Efficacy of post-lenvatinib treatments in patients (pts) with advanced renal cell carcinoma (aRCC).
Authors: Panian Justine , Zhong Caiwei , Choi Sharon , Quinn Roxanne , Ferrier Evan , Saad Eddy , Saliby Renee Maria , Malvar Carmel , Pal Sumanta Kumar , Ebrahimi Hedyeh , Tran Ben , Weickhardt Andrew James , Lalani Aly-Khan A. , Suárez Cristina , de Velasco Guillermo , Kanesvaran Ravindran , Zarba Martin , CHOUEIRI Toni K. , Heng Daniel Yick Chin , McKay Rana R. 
Published: July 2024

4538 Background: Lenvatinib is a tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) that targets both vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) receptor and fibroblast growth factor receptor. It has demonstrated efficacy both in the upfront and refractory disease settings. However, there is a lack of data surrounding the efficacy of TKIs post-lenvatinib exposure. In this study, we investigate the activity of post-lenvatinib therapies in pts with aRCC. Methods: We conducted a retrospective analysis utilizing the International Metastatic Database Consortium (IMDC). Pts having received treatment post lenvatinib exposure were eligible and divided into two cohort: pts post-1st line lenvatinib (2nd line cohort) and pts post-2nd line lenvatinib (3rd line cohort). The primary objective was objective response rate (ORR) and time to treatment failure (TTF). ORR was summarized with 95% two-sided exact binomial confidence interval. TTF was defined as time from treatment initiation to drug cessation for any reason censored at the date of last follow-up. Results: Overall, 84 pts received 1st line lenvatinib of whom 43 (51%) remain on therapy, 20 (24%) received 2nd line treatment, and 21 (25%) received no subsequent treatment. All pts received 1st line pembrolizumab + lenvatinib (ORR 50%, median TTF 9.7 months). Reason for lenvatinib discontinuation was progression (50%), progression + toxicity (20%), toxicity (15%), or other (15%). For the 2nd line cohort, median age was 61 years, most pts were male (85%), had prior nephrectomy (75%), clear cell histology (85%), and were IMDC intermediate/poor risk (55%). 2nd line therapy regimens included TKI monotherapy (80%), TKI-IO (5%), and other (15%). The ORR to 2nd line treatment was 5% (95% CI 0.2-25) and median TTF was 5.8 months (95% CI 1.9-14.9). Of 2nd line lenvatinib-exposed pts (n=84), 24 (29%) remain on treatment, 34 (40%) received 3rd line treatment, and 26 (31%) did not receive additional therapy. Most pts received 2nd line everolimus + lenvatinib (97%) (ORR 39%, median TTF 5.9 months). Reason for lenvatinib discontinuation was progression (59%), progression + toxicity (9%), toxicity (12%), or other (21%). For the 3rd line cohort, median age was 67 years, most pts were male (68%), had prior nephrectomy (88%), clear cell histology (68%), and were IMDC intermediate/poor risk (77%). 3rd line treatments included TKI alone (50%), IO-TKI (38%), and other (12%). The ORR to 3rd line treatment was 12% (95% CI 3.3-27) and median TTF was 2.8 months (95% CI 1.9-7.4). Conclusions: In this analysis, we demonstrate modest activity of TKI-based therapy post-lenvatinib exposure. Our study highlights the need for improved treatment options for pts progressing on lenvatinib-based therapies.