS: Patients with cancer who develop COVID-19 following vaccination have substantial comorbidities and can present with severe and even lethal infection. Patients harboring hematologic malignancies are over-represented among vaccinated patients with cancer who develop symptomatic COVID-19. CONCLUSIONS: Vaccination against COVID-19 remains an essential strategy in protecting vulnerable populations, including patients with cancer. Patients with cancer who develop breakthrough infection despite full vaccination, however, remain at risk of severe outcomes. A multilayered public health mitigation approach that includes vaccination of close contacts, boosters, social distancing, and mask-wearing should be continued for the foreseeable future.

Lower respiratory tract disease (LRTD) in patients with cancer and COVID-19: A COVID-19 and Cancer Consortium (CCC19) study

Background: Immunodeficiency in patients (pts) with cancer can lead to the progression of common respiratory viral infections to lower respiratory tract disease (LRTD) with potentially high mortality. Understanding risk factors of SARS-CoV-2 related LRTD in pts with cancer is imperative for the development of preventive measures. Methods: We examined all patients aged 18 years or older with cancer and laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection reported between March 16, 2020 and February 6, 2021 in the international CCC19 registry. We examined frequency of LRTD (pneumonia, pneumonitis, acute respiratory distress syndrome, or respiratory failure), demographic and clinicopathologic factors associated with LRTD, and 30-day and overall mortality in pts with and without LRTD. Results: Of 7,289 pts with a median follow-up time of 42 (21-90) days, 2187 (30%) developed LRTD. Pts of older age (65 yrs or older), male sex, pre-existing comorbidities, baseline immunosuppressants, baseline corticosteroids, and ECOG performance status of 2 or more had substantially higher rates of LRTD compared to those without these risk factors (Table). We did not observe differences in LRTD rates between pts of different racial/ethnic groups, smoking history, hypertension, obesity, cancer status, timing or type of anti-cancer therapy. LRTD was more likely in pts with thoracic malignancy (39%), hematological malignancy (39%) compared to those with other solid tumors (27%). The majority of pts (86%) had symptomatic presentation;however, 8% of pts with asymptomatic presentation developed LRTD. 30-day and overall mortality rates were significantly higher in pts with LRTD than those without LRTD (31% vs. 4% and 38% vs. 6%, P < 0.05). Conclusions: COVID-19 related LRTD rate is high and associated with worse mortality rates in pts with cancer. The majority of risk factors associated with LRTD demonstrate underlying immunodeficiency or lung structural damage as a driving force in this population. Identifying pts at high-risk for developing LRTD can help guide clinical management, improve pt outcomes, increase the cost-effectiveness of antiviral therapy, and direct future clinical trial designs for vaccine or antiviral agents. (Table Presented).

Thrombotic complications with SARS-CoV-2 infection in patients with cancer on high-risk therapies: Data from the COVID-19 and Cancer Consortium (CCC19)

Background: Patients (pts) with cancer have a high risk of venous thromboembolic (VTE) complications, further enhanced by anti-cancer treatments, specifically hormonal therapies, targeted therapies (VEGF inhibitors, other TKIs) and immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs). We hypothesized that high-risk therapies would predispose pts with cancer and COVID-19 to higher risk of VTE complications. Methods: CCC19 is the largest international registry (NCT04354701) recording outcomes of pts with cancer and COVID-19. The registry was queried for hospitalized pts who developed VTE and received systemic cancer treatment in the year prior to COVID-19. Incidence of VTE was analyzed as the primary endpoint;30-day any cause mortality & need for ICU admission at baseline were secondary endpoints in pts with and without VTE respectively. Pts were stratified by treatment type and time from last treatment dose: <2 wk, 2-4 wk, 1-3 months (mos), 3-12 mos. Results: As of February 9th 2021, 4217 hospitalized pts with complications data were present in the registry. 1867 (44%) pts had received systemic anti-cancer therapy within the year prior to COVID-19 and were analyzed. There were a total of 186 (10%) VTE events. Of these, VTE incidence was 141 (10.5%) in pts with solid tumors and 57 (9%) in pts with hematologic malignancies. Overall 30-day mortality was 20% and 22% in pts with and without VTE respectively, while direct admission to ICU at presentation was seen in 17% and 10% of pts with and without VTE, respectively. Treatment timing and drug exposures are below (Table). Receipt of systemic anti-cancer treatment within 3 mos vs 3-12 mos was associated with increased rate of VTE, OR 2.44, 95% CI 1.18-5.84, p=0.011 (univariate Fisher test). Conclusions: We describe the incidence of VTE events in pts with cancer and COVID-19 with recent systemic cancer therapy. ICI and VEGFi were associated with numerically higher rates of VTE;other examined drugs and drug classes were not. Timing of therapy appears to modify risk of VTE. Although retrospective, with possible selection and confounding biases, our analysis suggests that factors other than anticancer drug exposures may drive VTE events in this population.

Effect of bacillus calmette-guerin (BCG) exposure on severity of COVID-19 infection: A COVID-19 and cancer consortium (CCC19) study

Background: Oncology patients experience more severe disease outcomes from COVID-19 infection than the general population. BCG is a live bovine tuberculosis bacillus with immunotherapeutic effects in urothelial cancers;it is also used as vaccination against Mycobacterium tuberculosis in parts of the world. As BCG vaccination has been associated with broad protection against viral pathogens, BCG exposure through vaccination or intravesical therapy may modulate host immunity and reduce the severity of COVID-19 infection. We report the effect of BCG exposure on COVID-19 severity in oncology patients from the CCC19 registry. Methods: The CCC19 registry (NCT04354701) was used to identify patients with prior BCG exposure. Cohort A received intravesical treatment for bladder carcinoma, and cohort B received prior BCG vaccination. Each cohort was matched 3:1 to non-BCG-exposed controls by age, sex, race, primary cancer type, cancer status, ECOG performance status (PS) and calendar time of COVID-19 infection. The primary endpoint was COVID-19 severity reported on an ordinal scale (uncomplicated, hospitalized, admitted to ICU +/- ventilated, died within 30 days) of patients exposed to prior BCG compared to matched non-exposed controls. 2-sided Wilcoxon ranksum tests were used. Results: As of 6-Feb-2021 we included 124 patients with BCG exposure, 68 patients with bladder carcinoma who had received intravesical BCG (Cohort A), and 64 cancer patients with prior BCG vaccination (Cohort B). Median age was 76 years, IQR 69-83 (Cohort A) and 67 years, IQR 62-74 (Cohort B). Bladder cancer pts were predominately male (78%) vs 55% for Cohort B. Patients with PS 2+ were uncommon, 18% in Cohort A and 16% in Cohort B. COVID-19 illness severity was no different in patients exposed to prior intravesicular BCG (p=0.87). COVID-19 illness severity was no different in patients exposed to prior intradermal BCG vaccination (p=0.60). Conclusions: Despite this being the largest such cohort reported to date, we failed to demonstrate an association of prior BCG exposure with modulation of severity of COVID19 illness. Prospective trials evaluating the protective effect of BCG vaccination are ongoing and will add further insight into the effect of BCG on COVID-19 illness.

Association of clinical factors and recent anticancer therapy with COVID-19 severity among patients with cancer: a report from the COVID-19 and Cancer Consortium.

BACKGROUND: Patients with cancer may be at high risk of adverse outcomes from severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection. We analyzed a cohort of patients with cancer and coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) reported to the COVID-19 and Cancer Consortium (CCC19) to identify prognostic clinical factors, including laboratory measurements and anticancer therapies. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with active or historical cancer and a laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis recorded between 17 March and 18 November 2020 were included. The primary outcome was COVID-19 severity measured on an ordinal scale (uncomplicated, hospitalized, admitted to intensive care unit, mechanically ventilated, died within 30 days). Multivariable regression models included demographics, cancer status, anticancer therapy and timing, COVID-19-directed therapies, and laboratory measurements (among hospitalized patients). RESULTS: A total of 4966 patients were included (median age 66 years, 51% female, 50% non-Hispanic white); 2872 (58%) were hospitalized and 695 (14%) died; 61% had cancer that was present, diagnosed, or treated within the year prior to COVID-19 diagnosis. Older age, male sex, obesity, cardiovascular and pulmonary comorbidities, renal disease, diabetes mellitus, non-Hispanic black race, Hispanic ethnicity, worse Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status, recent cytotoxic chemotherapy, and hematologic malignancy were associated with higher COVID-19 severity. Among hospitalized patients, low or high absolute lymphocyte count; high absolute neutrophil count; low platelet count; abnormal creatinine; troponin; lactate dehydrogenase; and C-reactive protein were associated with higher COVID-19 severity. Patients diagnosed early in the COVID-19 pandemic (January-April 2020) had worse outcomes than those diagnosed later. Specific anticancer therapies (e.g. R-CHOP, platinum combined with etoposide, and DNA methyltransferase inhibitors) were associated with high 30-day all-cause mortality. CONCLUSIONS: Clinical factors (e.g. older age, hematological malignancy, recent chemotherapy) and laboratory measurements were associated with poor outcomes among patients with cancer and COVID-19. Although further studies are needed, caution may be required in utilizing particular anticancer therapies. CLINICAL TRIAL IDENTIFIER: NCT04354701.

Disparities in cancer during the COVID-19 pandemic: COVID-19 and cancer outcomes study (CCOS)

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic has rapidly altered cancer care. However, the ways in which it has done so and the associated impact at the individual and societal levels remains poorly defined. Methods: CCOS is a multicenter prospective cohort study designed to define the impact of the pandemic on cancer care delivery and outcomes. The CCOS cohort comprised consecutive outpatients with cancer seen at two US cancer centers from March 2 to March 6, 2020 (index visit). Data was collected at baseline, retrospectively from the preceding 3 months, and prospectively at 3-month follow up. Per patient changes in numbers of visits were compared using Wilcoxon signed rank tests. Correlates of increases in telehealth visits and decreases in in-person visits were evaluated using multivariable logistic regression models. Adjusted Odds ratios [aOR] and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were reported. Results: Of 2365 included patients, 1219 (51.6%) had a decrease in in-person visit frequency during the pandemic period relative to the preceding 3 months. Conversely, 760 (32.2%) had an increased frequency of telehealth visits (decrease in in-person and increase in telehealth visits;both p<0.01). 128 (5.4%) patients developed COVID-19. Compared to White patients, Black and Hispanic patients were less likely to have telehealth visits, had no significant change in frequency of in-person visits, and were more likely to develop COVID-19 (Table). [Formula presented] Conclusions: Significant disruptions to routine cancer care were observed during the pandemic period relative to the prior 3 months. Racial and ethnic barriers to the adoption of telehealth, and related socioeconomic factors, place these vulnerable populations simultaneously at disproportionate risk for decreased cancer-related visits and COVID infection, thereby exacerbating existing racial and ethnic health disparities. Legal entity responsible for the study: The authors. Funding: Has not received any funding. Disclosure: D. Doroshow: Honoraria (self), Advisory/Consultancy, Travel/Accommodation/Expenses: Ipsen;Honoraria (self), Advisory/Consultancy: Boehringer Ingelheim;Honoraria (self), Advisory/Consultancy: Athenaeum Partners;Honoraria (self), Advisory/Consultancy: Boston Healthcare Associates. A.L. Schmidt: Travel/Accommodation/Expenses: Pfizer;Travel/Accommodation/Expenses: Astellas. Z. Bakouny: Non-remunerated activity/ies: Bristol Myers Squibb;Research grant/Funding (self): Genentech/ImCore. M.M. Awad: Advisory/Consultancy, Research grant/Funding (self): Bristol Myers Squibb;Advisory/Consultancy, Research grant/Funding (self): Lilly;Advisory/Consultancy, Research grant/Funding (self): AstraZeneca;Advisory/Consultancy, Research grant/Funding (self): Genentech;Advisory/Consultancy: Merck;Advisory/Consultancy: Achilles;Advisory/Consultancy: AbbVie. R. Haddad: Advisory/Consultancy, Research grant/Funding (self): Bristol Myers Squibb;Advisory/Consultancy, Research grant/Funding (self): Merck;Advisory/Consultancy, Research grant/Funding (self): Pfizer;Advisory/Consultancy, Research grant/Funding (self): Genentech;Advisory/Consultancy, Research grant/Funding (self): AstraZeneca;Advisory/Consultancy, Research grant/Funding (self): GlaxoSmithKline. M.D. Galsky: Shareholder/Stockholder/Stock options: Rappta Therapeutics;Honoraria (self): BioMotiv;Honoraria (self): Janssen;Honoraria (self): Dendreon;Honoraria (self): Merck;Honoraria (self): GlaxoSmithKline;Honoraria (self): Lilly;Honoraria (self): Astellas Pharma;Honoraria (self): Genentech;Honoraria (self): Bristol-Myers Squibb;Honoraria (self): Novartis;Honoraria (self): Pfizer;Honoraria (self): EMD Serono;Honoraria (self): AstraZeneca;Honoraria (self): Seattle Genetics;Honoraria (self): Incyte;Honoraria (self): Alleron Therapeutics;Honoraria (self): Dracen;Honoraria (self): Inovio Pharmaceuticals;Honoraria (self): NuMab;Honoraria (self): Dragonfly Therapeutics;Honoraria (institution): Janssen Oncology;Honoraria (institution): Dendreon;Honoraria (institution): Novartis;Honoraria (institu ion): Bristol-Myers Squibb;Honoraria (institution): Merck;Honoraria (institution): AstraZeneca;Honoraria (institution): Genentech/Roche. T.K. Choueiri: Honoraria (self), Advisory/Consultancy, Research grant/Funding (self): AstraZeneca;Honoraria (self), Advisory/Consultancy, Research grant/Funding (self): Alexion;Honoraria (self), Advisory/Consultancy, Research grant/Funding (self): Bayer;Honoraria (self), Advisory/Consultancy, Research grant/Funding (self): BristolMyersSquibb;Honoraria (self), Advisory/Consultancy, Research grant/Funding (self): Cerulean;Honoraria (self), Advisory/Consultancy, Research grant/Funding (self): Eisai;Honoraria (self), Research grant/Funding (self): Foundation Medicine;Honoraria (self), Research grant/Funding (self): Exelixis;Honoraria (self), Advisory/Consultancy, Research grant/Funding (self): Ipsen;Research grant/Funding (self): 16 Tracon;Honoraria (self), Advisory/Consultancy, Research grant/Funding (self): Genentech;Honoraria (self), Advisory/Consultancy, Research grant/Funding (self): Roche;Honoraria (self), Research grant/Funding (self): Roche Products Limited;Honoraria (self), Research grant/Funding (self): Hoffman-LaRoche;Honoraria (self), Advisory/Consultancy, Research grant/Funding (self): GlaxoSmithKline;Advisory/Consultancy, Research grant/Funding (self): Lilly;Honoraria (self), Advisory/Consultancy, Research grant/Funding (self): Merck;Honoraria (self), Advisory/Consultancy, Research grant/Funding (self): Novartis;Honoraria (self), Advisory/Consultancy, Research grant/Funding (self): Peloton;Honoraria (self), Advisory/Consultancy, Research grant/Funding (self): Pfizer;Honoraria (self), Advisory/Consultancy, Research grant/Funding (self): Prometheus labs;Honoraria (self), Advisory/Consultancy, Research grant/Funding (self): Corvus;Research grant/Funding (self): Calithera;Research grant/Funding (self): Analysis Group;Honoraria (self), Research grant/Funding (self): Sanofi/Aventis;Research grant/Funding (self): Takeda;Honoraria (self), Advisory/Consultancy: EMD Serono;Honoraria (self), Advisory/Consultancy: UpToDate;Honoraria (self): NCCN;Honoraria (self), Advisory/Consultancy, Dr. Choueiri reports research support from AstraZeneca, Alexion, Bayer, Bristol Myers Squibb/ER Squibb and sons LLC, Cerulean, Eisai, Foundation Medicine Inc., Exelixis, Ipsen, 16 Tracon, Genentech, Roche, Roche Products Limited, F. Hoffmann-La Roche, GlaxoSmithKline, Lilly, Merck, Novartis, Peloton, Pfizer, Prometheus Labs, Corvus, Calithera, Analysis Group, Sanofi/Aventis, Takeda;Honoraria: AstraZeneca, Alexion, Sanofi/Aventis, Bayer, Bristol Myers-Squibb/ER Squibb and sons LLC, Cerulean, Eisai, Foundation Medicine Inc., Exelixis, Genentech, Roche, Roche Products Limited, F. Hoffmann-La Roche, GlaxoSmithKline, Merck, Novartis, Peloton, Pfizer, EMD Serono, Prometheus Labs, Corvus, Ipsen, Up-to-Date, NCCN, Analysis Group, NCCN, Michael J. Hennessy (MJH) Associates, Inc (Healthcare Communications Company with several brands such as OnClive, PeerView and PER), Research to Practice, L-path, Kidney Cancer Journal, Clinical Care Options, Platform Q, Navinata Healthcare, Harborside Press, American Society of Me: Analysis Group. All other authors have declared no conflicts of interest.