Immune Biomarkers Predictive for Disease-Free Survival with Adjuvant Sunitinib in High-Risk Locoregional Renal Cell Carcinoma: From Randomized Phase III S-TRAC Study
Adjuvant sunitinib therapy compared with placebo prolonged disease-free survival (DFS) in patients with locoregional high-risk renal cell carcinoma in the S-TRAC trial (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00375674). A prospectively-designed exploratory analysis of tissue biomarkers was conducted to identify predictors of treatment benefit.
Tissue blocks were used for immunohistochemistry (IHC) staining of PD-L1, CD4, CD8, and CD68. DFS was compared between < versus ≥ median IHC parameter using the Kaplan-Meier method. For biomarkers with predictive potential, Receiver Operating Characteristics curves were generated.
Baseline characteristics were similar in patients with (n=191) and without (n=419) IHC analysis. Among patients with IHC, longer DFS was observed in patients with tumor CD8+ T-cell density ≥ versus < median (median [95% CI], not reached [6.83-not reached] vs. 3.47 years [1.73-not reached]; hazard ratio 0.40 [95% CI, 0.20-0.81]; P=0.009) treated with sunitinib (n=101), but not with placebo (n=90). The sensitivity and specificity for CD8+ T-cell density in predicting DFS were 0.604 and 0.658, respectively. Shorter DFS was observed in placebo-treated patients with PD-L1+ versus PD-L1- tumors (hazard ratio 1.75; P=0.103). Among all patients with PD-L1+ tumors, DFS was numerically longer with sunitinib versus placebo (hazard ratio 0.58; P=0.175).
Greater CD8+ T-cell density in tumor tissue was associated with longer DFS with sunitinib but not placebo, suggesting predictive treatment effect utility. Further independent cohort validation studies are warranted. The prognostic value of PD-L1 expression in primary tumors from patients with high-risk non-metastatic renal cell carcinoma should also be further explored.
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science
1
2%
Nursing and Health Professions
1
2%
Other
2
4%
Unknown
20
35%
Attention Score in Context
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 23 February 2018.
All research outputs
#4,346,397
of 24,271,113 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Cancer Research
#3,945
of 12,969 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#80,771
of 332,412 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Cancer Research
#53
of 148 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,271,113 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 82nd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 12,969 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 332,412 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 148 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 64% of its contemporaries.
