Abstract:Background: There is interest in using treatment breaks in oncology, to reduce toxicity without compromising efficacy. Trial design: A Phase II/III multicentre, open-label, parallel-group, randomised controlled non-inferiority trial assessing treatment breaks in patients with renal cell carcinoma. Methods: Patients with locally advanced or metastatic renal cell carcinoma, starting tyrosine kinase inhibitor as first-line treatment at United Kingdom National Health Service hospitals. Interventions: At trial entry, patients were randomised (1 : 1) to a drug-free interval strategy or a conventional continuation strategy. After 24 weeks of treatment with sunitinib/pazopanib, drug-free interval strategy patients took up a treatment break until disease progression with additional breaks dependent on disease response and patient choice. Conventional continuation strategy patients continued on treatment. Both trial strategies continued until treatment intolerance, disease progression on treatment, withdrawal or death. Objective: To determine if a drug-free interval strategy is non-inferior to a conventional continuation strategy in terms of the co-primary outcomes of overall survival and quality-adjusted life-years. Co-primary outcomes: For non-inferiority to be concluded, a margin of ≤ 7.5% in overall survival and ≤ 10% in quality-adjusted life-years was required in both intention-to-treat and per-protocol analyses. This equated to the 95% confidence interval of the estimates being above 0.812 and -0.156, respectively. Quality-adjusted life-years were calculated using the utility index of the EuroQol-5 Dimensions questionnaire. Results: Nine hundred and twenty patients were randomised (461 conventional continuation strategy vs. 459 drug-free interval strategy) from 13 January 2012 to 12 September 2017. Trial treatment and follow-up stopped on 31 December 2020. Four hundred and eighty-eight (53.0%) patients [240 (52.1%) vs. 248 (54.0%)] continued on trial post week 24. The median treatment-break length was 87 days. Nine hundred and nineteen patients were included in the intention-to-treat analysis (461 vs. 458) and 871 patients in the per-protocol analysis (453 vs. 418). For overall survival, non-inferiority was concluded in the intention-to-treat analysis but not in the per-protocol analysis [hazard ratio (95% confidence interval) intention to treat 0.97 (0.83 to 1.12); per-protocol 0.94 (0.80 to 1.09) non-inferiority margin: 95% confidence interval ≥ 0.812, intention to treat: 0.83 > 0.812 non-inferior, per-protocol: 0.80 < 0.812 not non-inferior]. Therefore, a drug-free interval strategy was not concluded to be non-inferior to a conventional continuation strategy in terms of overall survival. For quality-adjusted life-years, non-inferiority was concluded in both the intention-to-treat and per-protocol analyses [marginal effect (95% confidence interval) intention to treat -0.05 (-0.15 to 0.05); per-protocol 0.04 (-0.14 to 0.21) non-inferiority margin: 95% confidence interval ≥ -0.156]. Therefore, a drug-free interval strategy was concluded to be non-inferior to a conventional continuation strategy in terms of quality-adjusted life-years. Limitations: The main limitation of the study is the fewer than expected overall survival events, resulting in lower power for the non-inferiority comparison. Future work: Future studies should investigate treatment breaks with more contemporary treatments for renal cell carcinoma. Conclusions: Non-inferiority was shown for the quality-adjusted life-year end point but not for overall survival as pre-defined. Nevertheless, despite not meeting the primary end point of non-inferiority as per protocol, the study suggested that a treatment-break strategy may not meaningfully reduce life expectancy, does not reduce quality of life and has economic benefits. Although the treating clinicians' perspectives were not formally collected, the fact that clinicians recruited a large number of patients over a long period suggests support for the study and provides clear evidence that a treatment-break strategy for patients with renal cell carcinoma receiving tyrosine kinase inhibitor therapy is feasible. Trial registration: This trial is registered as ISRCTN06473203. Funding: This award was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment Programme (NIHR award ref: 09/91/21) and is published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 28, No. 45. See the NIHR Funding and Awards website for further award information.

Strategic treatment pause of first-line immune checkpoint inhibitor + VEGFR-tyrosine kinase inhibitor in patients with good or intermediate risk metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) in response at 1 year of treatment (SPICI-GETUG R05): A non-inferiority randomized clinical trial.

A Multi-Center Phase II Study of Toripalimab with Chemotherapy in Patients with EGFR Mutant Advanced NSCLC Patients Resistant to EGFR TKIs: Efficacy and Biomarker Analysis.

STOPTRAFFIC-1: A Phase I/II Trial of SX-682 in Combination with Nivolumab for Refractory RAS-mutated Microsatellite Stable (MSS) Metastatic Colorectal Cancer (Mcrc).

A Phase II Trial of Sitravatinib Plus Nivolumab after Progression on Prior Immune Checkpoint Inhibitor (ICI) in Patients with Metastatic Clear Cell Renal Cell Carcinoma (Ccrcc).

Temporary treatment cessation compared with continuation of tyrosine kinase inhibitors for adults with renal cancer: the STAR non-inferiority RCT

EORTC GUCG 2238 De-escalate: A pragmatic trial to revisit intermittent androgen-deprivation therapy in metastatic hormone-naïve prostate cancer in the era of new AR pathway inhibitors.

PIVOT-09: A Phase III Randomized Open-Label Study of Bempegaldesleukin (NKTR-214) Plus Nivolumab Versus Sunitinib or Cabozantinib (investigator's Choice) in Patients with Previously Untreated Advanced Renal Cell Carcinoma (RCC)

Neoadjuvant pembrolizumab (PEMBRO) and axitinib (AXI) in renal cell carcinoma with associated inferior vena cava tumor thrombus (NEOPAX).

45 INTerpath-004: A phase 2, randomized, double-blind study of pembrolizumab with V940 (mRNA-4157) or placebo in the adjuvant treatment of renal cell carcinoma

Neoadjuvant Toripalimab Plus Chemotherapy for Resectable Stage II-IIIB Non-Squamous Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer with EGFR Mutations: A Multi-Center, Multi-Cohort, Exploratory Study.

Optimal treatment by invoking biologic clusters in renal cell carcinoma (OPTIC RCC).

Advanced renal cell cancer combination immunotherapy clinical trial (ARCITECT; HCRN GU 22-587).

SAKK 16/18: Immune-modulatory radiotherapy to enhance the effects of neoadjuvant PD-L1 blockade after neoadjuvant chemotherapy in patients with resectable stage III (N2) non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC)—A multicenter phase II trial.

A phase I study of the combination of atezolizumab, tiragolumab, and stereotactic body radiation therapy in patients with metastatic multiorgan cancer

ATLAS Study: A Randomized Double-Blind Phase 3 Study of Adjuvant Axitinib Versus Placebo in Subjects at High Risk of Recurrent Renal Cell Carcinoma (RCC).

Randomized phase III study comparing suspension or continuation of PD-1 pathway blockade for patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (SAVE study: JCOG1701).

The role of cytoreductive nephrectomy in metastatic renal cell carcinoma in immune-oncology era (SEVURO-CN): A study protocol for a multi-center, prospective, randomized trial.

Phase II Trial of Intermittent Therapy in Patients with Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Treated with Front-line Ipilimumab and Nivolumab

Abstract PO3-18-11: A011801 (CompassHER2 RD): Postneoadjuvant T-DM1 + tucatinib/placebo in patients with residual HER2-positive invasive breast cancer

A phase 1b open-label study to evaluate the safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics, and pharmacodynamics of py314 in combination with pembrolizumab in patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma

Real-world outcomes in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) receiving dual immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI-ICI) regimens or immune checkpoint inhibitor and tyrosine kinase inhibitor (ICI-TKI) combinations as first-line therapy: A British Columbia (BC) population-based analysis.