Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34337479›Full record

ReviewEuropean urology open science2020

Treatment of Advanced Renal Cell Carcinoma: Immunotherapies Have Demonstrated Overall Survival Benefits While Targeted Therapies Have Not.

Otto Hemminki, Nathan Perlis, Johan Bjorklund, Antonio Finelli, Alexandre R Zlotta, Akseli Hemminki

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in European urology open science, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
1.3field-weighted citation impact, top 16% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

9 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 2 institutions in 3 countries.

Otto HemminkiDivision of Urologic Oncology, Department of Surgical Oncology, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, University Health Network and University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Nathan PerlisDivision of Urologic Oncology, Department of Surgical Oncology, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, University Health Network and University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Johan BjorklundDivision of Urologic Oncology, Department of Surgical Oncology, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, University Health Network and University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Antonio FinelliDivision of Urologic Oncology, Department of Surgical Oncology, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, University Health Network and University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Alexandre R ZlottaDivision of Urologic Oncology, Department of Surgical Oncology, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, University Health Network and University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Akseli HemminkiCancer Gene Therapy Group, Translational Immunology Research Program, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland.
University Health Network · CAUniversity of Helsinki · FI

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

contextCurrent guidelines suggest several targeted therapies (TTs) and immunotherapies (ITs) in the treatment of advanced or metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). Ideal sequencing of these treatments is unclear.

objectiveThe primary objective was to evaluate the overall survival (OS) data of the treatments approved for mRCC. Secondary objectives included evaluating other signs of efficacy and adverse events. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: We reviewed the current Food and Drug Administration-approved treatments for mRCC. Trials associated with approval were reviewed. We also included pre- and postapproval publications when appropriate. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: There is minimal evidence supporting OS benefit for the nine approved TTs. They result in adverse events and are a considerable economic burden. For these reasons, their future role in mRCC treatment should be re-evaluated, given the emergence of IT that have demonstrated OS benefits. Accumulating long-term survival data with high-dose interleukin-2 treatment suggests that this older treatment could still be considered for eligible patients. Checkpoint inhibitors have shown promising OS and durable responses; as such, the high cost of treatment might be justified. However, the available evidence does not suggest that adding TT to IT would increase efficacy over IT alone, but would add toxicity.

conclusionsTrial data supporting OS benefit are much stronger for ITs than for TTs. Combining checkpoint inhibitors with TTs has not been shown to produce better OS than checkpoint inhibitors alone, while more adverse events are present. Granting drug approvals based on efficacy without demonstrated OS benefit should be revisited. PATIENT SUMMARY: Approved treatments for metastatic kidney cancer include targeted and immune-based therapies. The former commonly produces temporary tumour shrinkage, but survival benefits are unclear. All approved immunotherapies have increased survival, and a proportion of patients appear cured.

Indexed as

AdvancedAdvanced renal cell carcinomaApprovedKidney cancerMetastaticMetastatic renal cell carcinomaQuality of lifeRenal cell carcinomaReviewSurvivalTreatments

Identifiers

PMID34337479
PMCPMC8317793
OpenAlexW3109073162

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.