Nathan H. Fowler, MD:When patients relapse either after frontline therapy or after autologous stem cell transplant, I generally think of patients in 2 main buckets. The first bucket is patients who have a great performance status, whose blood counts are pretty good and who have good organ function. These are patients who are great candidates for an aggressive approach when they relapse after transplant or after frontline therapy. For those patients, I still use combination approaches, and that would mean some combination chemotherapy that hopefully uses different drugs from the ones they were exposed to either with the transplant or in the frontline setting.
I’ll provide an example. If a patient received CHOP [cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin hydrochloride, vincristine, prednisone] chemotherapy in the frontline and then received ICE [ifosfamide, carboplatin, etoposide] chemotherapy, and ICE [ifosfamide, carboplatin, etoposide] didn’t work, I would switch to DHAP [dexamethasone, high-dose cytarabine, cisplatin], or I would switch to gemcitabine-oxaliplatin, or I might switch to a methotrexate-based regimen. I’m thinking that this patient has a good performance status. They’re still very healthy. And so what is a combination chemotherapy regimen that could potentially work, that will kill these cells that didn’t respond to traditional chemotherapy? Ideally, if they’re pretransplant, I’m trying to get them to a place of good remission, so I can get them to autologous transplant. If they’re relapsing after an autologous transplant, I’m trying to control that disease to get them to a place where they might tolerate allogeneic transplant or potentially go on to some maintenance therapy or something else to try to control their disease long-term.
The other bucket of patients are patients who either are too oldI hate to use the wordold, because I thinkoldis just age. I should say patients who have a poor performance status, are bed-bound, and kidney function that isn’t very good, and maybe they have difficulties with heart function. These are patients who, even if I can get them into a remission, probably are not going to tolerate a stem cell transplant. For those patients, I’m looking for something that is not too toxic and is going to give me a long a progression-free survival.
Then I’m thinking about novel targeted drugs, potentially immune-based drugs or biological drugs, that patients can tolerate, will not affect organ function, and can give me a long progression-free survival. I’m really trying to maximize their quality of life. What we don’t ever want to do is have a treatment that’s worse than the disease. For a patient I can’t give aggressive chemotherapy to, I’m really looking at something that is mild and is going to control that disease for as long as possible.
Transcript edited for clarity.
Key Takeaways From QOL and Use of Steroids With IO-Based RCC Regimens
May 6th 2024During a Case-Based Roundtable® event, Ulka Vaishampayan, MBBS, discussed the safety and quality-of-life data for ipilimumab plus nivolumab in patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma in the second article of a 2-part series.
Read More
Enhancing Precision in Immunotherapy: CD8 PET-Avidity in RCC
March 1st 2024In this episode of Emerging Experts, Peter Zang, MD, highlights research on baseline CD8 lymph node avidity with 89-Zr-crefmirlimab for the treatment of patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma and response to immunotherapy.
Listen
Responders to UGN-101 Have Positive RFS in Upper Tract Urothelial Cancer
May 5th 2024In patients at 15 centers who had upper tract urothelial cancer, those with no evidence of disease after UGN-101 induction had a 68% rate of 3-year recurrence-free survival, and this outcome did not differ based on tumor status, method of instillation, or treatment intent.
Read More