ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate predictive ability of a novel combined index, Charlson comorbidity index and C-reactive protein (CCI-CRP), for outcomes in renal cell carcinoma (RCC), and compare predictive outcomes with of CCI-CRP to its separate components and to the UCLA integrated staging system (UISS). PATIENTS AND METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed INMARC registry of RCC patients. Receiver Operator Characteristics (ROC) analysis was fitted to identify threshold defining low-CRP (LCRP) and high-CRP (HCRP). Patients were stratified according to CCI [low-CCI ≤ 3 (LCCI); intermediate-CCI 4-6 (ICCI); high-CCI > 6 (HCCI)] and CRP level. Kaplan-Meier analysis (KMA) was conducted for overall (OS) and cancer-specific survival (CSS). Based on survival analysis distribution we proposed a new stratification: CCI-CRP. Model performance was assessed with ROC/area under the curve (AUC) analysis and compared to CCI and CRP alone, and UISS. RESULTS: We analyzed 2,890 patients (median follow-up 30 months). ROC identified maximum product sensitivity and specificity for CRP at 3.5 mg/L. KMA revealed 5-year OS of 95.6% for LCRP/LCCI, 83% LCRP/ICCI, 73.3% LCRP/HCCI, 62.6% HCRP/LCCI, 51.6% HCRP/ICCI and 40.5% HCRP/HCCI (P < .001). From this distribution, new CCI-CRP is proposed: low CCI-CRP (LCRP/LCCI and LCRP/ICCI), intermediate CCI-CRP (LCRP/HCCI and HCRP/LCCI), and high CCI-CRP (HCRP/ICCI and HCRP/HCCI). AUC for CCI-CRP showed improved performance for predicting OS/CSS vs. CCI alone (0.73 vs. 0.63/0.77 vs. 0.60), CRP alone (0.73 vs. 0.71/0.77 vs. 0.74) and UISS (0.73 vs 0.67/0.77 vs 0.73). CONCLUSIONS: CCI-CRP, exhibits increased prognostic performance for survival outcomes in RCC compared to CCI and CRP alone, and UISS. Further investigation is requisite.
ABSTRACT
PURPOSE: Given the emergence of PSMA-targeted diagnostic agents and therapeutics, we sought to investigate patterns of FOLH1 expression in RCC and their impacts on RCC outcomes. METHODS: We conducted a pooled multi-institutional analysis of patients with RCC having undergone DNA and RNA next-generation sequencing. FOLH1-high/low expression was defined as the ≥75th/<25th percentile of RNA transcripts per million (TPM). Angiogenic, T-effector, and myeloid expression signatures were calculated using previously defined gene sets. Kaplan-Meier estimates were calculated from the time of tissue collection or therapy start. RESULTS: We included 1,724 patients in the analysis. FOLH1 expression was significantly higher in clear cell (71%) compared to non-clear cell RCC tumors (19.0 versus 3.3 TPM, p < 0.001) and varied by specimen site (45% primary kidney/55% metastasis, 13.6 versus 9.9 TPM, p < 0.001). FOLH1 expression was correlated with angiogenic gene expression (Spearman = 0.76, p < 0.001) and endothelial cell abundance (Spearman = 0.76, p < 0.001). While OS was similar in patients with FOLH1-high versus -low ccRCC, patients with FOLH1-high clear cell tumors experienced a longer time on cabozantinib treatment (9.7 versus 4.6 months, respectively, HR 0.57, 95% CI 0.35-0.93, p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: We observed differential patterns of FOLH1 expression based on histology and tumor site in RCC. FOLH1 was correlated with angiogenic gene expression, increased OS, and a longer duration of cabozantinib treatment.
ABSTRACT
PURPOSE: The field of immunotherapy combinations for advanced renal cell carcinoma (aRCC) has been expanded in recent years. However, the treatment response varies widely among individual patients. It is still a challenge to predict oncological outcome in clinical practice. We assessed the impact of an activated immune system reflected by changes in C-reactive protein (CRP) levels and the early onset of treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) on the treatment response. METHODS: In this retrospective analysis of 57 aRCC patients, CRP kinetics based on previous descriptions of CRP flare-response, CRP response or CRP non-response, and the TRAEs, which occurred within a month after therapy initiation, were obtained for this study. According to logistic regression analysis of both factors, we stratified the patients into risk groups: the presence of CRP flare-response/response and early onset of TRAE (low-risk group); the presence of a single factor (intermediate-risk group); and without both factors (high-risk group). RESULTS: Ten patients (17%) experienced primary disease progression. No progressive disease was observed in the low-risk group, while 60% (n = 6/10) of the high-risk group showed a primary disease progression. Significantly, an increased risk of disease progression was observed by patients without CRP response and TRAEs (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: The present analysis displays the predictive value of the on-treatment risk model based on CRP kinetics and the early onset of TRAEs, which can be easy to implement in clinical practice to optimize the treatment monitoring.