A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@gmail.com&api_key=61f08fa0b96a73de8c900d749fcb997acc09&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 197

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 197
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 271
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3165
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 597
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 511
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 317
Function: require_once

Prognostic Impact of IMDC Category Shift From Baseline to Nivolumab Initiation in Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma: A Sub-Analysis of the MEET-URO 15 Study. | LitMetric

Category Ranking

98%

Total Visits

921

Avg Visit Duration

2 minutes

Citations

20

Article Abstract

Introduction: The International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium (IMDC) score is the most important prognostic score to stratify patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC), helping to guide treatment choice in first line. We hypothesized that IMDC change may also exert a prognostic role in subsequent lines of mRCC therapy.

Methods: Meet-URO 15 is a multicenter Italian study of patients with mRCC receiving nivolumab as a second or subsequent line of therapy. This posthoc analysis aimed to evaluate the overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) from nivolumab start as primary endpoints, overall response rate (ORR) and disease-control rate (DCR) as secondary endpoints, according to the change in the IMDC category from the first-line setting (baseline) to nivolumab start. Patients with available prognostic IMDC category information at baseline and before nivolumab were included.

Results: 492 patients were included in the analysis. At baseline, 165 (33.5%), 287 (58.3%), and 40 patients (8.2%) had favorable, intermediate, and poor IMDC categories, respectively. Before nivolumab, 364 patients (73.9%) remained in the same prognostic category as at baseline, 27 (5.5%) improved, and 101 (20.5%) deteriorated. Significantly longer mPFS (P = .01) and mOS (P < .01) were reached by patients with a stable favorable group compared to those worsening to intermediate/poor. A longer mOS was also achieved from intermediate/poor patients who improved their IMDC category before nivolumab compared to those remaining stable/worsening (P < .01 and P = .04, respectively). Maintaining IMDC category stability from baseline to nivolumab determined a more consistent DCR in favorable patients (P = .03). Overall, patients who improved their IMDC risk score reached better survival outcomes than those who remained stable/deteriorated.

Conclusions: In our sub-analysis, the shift in the IMDC risk category appears to be a helpful prognostic tool for assessing the outcomes of patients with mRCC treated with ≥2nd line nivolumab.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.clgc.2024.102267DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

imdc category
20
baseline nivolumab
16
metastatic renal
12
renal cell
12
cell carcinoma
12
patients
11
imdc
10
nivolumab
9
patients mrcc
8
nivolumab start
8

Similar Publications