Treatment outcomes in renal cell carcinoma patients with metastases to the pancreas and other sites.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
4557 Background: Metastatic RCC (mRCC) involving the pancreas is distinct from RCC involving other metastatic sites and is characterized by an indolent clinical course, heightened angiogenesis, and an inflamed stroma (PMID: 32271170). We previously reported on outcomes of RCC patients (pts) with pancreatic oligometastasis (ASCO GU 2020). We now report on outcomes in pts with mRCC involving the pancreas in conjunction with other metastases (mets). Methods: We conducted a retrospective, multi-institutional study of mRCC pts with mets to the pancreas and other sites. Data on pt demographics, tumor characteristics, systemic therapy, and outcomes were collected. Pts were classified based on treatment category: immunotherapy (IO) or vascular endothelial growth factor/receptor inhibitors (VEGFI). Outcomes measured included objective response rates (ORR), time-on-treatment (TOT), and overall survival (OS). Results: The analysis included 229 pts from 9 institutions, diagnosed between 1985-2020. Of these, 211 (92%) had clear-cell histology; 131 (57%) had nephrectomy; 41 (18%) had local pancreas-directed therapy; 111 (48%) had synchronous presentation of disease in the pancreas and other sites at time of mets. IMDC risk was favorable in 33%, intermediate in 41%, poor in 11%, and unknown in 15% pts. Median lines of therapy was 2 (range 0-9). Of 219 pts who received first-line (1L) therapy, 151 (69%) had VEGFI therapy, 41 (19%) had IO, and 18 (8%) had VEGFI/IO combination (Table). The IO group included 21 pts on checkpoint inhibitor (CPI), 16 pts on HD-IL2, 4 pts on other IO. 1L ORR was 39.7% for VEGFI (95% CI 31.8-48.0) and 31.7% for IO (95% CI 18.1-48.1) and was not statistically significant (NS, OR 1.4, 95% CI 0.65-3.23, p = 0.371). Median TOT for 1L therapy was 11.6m for VEGFI and 6.5m for IO (p = 0.0106). With a median follow-up of 51.5m, the median OS (mOS) for all pts from time of metastatic disease was 7.7 years (y) (95% CI 6.3-10.3). The mOS for pts who received 1L VEGFI was 7.6y (95% CI 5.5-9.5) and was not reached (NR) for those who got 1L IO (95%CI 6.5-NR); this difference was significant with an unadjusted p-value of 0.029. The pair-wise comparison between mOS of the 1L CPI subgroup compared to that of the 1L VEGFI group was significant (p = 0.0148). Conclusions: Consistent with the literature, mRCC pts with involvement of the pancreas in this study have prolonged OS compared to historical OS for the standard mRCC population. Additionally, our findings suggest that the choice of first-line therapy may impact outcomes. Additional analyses will be presented.[Table: see text]
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".