Phase II trial investigates ixazomib with gemcitabine and doxorubicin, finding modest response in renal medullary carcinoma, indicating challenges for future therapies.
Purpose: SMARCB1-deficient renal medullary carcinoma (RMC) is an aggressive kidney cancer lacking mechanism-directed therapies. We conducted a single-center, single-arm, phase II study (NCT03587662) testing the proteasome inhibitor ixazomib combined with gemcitabine and doxorubicin. Patients and Methods: Ixazomib 5.5 mg, gemcitabine 756 mg/m2, and doxorubicin 42 mg/m2 were given every 2 weeks for up to 13 cycles, followed by ixazomib plus gemcitabine maintenance. Coprimary endpoints were objective response rate (ORR) and 28-week disease-control rate (DCR) versus historic gemcitabine plus doxorubicin. Secondary endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and safety. Results: Thirty patients (median age 34.5 years old, 90% Black) were treated. The posterior ORR was 36% [95% credible interval (CrI), 21%–54%] with a 91.4% probability of exceeding historic doublet therapy. However, the 28-week DCR was 17% (95% CrI, 6%–31%), crossing the predefined futility boundary. Median PFS and OS were 3.5 and 7.4 months, respectively. Grade ≥3 toxicities were predominantly hematologic (thrombocytopenia 20%, leukopenia 17%) and manageable, with no treatment-related deaths. Single-cell and bulk multi-omics from 11 patients revealed that immune-inflamed tumors enriched for T cells and plasmacytoid/conventional dendritic cells correlated with response, whereas stromal–myeloid niches and proliferative or neuroendocrine–squamous plastic epithelial states associated with resistance. Resistant tumors upregulated unfolded protein response, proteostasis maintenance, and NF-κB pathways. Conclusions: Addition of ixazomib to gemcitabine plus doxorubicin modestly increased radiographic response but did not extend disease control in an all-comer biomarker-unstratified RMC cohort. The integrated correlatives nominate mechanisms and biomarkers to guide future mechanism–directed trials in RMC.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Yu et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: