A Prospective Multicenter Evaluation of Initial Treatment Choice in Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Prior to the Immunotherapy Era: The MaRCC Registry Experience

IntroductionThe Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma (MaRCC) Registry provides prospective data on real-world treatment patterns and outcomes in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC).Methods and MaterialsPatients with mRCC and no prior systemic therapy were enrolled at academic and community sites. End of study data collection was in March 2019. Outcomes included overall survival (OS). A survey of treating physicians assessed reasons for treatment initiations and discontinuations.ResultsOverall, 376 patients with mRCC initiated first-line therapy; 171 (45.5%) received pazopanib, 75 (19.9%) sunitinib, and 74 (19.7%) participated in a clinical trial. Median (95% confidence interval) OS was longest in the clinical trial group (50.3 [35.8-not reached] months) versus pazopanib (39.0 [29.7-50.9] months) and sunitinib 26.2 [19.9-61.5] months). Non-clear cell RCC (21.5% of patients) was associated with worse median OS than clear cell RCC (18.0 vs. 47.3 months). Differences in baseline characteristics, treatment starting dose, and relative dose exposure among treatment groups suggest selection bias. Survey results revealed a de-emphasis on quality of life, toxicity, and patient preference compared with efficacy in treatment selection.ConclusionThe MaRCC Registry gives insights into real-world first-line treatment selection, outcomes, and physician rationale regarding initial treatment selection prior to the immunotherapy era. Differences in outcomes between clinical trial and off-study patients reflect the difficulty in translating trial results to real-world patients, and emphasize the need to broaden clinical trial eligibility. Physician emphasis on efficacy over quality of life and toxicity suggests more data and education are needed regarding these endpoints.     

Sunitinib Versus Sorafenib as Initial Targeted Therapy for mCC-RCC With Favorable/Intermediate Risk: Multicenter Randomized Trial CROSS-J-RCC

PurposeThe present study compared the efficacy of sunitinib and sorafenib as first-line treatment of metastatic clear cell renal cell carcinoma (mCC-RCC) with favorable or intermediate Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center (MSKCC) risk.Patients and MethodsTreatment-naive patients with mCC-RCC were randomized to receive open-label sunitinib followed by sorafenib (SU/SO) or sorafenib followed by sunitinib (SO/SU). The primary endpoint was first-line progression-free survival (PFS). The secondary endpoints were total PFS and overall survival (OS).ResultsOf the 124 patients enrolled at 39 institutions from February 2010 to July 2012, 120 were evaluated. The median first-line PFS duration was 8.7 and 7.0 months in the SU/SO and SO/SU groups, respectively (hazard ratio [HR], 0.67; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.42-1.08). The total PFS and OS were not significantly different between the SU/SO and SO/SU groups (27.8 and 22.6 months; HR, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.428-1.246; and 38.4 and 30.9 months; HR, 0.934; 95% CI, 0.588-1.485, respectively). The subgroup analysis revealed that the total PFS with SU/SO was superior to the total PFS with SO/SU in the patients with favorable MSKCC risk and those with < 5 metastatic sites). SO/SU was superior to SU/SO for patients without previous nephrectomy.ConclusionsNo statistically significant differences were found in first-line PFS, total PFS, or OS between the 2 treatment arms (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier, NCT01481870).     

Treatment patterns and clinical outcomes in patients with renal cell carcinoma in the UK: insights from the RECCORD registry

BackgroundThe aim of the RECCORD registry was to gather real-world UK data on the use of targeted therapies in renal cell carcinoma (RCC) and assess clinical outcomes. Here, demographic and outcome data are presented with the treatment patterns and demographic profile of patients on the registry.Patients and methodsPatients were retrospectively identified at seven UK hospitals with large cancer centres in England (5), Scotland (1) and Wales (1). Anonymised data were collected through an online registry covering demographics, treatments and outcomes. Five hundred and fourteen UK adult patients with metastatic RCC were included in the study for analysis. Patients were included if they were treated for metastatic RCC at one of the seven centres, and started systemic anti-cancer treatment from March 2009 to November 2012 inclusive. In addition to demographic factors, the principal outcome measures were overall survival (OS), time to disease progression and toxicity.ResultsThe majority of first-line treatment was with sunitinib; first-line use of pazopanib increased as the study progressed. 15.8% of patients received second-line treatment, half of whom were prescribed everolimus. Median OS (from initiation of first-line treatment) was 23.9 months (95% confidence interval [CI] 18.6–29.1 months), similar to that reported for clinical trials of targeted RCC therapies [Ljungberg B, Campbell SC, Choi HY et al. The epidemiology of renal cell carcinoma. Eur Urol 2011; 60: 615–621; Abe H, Kamai T. Recent advances in the treatment of metastatic renal cell carcinoma. Int J Urol 2013; 20: 944–955; Motzer RJ, Hutson TE, Tomczak P et al. Overall survival and updated results for sunitinib compared with interferon alfa in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma. J Clin Oncol 2009; 27: 3584–3590]. OS was significantly longer for those who received second-line treatment after disease progression (33.0 months; 95% CI 30.8–35.2 months) than those who did not (20.9 months; 95% CI 16.4–25.3 months; P = 0.008).ConclusionsRECCORD is a large ‘real-world’ database assessing metastatic RCC treatment patterns and outcomes. Treatment patterns changed over time as targeted therapies were approved and became widely available; survival data in RECCORD are consistent with those reported for systemic treatments in clinical trials. Kaplan–Meier analysis of results demonstrated that receiving second-line therapy was a major prognostic factor for longer OS.     

Pazopanib: a Review in Advanced Renal Cell Carcinoma

Pazopanib (Votrient®), an orally administered multi-targeted tyrosine kinase inhibitor that predominantly inhibits vascular endothelial growth factor receptor-1, ?2 and ?3, platelet-derived growth factor receptor-α and -β, and the stem cell factor receptor c-Kit, is approved in the EU, the USA and other countries for the treatment of advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC). In randomized controlled trials in patients with advanced, predominantly clear-cell RCC, pazopanib significantly improved progression-free survival (PFS) compared with placebo in both treatment-naïve and cytokine-pretreated patients and, as a first-line therapy, was noninferior to intermittent sunitinib with respect to PFS. However, pazopanib had a tolerability profile that was distinguishable from that of sunitinib, based on lower incidences of most adverse events, particularly those associated with discomfort, such as fatigue, hand-foot syndrome and stomatitis. Consistent with this, health-related quality of life (HR-QOL) measures evaluating fatigue, hand/foot soreness and mouth/throat soreness significantly favoured pazopanib over sunitinib. In addition, significantly more patients expressed a preference for pazopanib over sunitinib, primarily because of better overall HR-QOL and less fatigue. Efficacy and tolerability findings from these prospective clinical trials have been substantiated by evidence from a number of retrospective studies evaluating unselected real-world patients with metastatic RCC who received pazopanib (or sunitinib) as a first-line therapy. Thus, data from clinical trials supplemented with that from clinical practice support the use of pazopanib as a standard or alternative first-line treatment for advanced or metastatic RCC.

Open image in new window

     

Treatment Patterns and Survival Outcomes in Patients With Follicular Lymphoma: A 2007 to 2015 Humedica Database Study

BackgroundFew studies have evaluated real-world treatment patterns and survival in follicular lymphoma (FL). This study evaluated these outcomes among newly diagnosed patients with FL in routine clinical care.Patients and MethodsA retrospective study was conducted in newly diagnosed patients with FL from Humedica, a large United States electronic medical record database, from January 1, 2008 to July 31, 2015. Patients were followed from treatment initiation until death, loss to follow-up, or end of study (September 30, 2015). Treatment patterns were assessed in the follow-up period. Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) at 2 years were evaluated in the overall population using Kaplan-Meier analyses. OS was also compared between patients with and without evidence of disease progression within 2 years following first-line therapy (ie, early progressors vs. non-early progressors).ResultsA total of 1346 patients were included in the study, with most patients receiving rituximab-based regimens. Fewer early progressors received rituximab-based regimens. Across all lines, combination therapies predominated, particularly bendamustine + rituximab. Following first-line therapy, OS was 86.9% at 2 years, and median OS was not reached. Two-year PFS after first-line therapy was 64.6%, and median PFS was 48.1 months (95% confidence interval, 39.4-58.4 months). OS at 2 years was 76.8% among early progressors versus 90.4% among non-early progressors (P < .001); the median OS was not reached in both groups.ConclusionIn routine clinical practice, rituximab-based regimens predominated; however, utilization of these regimens differed among early and non-early progressors. The assessment of survival outcomes also highlights the negative impact of early progression on OS in the rituximab-era.     

Prognostic factors for progression-free and overall survival with sunitinib targeted therapy and with cytokine as first-line therapy in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma

BackgroundAnalysis of prognostic factors for progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) was performed using final data from a randomized phase III trial of sunitinib versus interferon-α (IFN-α) as first-line metastatic renal cell carcinoma (RCC) therapy.DesignA multivariate Cox regression model analyzed baseline variables for prognostic significance. Each variable was investigated univariately and then multivariately using a stepwise algorithm.ResultsEach treatment arm comprised 375 patients. For sunitinib, multivariate analysis of PFS identified five independent predictors, including serum lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) level, presence of ≥2 metastatic sites, no prior nephrectomy, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status, and baseline platelet count, while multivariate analysis of OS identified serum LDH level, corrected serum calcium level, time from diagnosis to treatment, hemoglobin level, ECOG performance status, and presence of bone metastasis as predictors. For IFN-α, LDH level and presence of ≥2 metastatic sites were common predictors of PFS to those for sunitinib, as were all predictors of OS except ECOG status.ConclusionsThis analysis identified prognostic factors for PFS and OS with sunitinib as first-line metastatic RCC therapy and confirmed that the Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center model is applicable in the era of targeted therapy.     

Is Axitinib Still a Valid Option for mRCC in the Second-Line Setting? Prognostic Factor Analyses From the AXIS Trial

BackgroundAxitinib resulted in significantly longer progression-free survival (PFS) versus sorafenib in patients with metastatic renal-cell carcinoma (mRCC) previously treated with sunitinib in the AXIS trial. We report post hoc analyses evaluating patient subgroups that may benefit more from axitinib in this setting.Patients and MethodsAXIS was an open-label randomized phase 3 trial (NCT00678392) in mRCC patients with disease that failed to respond to one prior systemic therapy. Univariate and multivariate analyses evaluated potential prognostic factors for improved PFS and overall survival (OS) after sunitinib. PFS and OS of axitinib versus sorafenib were assessed within subgroups identified according to these factors.ResultsOf 723 patients, 389 received first-line sunitinib; 194 and 195 were randomized to second-line axitinib and sorafenib, respectively. Identified prognostic factors were: nonbulky disease (sum of the longest diameter < 98 mm), favorable/intermediate risk disease (Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center or International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium criteria), and no bone or liver metastases. In patients with all of these prognostic factors (n = 86), significantly longer PFS was observed for axitinib versus sorafenib (hazard ratio = 0.476; 95% confidence interval, 0.263-0.863; 2-sided P = .0126). OS (hazard ratio = 0.902; 95% confidence interval, 0.457-1.780; 2-sided P = .7661) was similar between treatments. Across subgroups, PFS was generally longer in patients treated with axitinib versus sorafenib, and OS was generally similar between the two treatments.ConclusionIn patients with mRCC, axitinib remains a suitable second-line treatment option across multiple subgroups. A relevant reduction in the risk of a PFS event was observed for axitinib compared to sorafenib in selected subgroups of patients.     

Angiotensin system inhibitors and survival in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma treated with VEGF‐targeted therapy: A pooled secondary analysis of clinical trials

Use of angiotensin system inhibitors (ASIs; angiotensin receptor blockers or angiotensin‐converting enzyme inhibitors) has been reported to be associated with improved survival in metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC), particularly when used with vascular endothelial growth factor‐targeted therapies. This study was a secondary pooled analysis of two Phase III randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of patients with mRCC: NCT00334282 comparing pazopanib to placebo and NCT00720941 comparing pazopanib to sunitinib. ASI users were defined as patients using an ASI at baseline. Association with overall survival (OS; primary outcome) and progression‐free survival (PFS) was evaluated using Cox proportional hazards regression. The association was adjusted in multivariable analysis for baseline systolic blood pressure (SBP), use of other antihypertensive drugs and prognostic factors comprising the Heng risk criteria for mRCC. Of 1,545 patients pooled from the two RCTs, 649 (42%) were using one or more antihypertensive drugs at baseline, 385 (59%) of which were using an ASI. In the multivariable analysis of patients using pazopanib or sunitinib, no significant association was observed between baseline ASI use and OS (hazard ratio [HR] 0.97 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.80–1.18], p = 0.80) or PFS (HR 0.88 [95% CI 0.73–1.06], p = 0.17). Exploratory subgroup analysis of NCT00720941 highlighted that the effect of baseline ASI use on OS may differ between patients treated with sunitinib and pazopanib. In conclusion, use of ASIs at baseline was not a significant independent prognostic factor for improved survival in a pooled analysis of mRCC patients treated with pazopanib or sunitinib.     

Final overall survival analysis for the phase II RECORD-3 study of first-line everolimus followed by sunitinib versus first-line sunitinib followed by everolimus in metastatic RCC

BackgroundRECORD-3 compared everolimus and sunitinib as first-line therapy, and the sequence of everolimus followed by sunitinib at progression compared with the opposite (standard) sequence in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). This final overall survival (OS) analysis evaluated mature data for secondary end points.Patients and methodsPatients received either first-line everolimus followed by second-line sunitinib at progression (n = 238) or first-line sunitinib followed by second-line everolimus (n = 233). Secondary end points were combined first- and second-line progression-free survival (PFS), OS, and safety. The impacts of neutrophil lymphocyte ratio (NLR) and baseline levels of soluble biomarkers on OS were explored.ResultsAt final analysis, median duration of exposure was 5.6 months for everolimus and 8.3 months for sunitinib. Median combined PFS was 21.7 months [95% confidence interval (CI) 15.1–26.7] with everolimus-sunitinib and 22.2 months (95% CI 16.0–29.8) with sunitinib-everolimus [hazard ratio (HR)_{EVE-SUN/SUN-EVE}, 1.2; 95% CI 0.9–1.6]. Median OS was 22.4 months (95% CI 18.6–33.3) for everolimus-sunitinib and 29.5 months (95% CI 22.8–33.1) for sunitinib-everolimus (HR_{EVE-SUN/SUN-EVE}, 1.1; 95% CI 0.9–1.4). The rates of grade 3 and 4 adverse events suspected to be related to second-line therapy were 47% with everolimus and 57% with sunitinib. Higher NLR and 12 soluble biomarker levels were identified as prognostic markers for poor OS with the association being largely independent of treatment sequences.ConclusionsResults of this final OS analysis support the sequence of sunitinib followed by everolimus at progression in patients with mRCC. The safety profiles of everolimus and sunitinib were consistent with those previously reported, and there were no unexpected safety signals.Clinical Trials numberClinicalTrials.gov identifier, NCT00903175     

First-line treatment with sunitinib for type 1 and type 2 locally advanced or metastatic papillary renal cell carcinoma: a phase II study (SUPAP) by the French Genitourinary Group (GETUG)

BackgroundPapillary renal cell carcinoma (PRCC), type 1 and type 2, represents 10%–15% of renal cell carcinomas (RCC). There is no standard first-line treatment of metastatic PRCC (mPRCC). Anti-angiogenics have shown activity in retrospective studies but no prospective studies in pure papillary histology have been reported, but one with foretinib.Patients and methodsA prospective phase II study evaluated sunitinib in first-line treatment of mPRCC. The primary end point was overall response rate (ORR). Secondary end points were progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS).ResultsFifteen and 46 patients, respectively, with type 1 and type 2 mPRCC were enrolled. Using the MSKCC scoring system: 12 (20%), 33 (55%) and 9 (15%) patients were, respectively, in the favourable, intermediate or poor risk group and 7 undetermined. Median follow-up is 51.4 months. In type 1, 2 patients 13% [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.1–30.5] had a partial response (PR), 10 had stable disease (SD) with 5 (33%) ≥12 weeks. In type 2, 5 patients 11% (95% CI 1.9–20.3) had a PR, 25 had SD with 10(22%) ≥12 weeks. Median PFS was 6.6 months (95% CI 2.8–14.8) in type 1 and 5.5 months (95% CI 3.8–7.1) in type 2. Median OS was 17.8 (95% CI 5.7–26.1) and 12.4 (95% CI 8.2–14.3) months, respectively, in type 1 and 2. Safety was as expected with sunitinib for metastatic RCC.ConclusionSunitinib showed activity in treatment of type 1 and 2 mPRCC but lower than in clear-cell mRCC. Both PFS and OS are longer in type I PRCC. Sunitinib represents an acceptable option in first-line treatment of mPRCC.     

Long-Term Response to Sunitinib Therapy for Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma

BackgroundSunitinib achieves objective response and prolongs progression-free survival (PFS) in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (RCC). A subset of patients achieves long-term responses. The characteristics of patients who achieved long-term response (defined as patients achieving ongoing complete response [CR] or remaining progression free for > 18 months while receiving sunitinib) are reported.Patients and MethodsA database of 186 patients treated with sunitinib alone (n = 89) or in combination (n = 97) in 9 clinical trials was reviewed; all had 1 year or more follow-up from sunitinib start to data cutoff for analysis. Median PFS was 10.8 months (95% CI, 8.3-13.3); median overall survival (OS) was 30.4 months (95% CI, 21.5-36.8 months) for the 186 patients. Thirty-four patients were identified as long-term responders because they either had durable CR or remained progression free while receiving sunitinib for > 18 months.ResultsBest response for 34 long-term responders was CR in 3 patients, partial response (PR) in 24 patients, and stable disease in 7 patients. The median duration of sunitinib therapy was 24.9 months (range, 18.1-73.9 months). The median PFS among the long-term responders was 17.4 months (95% CI, 7-29.9 months) at a landmark PFS analysis performed after 18 months from treatment start. Univariate analysis from the 186 patients identified bone metastasis, lung metastasis, and intermediate/poor risk groups as adverse prognostic factors for long-term response.ConclusionSunitinib achieves long-term response in a subset of patients with metastatic RCC. Lack of bone metastasis or lung metastasis and good MSKCC risk status may predict long-term response.     

Is change in blood pressure a biomarker of pazopanib and sunitinib efficacy in advanced/metastatic renal cell carcinoma?

AimPazopanib, an oral antiangiogenic agent, is associated with improved outcomes in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma. In this retrospective analysis, we explore hypertension, an on-target adverse event, as a predictive marker.MethodsData from the pazopanib arm of the phase III COMPARZ trial (NCT00720941) comprised the test set. Pooled data from phase II (NCT00244764) and III (NCT00334282) pazopanib trials comprised the validation set. Data from the sunitinib arm of COMPARZ were analysed separately. Measures of efficacy were response rate, progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS). Mean arterial blood pressure (MAP) was the primary metric, and systolic hypertension (S-HTN) and diastolic hypertension (D-HTN) were secondary metrics; 4- and 12-week landmark analyses were performed.ResultsAnalyses revealed no significant associations at the landmarks between response and MAP. We observed a trend towards improved PFS with S-HTN at week 4 (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.79, P = 0.060) and week 12 (HR = 0.75, P = 0.073) among pazopanib-treated patients in COMPARZ. This trend was not confirmed at week 12 in the validation set or in sunitinib-treated patients. In the test set, there was a trend towards increased OS in patients with S-HTN by week 4 (HR = 0.76, P = 0.062) and with D-HTN by week 4 (HR = 0.71, P = 0.016) but not by week 12. No significant differences in OS were observed in sunitinib-treated patients for S-HTN or D-HTN.ConclusionNeither hypertension nor any blood pressure elevation above baseline was associated with efficacy outcomes of pazopanib or sunitinib. Accordingly, management of tyrosine kinase inhibitor-induced hypertension is unlikely to compromise outcome.     

Negative impact of bone metastasis on outcome in clear-cell renal cell carcinoma treated with sunitinib

BackgroundThe aim of our study was to determine whether the presence of bone metastases affects outcomes in patients with metastatic clear-cell renal cell carcinoma (m-ccRCC) receiving sunitinib.Patients and methodsWe reviewed the charts of all patients in four academic centers in Belgium and France who started first-line sunitinib (50 mg/day; 4 weeks on and 2 weeks off) between January 2005 and December 2008. Data were collected on known prognostic factors for metastatic renal cell carcinoma and metastatic sites. Response and progression were evaluated by computed tomography scan (according to RECIST).ResultsTwo hundred twenty-three patients were identified. With a median follow-up of 40 months, median progression-free survival (PFS) and median overall survival (OS) were significantly shorter in patients with bone metastases than in those without: respectively, 8.2 versus 19.1 months (P < 0.0001) and 19.5 versus 38.5 months (P < 0.0001). On multivariate analysis, taking on account platelet count, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status, number of metastatic sites, neutrophil count, corrected serum calcium, time from diagnosis to systemic treatment, and the presence of bone metastases, bone metastasis was the independent variable most significantly associated with poor PFS (P < 0.0001) and OS (P = 0.001).ConclusionThe presence of bone metastases in m-ccRCC patients has a significant and clinically relevant negative impact on outcome on sunitinib.     

Association of post-treatment hypoalbuminemia and survival in Chinese patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma

Background: Hypoalbuminemia adversely affects the clinical outcomes of various cancers. The purpose of this study was to estimate the prognostic value of hypoalbuminemia 3–5 weeks after treatment in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) who received sorafenib or sunitinib as first-line treatment. Methods: In this single-center, retrospective study, we assessed the progression-free survival (PFS) and overall sur-vival (OS) of 184 mRCC patients who received first-line sorafenib or sunitinib treatment. PFS and OS were compared between patients with post-treatment hypoalbuminemia (post-treatment albumin level <36.4 g/L) and those with normal post-treatment albumin level (albumin level ≥36.4 g/L). The Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center (MSKCC)risk model stratified mRCC patients into three risk categories. Prognostic values of all patient characteristics including MSKCC risk category were determined by using univariate and multivariate Cox regression models. Prognostic value was further determined using the Harrell concordance index and receiver operating characteristic curve analysis. Results: The median PFS and OS of the 184 patients were 11 months (95% confidence interval [CI] 9–12 months) and 23 months (95% CI 19–33 months), respectively. Patients with post-treatment hypoalbuminemia had significantly shorter median PFS (6 months [95% CI 5–7 months]) and OS (11 months [95% CI 9–15 months]) than patients who had normal post-treatment albumin levels (PFS: 12 months [95% CI 11–16 months], P < 0.001; OS: 31 months [95% CI 24–42 months], P < 0.001), respectively. Multivariate analysis showed that post-treatment hypoalbuminemia was an independent predictor of PFS (hazard ratio [HR], 2.113; 95% CI 1.390–3.212; P < 0.001) and OS (HR, 2.388; 95% CI 1.591–3.585; P < 0.001). Post-treatment hypoalbuminemia could also be combined with the MSKCC risk category for better prediction about OS. The model that included post-treatment hypoalbuminemia and MSKCC risk category improved the predictive accuracy for PFS and OS (c-index: 0.68 and 0.73, respectively) compared with the basic MSKCC risk model (c-index: 0.67 and 0.70, respectively). The prognostic values for PFS and OS of the integrated MSKCC risk model involving post-treatment hypoalbuminemia were significantly more accurate than the basic MSKCC risk model using likelihood ratio analysis (both P < 0.001). Conclusions: Post-treatment hypoalbuminemia can be considered an independent prognostic factor for patients with mRCC who undergo first-line treatment with tyrosine kinase inhibitors. Additionally, integrating post-treatment serum albumin level into the basic MSKCC risk model can improve the accuracy of this model in predicting patient overall survival and progression-free survival.     

Assessing Outcomes and Prognostic Factors for First-Line Therapy in Elderly Patients With Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma: Real-Life Data From a Single United Kingdom Institution

BackgroundElderly metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) patients are under-represented in clinical trials, whose results are therefore difficult to translate into routine management of older patients. We aimed at exploring treatment outcomes and prognostic factors in our real-life elderly mRCC cohort receiving first-line tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) monotherapy.Patients and MethodsWe retrospectively analyzed demographic and clinicopathological characteristics, and treatment data of elderly (≥ 70 years old at first-line start) mRCC patients starting either pazopanib or sunitinib as first-line treatment in our institution between March 2012 and April 2018. Baseline characteristics included age-adjusted Charlson comorbidity index (CCI).ResultsIn total, the records of 35 elderly mRCC patients were identified and retrospectively analyzed. Overall response rate, median progression-free survival, and median overall survival were 20%, 9.7 months, and 21.6 months, respectively. Karnofsky performance status ≤ 70%, sarcomatoid features, absolute neutrophil count greater than upper limit of normal, and treatment-related Grade 3 arterial hypertension were independently associated with survival after multivariate analysis. Age-adjusted CCI was significantly associated with survival in univariate analysis only. The overall incidence of Grade 3 to 5 toxicities was 74%. Seven patients (20%) received early crossover to either sunitinib or pazopanib because of toxicity. Dose reduction was applied in 24 (73%) of the 33 patients who completed at least 1 cycle.ConclusionFirst-line TKI monotherapy provided clinical benefit in our elderly mRCC cohort. Relatively frequent dose reductions helped to maintain an acceptable tolerability profile. Further research is warranted to explore the significance of prognostic factors in elderly mRCC patients.     

Assessment of progression-free survival as a surrogate end-point for overall survival in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma

BackgroundTo determine suitability of progression-free survival (PFS) as a surrogate end-point for overall survival (OS), we evaluated the relationship between PFS and OS in 750 treatment-naïve metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) patients who received sunitinib or interferon-alpha (IFN-α) in a phase III study.MethodsThe relationship between PFS and post-progression survival (PPS; the difference between PFS and OS) was studied, which correctly removes inherent dependencies between PFS and OS, to properly estimate whether and to what extent PFS can serve as a surrogate for OS. A Weibull parametric model to failure time data was fit to determine whether longer PFS was significantly and meaningfully predictive of longer PPS. In a sensitivity analysis by Kaplan–Meier non-parametric method, PPS curves for three approximately equal numbered groups of patients categorised by PFS were compared by log-rank test.ResultsIn the Weibull parametric model, longer PFS was significantly predictive of longer PPS (P < 0.001). The model also allowed prediction of estimated median PPS duration from actual PFS times. In the Kaplan–Meier (non-parametric) analysis, incrementally longer PFS was also associated with longer PPS, and the PPS curves for the three PFS groups were significantly different (P < 0.0001).ConclusionsA positive relationship was found between PFS and PPS duration in individual mRCC patients randomised to first-line treatment with sunitinib or IFN-α. These results indicate that PFS can act as a surrogate end-point for OS in the first-line mRCC setting and provide clinical researchers with a potentially useful approach to estimate median PPS based on PFS.     

On-target Toxicities Predictive of Survival in Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma (mRCC) Treated With Sunitinib: A Multicenter Retrospective Study

BackgroundPreliminary studies suggested that selected drug-related toxicities of sunitinib may correlate with a better prognosis.Patients and MethodsFrom January 2006 through December 2015, we retrospectively analyzed data of 145 patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma treated with sunitinib as a first-line therapy in 7 different Italian oncology departments. Hypertension, hypothyroidism, thrombocytopenia, neutropenia, and anemia were evaluated. Overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were calculated. OS and PFS were compared in patients who developed and who did not develop a drug-related toxicity. A multivariate analysis using the Cox regression model was performed.ResultsWe evaluated 145 patients (92 males; median age, 70 years); 105 (62.4%) patients experienced at least 1 toxicity: 66 (45.5%) patients developed hypothyroidism, 41 (28.3%) thrombocytopenia, 39 (26.9%) hypertension that required medical therapy, 22 (15.2%) anemia, and 11 (7.6%) neutropenia. The median PFS of patients who developed hypertension was 12 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 9-21 months) versus 9 months (95% CI, 7-12 months) in patients who did not develop toxicity; the median OS was 36 months (95% CI, 22 months to not reached) versus 26 months (95% CI, 18-34 months). For neutropenia, the median PFS was 17.5 months (95% CI, 9-65 months) versus 10 months (95% CI, 8-12 months); the median OS was 23 months (95% CI, 13 months to not reached) versus 28 months (95% CI, 22-35 months). At univariate and multivariate analysis, we observed a protective effect of hypertension and neutropenia on tumor progression (hazard ratio, 0.47; 95% CI, 0.28-0.78 and hazard ratio, 0.26; 95% CI, 0.09-0.76, respectively).ConclusionsMany patients developed toxicities during treatment with sunitinib; hypertension and neutropenia were related to longer PFS in our cohort.     

Nivolumab VERSUS Cabozantinib as Second-Line Therapy in Patients With Advanced Renal Cell Carcinoma: A Real-World Comparison

BackgroundTyrosine-kinase inhibitors (TKIs) still represent a first-line option for selected patients with metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma (mRCC). We aimed to compare the real-world efficacy of nivolumab or cabozantinib as second-line therapy in specific mRCC subpopulations.Patients and MethodsWe retrospectively collected data from 11 centers from Italy, Spain and US. Overall Survival (OS) and Progression-Free Survival (PFS) were analyzed using Kaplan-Meier curves. Cox proportional models were used at univariate and multivariate analyses.ResultsWe collected data from 343 patients with mRCC, 123 (36%) treated with cabozantinib and 220 (64%) with nivolumab. The median OS resulted longer, but not statistically significant, with nivolumab in patients aged >70 years (21.4 vs. 15.4 months, P = .746), treated with first-line pazopanib (26.8 vs. 11.6 months, P = .450), or with good (47.0 vs. 15.5 months, P = .285) or intermediate-risk criteria (14.4 vs. 11.0 months, P = .357), while it was longer, but even not statistically significant, for cabozantinib in patients who received previous sunitinib (25.7 vs. 21.7 months, P = .638) or with bone metastases (28.4 vs. 24.4 months, P = .871). The median PFS was significantly longer with cabozantinib in patients with clear cell histology (7.8 vs. 5.4 months, P = .026) and in patients with good risk features (12.3 vs. 5.7 months, P = .022).ConclusionsNivolumab and cabozantinib resulted active in mRCC patients, showing distinct results when stratified into clinico-pathological features.     

Real-World Efficacy of First-Line Pembrolizumab in Patients With Advanced or Recurrent Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer and High PD-L1 Tumor Expression

BackgroundIn clinical trials, first-line treatment with pembrolizumab improved overall survival (OS) in patients with advanced non–small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) with a programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) tumor proportion score of ≥ 50%. However, data on the efficacy of this treatment between clinical trials and actual clinical practice are inconsistent.Patients and MethodsNinety-five patients with histologically diagnosed advanced or recurrent NSCLC and a PD-L1 tumor proportion score of ≥ 50% who received pembrolizumab as first-line treatment were consecutively enrolled onto this multicenter retrospective study from February 2017 to December 2018. Clinical data were collected from electronic medical records. We assessed the objective response rate, progression-free survival (PFS), OS, and immune-related adverse events (irAE), and determined their associations with clinical characteristics.ResultsThe objective response rate was 40.0%. The median PFS was 6.1 months, and OS did not reach the median. Multivariate analyses revealed that nonadenocarcinoma histology (hazard ratio, 1.78; 95% confidence interval, 1.05-3.03; P = .015) and ≥ 3 metastatic sites (hazard ratio, 3.97; 95% confidence interval, 1.97-8.01; P < .001) were independently correlated with poor PFS. Patients with irAE and patients without interstitial lung disease had significantly longer PFS (14.0 and 4.9 months, respectively; P = .011) than patients without irAE or patients with interstitial lung disease.ConclusionThe outcome of patients receiving first-line pembrolizumab treatment was worse in those with nonadenocarcinoma and with a large number of metastatic sites. Patients with irAE and without interstitial lung disease had a more favorable outcome.     

Prognostic factors for survival in 1059 patients treated with sunitinib for metastatic renal cell carcinoma

Background:

Prognostic factors for progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and long-term OS (⩾30 months) were investigated in sunitinib-treated patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (RCC).

Methods:

Data were pooled from 1059 patients in six trials. Baseline variables, including ethnicity, were analysed for prognostic significance by Cox proportional-hazards model.

Results:

Median PFS and OS were 9.7 and 23.4 months, respectively. Multivariate analysis of PFS and OS identified independent predictors, including ethnic origin, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status, time from diagnosis to treatment, prior cytokine use, haemoglobin, lactate dehydrogenase, corrected calcium, neutrophils, platelets, and bone metastases (OS only). Characteristics of long-term survivors (n=215, 20%) differed from those of non-long-term survivors; independent predictors of long-term OS included ethnic origin, bone metastases, and corrected calcium. There were no differences in PFS (10.5 vs 7.2 months; P=0.1006) or OS (23.8 vs 21.4 months; P=0.2135) in white vs Asian patients; however, there were significant differences in PFS (10.5 vs 5.7 months; P<0.001) and OS (23.8 vs 17.4 months; P=0.0319) in white vs non-white, non-Asian patients.

Conclusion:

These analyses identified risk factors to survival with sunitinib, including potential ethnic-based differences, and validated risk factors previously reported in advanced RCC.