Dataset Information

Clinical outcomes in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma receiving everolimus or temsirolimus after sunitinib.

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

There are little data on the clinical activity of temsirolimus (TM) and everolimus (EV) when used as second-line therapy after sunitinib (SU) in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC).

Methods

Patients with mRCC treated with EV or TM after SU were included in this retrospective analysis. Progression-free survival (PFS), time to sequence failure (TTSF) from the start of SU to disease progression with EV/TM and overall survival (OS) were estimated using Kaplan-Meier method and compared across groups using the log-rank test. Cox proportional hazards models were applied to investigate predictors of TTSF and OS.

Results

In total, 89 patients (median age 60.0 years) were included. At baseline 43% were classified as MSKCC good-risk, 43% as intermediate-risk and 14% as poor-risk. Median OS was 36.3 months and median TTSF was 17.2 months. Sixty-five patients received SU-EV and 24 patients SU-TM. Median PFS after the second-line treatment was 4.3 months in the EV group and 3.5 months in the TM group (p = 0.63). Median TTSF was 17.0 and 18.9 months (p = 0.32) and the OS was 35.8 and 38.3 months (p = 0.73) with SU-EV and SU-TM, respectively. The prognostic role of initial MSKCC was confirmed by multivariable analysis (hazard ratio 1.76, 95% confidence interval 1.08-2.85. p = 0.023).

Conclusions

This study did not show significant differences in terms of disease control and OS between EV and TM in the second-line setting. EV remains the preferred mTOR inhibitor for the treatment of mRCC patients resistant to prior tyrosine kinase inhibitor treatment.

SUBMITTER: Iacovelli R

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3956829 | biostudies-literature | 2014 Mar-Apr

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Clinical outcomes in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma receiving everolimus or temsirolimus after sunitinib.

Iacovelli Roberto R Cartenì Giacomo G Milella Michele M Berardi Rossana R Di Lorenzo Giuseppe G Verzoni Elena E Rizzo Mimma M Santoni Matteo M Procopio Giuseppe G

Canadian Urological Association journal = Journal de l'Association des urologues du Canada 20140301 3-4

<h4>Introduction</h4>There are little data on the clinical activity of temsirolimus (TM) and everolimus (EV) when used as second-line therapy after sunitinib (SU) in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC).<h4>Methods</h4>Patients with mRCC treated with EV or TM after SU were included in this retrospective analysis. Progression-free survival (PFS), time to sequence failure (TTSF) from the start of SU to disease progression with EV/TM and overall survival (OS) were estimated using Ka ...[more]

PMID: 24678349

Similar Datasets

Project description:PurposeWe identified sunitinib alternative schedules that maintained dose intensity while decreasing adverse events in patients with metastatic renal cell cancer. We also determined the impact of alternative schedules on clinical outcomes.Materials and methodsWe retrospectively reviewed the records of patients 18 years old or older with clear cell metastatic renal cell cancer who received first line sunitinib between January 26, 2006 and March 1, 2011 at our major comprehensive cancer center. A subset of patients was switched at the first intolerable adverse event from the traditional schedule of 28 days on and 14 days off to a schedule of 14 days on and 7 days off or other alternative schedules. A control group underwent standard dose reduction. We estimated progression-free and overall survival by the Kaplan-Meier method. Predictors of progression-free and overall survival were analyzed using Cox regression.ResultsA total of 187 patients were included in analysis, of whom 87% were on the traditional schedule at baseline. During treatment 53% of patients continued on the traditional schedule and 47% began or were transitioned to alternative schedules. Baseline characteristics were similar. Adverse events prompting schedule modification included fatigue in 64% of cases, hand-foot syndrome in 38% and diarrhea in 32%. Median time to alternative schedules was 5.6 months. Median overall survival was 17.7 months (95% CI 10.8-22.2) on the traditional schedule compared to 33.0 months (95% CI 29.3-not estimable) on alternative schedules (p <0.0001). On multivariable analysis poor Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status, increased lactate dehydrogenase, decreased albumin, unfavorable Heng criteria and the traditional schedule were associated with decreased overall survival (p <0.05).ConclusionsSunitinib administered on alternative schedules may mitigate adverse events while achieving outcomes comparable to those of the traditional schedule in patients with metastatic renal cell cancer. Prospective investigations of alternate dosing schemas are warranted.

Project description:BackgroundSunitinib and everolimus are standard first-line and second-line therapies, respectively, in clear cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC).ObjectiveTo conduct a randomized phase 2 trial comparing sunitinib and everolimus in non-clear cell RCC (non-ccRCC).Design, setting, and participantsPatients with metastatic, non-ccRCC, or ccRCC with >20% sarcomatoid features (ccSRCC) were randomized to receive sunitinib or everolimus with crossover at disease progression.Outcome measurement and statistical analysisPrimary end point was progression-free survival (PFS) in first-line therapy; 108 patients were needed to show improvement in median PFS (mPFS) from 12 wk with sunitinib to 20 wk with everolimus.Results and limitationsInterim analysis of 68 patients (papillary [27], chromophobe [12], unclassified [10], translocation [7], ccSRCC [12]) prompted early trial closure. The mPFS in first-line therapy was 6.1 mo with sunitinib and 4.1 mo with everolimus (p=0.6); median overall survival (mOS) was not reached with sunitinib and was 10.5 mo with everolimus, respectively (p=0.014). At final analysis, mOS was 16.2 and 14.9 mo with sunitinib and everolimus, respectively (p=0.18). There were four partial responses (PRs) in first-line therapy (sunitinib: 3 of 33 [9%]; everolimus, 1 of 35 [2.8%]) and four PRs in second-line therapy (sunitinib: 2 of 21 [9.5%]; everolimus, 2 of 23 [8.6%]), with mPFS of 1.8 mo and 2.8 mo, respectively. In patients without sarcomatoid features in their tumors (n=49), mOS was 31.6 mo with sunitinib and 10.5 mo with everolimus (p=0.075). Genomic profiling of a chromophobe RCC from a patient with a PR to first-line everolimus revealed a somatic TSC2 mutation.ConclusionsIn this trial, everolimus was not superior to sunitinib. Both agents demonstrated modest efficacy, underscoring the need for better therapies in non-ccRCC.Patient summaryThis randomized phase 2 trial provides the first head-to-head comparison of everolimus and sunitinib in patients with metastatic non-clear cell renal cell carcinoma (non-ccRCC). The observed very modest efficacy underscores the need to develop more effective therapies for non-ccRCC.

Project description:BackgroundMetastatic renal cell carcinoma (RCC) patients are commonly treated with vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) inhibitors or mammalian target of rapamycin inhibitors. Correlations between somatic mutations and first-line targeted therapy outcomes have not been reported on a randomized trial.ObjectiveTo evaluate the relationship between tumor mutations and treatment outcomes in RECORD-3, a randomized trial comparing first-line everolimus (mTOR inhibitor) followed by sunitinib (VEGF inhibitor) at progression with the opposite sequence in 471 metastatic RCC patients.Design, setting, and participantsTargeted sequencing of 341 cancer genes at ∼540× coverage was performed on available tumor samples from 258 patients; 220 with clear cell histology (ccRCC).Outcome measurements and statistical analysisAssociations between somatic mutations and median first-line progression free survival (PFS1L) and overall survival were determined in metastatic ccRCC using Cox proportional hazards models and log-rank tests.Results and limitationsPrevalent mutations (≥ 10%) were VHL (75%), PBRM1 (46%), SETD2 (30%), BAP1 (19%), KDM5C (15%), and PTEN (12%). With first-line everolimus, PBRM1 and BAP1 mutations were associated with longer (median [95% confidence interval {CI}] 12.8 [8.1, 18.4] vs 5.5 [3.1, 8.4] mo) and shorter (median [95% CI] 4.9 [2.9, 8.1] vs 10.5 [7.3, 12.9] mo) PFS1L, respectively. With first-line sunitinib, KDM5C mutations were associated with longer PFS1L (median [95% CI] of 20.6 [12.4, 27.3] vs 8.3 [7.8, 11.0] mo). Molecular subgroups of metastatic ccRCC based on PBRM1, BAP1, and KDM5C mutations could have predictive values for patients treated with VEGF or mTOR inhibitors. Most tumor DNA was obtained from primary nephrectomy samples (94%), which could impact correlation statistics.ConclusionsPBRM1, BAP1, and KDM5C mutations impact outcomes of targeted therapies in metastatic ccRCC patients.Patient summaryLarge-scale genomic kidney cancer studies reported novel mutations and heterogeneous features among individual tumors, which could contribute to varied clinical outcomes. We demonstrated correlations between somatic mutations and treatment outcomes in clear cell renal cell carcinoma, supporting the value of genomic classification in prospective studies.

Dataset Information

Clinical outcomes in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma receiving everolimus or temsirolimus after sunitinib.

Introduction

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Clinical outcomes in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma receiving everolimus or temsirolimus after sunitinib.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets