BACKGROUND: We conducted a systematic literature review (SLR) to identify clinical evidence on treatments in advanced renal cell carcinoma (aRCC) after the failure of prior therapy with cytokines, tyrosine kinase inhibitors, or immune checkpoint inhibitors. Herein, we summarise the evidence for axitinib in aRCC after the failure of prior therapy with cytokines or sunitinib.
METHODS: This SLR was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42023492931) and followed the 2020 PRISMA statement and the Cochrane guidelines. Comprehensive searches were conducted in MEDLINE and Embase as well as for conference proceedings. Study eligibility was defined according to population, intervention, comparator, outcome, and study design.
RESULTS: Of 1252 titles/abstracts screened, 266 peer-reviewed publications were reviewed, of which 182 were included. In addition, 28 conference abstracts were eligible. Data on axitinib were reported in 55 publications, of which 16 provided efficacy and/or safety outcomes on axitinib after therapy with sunitinib or cytokines. In these patients, median progression-free and overall survival ranged between 5.5 and 8.7 months and 11.0 and 69.5 months, respectively.
CONCLUSIONS: Axitinib is commonly used in clinical practice and has a well-characterised safety and efficacy profile in the treatment of patients with aRCC after the failure of prior therapy with sunitinib or cytokines.

Vascular endothelial growth factor receptor inhibitors (VEGFRi), namely axitinib, are commonly used chemotherapeutic agents in patients with cancer; however, this medication has a significant cardiovascular side effect profile, such as high-grade hypertension. We performed this updated meta-analysis of RCTs to compile cardiovascular adverse events, such as all-grade and high-grade (>3) hypertension, the risk for thrombosis (DVT and PE), and peripheral edema. A systematic search was performed on PubMed, Cochrane, and Embase from inception until October 2023 for studies using axitinib to treat various cancers. Trials with patients randomly allocated for VEGFRi drug therapy with axitinib and reported all-grade hypertension as an outcome were included. Statistical analysis was performed using Cochrane Review Manager to calculate pooled proportions of odds ratios (OR) with a 95 % confidence interval (CI) using the random-effects model, Mantel-Haenszel method. A total of 8 RCTs and 2502 patients were included in the review. Compared with the placebo group, the VEGFRi (Axitinib) therapy group was associated with a higher risk of all-grade and high-grade hypertension, hand-foot syndrome, and fatigue. Furthermore, there was no increased risk of thromboembolism (DVT/PE) or hypothyroidism. However, a lower risk of peripheral edema was noted between the two groups. Screening for patients with preexisting hypertension, identifying risk factors for cardiovascular diseases before the initiation of VEGFRi therapy, and careful monitoring of high-risk patients during VEGFRi therapy, as well as prompt treatment with antihypertensive drugs, will help mitigate the adverse effects. Further evaluation using prospective designs is required to study the clinical significance and develop mitigation strategies.

BACKGROUND: Treatment with a combination of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) (pembrolizumab or nivolumab) and oral Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitors (TKI) targeting angiogenesis (axitinib, cabozantinib or lenvatinib) has shown benefits in terms of efficacy and survival in metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC), with a favorable toxicity profile. However, some rare and serious treatment-related adverse events can be difficult to manage.
METHODS: Here we report the first case of an mRCC patient who, after only 2 administrations of pembrolizumab-axitinib, experienced severe multiorgan failure (MOF) with heart failure, oliguria and acute hepatitis requiring aggressive supportive treatment in intensive care unit.
METHODS: A diagnosis of severe MOF induced by pembrolizumab plus axitinib was considered.
METHODS: The patient was treated with dobutamine, levosimendan along with high-dose steroids under continuous cardiologic monitoring.
RESULTS: After treatment, the patient had a full recovery and was discharged from the hospital.
CONCLUSIONS: We reviewed all the other cases of MOF reported during treatment with combined ICI-TKI in cancer patients in order to summarize incidence, clinical manifestations and management with a specific focus on the need for prompt recognition and aggressive management under multidisciplinary care.

UNASSIGNED: Patients with translocation renal cell carcinoma (tRCC) have a poor prognosis without standardized treatment.
UNASSIGNED: The first case was of a 72-year-old woman who underwent robot-assisted partial nephrectomy for a left renal tumor and was pathologically diagnosed with tRCC. Recurrence was observed in the left retroperitoneal soft tissue. After treatment with avelumab-axitinib, continued progression-free survival was confirmed at the 90-week follow-up. The second case was of a 41-year-old woman referred to our hospital and presented with translocation renal cell carcinoma metastasis to a para-aortic lymph node. After treatment with avelumab-axitinib, continued progression-free survival was confirmed at the 43-week follow-up.
UNASSIGNED: The outcomes of these cases indicate that avelumab-axitinib therapy has a long-term antitumor effect in some patients with tRCC.

Vascular endothelial growth factor tyrosine kinase inhibitors (VEGF-TKIs) are a common cancer treatment. However, the pharmacologic characteristics of VEGF-TKIs may influence cardiovascular risks. The relative risks of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs) associated with VEGF-TKIs are poorly understood.
We searched PubMed, Embase, and ClinicalTrials.gov from inception until August 31, 2021, for phase II/III randomized controlled trials of 11 VEGF-TKIs (axitinib, cabozantinib, lenvatinib, pazopanib, ponatinib, ripretinib, regorafenib, sorafenib, sunitinib, tivozanib, and vandetanib). The endpoints were heart failure, thromboembolism, and cardiovascular death. The Mantel-Haenszel method was used to calculate the risk of VEGF-TKI among users by comparing it to nonusers. Pairwise meta-analyses with a random-effects model were used to estimate the risks of the various VEGF-TKIs. We estimated ranked probability with a P-score and assessed credibility using the Confidence in Network Meta-Analysis framework.
We identified 69 trials involving 30 180 patients with cancer. The highest risk of MACEs was associated with high-potency tivazonib (odds ratio [OR]: 3.34), lenvatinib (OR: 3.26), and axitinib (OR: 2.04), followed by low-potency pazopanib (OR: 1.79), sorafenib (OR: 1.77), and sunitinib (OR: 1.66). The risk of heart failure significantly increased in association with less-selective sorafenib (OR: 3.53), pazopanib (OR: 3.10), and sunitinib (OR: 2.65). The risk of thromboembolism significantly increased in association with nonselective lenvatinib (OR: 3.12), sorafenib (OR: 1.54), and sunitinib (OR: 1.53). Higher potency (tivozanib, axitinib) and lower selectivity (sorafenib, vandetanib, pazopanib, sunitinib) were associated with a higher probability of heart failure. Low selectivity (lenvatinib, cabozantinib, sorafenib, sunitinib) was associated with a higher probability of thromboembolism.
Higher-potency and lower-selectivity VEGF-TKIs may influence the risks of MACEs, heart failure, and thromboembolism. These findings may facilitate evidence-based decision-making in clinical practice.

Kidney injury due to medications is a well-known clinical entity. Although drug-induced tubulointerstitial disease is commonly encountered, there are few reports in the literature associated with glomerular injury due to medications. The recognition of this type of kidney injury is crucial, as rapid discontinuation of the offending agent is critical to maximizing the likelihood of quick and effective renal function recovery. In this article, we present four cases that presented with nephrotic syndrome and were diagnosed with biopsy-proven podocytopathies, associated with exposure to a certain medication. All of them experienced complete resolution of nephrotic syndrome within days or weeks after discontinuation of the offending drug. We also present the data, which were found in a Medline search from the year 1963 until the present, regarding cases with podocytopathies associated with penicillamine, tamoxifen and the combination of pembrolizumab-axitinib, including only adult cases from the English literature. The Medline search revealed nineteen cases of penicillamine-induced minimal-change disease (MCD), one case of tamoxifen-induced MCD, and none associated with pembrolizumab-axitinib therapy. We also searched for the largest studies and meta-analyses regarding drug-induced podocytopathies after a Medline search from 1967 to the present of the English literature.

Since the approval of tyrosine kinase inhibitors, angiogenesis inhibitors and immune checkpoint inhibitors, the treatment landscape for advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC) has changed fundamentally. Today, combined therapies from different drug categories have a firm place in a complex first-line therapy. Due to the large number of drugs available, it is necessary to identify the most effective therapies, whilst considering their side effects and impact on quality of life (QoL).
To evaluate and compare the benefits and harms of first-line therapies for adults with advanced RCC, and to produce a clinically relevant ranking of therapies. Secondary objectives were to maintain the currency of the evidence by conducting continuous update searches, using a living systematic review approach, and to incorporate data from clinical study reports (CSRs).
We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, conference proceedings and relevant trial registries up until 9 February 2022. We searched several data platforms to identify CSRs.
We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating at least one targeted therapy or immunotherapy for first-line treatment of adults with advanced RCC. We excluded trials evaluating only interleukin-2 versus interferon-alpha as well as trials with an adjuvant treatment setting. We also excluded trials with adults who received prior systemic anticancer therapy if more than 10% of participants were previously treated, or if data for untreated participants were not separately extractable.
All necessary review steps (i.e. screening and study selection, data extraction, risk of bias and certainty assessments) were conducted independently by at least two review authors. Our outcomes were overall survival (OS), QoL, serious adverse events (SAEs), progression-free survival (PFS), adverse events (AEs), the number of participants who discontinued study treatment due to an AE, and the time to initiation of first subsequent therapy. Where possible, analyses were conducted for the different risk groups (favourable, intermediate, poor) according to the International Metastatic Renal-Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium Score (IMDC) or the Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center (MSKCC) criteria. Our main comparator was sunitinib (SUN). A hazard ratio (HR) or risk ratio (RR) lower than 1.0 is in favour of the experimental arm.
We included 36 RCTs and 15,177 participants (11,061 males and 4116 females). Risk of bias was predominantly judged as being \'high\' or \'some concerns\' across most trials and outcomes. This was mainly due to a lack of information about the randomisation process, the blinding of outcome assessors, and methods for outcome measurements and analyses. Additionally, study protocols and statistical analysis plans were rarely available. Here we present the results for our primary outcomes OS, QoL, and SAEs, and for all risk groups combined for contemporary treatments: pembrolizumab + axitinib (PEM+AXI), avelumab + axitinib (AVE+AXI), nivolumab + cabozantinib (NIV+CAB), lenvatinib + pembrolizumab (LEN+PEM), nivolumab + ipilimumab (NIV+IPI), CAB, and pazopanib (PAZ). Results per risk group and results for our secondary outcomes are reported in the summary of findings tables and in the full text of this review. The evidence on other treatments and comparisons can also be found in the full text. Overall survival (OS) Across risk groups, PEM+AXI (HR 0.73, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.50 to 1.07, moderate certainty) and NIV+IPI (HR 0.69, 95% CI 0.69 to 1.00, moderate certainty) probably improve OS, compared to SUN, respectively. LEN+PEM may improve OS (HR 0.66, 95% CI 0.42 to 1.03, low certainty), compared to SUN. There is probably little or no difference in OS between PAZ and SUN (HR 0.91, 95% CI 0.64 to 1.32, moderate certainty), and we are uncertain whether CAB improves OS when compared to SUN (HR 0.84, 95% CI 0.43 to 1.64, very low certainty). The median survival is 28 months when treated with SUN. Survival may improve to 43 months with LEN+PEM, and probably improves to: 41 months with NIV+IPI, 39 months with PEM+AXI, and 31 months with PAZ. We are uncertain whether survival improves to 34 months with CAB. Comparison data were not available for AVE+AXI and NIV+CAB. Quality of life (QoL) One RCT measured QoL using FACIT-F (score range 0 to 52; higher scores mean better QoL) and reported that the mean post-score was 9.00 points higher (9.86 lower to 27.86 higher, very low certainty) with PAZ than with SUN. Comparison data were not available for PEM+AXI, AVE+AXI, NIV+CAB, LEN+PEM, NIV+IPI, and CAB. Serious adverse events (SAEs) Across risk groups, PEM+AXI probably increases slightly the risk for SAEs (RR 1.29, 95% CI 0.90 to 1.85, moderate certainty) compared to SUN. LEN+PEM (RR 1.52, 95% CI 1.06 to 2.19, moderate certainty) and NIV+IPI (RR 1.40, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.97, moderate certainty) probably increase the risk for SAEs, compared to SUN, respectively. There is probably little or no difference in the risk for SAEs between PAZ and SUN (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.75 to 1.31, moderate certainty). We are uncertain whether CAB reduces or increases the risk for SAEs (RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.60 to 1.43, very low certainty) when compared to SUN. People have a mean risk of 40% for experiencing SAEs when treated with SUN. The risk increases probably to: 61% with LEN+PEM, 57% with NIV+IPI, and 52% with PEM+AXI. It probably remains at 40% with PAZ. We are uncertain whether the risk reduces to 37% with CAB. Comparison data were not available for AVE+AXI and NIV+CAB.
Findings concerning the main treatments of interest comes from direct evidence of one trial only, thus results should be interpreted with caution. More trials are needed where these interventions and combinations are compared head-to-head, rather than just to SUN. Moreover, assessing the effect of immunotherapies and targeted therapies on different subgroups is essential and studies should focus on assessing and reporting relevant subgroup data. The evidence in this review mostly applies to advanced clear cell RCC.

Renal cell carcinoma (RCC) is the most common kidney cancer in adults (approximately 90%), and clear cell RCC (ccRCC) is the most frequent histologic subtype (approximately 75%). We reviewed the safety and efficacy of checkpoint inhibitors (CPIs) in ccRCC, identifying 5927 articles in PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, and Web of Science. Ten randomized control (N = 7765) and 10 non-randomized (N = 572) studies were included. Overall, 4819 patients treated with CPI combinations were compared with everolimus, sunitinib, or placebo. Overall response rates (ORR) were 9-25% with nivolumab (niv), 42% with niv + ipilimumab (ipi), 55.7% with niv + cabozantinib, 56% with niv + tivozanib vs. 5% with everolimus. ORR was 51.5-58% with avelumab + axitinib vs. 25.5% with sunitinib. ORR was 59.3-73% with pembrolizumab + tyrosine kinase inhibitor vs. 25.7% with sunitinib. ORR was 32-36% with atezolizumab + bevacizumab vs. 29-33% with sunitinib. In patients with PD-L1+ve and -ve ccRCC, niv, atezolizumab, ipi, and pembrolizumab were safe and effective alone and when combined with cabozantinib, tivozanib, axitinib, levantinib, and pegilodecakin. Atezolizumab + bevacizumab was safe and effective in ccRCC with high PD-L1 expression. Pembrolizumab was safe and effective in preventing recurrence in ccRCC patients with nephrectomy. Additional randomized, double-blind, multicenter clinical trials are needed to confirm these results.

Combination therapies of an immune checkpoint inhibitor and a molecular targeted agent are widely accepted as an appropriate initial systemic therapy for metastatic renal cell carcinoma (RCC), but there is little published evidence regarding the efficacy of this approach in patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD). Here, we report three patients who were undergoing hemodialysis for ESRD whose metastatic RCC was successfully treated using avelumab plus axitinib. The patients were a 67-year-old man with swollen lymph nodes, a 65-year-old man with pleural dissemination, and a 71-year-old man with lung nodules and an infra-diaphragmatic nodule. They were administered a combination of avelumab plus axitinib as their initial systemic therapy following definitive surgical therapy. The best response of three patients was graded as partial response. No severe adverse events were identified. This is the first report of the use of combination therapy consisting of avelumab plus axitinib in patients with ESRD undergoing hemodialysis. We found that this combination was useful in such patients.

OBJECTIVE: To assess comparative effectiveness of adjuvant therapies for renal cell carcinoma and quantify the absolute benefit of adjuvant treatments by clinicopathological risk groups.
METHODS: This \'living\' review was conducted using Living Interactive Evidence (LIvE) synthesis framework.
RESULTS: The \'living\' results are available on an interactive website. This network meta-analysis, including six RCTs with 7525 participants, showed that pembrolizumab (rank 1) significantly improved disease-free survival and overall survival compared with sunitinib but not when compared to pazopanib, and axitinib. The risk of treatment-related grade 3 or higher adverse events was increased with pembrolizumab as compared to placebo and axitinib but not when compared to sunitinib. The absolute benefit of adjuvant pembrolizumab increases substantially with larger tumor size, nodal positivity and higher Leibovich scores.
CONCLUSIONS: Current evidence suggests that pembrolizumab delays disease progression compared to sunitinib. A risk-adapted strategy should be used in patients undergoing consideration for treatment with adjuvant pembrolizumab.