BACKGROUND: Alterations in the gene encoding fibroblast growth factor receptor (
METHODS: In this open-label, phase 2 study, we enrolled patients who had locally advanced and unresectable or metastatic urothelial carcinoma with prespecified
RESULTS: A total of 99 patients in the selected-regimen group received a median of five cycles of erdafitinib. Of these patients, 43% had received at least two previous courses of treatment, 79% had visceral metastases, and 53% had a creatinine clearance of less than 60 ml per minute. The rate of confirmed response to erdafitinib therapy was 40% (3% with a complete response and 37% with a partial response). Among the 22 patients who had undergone previous immunotherapy, the confirmed response rate was 59%. The median duration of progression-free survival was 5.5 months, and the median duration of overall survival was 13.8 months. Treatment-related adverse events of grade 3 or higher, which were managed mainly by dose adjustments, were reported in 46% of the patients; 13% of the patients discontinued treatment because of adverse events. There were no treatment-related deaths.
CONCLUSIONS: The use of erdafitinib was associated with an objective tumor response in 40% of previously treated patients who had locally advanced and unresectable or metastatic urothelial carcinoma with

BACKGROUND: A phase 2 trial showed improved progression-free survival for atezolizumab plus bevacizumab versus sunitinib in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma who express programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1). Here, we report results of IMmotion151, a phase 3 trial comparing atezolizumab plus bevacizumab versus sunitinib in first-line metastatic renal cell carcinoma.
METHODS: In this multicentre, open-label, phase 3, randomised controlled trial, patients with a component of clear cell or sarcomatoid histology and who were previously untreated, were recruited from 152 academic medical centres and community oncology practices in 21 countries, mainly in Europe, North America, and the Asia-Pacific region, and were randomly assigned 1:1 to either atezolizumab 1200 mg plus bevacizumab 15 mg/kg intravenously once every 3 weeks or sunitinib 50 mg orally once daily for 4 weeks on, 2 weeks off. A permuted-block randomisation (block size of 4) was applied to obtain a balanced assignment to each treatment group with respect to the stratification factors. Study investigators and participants were not masked to treatment allocation. Patients, investigators, independent radiology committee members, and the sponsor were masked to PD-L1 expression status. Co-primary endpoints were investigator-assessed progression-free survival in the PD-L1 positive population and overall survival in the intention-to-treat (ITT) population. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02420821.
FINDINGS: Of 915 patients enrolled between May 20, 2015, and Oct 12, 2016, 454 were randomly assigned to the atezolizumab plus bevacizumab group and 461 to the sunitinib group. 362 (40%) of 915 patients had PD-L1 positive disease. Median follow-up was 15 months at the primary progression-free survival analysis and 24 months at the overall survival interim analysis. In the PD-L1 positive population, the median progression-free survival was 11·2 months in the atezolizumab plus bevacizumab group versus 7·7 months in the sunitinib group (hazard ratio [HR] 0·74 [95% CI 0·57-0·96]; p=0·0217). In the ITT population, median overall survival had an HR of 0·93 (0·76-1·14) and the results did not cross the significance boundary at the interim analysis. 182 (40%) of 451 patients in the atezolizumab plus bevacizumab group and 240 (54%) of 446 patients in the sunitinib group had treatment-related grade 3-4 adverse events: 24 (5%) in the atezolizumab plus bevacizumab group and 37 (8%) in the sunitinib group had treatment-related all-grade adverse events, which led to treatment-regimen discontinuation.
INTERPRETATION: Atezolizumab plus bevacizumab prolonged progression-free survival versus sunitinib in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma and showed a favourable safety profile. Longer-term follow-up is necessary to establish whether a survival benefit will emerge. These study results support atezolizumab plus bevacizumab as a first-line treatment option for selected patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma.
FUNDING: F Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd and Genentech Inc.

BACKGROUND: Nivolumab treatment resulted in superior efficacy and safety versus everolimus treatment in the 2-year follow-up of the CheckMate 025 Phase III study, with consistent results in the global population and the Japanese population. Here, we report the 3-year follow-up in both groups.
METHODS: Patients were randomized 1:1 to nivolumab 3 mg/kg intravenously every 2 weeks or everolimus 10 mg orally once daily until progression/intolerable toxicity. The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS). Key secondary endpoints included objective response rate, progression-free survival, safety and patient-reported quality of life.
RESULTS: Of 410 and 411 patients randomized to nivolumab and everolimus, 37 and 26 were Japanese, respectively. The median OS for the global population was 25.8 months with nivolumab and 19.7 months with everolimus (hazard ratio 0.74; 95.5% confidence interval [CI]: 0.63-0.88; P = 0.0005); in the Japanese population, median OS was 45.9 months and not reached (hazard ratio 1.08; 95% CI: 0.50-2.34; P = 0.85), respectively. The investigator-assessed objective response rate was 26% versus 5% with nivolumab versus everolimus (odds ratio [OR] 6.19; 95% CI: 3.82-10.06) in the global population and 43% versus 8% in the Japanese population (OR 6.80; 95% CI: 1.60-28.91; P = 0.0035), respectively. The incidence of any-grade treatment-related adverse events was lower with nivolumab versus everolimus in both the global patient population (80% versus 89%) and the Japanese population (81% versus 100%).
CONCLUSIONS: At the 3-year follow-up, the efficacy and safety results of CheckMate 025 are generally consistent in the global and the Japanese populations.

Background: In this study the toxicity and efficacy of an irradiated autologous tumor cell vaccine (ATV) co-injected with a class-B CpG oligodeoxynucleotide (CpG-B) and GM-CSF, followed by systemic CpG-B and IFN-α administration, were examined in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC).
Methods: A single-arm Phase II trial was conducted, in which patients with mRCC were intradermally injected with a minimum of three whole-cell vaccines containing 0.7–1.3 × 107 irradiated autologous tumor cells (ATC), admixed with 1 mg CpG-B and 100 µg GM-CSF, followed by bi-weekly s.c. injections with 8 mg CpG-B and s.c. injections with 6 MU IFN-α three times per week.
Results: Fifteen patients were treated according to the protocol. Treatment was well tolerated. Objective clinical responses occurred in three patients, including one long-term complete response. Disease stabilization occurred in another three patients. Positive delayed type hypersensitivity (DTH) responses to ATC were absent before treatment but present in 13 out of 15 patients during treatment. Immune monitoring revealed activation of plasmacytoid dendritic cells, non-classical monocytes and up-regulation of both PD-1 and CTLA4 on effector T cells upon treatment. Moreover, a pre-existing ex vivo IFN-γ response to ATC was associated with clinical response.
Conclusions: ATV combined with systemic CpG-B and IFN-α is tolerable, safe, immunogenic and able to elicit anti-tumor responses in patients with mRCC. Immune activation and treatment-induced up-regulation of PD-1 and CTLA4 on circulating T cells further suggest an added benefit of combining this approach with immune checkpoint blockade [added]

BACKGROUND: In a single-group, phase 1b trial, avelumab plus axitinib resulted in objective responses in patients with advanced renal-cell carcinoma. This phase 3 trial involving previously untreated patients with advanced renal-cell carcinoma compared avelumab plus axitinib with the standard-of-care sunitinib.
METHODS: We randomly assigned patients in a 1:1 ratio to receive avelumab (10 mg per kilogram of body weight) intravenously every 2 weeks plus axitinib (5 mg) orally twice daily or sunitinib (50 mg) orally once daily for 4 weeks (6-week cycle). The two independent primary end points were progression-free survival and overall survival among patients with programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1)-positive tumors. A key secondary end point was progression-free survival in the overall population; other end points included objective response and safety.
RESULTS: A total of 886 patients were assigned to receive avelumab plus axitinib (442 patients) or sunitinib (444 patients). Among the 560 patients with PD-L1-positive tumors (63.2%), the median progression-free survival was 13.8 months with avelumab plus axitinib, as compared with 7.2 months with sunitinib (hazard ratio for disease progression or death, 0.61; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.47 to 0.79; P<0.001); in the overall population, the median progression-free survival was 13.8 months, as compared with 8.4 months (hazard ratio, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.56 to 0.84; P<0.001). Among the patients with PD-L1-positive tumors, the objective response rate was 55.2% with avelumab plus axitinib and 25.5% with sunitinib; at a median follow-up for overall survival of 11.6 months and 10.7 months in the two groups, 37 patients and 44 patients had died, respectively. Adverse events during treatment occurred in 99.5% of patients in the avelumab-plus-axitinib group and in 99.3% of patients in the sunitinib group; these events were grade 3 or higher in 71.2% and 71.5% of the patients in the respective groups.
CONCLUSIONS: Progression-free survival was significantly longer with avelumab plus axitinib than with sunitinib among patients who received these agents as first-line treatment for advanced renal-cell carcinoma. (Funded by Pfizer and Merck [Darmstadt, Germany]; JAVELIN Renal 101 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02684006.).

BACKGROUND: The combination of pembrolizumab and axitinib showed antitumor activity in a phase 1b trial involving patients with previously untreated advanced renal-cell carcinoma. Whether pembrolizumab plus axitinib would result in better outcomes than sunitinib in such patients was unclear.
METHODS: In an open-label, phase 3 trial, we randomly assigned 861 patients with previously untreated advanced clear-cell renal-cell carcinoma to receive pembrolizumab (200 mg) intravenously once every 3 weeks plus axitinib (5 mg) orally twice daily (432 patients) or sunitinib (50 mg) orally once daily for the first 4 weeks of each 6-week cycle (429 patients). The primary end points were overall survival and progression-free survival in the intention-to-treat population. The key secondary end point was the objective response rate. All reported results are from the protocol-specified first interim analysis.
RESULTS: After a median follow-up of 12.8 months, the estimated percentage of patients who were alive at 12 months was 89.9% in the pembrolizumab-axitinib group and 78.3% in the sunitinib group (hazard ratio for death, 0.53; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.38 to 0.74; P<0.0001). Median progression-free survival was 15.1 months in the pembrolizumab-axitinib group and 11.1 months in the sunitinib group (hazard ratio for disease progression or death, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.57 to 0.84; P<0.001). The objective response rate was 59.3% (95% CI, 54.5 to 63.9) in the pembrolizumab-axitinib group and 35.7% (95% CI, 31.1 to 40.4) in the sunitinib group (P<0.001). The benefit of pembrolizumab plus axitinib was observed across the International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium risk groups (i.e., favorable, intermediate, and poor risk) and regardless of programmed death ligand 1 expression. Grade 3 or higher adverse events of any cause occurred in 75.8% of patients in the pembrolizumab-axitinib group and in 70.6% in the sunitinib group.
CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with previously untreated advanced renal-cell carcinoma, treatment with pembrolizumab plus axitinib resulted in significantly longer overall survival and progression-free survival, as well as a higher objective response rate, than treatment with sunitinib. (Funded by Merck Sharp & Dohme; KEYNOTE-426 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02853331.).

INTRODUCTION: Metastatic renal cell cancer (mRCC) patients have a median overall survival (mOS) of approximately 28 months. Until recently, mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) inhibition with everolimus was the standard second-line treatment regimen for mRCC patients, improving median progression-free survival (mPFS). Treatment with everolimus supports the expansion of immunosuppressive regulatory T cells (Tregs), which exert a negative effect on antitumor immune responses. In a phase 1 dose-escalation study, we have recently demonstrated that a low dose of 50 mg oral cyclophosphamide once daily can be safely combined with everolimus in mRCC patients and prevents the everolimus-induced increase in Tregs.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: In a multicenter phase 2 study, performed in patients with mRCC not amenable to or progressive on a vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF)-receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) containing treatment regimen, we assessed whether the addition of this metronomic dosing schedule of cyclophosphamide to therapy with everolimus could result in an improvement of progression-free survival (PFS) after 4 months of treatment.
RESULTS: Though results from this study confirmed that combination treatment effectively lowered circulating levels of Tregs, addition of cyclophosphamide did not improve the PFS rate at 4 months. For this reason, the study was abrogated at the predefined interim analysis.
CONCLUSION: Although the comprehensive immunomonitoring analysis performed in this study provides relevant information for the design of future immunotherapeutic approaches, the addition of metronomic cyclophosphamide to mRCC patients receiving everolimus cannot be recommended.

BACKGROUND: A prospective, randomised phase II study demonstrated clinical benefit of axitinib dose titration in a subset of treatment-naïve patients treated with axitinib for metastatic renal cell carcinoma. This analysis evaluated patient baseline characteristics that may impact overall survival (OS) with axitinib dose titration.
METHODS: Following a 4-week lead-in period during which all patients received axitinib 5 mg twice-daily (bid); patients meeting the predefined randomisation criteria were randomly assigned to receive axitinib 5 mg bid plus either axitinib or placebo titration. In exploratory analyses, patients were grouped into those who achieved OS ≥24 versus < 24 months, and compared their baseline characteristics with Fisher's exact test or Cochran-Armitage trend exact test, with a 5% significance level. Potential predictive baseline characteristics associated with effect of axitinib dose titration on OS were investigated using a Cox proportional hazard model.
RESULTS: Overall, 112 patients were randomised. Three of 56 patients receiving axitinib titration were censored; of the remaining 53, 33 (62%) achieved OS ≥24 months versus 20 (38%) with OS < 24 months. Patients with OS ≥24 vs. < 24 months, respectively, had significantly fewer metastatic sites (≤2 metastases: 52% vs. 10%; ≥3 metastases: 48% vs. 90%), fewer lymph node (45% vs. 75%) or liver (15% vs. 45%) metastases, higher haemoglobin level (i.e., ≥ lower limit of normal: 67% vs. 25%) at baseline, lower neutrophil (≤ upper limit of normal, 97% vs. 75%) and platelet (≤ upper limit of normal, 82% vs. 50%) levels at baseline and ≥ 1 year between histopathological diagnosis and treatment (64% vs. 15%). The primary reason for treatment discontinuation in both OS groups was disease progression. The frequency of toxicity-related discontinuation was comparable between the 2 groups, indicating that it was not a factor for a shorter OS. The multivariate analysis showed that ≥1 year from histopathological diagnosis to treatment and baseline haemoglobin level equal or greater than lower limit of normal were significant covariates associated with favourable OS in patients receiving axitinib titration.
CONCLUSIONS: The current analyses identified potentially predictive factors that could help selecting patients who may benefit from axitinib dose titration.
TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier, NCT00835978. Registered prospectively, February 4, 2009.

To outline the design and rationale of clock, a large, phase III randomized controlled trial which examines the role vascular clamping during robot-assisted partial nephrectomy (RAPN) for localized renal cancer. To be eligible for study entry, patients must have normal coagulative function, preoperative estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) >60 mL/min, normal contralateral kidney and a single renal mass with RENAL Score ≤10. Eligible patients are to be randomized in a 1:1 ratio between two arms. Randomized allocation was assigned by a permuted block design, stratified by center. Allocation arm was notified by the study internet-based e-form, managed by an independent software house. Arm A=RAPN with ischemia; Arm B=RAPN without ischemia. At any moment, from randomization to the end of the procedure, the investigators could amend the indication given by randomization and shift to the alternative clamping option, detailing the timing and reasons of their decision. CLOCK is a randomized controlled trial, which addresses two questions relating to the management of localized renal cancer treated by RAPN with or without ischemia: 1) what is the impact of the surgical technique on long-term renal function; 2) what are the factors influencing the shift from one technique to the other. The study will be completed 24 months after the last enrollment.

BACKGROUND: In case of high grade non-muscle invasive bladder cancer (HG-NMIBC), intravesical BCG represents the first-line treatment; despite the "gold" standard therapy, up to 50% of patients relapse, needing radical cystectomy. Hence, alternative therapeutic strategies have been developed. The aim of the study was to evaluate a first-line salvage treatment with EMDA®-MMC in patients with HGNMIBC unresponsive to BCG.
METHODS: We carried out a prospective, single-center, single-arm Phase II study in order to evaluate the efficacy (in terms of recurrence and progression) and the safety of the EMDA®-MMC treatment in 26 (21 male, 5 female) consecutive patients with "BCG refractory" HGNMIBC on a 3 years follow-up. EMDA®-MMC treatment consisted of 40 mg of MMC diluted in 100 ml of sterile water retained in the bladder for 30 min with 20 mA pulsed electric current. EMDA®-MMC regimen consisted of an induction course of 6 weekly instillations followed by a maintenance course of 6 monthly instillations. Follow-up was performed with systematic mapping biopsies of the bladder (with sampling in the prostatic urethra for men), voiding and washing urinary cytology, radiological study of the upper urinary tract. We performed Survival Kaplan-Meier curves and Log-rank test in order to analyze high grade disease-free survival.
RESULTS: At the end of follow-up, 16 patients (61.5%) preserved their native bladder; 10 patients (38.4%) underwent radical cystectomy, in 6 patients (23.1%) for recurrent HGNMIBC and in 4 patients (15.4%) for progression to muscle-invasive disease. At the end of follow-up, stratifying patients based on TNM classification (TaG3, T1G3, Cis, TaT1G3 + Cis), disease-free rates were 75, 71.4, 50 and 25%, respectively; survival curves showed statistically significant differences (p value < 0.05). Regarding toxicity, we reported severe adverse systemic event of hypersensitivity to the MMC in 3 patients (11.5%), and local side effects in 6 patients (26.1%).
CONCLUSIONS: In the field of alternative strategies to radical cystectomy, the EMDA®-MMC could be considered safe and effective in high-risk NMIBC unresponsive to BCG, as a "bladder sparing" therapy in selected patients. Multicenter studies with a larger number of patients and a longer follow-up might confirm our preliminary results.
TRIAL REGISTRATION: EudraCT2017-002585-43. 17 June 2017 (retrospectively registered).

BACKGROUND: Previous studies have revealed that higher exposure of axitinib leads to better prognosis in metastatic renal-cell carcinoma. We thus assessed individualized dosing of axitinib on the basis of the first-dose area under the concentration-time curve from 0 to 12 hours (AUC
PATIENTS AND METHODS: In this prospective single-arm trial, the starting dose of axitinib was 5 mg twice daily. A series of blood samples were taken at predetermined times after the first dose to calculate AUC
RESULTS: Twenty-six Japanese patients were enrolled. The median recommended dose based on the first-dose AUC
CONCLUSION: Individualized dosing of axitinib based on the first-dose AUC

OBJECTIVE: We conducted the present phase I/IIa positron emission tomography (PET) imaging study with

BACKGROUND: Vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) targeting represents the standard first-line therapy for metastatic renal-cell carcinoma (mRCC), while blocking the mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) is effective in relapsed disease. Since continuing blockade of VEGF may be of value, we studied the combination of bevacizumab with temsirolimus in mRCC patients relapsing after first-line treatment.
METHODS: A prospective, phase II study of the combination of bevacizumab (10 mg/kg, every 2 weeks) with temsirolimus (25 mg weekly) in patients with mRCC who failed first-line anti-VEGF treatment. 6-month progression-free survival (PFS) rate was the primary end point. The association of VEGFa, VEGFR2, fibroblast growth factor (FGF) b, platelet-derived growth factor receptor (PDGFR) a and PDGFRb with prognostic factors and outcomes were also studied.
RESULTS: 39 patients were enrolled. First-line therapy included: sunitinib (n = 16), bevacizumab/interferon (n = 12), pazopanib (n = 10), sorafenib (n = 1). After a median follow-up of 37 months, 6-month PFS rate was 50.9% [95% confidence interval (CI) 33.8-65.7], median time to progression 6.8 months (95% CI 5.5-9.2) and median overall survival (OS) 18.2 months (95% CI 12.9-27.2). Objective response rate was 27%. The most common AEs were metabolic (33%), renal (8%) and gastrointestinal (GI) (7%). The most common grade 3-5 AEs were GI (18%), infections (14%) and metabolic (25%). Toxicity was the most frequent cause of treatment discontinuation (40%). FGFb levels were associated with OS.
CONCLUSIONS: In concert with recent data, our study confirms the efficacy of anti-VEGF/anti-mTOR combination in mRCC relapsing after anti-VEGF therapy. Toxicity was considerable leading to high rate of treatment discontinuations.
TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01264341.

BACKGROUND: Stereotactic ablative body radiotherapy (SABR) is a non-invasive alternative to surgery to control primary renal cell cancer (RCC) in patients that are medically inoperable or at high-risk of post-surgical dialysis. The objective of the FASTRACK II clinical trial is to investigate the efficacy of SABR for primary RCC.
METHODS: FASTRACK II is a single arm, multi-institutional phase II study. Seventy patients will be recruited over 3 years and followed for a total of 5 years. Eligible patients must have a biopsy confirmed diagnosis of primary RCC with a single lesion within a kidney, have ECOG performance ≤2 and be medically inoperable, high risk or decline surgery. Radiotherapy treatment planning is undertaken using four dimensional CT scanning to incorporate the impact of respiratory motion. Treatment must be delivered using a conformal or intensity modulated technique including IMRT, VMAT, Cyberknife or Tomotherapy. The trial includes two alternate fractionation schedules based on tumour size: for tumours ≤4 cm in maximum diameter a single fraction of 26Gy is delivered; and for tumours > 4 cm in maximum diameter 42Gy in three fractions is delivered. The primary outcome of the study is to estimate the efficacy of SABR for primary RCC. Secondary objectives include estimating tolerability, characterising overall survival and cancer specific survival, estimating the distant failure rate, describing toxicity and renal function changes after SABR, and assessment of cost-effectiveness of SABR compared with current therapies.
DISCUSSION: The present study design allows for multicentre prospective validation of the efficacy of SABR for primary RCC that has been observed from prior single institutional and retrospective series. The study also allows assessment of treatment related toxicity, overall survival, cancer specific survival, freedom from distant failure and renal function post therapy.
TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov NCT02613819 , registered Nov 25th 2015.

BACKGROUND: The extent of lymph node dissection (LND) in bladder cancer (BCa) patients at the time of radical cystectomy may affect oncologic outcome.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate whether extended versus limited LND prolongs recurrence-free survival (RFS).
DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Prospective, multicenter, phase-III trial patients with locally resectable T1G3 or muscle-invasive urothelial BCa (T2-T4aM0).
INTERVENTION: Randomization to limited (obturator, and internal and external iliac nodes) versus extended LND (in addition, deep obturator, common iliac, presacral, paracaval, interaortocaval, and para-aortal nodes up to the inferior mesenteric artery).
OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: The primary endpoint was RFS. Secondary endpoints included cancer-specific survival (CSS), overall survival (OS), and complications. The trial was designed to show 15% advantage of 5-yr RFS by extended LND.
RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: In total, 401 patients were randomized from February 2006 to August 2010 (203 limited, 198 extended). The median number of dissected nodes was 19 in the limited and 31 in the extended arm. Extended LND failed to show superiority over limited LND with regard to RFS (5-yr RFS 65% vs 59%; hazard ratio [HR]=0.84 [95% confidence interval 0.58-1.22]; p=0.36), CSS (5-yr CSS 76% vs 65%; HR=0.70; p=0.10), and OS (5-yr OS 59% vs 50%; HR=0.78; p=0.12). Clavien grade ≥3 lymphoceles were more frequently reported in the extended LND group within 90d after surgery. Inclusion of T1G3 tumors may have contributed to the negative study result.
CONCLUSIONS: Extended LND failed to show a significant advantage over limited LND in RFS, CSS, and OS. A larger trial is required to determine whether extended compared with limited LND leads to a small, but clinically relevant, survival difference (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01215071).
PATIENT SUMMARY: In this study, we investigated the outcome in bladder cancer patients undergoing cystectomy based on the anatomic extent of lymph node resection. We found that extended removal of lymph nodes did not reduce the rate of tumor recurrence in the expected range.

BACKGROUND: The majority of urothelial cancers (UC) harbor alterations in retinoblastoma (Rb) pathway genes that can lead to loss of Rb tumour suppressor function. Palbociclib is an oral, selective inhibitor of CDK 4/6 that restores Rb function and promotes cell cycle arrest.
METHODS: In this phase II trial, patients with metastatic platinum-refractory UC molecularly selected for p16 loss and intact Rb by tumour immunohistochemistry received palbociclib 125 mg p.o. daily for 21 days of a 28-day cycle. Primary endpoint was progression-free survival at 4 months (PFS4) using a Simon's two-stage design. Next-generation sequencing including Rb pathway alterations was conducted.
RESULTS: Twelve patients were enrolled and two patients (17%) achieved PFS4 with insufficient activity to advance to stage 2. No responses were seen. Median PFS was 1.9 months (95% CI 1.8-3.7 months) and median overall survival was 6.3 months (95% CI 2.2-12.6 months). Fifty-eight percent of patients had grade ≥3 hematologic toxicity. There were no CDKN2A alterations found and no correlation of Rb pathway alterations with clinical outcome.
CONCLUSIONS: Palbociclib did not demonstrate meaningful activity in selected patients with platinum-refractory metastatic UC. Further development of palbociclib should only be considered with improved integral biomarker selection or in rational combination with other therapies.

BACKGROUND: Non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC) has a significant risk of recurrence despite adjuvant intravesical therapy.
OBJECTIVE: To determine whether celecoxib, a cyclo-oxygenase 2 inhibitor, reduces the risk of recurrence in NMIBC patients receiving standard treatment.
DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: BOXIT (CRUK/07/004, ISRCTN84681538) is a double-blinded, phase III, randomised controlled trial. Patients aged ≥18 yr with intermediate- or high-risk NMIBC were accrued across 51 UK centres between 1 November 2007 and 23 July 2012.
INTERVENTION: Patients were randomised (1:1) to celecoxib 200mg twice daily or placebo for 2 yr. Patients with intermediate-risk NMIBC were recommended to receive six weekly mitomycin C instillations; high-risk NMIBC cases received six weekly bacillus Calmette-Guérin and maintenance therapy.
OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: The primary endpoint was time to disease recurrence. Analysis was by intention to treat.
RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: A total of 472 patients were randomised (236:236). With median follow-up of 44 mo (interquartile range: 36-57), 3-yr recurrence-free rate (95% confidence interval) was as follows: celecoxib 68% (61-74%) versus placebo 64% (57-70%; hazard ratio [HR] 0.82 [0.60-1.12], p=0.2). There was no difference in high-risk (HR 0.77 [0.52-1.15], p=0.2) or intermediate-risk (HR 0.90 [0.55-1.48], p=0.7) NMIBC. Subgroup analysis suggested that time to recurrence was longer in pT1 NMIBC patients treated with celecoxib compared with those receiving placebo (HR 0.53 [0.30-0.94], interaction test p=0.04). The 3-yr progression rates in high-risk patients were low: 10% (6.5-17%) and 9.7% (6.0-15%) in celecoxib and placebo arms, respectively. Incidence of serious cardiovascular events was higher in celecoxib (5.2%) than in placebo (1.7%) group (difference +3.4% [-0.3% to 7.2%], p=0.07).
CONCLUSIONS: BOXIT did not show that celecoxib reduces the risk of recurrence in intermediate- or high-risk NMIBC, although celecoxib was associated with delayed time to recurrence in pT1 NMIBC patients. The increased risk of cardiovascular events does not support the use of celecoxib.
PATIENT SUMMARY: Celecoxib was not shown to reduce the risk of recurrence in intermediate- or high-risk non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC), although celecoxib was associated with delayed time to recurrence in pT1 NMIBC patients. The increased risk of cardiovascular events does not support the use of celecoxib.

BACKGROUND: There is no effective intravesical second-line therapy for non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC) when bacillus Calmette-Guérin (BCG) fails.
OBJECTIVE: To compare disease-free survival time (DFS) between radiofrequency-induced thermo-chemotherapy effect (RITE) and institutional standard second-line therapy (control) in NMIBC patients with recurrence following induction/maintenance BCG.
DESIGN, SETTINGS, AND PARTICIPANTS: Open-label, phase III randomised controlled trial accrued across 14 centres between May 2010 and July 2013 (HYMN [ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01094964]).
INTERVENTION: Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to RITE (60min, 40mg mitomycin-C, 42±2°C) or control following stratification for carcinoma in situ (CIS) status (present/absent), therapy history (failure of previous induction/maintenance BCG), and treatment centre.
OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Primary outcome measures were DFS and complete response (CR) at 3 mo for the CIS at randomisation subgroup. Analysis was based on intention-to-treat.
RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: A total of 104 patients were randomised (48 RITE: 56 control). Median follow-up for the 31 patients without a DFS event was 36 mo. There was no significant difference in DFS between treatment arms (hazard ratio [HR] 1.33, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.84-2.10, p=0.23) or in 3-mo CR rate in CIS patients (n=71; RITE: 30% vs control: 47%, p=0.15). There was no significant difference in DFS between treatment arms in non-CIS patients (n=33; RITE: 53% vs control: 24% at 24 mo, HR 0.50, 95% CI 0.22-1.17, p=0.11). DFS was significantly lower in RITE than in control in CIS with/without papillary patients (n=71; HR 2.06, 95% CI 1.17-3.62, p=0.01; treatment-subgroup interaction p=0.007). Disease progression was observed in four patients in each treatment arm. Adverse events and health-related quality of life between treatment arms were comparable.
CONCLUSIONS: DFS was similar between RITE and control. RITE may be a second-line therapy for non-CIS recurrence following BCG failure; however, confirmatory trials are needed. RITE patients with CIS with/without papillary had lower DFS than control. HYMN highlights the importance of the control arm when evaluating novel therapies.
PATIENT SUMMARY: This study did not show a difference in bladder cancer outcomes between microwave-heated chemotherapy and standard of care treatment. Papillary bladder lesions may benefit from microwave-heated chemotherapy treatment; however, more research is needed. Both treatments are similarly well tolerated.

BACKGROUND: In the phase 3 METEOR trial, cabozantinib improved progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate (ORR), and overall survival (OS) versus everolimus in patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC), after prior antiangiogenic therapy.
METHODS: Outcomes were evaluated for subgroups defined by prior therapy with sunitinib or pazopanib as the only prior VEGFR inhibitor, or prior anti-PD-1/PD-L1 therapy.
RESULTS: For the prior sunitinib subgroup (N = 267), median PFS for cabozantinib versus everolimus was 9.1 versus 3.7 months (HR 0.43, 95% CI 0.32-0.59), ORR was 16% versus 3%, and median OS was 21.4 versus 16.5 months (HR 0.66, 95% CI 0.47-0.93). For the prior pazopanib subgroup (N = 171), median PFS for cabozantinib versus everolimus was 7.4 versus 5.1 months (HR 0.67, 95% CI 0.45-0.99), ORR was 19% versus 4%, and median OS was 22.0 versus 17.5 months (HR 0.66, 95% CI 0.42-1.04). For prior anti-PD-1/PD-L1 therapy (N = 32), median PFS was not reached for cabozantinib versus 4.1 months for everolimus (HR 0.22, 95% CI 0.07-0.65), ORR was 22% versus 0%, and median OS was not reached versus 16.3 months (HR 0.56, 95% CI 0.21-1.52).
CONCLUSIONS: Cabozantinib was associated with improved clinical outcomes versus everolimus in patients with advanced RCC, irrespective of prior therapy, including checkpoint inhibitor therapy.

The S1602 Intergroup trial is a randomized phase III clinical trial that aims to test two important hypotheses: (1) priming with intradermal bacillus Calmette-Guérin (BCG) vaccine prior to standard intravesical BCG improves response to BCG in terms of recurrence-free survival and (2) Tokyo-172 BCG strain is non-inferior to TICE BCG in terms of time to high-grade recurrence. The study was approved by the Cancer Therapy Evaluation Program of the National Cancer Institute and activated in spring 2017. Here, we provide a synopsis of the study background, design, and update of the clinical trial.

INTRODUCTION: The EXIST-2 (NCT00790400) study demonstrated the superiority of everolimus over placebo for the treatment of renal angiomyolipomas associated with tuberous sclerosis complex (TSC) or sporadic lymphangioleiomyomatosis (LAM). This post hoc analysis of EXIST-2 study aimed to assess angiomyolipoma tumor behavior among patients who submitted to continued radiographic examination following discontinuation of everolimus in the noninterventional follow-up phase.
METHODS: For patients who discontinued everolimus at the completion of extension phase for reasons other than angiomyolipoma progression, a single CT/MRI scan of the kidney was collected after 1 year of treatment discontinuation. Changes from baseline and from the time of everolimus discontinuation in the sum of volumes of target angiomyolipoma lesions were assessed in the non-interventional follow-up phase (data cutoff date, November 6, 2015).
RESULTS: Of the 112 patients who received ≥1 dose of everolimus and discontinued treatment by the end of extension phase, 34 (30.4%) were eligible for participation in the non-interventional follow-up phase. Sixteen of 34 patients were evaluable for angiomyolipoma tumor behavior as they had at least one valid efficacy assessment (i.e. kidney CT/MRI scan) after everolimus discontinuation. During the non-interventional follow-up phase, compared with baseline, two patients (12.5%) experienced angiomyolipoma progression (angiomyolipoma-related bleeding [n = 1], increased kidney volume [n = 1]). Five patients out of 16 (31.3%) experienced angiomyolipoma progression when compared with the angiomyolipoma tumor assessment at everolimus discontinuation. The median (range) percentage change in angiomyolipoma tumor volume (cm3) from baseline was -70.56 (-88.30; -49.64) at time of everolimus discontinuation (n = 11), and -50.55 (-79.40; -23.16) at week 48 (n = 7) after discontinuation of everolimus. One patient death was reported due to angiomyolipoma hemorrhage.
CONCLUSIONS: Angiomyolipoma lesions displayed an increase in volume following discontinuation of everolimus in patients with renal angiomyolipoma or sporadic LAM associated with TSC, but there was no evidence of rapid regrowth.
TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00790400.

BACKGROUND: Sorafenib, an oral tyrosine kinase inhibitor, may enhance the antitumor activity of platinum-based chemotherapy in transitional-cell carcinoma. This study investigated the safety and clinical outcome of adding sorafenib to gemcitabine and carboplatin for patients with advanced transitional-cell carcinoma.
PATIENTS AND METHODS: Subjects with metastatic or unresectable chemotherapy-naive TCC with Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0 or 1 received gemcitabine (1000 mg/m
RESULTS: Seventeen subjects were enrolled. The median number of cycles of gemcitabine and carboplatin with sorafenib provided was 4.4. A total of 15, 5, and 8 subjects required reductions of gemcitabine, carboplatin, and sorafenib, respectively. Thirteen subjects (76%) required multiple dose reductions. Eleven subjects (65%) were free of progression at 5 months. The overall response rate was 54% (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.28-077), with 4 patients experiencing complete response (24%; 95% CI, 0.07-0.50) and 5 partial response (29%; 95% CI, 0.10-0.56); 7 subjects (41%) had stable disease. Median PFS was 9.5 months (95% CI, 0.43-1.26), and median overall survival was 25.2 months (95% CI, 0.96-5.65). One-year PFS was 31%, and 1-year overall survival was 72%. Eleven subjects (65%) discontinued treatment because of toxicity. There were no toxic deaths.
CONCLUSION: Gemcitabine and carboplatin with sorafenib showed clinical activity in advanced TCC, with some prolonged progression-free intervals. However, gemcitabine and carboplatin with sorafenib was associated with significant toxicity, causing discontinuation of therapy in most patients.

AIM: Efficacy/safety of first-line axitinib in Asian patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma.
METHODS: Patients were assigned (2:1) to 5-mg axitinib (n = 48) or 400-mg sorafenib (n = 24) twice daily. Primary end point was progression-free survival. Objective response rate, overall survival and adverse events were also assessed.
RESULTS: For axitinib versus sorafenib, hazard ratio for progression-free survival was 0.652 (95% CI: 0.340-1.252; p = 0.0989), objective response rate was higher (35.4 vs 16.7%; p = 0.0495), overall survival longer (hazard ratio: 0.739; 95% CI: 0.397-1.375; p = 0.1683). Palmar-plantar erythrodysesthesia (57.4%), diarrhea (55.3%), hypertension (51.1%) were commonest adverse events with axitinib; palmar-plantar erythrodysesthesia (50.0%) with sorafenib.
CONCLUSION: Axitinib improved efficacy in Asian patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma; adverse events were consistent with previous findings.

OBJECTIVE: To confirm the reproducibility of the effectiveness and safety in photodynamic diagnosis of non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer using 5-aminolevulinic acid in a prospective multicenter non-randomized phase III trial.
METHODS: A total of 61 patients with primary or recurrent non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer were prospectively enrolled from five hospitals between May 2015 and March 2016. 5-Aminolevulinic acid (20 mg/kg) was orally administered 3 h before transurethral resection of bladder tumors using white light or fluorescent light. Of 60 evaluable patients, 511 specimens were obtained from tumor-suspicious lesions and normal-looking mucosa. The primary end-point was sensitivity. The secondary end-points were specificity, positive and negative predictive values, and safety.
RESULTS: The sensitivity of the fluorescent light source (79.6%) was significantly higher (P < 0.001) than that of the white light source (54.1%). In total, 25.4% (46/181) of tumor specimens were diagnosed as positive with only the fluorescent light source. In nine (15%) of 60 patients, the risk classification and recommended treatment after transurethral resection of bladder tumors were changed depending on the additional types of tumor diagnosed by the fluorescent light source. The specificity of the fluorescent light versus white light source was 80.6% versus 95.5%. No grade 4-5 adverse event was noted. Hypotension and urticaria were severe adverse events whose relationship to oral 5-aminolevulinic acid could not be excluded.
CONCLUSIONS: These findings confirm the diagnostic efficacy and safety of photodynamic diagnosis with 20 mg/kg of oral 5-aminolevulinic acid, and show that transurethral resection of bladder tumors with a fluorescent light source using oral 5-aminolevulinic acid is well tolerated.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate blue-light flexible cystoscopy (BLFC) with hexaminolevulinate in the office surveillance of patients with non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer with a high risk of recurrence by assessing its impact on pain, anxiety, subjective value of the test and patient willingness to pay.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: A prospective, multicentre, phase III study was conducted during which the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) Anxiety, Pain and 'Was It Worth It' questionnaires were administered at baseline, after surveillance with BLFC and after resection for those referred to the operating room. Comparisons of scores were performed between groups.
RESULTS: A total of 304 patients were enrolled, of whom 103 were referred for surgical examination. Of these, 63 were found to have histologically confirmed malignancy. Pain levels were low throughout the study. Anxiety levels decreased after BLFC (∆ = -2.6), with a greater decrease among those with negative pathology results (P = 0.051). No differences in anxiety were noted based on gender, BLFC results, or test performance (true-positive/false-positive). Most patients found BLFC 'worthwhile' (94%), would 'do it again' (94%) and 'would recommend it to others' (91%), with no differences based on BLFC results or test performance. Most patients undergoing BLFC (76%) were willing to pay out of pocket.
CONCLUSIONS: Anxiety decreased after BLFC in patients with negative pathology, including patients with false-positive results. Most of the patients undergoing BLFC were willing to pay out of pocket, found the procedure worthwhile and would recommend it to others, irrespective of whether they had a positive BLFC result or whether this was false-positive after surgery.

BACKGROUND: Radical cystectomy is the surgical standard for invasive bladder cancer. Robot-assisted cystectomy has been proposed to provide similar oncological outcomes with lower morbidity. We aimed to compare progression-free survival in patients with bladder cancer treated with open cystectomy and robot-assisted cystectomy.
METHODS: The RAZOR study is a randomised, open-label, non-inferiority, phase 3 trial done in 15 medical centres in the USA. Eligible participants (aged ≥18 years) had biopsy-proven clinical stage T1-T4, N0-N1, M0 bladder cancer or refractory carcinoma in situ. Individuals who had previously had open abdominal or pelvic surgery, or who had any pre-existing health conditions that would preclude safe initiation or maintenance of pneumoperitoneum were excluded. Patients were centrally assigned (1:1) via a web-based system, with block randomisation by institution, stratified by type of urinary diversion, clinical T stage, and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status, to receive robot-assisted radical cystectomy or open radical cystectomy with extracorporeal urinary diversion. Treatment allocation was only masked from pathologists. The primary endpoint was 2-year progression-free survival, with non-inferiority established if the lower bound of the one-sided 97·5% CI for the treatment difference (robotic cystectomy minus open cystectomy) was greater than -15 percentage points. The primary analysis was done in the per-protocol population. Safety was assessed in the same population. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01157676.
FINDINGS: Between July 1, 2011, and Nov 18, 2014, 350 participants were randomly assigned to treatment. The intended treatment was robotic cystectomy in 176 patients and open cystectomy in 174 patients. 17 (10%) of 176 patients in the robotic cystectomy group did not have surgery and nine (5%) patients had a different surgery to that they were assigned. 21 (12%) of 174 patients in the open cystectomy group did not have surgery and one (1%) patient had robotic cystectomy instead of open cystectomy. Thus, 302 patients (150 in the robotic cystectomy group and 152 in the open cystectomy group) were included in the per-protocol analysis set. 2-year progression-free survival was 72·3% (95% CI 64·3 to 78·8) in the robotic cystectomy group and 71·6% (95% CI 63·6 to 78·2) in the open cystectomy group (difference 0·7%, 95% CI -9·6% to 10·9%; p
INTERPRETATION: In patients with bladder cancer, robotic cystectomy was non-inferior to open cystectomy for 2-year progression-free survival. Increased adoption of robotic surgery in clinical practice should lead to future randomised trials to assess the true value of this surgical approach in patients with other cancer types.
FUNDING: National Institutes of Health National Cancer Institute.

PURPOSE: A phase I study using two peptide vaccines derived from M phase phosphoprotein 1 (MPHOSPH1) and DEP domain containing 1 (DEPDC1) demonstrated promising results for the treatment of advanced bladder cancer. Therefore, we further tested the ability of these peptides to prevent recurrence after transurethral resection of the bladder tumor in patients with non-muscle invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC).
MATERIALS AND METHODS: 127 patients were enrolled in a multicenter, non-randomized phase II clinical trial. The primary endpoint was recurrence-free survival (RFS) rate, and secondary endpoints were safety and immunological response. HLA-A24-restricted peptides were subcutaneously administered in addition to intravesical BCG therapy. The exploratory endpoint evaluated differences of RFS rate between HLA-A*2402-positive (A24(+)) and -negative (A24(-)) groups.
RESULTS: A 2-year RFS rate in all patients was 74.0%. The RFS rate in the A24(+) group (n = 75) and in the A24(-) group (n = 52) were 76.0 and 71.2%, respectively. This vaccine therapy was well-tolerated and feasible. MPHOSPH1 and DEPDC1 peptide-specific cytotoxic T lymphocyte responses were observed in 75.8 and 77.5% of the A24(+) group, respectively. Patients having both peptide-specific CTL responses showed significantly better RFS than patients without CTL response (P = 0.014). In the A24(+) group, patients who had positive reaction at the injection sites (RAI) had significantly lower rates of recurrence than RAI-negative patients (P = 0.0019).
CONCLUSIONS: Cancer peptide vaccines in combination with intravesical BCG therapy demonstrated good immunogenicity and safety, and may provide benefit for preventing recurrence of NMIBC.

BACKGROUND: Collecting duct carcinoma (CDC) is a rare type of renal cancer with a poor prognosis. As there are no standard guidelines for the management of metastatic CDC (mCDC), we evaluated the efficacy and safety of combined therapies of sorafenib, gemcitabine, plus cisplatin in patients with mCDC.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: A prospective, multicentre, single-arm, open-label, phase 2 trial (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT01762150) that enrolled 26 mCDC patients with no prior systemic chemotherapy. Patients were treated with sorafenib (400 mg orally, twice daily) combined with chemotherapy (gemcitabine 1000 mg/m
RESULTS: The 6-month PFS rate was 65%, and the median PFS was 8.8 months (95% confidence interval [CI]: 6.7-10.9) with a median overall survival of about 12.5 months (95% CI: 9.6-15.4). The objective response rate was 30.8%, and the disease control rate was 84.6%. The treatment was generally well tolerated. Major grade 3/4 toxicities included leucopenia (26.9%), thrombocytopenia (23.1%), anaemia (11.5%) and palmar-plantar erythrodysesthesia (7.7%).
CONCLUSIONS: Though the combination of sorafenib and chemotherapy demonstrated a similar outcome as that of the previously reported regimens in patients with mCDC, this combination may be a suitable option for patients who have low Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status or less metastatic sites.

BACKGROUND: The optimal treatment option for non-clear-cell renal cell carcinoma (nccRCC) is not established. We conducted a multicenter phase II trial of axitinib for patients with advanced nccRCC who had failed prior treatment with temsirolimus.
PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with histologically confirmed metastatic or recurrent nccRCC received 5 mg axitinib twice daily. Prior use of vascular endothelial growth factor pathway inhibitors was not allowed. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS), and the secondary endpoints were objective response rate (ORR), disease control rate, overall survival, and safety.
RESULTS: Forty patients were included between January 2013 and December 2016. The median age was 59 years (range, 22-84 years). Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status were 0 (7.5%) and 1 (92.5%), and 82.5% of patients had undergone prior nephrectomy. Papillary type 2 (60.0%) was the most common histology, and patients belonged to favorable (12.5%), intermediate (72.5%), and poor (15.0%) risk groups according to the International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium risk stratification. With a median follow-up duration of 14.7 months (95% confidence interval, [CI], 10.8-18.6 months), the median PFS was 7.4 months (95% CI, 5.2-9.5 months). The ORR was 37.5%, and the disease control rate was 67.5%. The median overall survival was 12.1 months (95% CI, 6.4-17.7 months). Most adverse events were manageable, and no unexpected toxicities were found.
CONCLUSION: Axitinib showed promising efficacy in terms of ORR and PFS in recurrent or metastatic nccRCC when used after failure with temsirolimus.

INTRODUCTION: Enrollment of a representative study population permits generalizable and reliable results for clinical trials. We sought to evaluate whether patients enrolled in trials for advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC) are representative of the overall population of advanced RCC patients in the United States.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: The clinicaltrials.gov results database was queried for interventional clinical trials directed at clinically advanced (stage III/IV) RCC that enrolled patients from the US only. We identified 375 patients from 18 phase I to II trials that met eligibility criteria. The American College of Surgeons' National Cancer Database (NCDB) which includes data on approximately 70% of all US cancer diagnoses was queried and we identified 75,308 patients with advanced (stage III/IV) RCC. Demographic characteristics were summarized and compared between the 2 populations.
RESULTS: Compared to the US population of advanced RCC (NCDB), significant under-representation in clinical trials was observed for patients aged 65+ (26.3% vs. 50.4%; P<0.001) and among those with Hispanic ethnicity (2.7% vs. 7.2%; P = 0.005). A trend toward under-representation was observed for black patients (7.0% vs. 9.8%, P = 0.076) but not for white patients (89.9% vs. 87.0%, P = 0.107) or other racial groups (P>0.05 for all). Female patients made up 30.3% of trial enrollees and 33.3% of the US advanced RCC population (P = 0.221).
CONCLUSION: Significant under-representation was observed for elderly and Hispanic patients with a trend toward under-representation for black and female patients in phase I to II RCC clinical trials. Greater efforts to include underrepresented populations are necessary to improve the effectiveness and generalizability of clinical trials in kidney cancer.